Is circumcision still an issue even for messianic jews?

[Metropolitan]

A lot emotional replies...But I need some that confirms to the scriptures attesting to the New Covenant

Let us read Gen 17

And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk in my ways and be blameless. I will establish my covenant between me and you and I will make you exceedingly numerous. And you shall no longer be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham and I make you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fertile and make nations of you and kings shall come forth from you. I will maintain my covenant between me and you to be God to you and your offspring to come. I assign the land you sojourn in to you and to your offspring to come, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting holding; I will be their God.

God further said to Abraham:

As for you, you and your offspring to come throughout the ages shall keep my covenant. Such shall be the covenant between me and you and your offspring to follow, which you shall keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin and that shall be the sign of the covenant between me and you. And throughout the generations every male among you shall be circumcised at the age of eight days. Thus shall my covenant be marked in your flesh as an everlasting pact. And if any male who is uncircumcised fails to circumcise the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his kin. He has broken my covenant.

Can someone revisit these verses, and give an exact account of what actually it means to the Jewish faith?

And also what exactly happens/or would happen if a Jewish infant doesnt get circumcised on the 8th day, in the light of the New Covenant?

If we are justifying it for medical or cultural reasons, I would not be interested...But if its for religious reasons, then I really really want to know!

PS: I do agree Jesus was a jew and even He would have been circumcised...But lets not forget, that even the ones who crucified him were also 'law abiding ,devot ,circumcised Jews'!

[Vickilynn]

Shalom Metro,

May I ask in all sincerity, what exactly is your question then?

You seem to already have a position, but are not posting it.

I do see a problem here in your words "converted Jews." Who do you think "converted Jews" are?

Do you think there are 2 ways to please G-d, one for "converted Jews" and one for anyone else?

And here you say people are "justifying" it [circumcision] That tells me you already have your mind made up against it.

So what exactly are you digging for?

Why don't you just come out and post your position and your Scriptural support for it? For while you asked questions, when you received the answers, it appeared they weren't what you wanted. So I am confused as to what you truly want and are asking about. Could you please clear that up for me?

Thanks!

[Vickilynn]

PS: I do agree Jesus was a jew and even He would have been circumcised...But lets not forget, that even the ones who crucified him were also 'law abiding ,devot ,circumcised Jews'!

Shalom,

This is disturbing. And could this be where you are coming from? Could this be antisemitism rearing its ugly head?

[Guest yod]

I did already answer the question.

Circumcision is still a commandment to be obeyed by a jewish person; messianic or otherwise. It has always been a sign of the covenant between them and God. In Acts 15, the disciples of the original faith community at Jerusalem, in conjunction with the Holy Spirit, decided that it is not mandatory for anyone who isn't jewish.

This question you asked about NT vs OT is an assumption of theological bias. In other words, the Bible doesn't say there is a division of Old vs New Testament commandments. That is a post-biblical christian invention. Every bible I own has 2 pages torn out of it; the one that says "Old Testament" and the one that says "New Testament". God didn't write those pages.

The difference in the NT is that gentiles are added to the commonwealth of Israel without being legally bound to the laws of Israel proper.

[Phil.2:12]

Metropolitan, I applaud your desire to learn more about circumcision from our Messianic friends here on Worthy. But let's not mix apples with oranges when we seek wisdom. Circumcision in the Old Testament was a way an individual was "cut into" the covenant God had made with Abraham. Circumcision in the New Testament is an entirely different matter. Note Paul's discussion on this topic in Romans 2:25-29. Paul winds up by saying "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" (verse 29, KJV). Paul later on in his letter to the Colossian church says "in whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ". So now Paul has identified two separate acts of circumcision, one with human hands and one without. The circumcision done without hands is the circumcision Christ performed when we became a new creation in Christ.

Paul shows us an example of this process in Ephesians 4:22-24 "That ye put off concerning the the former conversion (manner of life) the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness". This is describing the actual process whereby Christ circumcises our heart (both male and female) and is the circumcision made without hands, In this manner, we are now "cut into" the Covenant between God and Christ and no longer need to be "cut into" the Abrahamic Covenant. The Old Covenant (or Testament) between God and Abraham has now been replaced with a new Covenant (or Testament) between God and Jesus which totally replaces the Old Covenant with Abraham.

