
Originally Posted by
Sojourner55
Hi Brits,
I can see why you would ask that. I didn't make the premise of my point very clear. "The law" began in the garden with the commandment "thou shalt not." The disobedience of Adam and Eve broke fellowship with God, and the long road to redemption was inaugurated. I believe the same type of animal sacrifice we see practiced by Noah and Abraham, and later established under Moses, began in the days of Adam, as alluded to in Gen 4:4. (I think we can safely assume that the sacrifice offered by Cain was rejected by God because it was not a blood sacrifice like Abel's, as required). As such, both "the law" as we understand it, and the blood sacrifice, were introduced soon after the banishment from the garden, rather than some 2000 years later, as we commonly think. The establishment of the law and the Levitical priesthood therefore, were simply a more structured continuation of what began earlier, and continued until the resurrection of Jesus.
So, then, I view Jesus as the second stage and ultimate completion of the one plan of redemption, after demonstrating that was incapable of keeping the commandments of God on His own. So to me, Adam represents the failure of the law, and Jesus, the law of the Spirit, that did what the law could not do. In this sense then, Adam, as the embodiment of our failure to measure up to God's standards, is the starting point, and Jesus the end, of a single plan--as opposed to the plan "A" and plan "B" premise suggested by the OP. I hope that makes sense. Thanks for calling my attention to that seeming disconnect. Sometimes we're so focused on the main point, we forget about lines of perspective. God bless.
Bookmarks