Circumcise Gentile converts??

[R' Y'hoshua Moshe]

Shalom Loving Neighbor,

I think that Natanel brings ups excellent points and addresses your objections well. Those whom where not circumcised before the commandment was given (Avraham ect.) would not be responsible during that time to do so. But, this is not what we are speaking of. It is those whom have agreed to the covenant of that we speak of. And, is clear that there is only one law for both the native born and the foreigner in this case.

If you don't feel you have joined the people of Israel and are subject to the "one " commandment given to both native born and foreigner as seen in the books of Sh'mot/Exo. (12:49), Vayikra/Lev. (24:22), and B’midbar/Num. (15:15-16,29)....that is one thing. But, you simply cannot claim to keep and neglect a clear sign for one of the covenants found therein. Like Natanel pointed out, it is not a matter of keeping perfectly...this has never been the point. It is about making an attempt to do so.

I firmly believe that the Father has had many in America circumcised by His direct will regardless of the reason of their parents. If one is already circumcised, I believe the requirement has already been fulfilled and that it was the Father's will. But, for those whom have not been circumcised and wish to take hold of the covenants as found in ...such a one has no excuse. Perhaps the Father decides to test such individuals. You simply cannot purposefully neglect a commandment in ...a covenant sign of the covenant of Avraham...and call yourself observant...Being observant means observing .....making an attempt to keep the covenants found therein. The is clear that the individual that joins Israel and refuses to be circumcised was to be cast out....

"The uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant."
- Bereshit (Gen.) 17:14

Obviously, this speaks of the person whom can make conscience decisions for themselves (older adolescents and adults) and not children. But, if someone does not claim to have joined Israel and the covenants of ...I believe such a one is less accountable to the above scripture passage. There is no getting around it. Sha'ul's (Paul's) words can be easily twisted, but the is very clear on this matter.

Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Rom 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Rom 3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

meditate on these verses and the ones above and we see in many places when this argument comes up that the Jews say they must be circumcised and the scripture contend with that thinking.

Rom 2:29 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.

I think you are missing the point...the terms "circumcision" and "uncircumcision" simply are terms throughout scripture to describe "Jew" and "Gentile" and of course both are justified by faith. But, our works show what we believe. Again, this thread addresses those individuals whom wish to take hold of the covenants of (we are not speaking of anyone else). Therefore, if one agrees to do this and does not become circumcised (as it is one of the requirements when agreeing to keeping all the covenants in )...such an individual is indeed sinning. The very definition of sin is transgression of /The Law (1Yochanan/1John 3:4).

In regards to the three year comment, this was a general suggestion for one that has claimed to agree to and the point at which accountability should be expected. We are simply backing up what clearly says...there is one Law for Yisrael and for all those whom join themselves to Yisrael...this is made abundantly clear in ...and yes, this includes all the covenant stipulations found therein.

Just to make clear for all of you out there whom are Gentiles and have not been circumcised, I am not saying that you are not saved or that you do not have a relationship with G’d or Yeshua The Messiah…I am only making the point that once you have claimed to join Yisrael and it’s covenants…at that time you are accountable to them and at that time you could realistically describe yourself as “ Observant”.

Shalom aleychem b’shem Yeshua HaMashiach,

Reuel

[LovingNeighbor]

Shalom Reuel,
In your first statement you state that Avraham was somehow exempt even though the covenant was made with him and for 13 years he was not circumcised. Then the commandments was given to him and he was circumcised. so one couldn't say they aren't in the covenant without physical circumcision.

The next point about it clearly being a commandment and once accepting the covenant having to be circumcised or it's a sin. just doesn't hold up. Al of the CHildren of Israel that were being chosen by God in the wilderness were not circumcised, they were under the covenant, and given the and it was after the commandment yet YHWH dwelt among them and they kept Pesach and were not cut off. How do you explain this. If what you say is true this would not be so. and This is Israel we are talking about who we are supposed to join.

