Quote:
Originally Posted by coksiw
Yup, Young Literal Translation. The question is, is “like men” the correct interpretation? Let the direct context: the sentence itself, say it.
But, even without that verse, the evidence of a covenant is in Gen.
|
But without that verse I just see God telling Adam what He is to do, not necessarily making a covenant with him. Although I don't think there's a problem with saying Adam was in covenant with God in a general sense of having a special relationship with Him. Yet creating a theological system with epochs like "The Adamic Covenant" strikes me as pushing things a bit much and getting outside the Scripture's presentation of doctrine.
At the end of the day, does it make a difference?
Threaded Mode
