Are we subject to the Old Covenant today?

[Studyman]

But why would gentile believers claim to have any confidence in the flesh, when none of them are physically circumcised?

Is Paul instructing Gentiles to be physically Circumcised in order to partake of the Church of God? Why not? Because in the Church of God, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, there is no confidence in the flesh. Because Paul teaches that true Circumcision is that of the heart, and a true Jew is one inwardly.

So when he says "WE are the Circumcision", is he not following his own teaching on what circumcision is? To believe your claim, it seems I would have to believe Paul taught the Philippians against his own teaching to the Romans.

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

Why would I believe that God inspired Paul to renounce his own teaching to men in Philippi?

Based on that, it won't make sense for Paul to state vs 4-5 if verse 3 "we" also includes gentile believers.

3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

Not at all. If the Jews religion, including their circumcision and the persecution of God's Church meant anything, then Paul would still be promoting it, as he was more zealous than others in it.

But he wasn't still promoting it, as there is no Jew or Gentile in the Church of God, but all are one in Christ.

Again, if you separate Paul's teaching in Philippians 3:1-5, from the rest of his teaching to other peoples, you might be able to make the case that DNA counts in the Body of Christ. And I know there are those religions of this world who teach that. But when we read what Paul actually teaches, we find that Circumcision (Jew) is nothing, and uncircumcision (Gentile) is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

That to me is common sense, but if you want to disagree because you want to believe that we are some form of "spiritual Israel", we can agree to disagree, as I said.

Again, whether or not I agree with the religious claim you are promoting, is irrelevant. What does Paul teach, that's relevant.

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

WE can both agree with Paul, or just one of us. In this discussion, I am agreeing with Paul, and you are not. So I can't "agree to just disagree". WE either believe Paul's definition of "Circumcision" who worship God in Spirit, or we don't.

At least, we agree on that. Thanks for clarifying.

I agree with a great many things you post and have said as much. But this issue about "We are the Circumcision" not including the members of the Body of Christ that are not Jews "after the flesh", or those non-Jews Grafted into the Holy Root, is simply not supported by scriptures, and certainly not Paul's letters.

But still, these discussions are good to have. I hope you might give it a little more thought, as God's Word doesn't return void.

And thanks for the frank and honest discussion.

 

[Guojing]

So when he says "WE are the Circumcision", is he not following his own teaching on what circumcision is? To believe your claim, it seems I would have to believe Paul taught the Philippians against his own teaching to the Romans.

Actually you don't.

If Paul was indeed only speaking to "Jewish brethren" in Philippians 3:1-5, then the statement "we are the circumcision", could only refer to the circumcised Jews, who were indeed physically circumcised since they were 8 days old.

He is simply telling those Jewish brethren, do not be confident in their physical circumcision, but rather the true circumcision in the heart, that only comes when they accept Christ as their promised Messiah, as you quoted from Romans 2:28-29.

 

[Gary K]

Actually you don't.

If Paul was indeed only speaking to "Jewish brethren" in Philippians 3:1-5, then the statement "we are the circumcision", could only refer to the circumcised Jews, who were indeed physically circumcised since they were 8 days old.

He is simply telling those Jewish brethren, do not be confident in their physical circumcision, but rather the true circumcision in the heart, that only comes when they accept Christ as their promised Messiah, as you quoted from Romans 2:28-29.

How do you get that out of that text?

hp 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Php 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

He is clearly speaking to those who worship God in the Spirit. That does not mean a Pharisee who despises him for preaching to the Gentiles. It could mean another Jew who loves God such as Peter, but even then your assertion is wrong as Paul is still including Jews and Gentile in his "we".

 

[Guojing]

How do you get that out of that text?

As I already stated "But why would gentile believers claim to have any confidence in the flesh, when none of them are physically circumcised?"

Based on that context, it won't make sense for Paul to state vs 4-5 if verse 3 "we" also includes gentile believers.

That to me is common sense, but if you want to disagree because you want to believe that we are some form of "spiritual Israel", we can agree to disagree, as I said.

 

[Gary K]

As I already stated "But why would gentile believers claim to have any confidence in the flesh, when none of them are physically circumcised?"

Based on that context, it won't make sense for Paul to state vs 4-5 if verse 3 "we" also includes gentile believers.

That to me is common sense, but if you want to disagree because you want to believe that we are some form of "spiritual Israel", we can agree to disagree, as I said.

The problem for you Paul is talking about those who worship God in the Spirit, not the flesh. I don't see how you can construe the wording to mean that.

