Circumcision

[Thera]

You wouldn't bear false witness against a brother; would you?

Would a brother of mine teach instruction contrary to that of Paul the apostle? Is it possible for someone to teach instruction contrary to Paul's instruction, and still be brother to Paul? Would it be bearing false witness against someone, were someone to teach instruction contrary to the apostle, and to name this practice as a heresy?

1 Corinthians 7:18-19
Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

the answer I infer from @HARK! is "yes" but for some reason, he refuses to say it.

I have noticed this seems to be a common practice for false teachers. They deny that they are preaching what they are preaching, even as they preach it. Hypocrites, like the Pharisees.

 

[Strong in Him]

No it doesn't.

Yes it does.
Hebrews 10:1
"The law is only a shadow of the good things to come; not the realities themselves."
Hebrews 8:13
"By calling this covenant 'new', he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear."

(CLV) Lk 16:17
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of the law to fall.

Maybe it's your understanding of Jesus' words which is incorrect?
Seeing as how the Bible doesn't contradict itself.

 

[Strong in Him]

So are you telling me that when Paul circumcised Timothy; that played the hypocrite and maliciously condemned Timothy to death?

No - and I'm sure I've said all this before.
Timothy's father was a Greek; at that point, Paul was speaking to the Jews and Timothy was with him. In order for Timothy to have been accepted by those he was preaching to - and to allow him into parts of the temple - Paul circumcised him.

Clearly when Paul was writing to the Galatians, false teachers were saying that circumcision was necessary for salvation - hence Paul's words, "if you are circumcised it means Christ died for nothing."

 

[HARK!]

Yes it does.
Hebrews 10:1
"The law is only a shadow of the good things to come; not the realities themselves."

There is nothing here about the law being obsolete.

Hebrews 8:13
"By calling this covenant 'new', he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear."

There is nothing here about the law being obsolete.

Maybe it's your understanding of Jesus' words which is incorrect?
Seeing as how the Bible doesn't contradict itself.

Yahshua made himself quite clear with this verse.

There is no need for interpretation. He used very strong terms.

(CLV) Lk 16:17
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of the law to fall.

 

[HARK!]

In order for Timothy to have been accepted by those he was preaching to - and to allow him into parts of the temple - Paul circumcised him.

Paul had left the council of Jerusalem and was about 1000 miles away in Turkey. They were no where near the Temple; and that still wouldn't address the hypocrisy. Clearly timothy was ready to take the next step in his walk, and be circumcised as he was beginning his ministry.

Clearly when Paul was writing to the Galatians, false teachers were saying that circumcision was necessary for salvation - hence Paul's words, "if you are circumcised it means Christ died for nothing."

James settled this natter at the council of Jerusalem. You mist be circumcised to keep the law. So it is written.

Paul affirms this to the Romans.


(CLV) Ro 2:25
For circumcision, indeed, is benefiting if you should be putting law into practice, yet if you should be a transgressor of law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

 

[HARK!]

1 Corinthians 7:18-19
Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

(CLV) Ac 16:3
This one Paul wants to come out with him, and, taking him, circumcised him because of the Jews who |are in those places, for they all were aware that his father belonged to the Greeks.

 

[Strong in Him]

There is nothing here about the law being obsolete.

No, it says the law is a shadow of what is to come - as I said.

There is nothing here about the law being obsolete.

Both the NIV and my interlinear Greek NT, translate the Greek word used as "obsolete".
In any case, the verse says that the former covenant is old/aging and will disappear.

There is no need for interpretation. He used very strong terms.

So why have you interpreted that verse to mean; "I require all Gentiles to keep the law"?

 

[1213]

...
And it comes to be for a sign of the covenant between Me and you. ... (FOREVER)

As that says, circumcision was the sign of that covenant. I think it is still valid covenant. However, God made a new covenant through Jesus. In that new covenant the same circumcision is not required. If that new covenant is enough for a person, previous circumcision is not necessary. The sign of the new covenant is the circumcision of heart.

Yahweh your God will circumcise your heart, and the heart of your seed, to love Yahweh your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, that you may live. Yahweh your God will put all these curses on your enemies, and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. You shall return and obey the voice of Yahweh, and do all his commandments which I command you this day. Yahweh your God will make you plenteous in all the work of your hand, in the fruit of your body, and in the fruit of your cattle, and in the fruit of your ground, for good: for Yahweh will again rejoice over you for good, as he rejoiced over your fathers;
Deuteronomy 30:6-9

"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, I will also write them on their heart. I will be to them a God, And they will be to me a people. They will not teach every man his fellow citizen, Every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' For all will know me, From the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness. I will remember their sins and lawless deeds no more."
Hebrews 8:10-12 (Jeremiah 31:31-34)

 

[Strong in Him]

Paul had left the council of Jerusalem and was about 1000 miles away in Turkey. They were no where near the Temple; and that still wouldn't address the hypocrisy.