Then when we bring up Shaul's clear verses in multiple places you try and spiritualize them away by saying he's not talking about circumcision just Jews and Gentiles.
Rom 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
his uncircumcision, that's pretty clear. and how if circumcision was a commandment how could an uncircumcised keep the righteousness of the law, it would be impossible

The verse in gen 17:14 is as I said referring to one born into a observant home that was not circumcised not about those joining to Israel, you forgot to post the verse before it talking to those born in Israel and what happens if they don't circumcise their sons, they would be cut off. not talking about the stranger.
Gen 17:13 **He that is born in thy house**, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Gen 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.



the stranger will be circumcised when Israel is gathered and in the land, then their shall be one law for the homeborn and the stranger that joins themselves to them, in the land.
notice the first line for when this will happen:
Num 15:13 **All that are born of the country** shall do these things after this manner, in offering an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
Num 15:14 And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; as ye do, so he shall do.
Num 15:15 One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD.
Num 15:16 One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

you have to read the context of these verses to not misunderstand them. you can't go in like a surgeon and disect just what sounds good. Each of these things in context say the same thing which then makes sense why paul says what he says over and over which is outward circumcision is not the prescription for strangers drawing to God, many come with circumcision of the spirit and that is way more important. Avraham is one example and Israel is another that were selected out of all Israel to inherit the land, Only a few of them that were circumcised were selected to enter the kingdom the vast majority God found acceptable were not, but they had to be once entering the kingdom. Your understanding goes against the two most important models of people accepted by God, Avraham, and righteous Israel. So it sounds like an understanding of men and not of , it falls apart. same problem Paul was dealing with in his time as strangers were coming to Yahshuah and not to Judiaism. They, almost like catholics, thought somehow ritual was the way, but the ritual was as Paul said to get them to the spiritual side. It was a tool, but don't forsake the goal for the tool. This I think is why Paul gets so misunderstood because he seemed to teach people the was not the Goal, as far as the letter of the Law but that it should change the spirit. Those literalist couldn't see past the letter and thought it somehow diminished it but it didn't it was the goal of the written to get you to spiritual represented by Messiah.

it is the outside of the cup verses the inside. but do we negate the law, no we go back and fulfill it by keeping both spirit and letter. but one should not boast the other. they were on a path both coming from diferent directions, shall the thousands of years of practice be thrust on those who just walked in the door, no leave them alone, for they came in by spirit of love, and those with the letter lack that many times, they both need to work on what they don't have to get both witnesses, only then shall they be established.
If Avraham and Israel were not observant by your standard for not being circumcised yet chosen by God, I will follow their path and not one that negates and doesn't represent the people they are trying to join to, in Avraham's covenant, and Israel as a a people.
Shalom

[LovingNeighbor]

Shalom, Oh by the way the part about God circumcising people outside of the covenant who weren't keeping Toah and openly sinning, Cmon.. if that was the case I could say because I was born Naturally circumcised that Maybe God did it himself and it was his will so I don't need to do it. That would also mean that he chose those people to be in his covenant without their will. has that happened anywhere where he circumcised someone not observing and said call it good later. If it were a sin for the parents not to circumcise their child on the 8th day, as the vast majority of circumcisions done in hospitals are done on the day after birth with a vitamin k shot not on the 8th day then they would as you say still be sinning and breaking the commandment, on top of that his verse about not circumcising on the 8th day or you would be cut off would not be true, so you can't have your cake and eat it too. It's like a bob and weave. my non circumcision done by parents not entering into the covenant and breaking the commandment of when to do it is valid and accepted, but others are sinning by not being circumcised and trying to keep . it is so far from the truth. If your going to be stringent on what you belive, you have to be consistent and go get circumcised yourself for the covenant, a pagan as many of us were, who circumcised their kid so they could have an easier time peeing is not anymore circumcised than an uncircumcised man in regards to the covenant of God. If someone has saturday off and is a pagan is he keeping the sabbath. I don't think so.

no Where should one be looked as less by trying to keep and not being circumcised. he says the circumcision (Parents circumcising their kids on the 8th day) shall be a sign of the covenant they have with God, No covenant, the scrib of flesh means nothing. Lets get real. I would at least respect if you said OK lets go both get circumcised. but as Paul says you want to lay a burden on strangers that you yourself have not done.
Shalom!

[NaildWithHim]

Reuel,

Please tell me if you can grasp this or not:

(Ephesians 5:29-32 Messianic Renewed Covenant)
For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Messiah also does the assembly, because we are members of His body.
"FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND SHALL CLEAVE TO HIS WIFE; AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH."
This mystery is great; but I am speaking in regard to Messiah and the assembly.

