Lamb of God Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7777777Now
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
7

7777777Now

Guest
I have a interesting question.

The passover came about because of the enslavement of Gods people in Egypt. And so the first son would be killed unless you painted the blood of a lamb on your doorpost. A destroying angel would then pass over the doors of the believers. Abraham was going to sacrafice his son to show God his faith. Then Jesus became the Lamb of God in Calvary.

How do all of these sacrifices relate? First it was an actual lamb, then almost Isaac (until it was stopped), and then it was Jesus.

Do these sacrifices have a relationship?
 
They all point undenialibly to Jesus as the Lamb of God and the source of our own salvation. Roanoker
 
** First it was an actual lamb, then almost Isaac (until it was stopped), and then it was Jesus.
**
**
Actually, “almost Isaac” came first, THEN the Passover Lamb, THEN Jesus.**
 
bpbasilphx said:
** First it was an actual lamb, then almost Isaac (until it was stopped), and then it was Jesus.
**
**
Actually, “almost Isaac” came first, THEN the Passover Lamb, THEN Jesus.**
Click to expand...
Too tired or too lazy to look this one up.
Wasn’t the Abraham’s sacrifice a ram? I seem to recall that he saw a ram whose horns were caught in a bush? (Doesn’t mean I’m right though.)
 
Conservative said:
Too tired or too lazy to look this one up.
Wasn’t the Abraham’s sacrifice a ram? I seem to recall that he saw a ram whose horns were caught in a bush? (Doesn’t mean I’m right though.)
Click to expand...
it does say ram. I don’t think that changes the theme.
 
If you want to go all the way back, in the Garden God killed animals to provide a covering for Adam and Eve because of their sin. The first blood sacrifice as a cover for sin.

Every sacrifice that came after was foreshadowing Christ, pointing mankind to the Cross and the Lamb of God who instead of covering our sins, His perfect sacrifice actually takes away the sins of the world.
 
In Isaac, Abraham’s “only begotten,” we understand the pain the Father felt in sacrificing his Son for our sakes. But Isaac first and foremost is a symbol (I think) of ourselves–and the ram, Christ, who took our place.

Likewise were the sacrifices afterward, all pointing to our redemption by Christ’s Blood.
 
St_Aloysius said:
In Isaac, Abraham’s “only begotten,” we understand the pain the Father felt in sacrificing his Son for our sakes. But Isaac first and foremost is a symbol (I think) of ourselves–and the ram, Christ, who took our place.

Likewise were the sacrifices afterward, all pointing to our redemption by Christ’s Blood.
Click to expand...
This is very insightful. Thanks!
 
If you want to go all the way back, in the Garden God killed animals to provide a covering for Adam and Eve because of their sin. The first blood sacrifice as a cover for sin.

According to the eastern fathers, the “garments of skin” for Adam and Eve were a change in their physical natures to keep them from having direct access to the spirit world of demons. It was for their protection.
 
bpbasilphx said:
According to the eastern fathers, the “garments of skin” for Adam and Eve were a change in their physical natures to keep them from having direct access to the spirit world of demons. It was for their protection.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Do you have more info… a link perhaps?
 
bpbasilphx said:
If you want to go all the way back, in the Garden God killed animals to provide a covering for Adam and Eve because of their sin. The first blood sacrifice as a cover for sin.

According to the eastern fathers, the “garments of skin” for Adam and Eve were a change in their physical natures to keep them from having direct access to the spirit world of demons. It was for their protection.
Click to expand...
I agree this is very interesting. Where did you find this information? I’d like to read more about this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top