Paul had left the council of Jerusalem and was about 1000 miles away in Turkey. They were no where near the Temple; and that still wouldn't address the hypocrisy. Clearly timothy was ready to take the next step in his walk, and be circumcised as he was beginning his ministry.

He wasn't being hypocritical; the Jews would have accepted Timothy, and therefore his teaching, more easily if he were circumcised.

Anyone will find it easier to talk/relate to another person if they start from where that person is; meet them on their own level. That's what Jesus did; he wanted humans to listen to, relate to him and talk to him, so he became human - in the OT people were scared witless when they even saw an angel, never mind God himself.
And that's also what Paul said; when I talk to Jews, I am a Jew, when I talk to Gentiles I am as a gentile ..... I have become all things to all men so that I might win some for Christ.

Clearly timothy was ready to take the next step in his walk, and be circumcised as he was beginning his ministry.

That circumcision was "the next step in his walk" is your interpretation.

James settled this natter at the council of Jerusalem. You mist be circumcised to keep the law. So it is written.

No, James said that they should not be circumcised, Acts of the Apostles 15:29.
The early church met to debate the matter. Men from Antioch were teaching that Gentiles SHOULD be circumcised to be saved; Peter and Paul disagreed. The letter they sent out does not mention circumcision.

(CLV) Ro 2:25
For circumcision, indeed, is benefiting if you should be putting law into practice, yet if you should be a transgressor of law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

Yes, IF you keep the whole law; your circumcision is beneficial to you.
If you don't keep the whole law, it's as if you were not circumcised.
James said something similar; if you fail to keep one part of the law, you have broken all of it.

That is in no way the same as saying that Gentile believers have to keep the law and be circumcised.

 

[Thera]

Yes, IF you keep the whole law; your circumcision is beneficial to you. If you don't keep the whole law, it's as if you were not circumcised.
James said something similar; if you fail to keep one part of the law, you have broken all of it.

That is in no way the same as saying that Gentile believers have to keep the law and be circumcised.

Isn't it also saying that Jews aren't obligated to try to keep the law, as there is no Jew who can keep all of it?

 

[Der Alte]

There is nothing here about the law being obsolete.....

Hebrews 8
13 By speaking of a new covenant, God has made the first one old. And what is becoming obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament (Heb 8:13). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.​

…..Greek is now, and has always been, the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church. Who, better than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the “literal” Greek Eastern Orthodox Bible [EOB], know the correct meaning of Greek words.
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/or...tament-(The-Eastern-Greek-Orthodox-Bible).pdf
The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96 can be D/L at the link above. If anyone has doubts/questions about the EOB version I suggest they read the 200 page preface which documents the extensive Greek scholarship supporting this translation?

 

[Strong in Him]

Isn't it also saying that Jews aren't obligated to try to keep the law, as there is no Jew who can keep all of it?

I'm not sure about that.
But Peter certainly said, "why should we ask the Gentiles to do something which we ourselves have not been able to do", Acts of the Apostles 15:10.

They can't keep the law perfectly now anyway; they don't do animal sacrifice and have no temple.

 

[HARK!]

Hebrews 8
13 By speaking of a new covenant, God has made the first one old. And what is becoming obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

There is a difference between the words covenant and law. That is why YHWH used two different words.

 

[HARK!]

I'm not sure about that.
But Peter certainly said, "why should we ask the Gentiles to do something which we ourselves have not been able to do", Acts of the Apostles 15:10.

Context is key.

Peter was referring to the fact That YHWH didn't ask works to precede belief.

Abraham believed first. He wasn't circumcised until he was 99 years old.

 

[HARK!]

Isn't it also saying that Jews aren't obligated to try to keep the law, as there is no Jew who can keep all of it?

(CLV) Mt 5:20
For I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness should not be superabounding more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.


(CLV) Lk 1:5
There came to be, in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zechariah, of the routine of Abiah, and his wife, of the daughters of Aaron, and her name is Elizabeth.

(CLV) Lk 1:6
Now they were both just in front of God, going in all the precepts and just statutes of the Lord, blameless.

1 John 3:9

Whosoever is born of YHWH does not commit sin; for His seed remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of YHWH.

Matthew 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.


