ECT Gen 12: Does the Bible start off in another direction?

Interplanner

New member
It certainly seems that the Bible starts off in another direction here. I must grant that to 2P2P friends. However, it is here that the NT now tells us that something else was intended to be true 'in Christ.' The 'Seed', for example, is still Christ, which we would have known from Gen 3 and 4. And when Gen 1-11 ended with a confusion of language because of a deviant message, it was a clear signal that things had resumed when the age of Christ begins with one happy and redemptive message in everyone's language! (the Spirit at Pentecost).

It is the NT that tells us officially (it is hinted all through the OT) that the mission of the Gospel was underway and was the intended meaning of the dark OT passages. There is no unfinished business that needs to be taken care of, and the main locations and equipment of Judaism as such were decimated.
 
It certainly seems that the Bible starts off in another direction here. I must grant that to 2P2P friends. However, it is here that the NT now tells us that something else was intended to be true 'in Christ.' The 'Seed', for example, is still Christ, which we would have known from Gen 3 and 4. And when Gen 1-11 ended with a confusion of language because of a deviant message, it was a clear signal that things had resumed when the age of Christ begins with one happy and redemptive message in everyone's language! (the Spirit at Pentecost).

It is the NT that tells us officially (it is hinted all through the OT) that the mission of the Gospel was underway and was the intended meaning of the dark OT passages. There is no unfinished business that needs to be taken care of, and the main locations and equipment of Judaism as such were decimated.

Huh?? :doh:
 

Rivers

New member
It certainly seems that the Bible starts off in another direction here. I must grant that to 2P2P friends. However, it is here that the NT now tells us that something else was intended to be true 'in Christ.' The 'Seed', for example, is still Christ, which we would have known from Gen 3 and 4. And when Gen 1-11 ended with a confusion of language because of a deviant message, it was a clear signal that things had resumed when the age of Christ begins with one happy and redemptive message in everyone's language! (the Spirit at Pentecost).

It is the NT that tells us officially (it is hinted all through the OT) that the mission of the Gospel was underway and was the intended meaning of the dark OT passages. There is no unfinished business that needs to be taken care of, and the main locations and equipment of Judaism as such were decimated.

I agree.

Abram was told to separate himself from all those who came before him (Genesis 12:1-3). From this point forward, the Bible becomes all about the "descendants" of Abraham.

Even Paul later identified both his circumcised (Law) and uncircumcised (faith) converts as "all the descendants" of Abraham who originated from the biological womb of Sarah (Romans 4:16-19).
 

DAN P

New member
It certainly seems that the Bible starts off in another direction here. I must grant that to 2P2P friends. However, it is here that the NT now tells us that something else was intended to be true 'in Christ.' The 'Seed', for example, is still Christ, which we would have known from Gen 3 and 4. And when Gen 1-11 ended with a confusion of language because of a deviant message, it was a clear signal that things had resumed when the age of Christ begins with one happy and redemptive message in everyone's language! (the Spirit at Pentecost).

It is the NT that tells us officially (it is hinted all through the OT) that the mission of the Gospel was underway and was the intended meaning of the dark OT passages. There is no unfinished business that needs to be taken care of, and the main locations and equipment of Judaism as such were decimated.


Hi and here is just one IMPORTANT point , it speaks to ABRAM as a gentile , just check Gal 3:8 , which the Greek has it as ABRAHAM BUT should be ABRAM !!

Gal

It also speaks to ABRAHAM or to Jews !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

New member
Hi and here is just one IMPORTANT point , it speaks to ABRAM as a gentile , just check Gal 3:8 , which the Greek has it as ABRAHAM BUT should be ABRAM !!

Gal

It also speaks to ABRAHAM or to Jews !!

dan p



It supports what I'm saying. The NT view of such passages is not generally what people would conclude directly. 2P2P does not see things 'in Christ,' and does not think they are there.
 

DAN P

New member
It supports what I'm saying. The NT view of such passages is not generally what people would conclude directly. 2P2P does not see things 'in Christ,' and does not think they are there.


Hi and do you agree with my reply and have you checked the Greek text ??

Gen 12 is also in Gal 3:8 and in Gal 2:7 !!

And it shows two GOSPELS !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

New member
Hi and to be ACCURSED IN Gal 1:8 , a person will have to say that was saved by GRACE and the FALL BACK UNDER THE LAW , in Gal 5:4 !!

dan p


That's true and that's the other gospel. There is not another (legit) gospel in ch 2 'to the uncirc' because the verb used is clearly 'preaching' that was the same to each group. And because Paul said there was one gospel. So besides all their other damage to Biblical understanding, 2P2P adds a problem to Galatians that has to be undone.
 

SaulToPaul

New member
That's true and that's the other gospel. There is not another (legit) gospel in ch 2 'to the uncirc' because the verb used is clearly 'preaching' that was the same to each group. And because Paul said there was one gospel. So besides all their other damage to Biblical understanding, 2P2P adds a problem to Galatians that has to be undone.

:chuckle:
 

SaulToPaul

New member
I wonder if Interplanner The Great Learned Scholar has ever studied Abraham in uncircumcision versus Abraham in circumcision, and taken note of the things the LORD said to him, and for him to do...

I doubt it.
 

Interplanner

New member
I wonder if Interplanner The Great Learned Scholar has ever studied Abraham in uncircumcision versus Abraham in circumcision, and taken note of the things the LORD said to him, and for him to do...

I doubt it.



If the NT didn't cover it, who cares?

You make it sound like: the NT is uninformed; the NT is ignorant; the NT missed the whole point; the NT is hard to read, etc.
 
Top