If I am flesh of His flesh, and bone of His bone I'm circumsized. Period! That's how intimate the relationship is. Our love for one another is not in a written code, but from the heart.

I'm very surprised none of you have yet mentioned Mikvah.


Shalom
Naild

[Chizuk Emunah]

1. Vayikra 12:3 for as it says children of Israel(those born in Israel) again not a commandment to all peoples. If you are born of a observant Father and not a circumcision your father has sinned. and you should straight way get circumcised. because you are a child of Israel. this is not the same as those who were not born as a child of Israel and are not in the land. In my opinion.

I disagree with your interpretation. Whenever the uses the term "bnei Yisrael" (children of Israel), it is a reference to the descendents of Ya'akov and not a reference to those born in HaEretz.

as one born in the land, it again puts the focus of circumcision to those who were native born. The problem with this statement that they can't keep Pesach is the children of Israel for 40 years kept 40 pesachs while YHWH was with them in the tabernacle. Why no mention of them not keeping it or being able when the Father would certainly said something if all of those who would go into the promised land were not circumcised and coming before him. Again the statement made just doesn't line up with what happened and is an interpretation of 1 or 2 verses but doesn't take into account all the other scriptures.
3.your point about acts 15 is that it was about salvation. my point exactly they were trying to have people who weren't native born or in the land get circumcised and they were told it was wrong.
4.my point on observant you seem to be in agreement with me not opposed because the statement made was one shouldn't call themselves observant if they are not circumcised. This would mean Avraham after making the covenant with God shouldn't claim to be observant, nor all the children of Israel chosen to receive the promises. It just doesn't line up with scripture.

Okay, so what you're saying is that observance is only required in HaEretz? If that is the case, then I disagree completely.

your last point is we are responsible for one anothers observance.

Actually we are only responsible for one another's observance if they are part of Yisrael, or wish to join Yisrael. Is not Yisrael both punished and rewarded corporately? The Mashiach was not rejected by all of Yisrael, only some. Yet the offer of the Kingdom was rescinded. Why? Because all of Yisrael did not accept the Mashiach.

lovingneighbor said:

So it sounds like an understanding of men and not of , it falls apart. same problem Paul was dealing with in his time as strangers were coming to Yahshuah and not to Judaism. They, almost like catholics, thought somehow ritual was the way, but the ritual was as Paul said to get them to the spiritual side.

I really think you are misunderstanding the situation. It was not that Shaul was teaching that Judaism was wrong, for if he was he would have been rebuked by the Beit Din in Yerushalyim. The problem that Shaul was dealing with was that certain men were teaching that you had to come to Judaism first, then be saved.

Allow me to re-iterate my earlier comments: "So, we can readily see that the crux of the argument was not just circumcision, but whether or not one needed to be circumcised before being saved.

So, down to the heart of the matter..... Does one need to be circumcised before they are saved from eternal separation? The definitive answer is no, they do not. Should one be circumcised if they wish to join themselves to Yisrael? Absolutely! The requires it."

I would at least respect if you said OK lets go both get circumcised. but as Paul says you want to lay a burden on strangers that you yourself have not done.

For those born Jewish, circumcision is uneccessary as they are already part of Yisrael.

I'm very surprised none of you have yet mentioned Mikvah.

That's because the main issue being discussed is circumcision. But yes, after a man is joined to Yisrael, he should then be circumcised and then immersed in a mikvah in the presence of 3 witnesses.

[LovingNeighbor]

Shalom All,
Natanel, Your first point doesn't account for the stranger who wasn't a child of Ya'akov and is exactly who we are talking about in this thread of those not circumcised by their origin. You have to throw out the context of these commanmdents to not see each time this is talked about it compares the homeBorn vs. the stranger. and the commandments seem to present it is when they go into the land that these strangers not Israel must be circumcised. No one has tackled the fact that Israel was not circumcised for atleast 39 years in the wilderness until they went into the promised land. If it was a sin why would they have not been rebuked, when they made the calf they were rejected, when they were murmurring they were corrected. If it was a sin and as the scripture says none of them born in the wilderness were circumcised then where does it say they were wrong. They weren't I believe their parents were and therefore when they were going into the land they were circumcised. It said a second time? Hmm what was the first, oh yeah it was because they were circumcised in the heart and in the spirit so the second witness was in the flesh to establish them.