 

[Guojing]

The problem for you Paul is talking about those who worship God in the Spirit, not the flesh. I don't see how you can construe the wording to mean that.

A physically circumcised Jew can also worship God in the Spirit, not the flesh, so I don't get why you are harping on this point.

 

[Gary K]

A physically circumcised Jew can also worship God in the Spirit, not the flesh, so I don't get why you are harping on this point.

Like I said, that could also mean a Christian Jew which still falsifies your theory.

 

[Guojing]

Like I said, that could also mean a Christian Jew which still falsifies your theory.

"A Christian Jew" is an oxymoron.

A Jew refers to only those who are physically circumcised.

A gentile believer who is a Christian, is NOT a Jew.

 

[pasifika]

"A Christian Jew" is an oxymoron.

A Jew refers to only those who are physically circumcised.

A gentile believer who is a Christian, is NOT a Jew.

Hi, sorry to interrupt your conversation. You might like to check this verse also Romans 2:28,29

 

[Guojing]

Hi, sorry to interrupt your conversation. You might like to check this verse also Romans 2:28,29

Those 2 verses, as I have already said in the post that you liked, refers to circumcised Jews who also believed that Christ is their promised Messiah.

They are the true Israel and spiritual Jews.

 

[Studyman]

So when you said In Romans, Paul didn't put a difference between Jewish believers and Gentile believers, you didn't actually meant that in an absolute sense.

I posted the words of the Apostles of Christ written in the Testimony.

Acts 15: 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

I listened to you promote your religion regarding Jew and Gentile, and I listened to the Apostles of the Christ of the Bible's teaching regarding Jew and Gentile. You and the Pharisees placed a difference between Faithful Jews and faithful Gentiles. The God of the Bible, and His Apostles did not place a difference between faithful Jews and faithful gentiles. The disconnect between what you preach and what the Apostles teach is pretty substantial. So much so that I am forced to make a choice. Do I listen and adopt your religion regarding Jew and Gentile? Or do I place my trust in what the Apostles and the Law and Prophets actually say?

I have made the choice to believe the inspired Word of Scriptures, over the religious philosophies you have adopted and are now promoting. I mean that in an absolute sense.

Sometimes in Romans, you allow the term brethren to refer to only Jews.

When Paul is addressing Jews after the flesh I allow that, Yes. When Paul is Addressing the Body of Christ, then I allow that he is speaking to Jews who are Jews inwardly, regardless of their DNA. It was God who declared Non-Jews who joined with HIM, as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself".

It was Paul who believed in this God who said, "Therefore if the uncircumcision (Non-Jews) keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted "for circumcision"? ( Shall he not be "Grafted into the Holy Root" and considered a Jew)

Therefore, when Paul said "We are the Circumcision", he is not only speaking to obedient Jews, but also obedient Gentiles. Not because I said so, or Valuntinus, or Copeland or Hastings said so, but because the Holy Scriptures said so. All we need is belief in what is written.

It is clear that the religion the Pharisees adopted didn't believe this, and it seems clear that the religion you have adopted, don't believe this either.

Nevertheless, as Prophesied by Isaiah in chapter 56, Gentiles who God says keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.

You are free to "Put a difference between Faithful Jews and Faithful Gentiles" if you so choose. I am simply posting what the Scriptures actually say and that God is no such respecter of persons.

 

[Studyman]

But why would any gentile believers claim to have any confidence in the flesh, when none of them are physically circumcised?

But in your religion, weren't the Pharisees trying to force the new Gentile Converts to cut the foreskin off their penis before they could partake of the Church of God? Was Paul also trying to convince Gentile converts that salvation can only come to them, if they cut skin off their penis?

I don't think Paul was teaching this. Why not? Because he had no confidence in the flesh, Right? As a zealous Pharisees/Jew, with his foreskin cut, he murdered innocent men and persecuted the church of God and rejected God's commandments. How was he any different than an unbelieving unrepentant Gentile?

Eph. 4: 17 This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, 18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: 19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

What if the Scriptures are right, and it's your teachers and their videos that are in error?

Based on that context, it won't make sense for Paul to state vs 4-5 if verse 3 "we" also includes gentile believers.

When all of Paul's words are considered, it makes perfect sense to teach Gentiles that cutting skin off the penis, profits them in absolutely now way, if they are a breaker of the Laws of God. And that the true Circumcision is that of the heart, not of the flesh.

That to me is common sense, but if you want to disagree because you want to believe that we are some form of "spiritual Israel", we can agree to disagree, as I said.

