Why was circumcision in the flesh added to GOD'S covenant with Abraham after GOD had credited Abraham with righteousness? According to Paul’s arguments should not circumcision of the flesh have come first?
If righteousness is credited apart from the law because Abraham believed GOD'S promise according to Paul, why then add more requirements to the covenant? But if righteousness is believing in the promised Son (WORD) first, walking in obedience to the Father's commandments would align with that righteousness.
James 1:25
ESV - 25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.
Clarify
•
Share
•
Report
•
Asked April 18 2024
•
Dave Larsen
For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.