Circumcision and Baptism

Quote:
"Every time a Jew circumcizes his infant son today, he blasphemes God and states to all watching "The Messias is yet to come." It is an insult to God and His Christ."

What about Acts 16:3 concerning Timothy: "Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters; for they all knew that his father was a Greek."

 

Acts takes place in the time when the Church is just beginning and the people are figuring out what this new thing called Christianity is all about. There were most likely a lot of things which were in the very early stages of developement which were very "grey" rather than black and white as they are now. We know now that St. Paul made a mistake, pure and simple.

Brother Ed

 

This is pretty confusing for me, I must admit; Paul does this after all the discussion in Acts 15 about circumcision, and the letter to the Galatians. However, I'm not sure Paul makes a mistake or that we just don't understand what's going on. Circumcision as a covenant commandment (not for salvation) doesn't seem to have been abolished.

 

No, but I don't think Paul circumcised Timothy for hygene (sp?) either. It is interesting to know that when a Brit Milah (circumcision) is done traditionally (on the 8th day of the newborn's life) that the potassium level (which is responsible for blood clotting) is at its highest level. God must have known what he was doing...

 

"Every time a Jew circumcizes his infant son today, he blasphemes God and states to all watching "The Messias is yet to come." It is an insult to God and His Christ."

Dear Ed,
you went too far here. Did Paul blaspheme when he circumcised Timothy? Did the early Christians in Acts who were all zealous for the Law sin when they obeyed God in this? The big question in the early church was did you need to be circumcised to become a Christian. Paul defended the liberty of Gentile believers, but never claimed that circumcision was sinful, just not relevant to Gentile converts.
Jews today who circumcise their sons are in no way offending God.
All the best, Colin

 

Hi again, I should have read through the whole thread before replying early on! Ed, you are starting to sound scary. Are you saying that scriptural practice is not as authoritative as your doctrine? When the Bible disagrees with catholic thought on something, its the Bible thats at fault? Deeply worried, Colin

 

Ed: Paul says circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. If it were a sin he would have said "sin" rather than "nothing." Isn't the right, Ed?

 

As I said -- the Church was just born. Things were being worked out. That is exactly why they had the Jerusalem Council -- no one knew exactly. There wasn't a New Testament, there were no books by Jerry Falwell or Jack Hyles, there was only the words of our Lord and the Church trying to understand and apply them.

It was in this milieu that St. Paul circumcized Timothy.

I have an interesting book called "100 Orthodox Martyrs". It tells the story of Orthodox believers who lived in Constantinople AFTER the heathen Turks came in with their Muslim false religion. You know what the one thing the Muslims insisted that the Christians do:

BE CIRCUMCIZED!!!

THAT was the initiation into the Muslim religion!! And the book is filled with brave and courageous believers who refused flat out to do so at the cost of their lives. I imagine that St. Paul AND Timothy would have been among them.

What's the difference?

Ohhhh, about 8 centuries and a ton of learning.

And what is the difference today? Same thing. 20 centuries of telling obstinate God hating Jews that Jesus is the Messiah and having them persecute the Church and kill believers. They are NOT IGNORANT of what they are doing in light of 20 centuries of hearing of the name of Jesus and Who He is.

Now -- IF it really is a prophecy of the coming Messiah every time a baby is circumcized, then the Jews openly state "Jesus is NOT the Messiah" every time they perform a bris.

Kapish?

Brother Ed

 

As a messianic Jew, I must say I'm disappointed by your view of the Jewish people. I don't believe the Jews have persecuted Christians for the last 20 centuries, in fact I would have to say the evidence is far in favor of the reverse. I have read alot of your posts, and was impressed by their depth; and though I don't personally agree with all of your viewpoints on theology, I have respected your opinion though I disagree with replacement theology. The "God hating Jews" comment really shocked me though. As for the return of the Messiah, I too believe it will happen for Him to establish His kingdom. Hopefully soon.

 

20 centuries of telling obstinate God hating Jews that Jesus is the Messiah and having them persecute the Church and kill believers. They are NOT IGNORANT of what they are doing in light of 20 centuries of hearing of the name of Jesus and Who He is.

Dear Ed, in Acts 21 Paul presents oferings in the Temple. This chapter also notes that it was a question of Gentiles not circumcising rather than Jews circumcising that concerned the early church. You have no biblical warrent for asserting that circumcision is blasphemy. There are scriptures which show that believing Jews did circumcise (keep the Law), and that Paul circumcised. That is, the God breather scriptures which instruct us in our practice give zero support and furnish examples to the opposite of what you are saying. You really do need to back down on this one. Sheer rudness like your above quote give no aid to your argument. Paul said to give no offence to Jews or Gentiles or the church of God, and to win them with love, not insults.
Colin

 

Dear Ed,

For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits, that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so ALL Israel shall be saved. Rom. 11: 25, 26.

Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, there shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Rom. 11: 25-27.

For all [the house of Israel] shall know me, from the least to the greatest. Heb. 8: 11. Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God. Rom. 8: 21

The apostle describes the "far-off divine event to which the whole creation moves," thus:

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, know the Lord; for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Heb. 8: 10-12.

Lam. 3, 31, 32. Thus even the "weeping prophet" saw the bow of promise in the sky, beheld "the rainbow round about the throne!"

What a mighty God we serve!

GH

 

Your idea that it is prophetic of Christ's advent has is interesting, but has no Scriptural foundation. If anything, circumcision (being a removal of flesh) seems more to indicate that God is not pleased with those who walk after the flesh but after the Spirit. In fact, you can make circumcision mean a lot of things if you try really hard. There's no point in stubbornly holding to a ridiculous interpretation that seeks to elevate yourself above the apostles and the word of God - that's the mark of an heretic.

[ August 20, 2002, 09:51 PM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]