(CLV) Ac 24:14
"Yet I am avowing this to you, that, according to the way which they are terming a sect, thus am I offering divine service to the hereditary God, believing all that is written, according to the law and in the prophets,

(CLV) Ac 25:8
Paul defending that "Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the sanctuary, nor against Caesar did I any sin."

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

 

[Strong in Him]

Context is key.

Peter was referring to the fact That YHWH didn't ask works to precede belief.

No he wasn't; he didn't mention Abraham.

Context IS key:
Men came from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised ..... you cannot be saved", Acts of the Apostles 15:1.
This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute with them, Acts of the Apostles 15:2.
So these two, and some other believers, went to Jerusalem to see the Apostles about this matter, Acts of the Apostles 15:2.
As they went to Jerusalem, they told others of how the Gentiles had been converted, Acts of the Apostles 15:3.
When they arrived at Jerusalem they were welcomed, and they told of what God had been doing through them, Acts of the Apostles 15:4.
Then some believers, who belonged to the party of the Pharisees, stood up and said "Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law", Acts of the Apostles 15:5. That was the matter they were discussing - not faith and works.
They all debated the matter, Acts of the Apostles 15:6.
After a while Peter stood up and said that God allowed him to take the Gospel to the Gentiles, Acts of the Apostles 15:7 and God showed he accepted them by filling them with his Holy Spirit, Acts of the Apostles 15:8. He made no distinction between them and the Gentiles, Acts of the Apostles 15:9.
So why were people trying to test God by putting a yolk on the Gentiles' necks that not even the Jews had been able to bear? Acts of the Apostles 15:10. He said that both Jew and Gentile had been saved through God's grace.
Then Paul and Barnabas testified to what God had been doing - and finally it was decided to write a letter to the Gentile believers.

 

[Strong in Him]

There is a difference between the words covenant and law. That is why YHWH used two different words.

The law was a sign of the covenant; they had been made God's people, they were to live like it.
Abraham was told to circumcise as a sign of the covenant God made with him.
If the covenant is broken, old and about to be replaced, how do you put it into practice?

 

[HARK!]

No he wasn't; he didn't mention Abraham.

Just because he didn't mention Abraham by name; doesn't mean he wasn't speaking of Abraham. Was Abraham not his forefather?

James understood this message.

(CLV) Gn 15:6
Now Abram believed on Elohim, and He reckoned it to him for righteousness

(CLV) Gn 26:5
inasmuch as your father Abraham hearkened to My voice and kept My charge, My instructions, My statutes and My laws.

(CLV) Ja 2:22
You are observing that faith worked together with his works, and by works was faith perfected.

(CLV) Ja 2:23
And fulfilled was the scripture which is saying, Now "Abraham believes God, and it is reckoned to him for righteousness," and he was called "the friend of God."

(CLV) Ja 2:24
You see that by works a man is being justified, and not by faith only.

 

[HARK!]

That was the matter they were discussing - not faith and works.

Salvation is of faith. Works are the fruit of that faith. That is the matter they were discussing.

Faith should precede the works. Works don't save you; but if we have faith, there should be fruit of that faith.

James goes over this in detail in James 2.

Here are some key excerpts:

(CLV) Ja 2:14
What is the benefit, my brethren, if anyone should be saying he has faith, yet may have no works? That faith can not save him.

(CLV) Ja 2:17
Thus, also, is faith, if it should not have works: it is dead by itself.

(CLV) Ja 2:18
But someone will be declaring, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from the works and I shall be showing you my faith by my works.

(CLV) Ja 2:21
Abraham, our father, was he not justified by works when offering up his son Isaac on the altar?

(CLV) Ja 2:22
You are observing that faith worked together with his works, and by works was faith perfected.

(CLV) Ja 2:23
And fulfilled was the scripture which is saying, Now "Abraham believes God, and it is reckoned to him for righteousness," and he was called "the friend of God."

(CLV) Ja 2:24
You see that by works a man is being justified, and not by faith only.

(CLV) Ja 2:26
For even as the body apart from spirit is dead, thus also faith apart from works is dead.

 

[HARK!]

The law was a sign of the covenant;

Why do you express that in the past tense?

(CLV) Lk 16:17
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of the law to fall.

(CLV) Mt 7:21
"Not everyone saying to Me `Lord! Lord!' will be entering into the kingdom of the heavens, but he who is doing the will of My Father Who is in the heavens.
(CLV) Mt 7:22
Many will be declaring to Me in that day, `Lord! Lord! Was it not in Your name that we prophesy, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name do many powerful deeds?'
(CLV) Mt 7:23
And then shall I be avowing to them that `I never knew you! Depart from Me, workers of lawlessness!'