Looking at the Lamb

Well I don't see the article as not adding "enough" to the national sins of Israel, but the article points out the relational side of Gods love as it applies to the inspections of the two lambs, and not the "sin inspection" of either of the recipients, both in Israel's time and ours in Christ after the cross.
I often don't toss the baby out with the bathwater when the message is Father's amazing grace, is seen in the ultimate sacrifice of Christ. Call me an easy yoke believer, a simpleton if you must. The post, IMO, doesn't contradict the heart of the gospel.
Peace.
just saying that there was no lamb inspections during Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) He is clueless about God's feasts, as is obvious from his ramblings. Goats, not lambs, were offered during Yom Kippur, and they weren't inspected to see if they were perfect lol
 
I'm 63 with a failing memory but I'll take your word about the discussion! And not to excuse myself, but 10 years ago I had just come out of the mixed message gospel and was starting to see grace and the righteous identity of the believer then, and quite possibly had not communicated the better benefits of the NC. I've never looked back from the mess of the "self-effort, law burdened theology" and maybe that wasn't the discussion then? I'm now all for claiming His grace for Life from the dead, no works at arrival of redemption and certainly none going forward, just simple faith in the cross and resurrection. That's the backbone of the NC, no additives of Moses needed or included.



That the pre cross OT saints we saved by grace thru faith I can conclude has a correlation to the New, but since a Covenant, or testament is not in place until the death of the testator, then no, the New Covenant came after Christ's death, not before. Plus Ezek. 36 speaks of the New coming at a later time, not sooner. The book of Hebrews is all about this. Time limits me to go verse thumping, lol, so please excuse more missing notes in this short note to discuss.

Concerning "special" well, true, but never would I conclude that that is the reason Christ came and died. If God is love, that's reason enough for the New.

Enjoy the weekend, HP & all.
I fondly and wistfully remember my 63 year old mind, although it's pretty foggy at this point. An example of what you may have to look forward to (I pray not): it only took 3 days for me to recall that I have failed to respond to:

That the pre cross OT saints we saved by grace thru faith I can conclude has a correlation to the New, but since a Covenant, or testament is not in place until the death of the testator, then no, the New Covenant came after Christ's death, not before.
My reference is to Gal. 3:15-29; which, when read, one must be cautious not to lightly move over the following, as they are essential to the meaning. Perhaps particularly 17 and 29.

17.....does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. ....
18...God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise....
21. Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! ...
29. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants [seed], heirs according to promise.

For an in-depth look at this and other passages related to the age of the New Covenant I can recomment Augustine, Against Two Letters, Bk. 3, ch. 6-13. It's a bit of a slog, but IMO well worth it.

https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf105/npnf105.xviii.v.vi.html

To navigate through the chapters on this cite you can use the drop down indicated by the one dot over three dots symbol in the upper left margin. If it doesn't work right for you, just ask. >>Duh! The arrows to the right work much more easily.<<
 
Last edited:

Israel

Senior Member
Inference without implication is ......... I don't know. What is it?
Can at least be dangerous.

"Said I never had much use for one. Never said I didn't know how to use one"

M Quigley
 
Top