"To better understand a religious requirement, you have to read and reference the religious texts. Genesis 17:11 very clearly states circumcision is a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham. It goes on to require all males in a household bound by this same covenant to be circumcised. This becomes the basis of the Judeo, Chrisitian and Muslim (www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/mosaic_law.htm www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/mosaic_law.htm) influence to circumcise sons. The reason the Catholic church and others do not specifically require circumcision is explained in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 17:19 and more) in several verses that Christ replaced the law so circumcision of the heart is more important. Circumcision of sons is still allowed for other reasons."
It always amazes me when Christians try to justify circumcision of their children by trying to quote The Bible. They are trying to make a "good showing."
Your quotations are Mosaic Law or "The Law." Christ came to do away with The Law. At The Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus quite forcefully spoke against circumcision and this angered many there as it was a Jewish celebration. This was the final straw that got him crucified. The Pharisees thought they had cut the head off of the emerging Christianity movement but the disciples continued to spread the word and gain converts. The Pharisees saw this as a threat to Judaism and set out to deceive and convert the disciples and bring them into Judaism. However, they required the disciples to submit to Mosaic Law and submit to circumcision. Some of the disciples were confused by the offer while some stood fast. To resolve this conflict, The Council of Jerusalem was called to discuss the issue and to come to an agreement and a common message. Apparently, the disciples realized that this was a trick and if the offer was accepted, the movement would come to an end and in due time, all record and memory of Christ would be destroyed and forgotten. This message is first communicated when Paul was addressing the Galatians in Gal. 5:2. He said "Mark my words! I Paul tell you that if you circumcise yourself Christ will have no value to you at all." What Paul was saying is that for a man circumcised himself, it was a symbolic rejection of Christ. By implication, for a parent to circumcise their son is a symbolic act of rejection by proxy.
Comment Reply
"To better understand a religious requirement, you have to read and reference the religious texts. Genesis 17:11 very clearly states circumcision is a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham. It goes on to require all males in a household bound by this same covenant to be circumcised. This becomes the basis of the Judeo, Chrisitian and Muslim (www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/mosaic_law.htm www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/mosaic_law.htm) influence to circumcise sons. The reason the Catholic church and others do not specifically require circumcision is explained in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 17:19 and more) in several verses that Christ replaced the law so circumcision of the heart is more important. Circumcision of sons is still allowed for other reasons."
It always amazes me when Christians try to justify circumcision of their children by trying to quote The Bible. They are trying to make a "good showing."
Your quotations are Mosaic Law or "The Law." Christ came to do away with The Law. At The Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus quite forcefully spoke against circumcision and this angered many there as it was a Jewish celebration. This was the final straw that got him crucified. The Pharisees thought they had cut the head off of the emerging Christianity movement but the disciples continued to spread the word and gain converts. The Pharisees saw this as a threat to Judaism and set out to deceive and convert the disciples and bring them into Judaism. However, they required the disciples to submit to Mosaic Law and submit to circumcision. Some of the disciples were confused by the offer while some stood fast. To resolve this conflict, The Council of Jerusalem was called to discuss the issue and to come to an agreement and a common message. Apparently, the disciples realized that this was a trick and if the offer was accepted, the movement would come to an end and in due time, all record and memory of Christ would be destroyed and forgotten. This message is first communicated when Paul was addressing the Galatians in Gal. 5:2. He said "Mark my words! I Paul tell you that if you circumcise yourself Christ will have no value to you at all." What Paul was saying is that for a man circumcised himself, it was a symbolic rejection of Christ. By implication, for a parent to circumcise their son is a symbolic act of rejection by proxy.
Frank O'Hara
March 24, 2010 - 9:18pmThis Comment
Reply