There are many who don't believe in the Law and the Testimony. And they don't believe that the Law is Spiritual, and that a Jew is not one outwardly, but of the heart, and that Circumcision is not of the flesh, but of the heart.

The rebellious Jews certainly didn't believe Paul. You don't seem to believe him either, but I do. And that is our disagreement.

 

[Studyman]

Actually you don't.

If Paul was indeed only speaking to "Jewish brethren" in Philippians 3:1-5, then the statement "we are the circumcision", could only refer to the circumcised Jews, who were indeed physically circumcised since they were 8 days old.

Only by ignoring or rejecting Paul's teaching "Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

"But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

You are placing a difference between repentant, faithful members of the Body of Christ whose skin is cut off the penis, from repentant, faithful members of the body of Christ whose skin is not cut off their penis.

The Apostles of Christ said in the Holy Scriptures, that the God of the Bible placed "No difference" between them. I believe them, you don't. This is the foundation of our disagreement.

He is simply telling those Jewish brethren, do not be confident in their physical circumcision, but rather the true circumcision in the heart, that only comes when they accept Christ as their promised Messiah, as you quoted from Romans 2:28-29.

Did he not teach Jews and Gentiles the same thing? Did he not teach gentiles the same thing who were being bewitched by the Mainstream Religion of their time to cut the skin off their penis in order to qualify for salvation?

Acts 15: 1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

If "Brethren" only means Circumcised Jews, as you are preaching, then how is it the Acts author is calling uncircumcised men "Brethren" who can't be saved unless they cut skin off their penis.

Normally I would just walk away, as you are pretty dug in. But this is important stuff. And worthy of lively Scriptural debate in search of biblical Truth.

 

[Studyman]

"A Christian Jew" is an oxymoron.

A Jew refers to only those who are physically circumcised.

A gentile believer who is a Christian, is NOT a Jew.

This is your adopted religious philosophy, and you are free to promote it. But Paul teaches a different gospel.

Rom. 2: 23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?

24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

 

[Gary K]

"A Christian Jew" is an oxymoron.

A Jew refers to only those who are physically circumcised.

A gentile believer who is a Christian, is NOT a Jew.

So, you're telling me no Jew by heritage can accept Christ as his Savior? That's really odd as all the apostles were Jews. Your beliefs take you into some very strange places. I actually have several books written by a Jew born in the 19th century and an entire Bible written by Israelites and Jews. I'm not sure who wrote yours as you believe there cannot be a Christian Jew.

 

[Leaf473]

Imagine if everyone got their truth from this same source.

Most people here are getting their information from basically the same biblical source. But different people use different lenses as they read imo.

 

[Gary K]

Most people here are getting their information from basically the same biblical source. But different people use different lenses as they read imo.

I don't think that is what Studyman is referring to. All Christians read the same Bible, other than Catholics and yet there are an almost infinite number of beliefs in the Christian community. They all can't come from the same source, i. e. the HS.

 

[Leaf473]

I don't think that is what Studyman is referring to. All Christians read the same Bible, other than Catholics and yet there are an almost infinite number of beliefs in the Christian community. They all can't come from the same source, i. e. the HS.

Well, if we're talking about the Holy Spirit as the source and not the Bible, or the Holy Spirit plus the Bible, then again, that's what pretty much everyone thinks here.

Kind of like I heard a study once where 95% of drivers will rank themselves in the top 5% of drivers

And that's why I'm thankful for discussion forums like this

 

[Guojing]

So, you're telling me no Jew by heritage can accept Christ as his Savior? That's really odd as all the apostles were Jews. Your beliefs take you into some very strange places. I actually have several books written by a Jew born in the 19th century and an entire Bible written by Israelites and Jews. I'm not sure who wrote yours as you believe there cannot be a Christian Jew.

At the time of Paul, he will be a true Jew, or a Jew according to the spirit, according to Romans 2:28-29.

If you are talking about Jews now, they will be in the Body of Christ like us. If your "Christian Jew" is referring to that, then I am fine.

 

[Guojing]

Did he not teach Jews and Gentiles the same thing? Did he not teach gentiles the same thing who were being bewitched by the Mainstream Religion of their time to cut the skin off their penis in order to qualify for salvation?

Look, does it make sense if I go to a gathering of ladies and tell them "Do not put confidence in your penises, if anyone has any confidence in their penises, I have the most in mine"?

You get my point now?

The ladies will go "Duhhh, we don't have them anyway, so why do you even think we will have confidence in something that is non-existent"?