The covenant that was sealed by the physical circumcision of a male organ is a very painful process, especially in an adult, which Abraham and his household were when they were circumcised. There were no operating rooms with sterile equipment to aid Abraham and the males of his household, nor were there any antisthetics to dull or eliminate the pain. The process of removing the male foreskin consisted of a rock on the outside of the foreskin which a piece of flint was used to actually cut away the foreskin from the inside of the foreskin as the flint struck the underlying rock and thereby cut the foreskin directly beneath it. Quite a painful ordeal for a male regardless of his age, but done at birth or after eight days, the memory of that ordeal is lost to the child, fortunately. For an adolescent or a full-grown male, the process is excruciatingly painful which is the reason why the Gentiles did not want to be circumcised. Because they were "cut into" the New Covenant between God and Jesus by accepting Jesus as their Savior, the physical cutting was unnecessary, for they were not under the old Abrahamic Covenant, but were now under the New Covenant between God and Jesus. Since Jesus had "cut away" or removed the old man and had replaced it with the new man, no further "cutting away" or circumcision was necessary for the Gentile believers, a great relief to those who understood the pain and suffering that they would have to endure.

However, to answer the question posted at the beginning of this thread "Is circumcision still an issue even for messanic Jews" one would have to determine just what school of thought the Messanic Jew came from. If they were Orthodox, then very definitely it is an issue with them. If Conservative, then maybe so, maybe not. If Reform, probably not, at least not to the level an Orthodox Jew would rise to.

[Vickilynn]

However, to answer the question posted at the beginning of this thread "Is circumcision still an issue even for messanic Jews" one would have to determine just what school of thought the Messanic Jew came from. If they were Orthodox, then very definitely it is an issue with them. If Conservative, then maybe so, maybe not. If Reform, probably not, at least not to the level an Orthodox Jew would rise to.

Shalom,

As a Messianic Jew, I have to disagree with this.

The focus is on new life in Messiah, not Judaism. This is something that people seem to overlook when talking about Messianic Jews - we are born-again, Spirit-filled, Bible-Believing Children of King Jesus.

[hmh]

That ignores the purpose of circumcision. It is a sign of the Covenant between God and the jewish people. Any messianic jews would have been circumcised on the 8th day already. This commandment was never rescinded....but it was never mandatory for gentiles either.

Necessary for salvation? No...but it is an important symbol of obedience and faith to a jewish person just like baptism is to a gentile.

I am not jewish but my 3rd son was born right after I was saved and we had him circumcised on the 8th day according to the commandment. My other 3 sons who were circumcised at birth. Apparently the medical benefits were known to God at Creation but doctors didn't find out until recently.

Aren't most male babies circumcised (at birth) in America these days?

It depends on where you live. Here most are not, except those in the Jewish religion. I wanted my son to be circumcised, but because in Florida the father has no say so, my wife refused to allow him to be circumcised. As mad as I was, I had no say so in the matter.

Only the mothers have any control of the baby. The fathers are merely looked upon as those who only provide financial support, and nothing else.

[OopsMartin]

That ignores the purpose of circumcision. It is a sign of the Covenant between God and the jewish people. Any messianic jews would have been circumcised on the 8th day already. This commandment was never rescinded....but it was never mandatory for gentiles either.

Necessary for salvation? No...but it is an important symbol of obedience and faith to a jewish person just like baptism is to a gentile.

I am not jewish but my 3rd son was born right after I was saved and we had him circumcised on the 8th day according to the commandment. My other 3 sons who were circumcised at birth. Apparently the medical benefits were known to God at Creation but doctors didn't find out until recently.

Aren't most male babies circumcised (at birth) in America these days?

It depends on where you live. Here most are not, except those in the Jewish religion. I wanted my son to be circumcised, but because in Florida the father has no say so, my wife refused to allow him to be circumcised. As mad as I was, I had no say so in the matter.

Only the mothers have any control of the baby. The fathers are merely looked upon as those who only provide financial support, and nothing else.

Seems it used to be that most male babies were circumcized because they realized it is actually healthier. However, that is no longer the case.

I'm sorry to hear that you were not allowed to have that input in your childs life.

Edited May 13, 2007 by OopsMartin

[Phil.2:12]

However, to answer the question posted at the beginning of this thread "Is circumcision still an issue even for messanic Jews" one would have to determine just what school of thought the Messanic Jew came from. If they were Orthodox, then very definitely it is an issue with them. If Conservative, then maybe so, maybe not. If Reform, probably not, at least not to the level an Orthodox Jew would rise to.

Shalom,

As a Messianic Jew, I have to disagree with this.

The focus is on new life in Messiah, not Judaism. This is something that people seem to overlook when talking about Messianic Jews - we are born-again, Spirit-filled, Bible-Believing Children of King Jesus.

Thanks, Vickilynn, I appreciate this information as it helps me to understand the Messanic Jew better. I stand corrected.