Their Fathers were circumcised in the flesh but not in the heart and they were not established by 2 witnesses and so died in the wilderness. This is exaclty what Paul says when he says those who were circumcised by(origin) of faith (ie the fathers and Jews of his argument) vs. those who were not circumcised but by keeping the spirit of faith were circumcised in the heart. He said do those in the spirit (ie children of the disobediant Israel and Gentile) void the the letter of the law, God forbid, they establish it. Meaning they are circumcised in the spirit then need to be circumcised also in the flesh to establish it.

People try and seperate it but you need both. 2 witnesses, that is why Paul says they establish it, anyone knowing knows that establishing any matter needs 2 witnesses. So to answer your question Naild about Messiah doing it for you, I don't think so. You are the 2nd group that came through faith and so then need to do it also in the flesh, the Jews who were born with it need to have the right spirit to establish themselves, he is speaking to 2 groups who each need the second witness to establish themselves but they are comeing at it from 2 different sides.

2nd Natanel, I am not say observance is only needed in the land, But if a commanmdent says when you come to the land YHWH has promised you what does that mean to those not in the land. There are things like the song of Moses that are going to happen at certain events in certain places, does that mean that if we don't do them somewhere else it's a sin. It's like not having a temple are you sinning then to not bring your offering to the priests. I don't think so. I beleive the circumcision for Gentiles is laid out in the context as it happened to the children of Israel when they go into the land they are to be circumcised if they weren't already. If you feel it is a sin don't sin against your own concience, but to say it is a sin for those not joined to Israel and not in the land doesn't line up with scripture, show me 2 examples in the scriptures or even one that the gentile or stanger who was not with Israel or in the land needed to be circumcised. I don't think you'll find one. Because that is not scriptural it's an Idea of men.

Your point about responsibility if part of Israel I don't think is totally coreect, they message of the Beam and Speck was in the context of being in Israel and we are not responsible for them, they are responsible for them, but we out of love should encourage them and discourage sin. the children of Israel that didn't partake in the sins of Korach were not punished, the children of Israel who spyed the land and would fight were not punished, so that isn't an accurate statement, It didn't mean prophets and servants of God did not have to suffer to Witness to the children, but the scriptures say every man is responsible for his own sin.

Your 4th statement doesn't make sense, that is the problem, you say they don't have to be cirumcised for salvation or eternal seperation, but they do to join to israel, so circumcision is about joining Israel, I thought it was the sign of the covenant made with Avraham. See in your own words what are they not seperate from not being circumcised? to join Israel is the ingathering I think and then I agree you need to be circumcised because those who at that time are joining have had spiritual circumcision and will have a 2nd witness by then I hope also, and Israel will have to have circumcision of the heart by then also. THey inthemselves represent each side and will be 2 witnesses of circumcision, but one should not boast over the other.
You said circumcision is not necessary if they are born Jewish, I don't know if I understand you right, Of course they need to be circumcised if they are born Jewish, You say it's a commandment and I agree if your born Jewish how then do you say they don't have to. they have to because they are part of Israel.

Too many people have come to conclusions of cutting and pasting verses and think they have a formula for circumcision but we all need to look with fresh eyes at this and not just accept what we thought without doing a open minded critical study. Not a study of tradition or mens ideas but go and study all the verses on circumcision and read Pauls writings and most importantly make a discernment between the stranger, what we are talking about here, and the homeborn.
Shalom

[Chizuk Emunah]

Okay, so we need to lay out some groundrules for what we're discussing here:
1. The main topic is circumcision for Gentiles
2. The secondary topic is circumcision for Am Yisrael

Topic one is where the focus of the debate is. Topic two is merely a secondary discussion because circumcision for those who are born Jewish should be a given.

Now that that is done we can continue.



{I will post more on this later as it is late in my part of the country.}

[R' Y'hoshua Moshe]

Thank you Natanel,

This is what I have been also trying to describe....for those whom are Am Yisrael...(people of Yisrael) there is no wiggle room...you must be circumcised. This is also true for all those whom have agreed to keep all the covenants of G'd. When I speak of "circumcision" I am not talking about Gentiles converting to Christianity. I am talking about Gentiles converting to observant Messianic Judaism of their own free will and not out of a sense that they must do this to be saved. For those brothers whom are new and are not in positions being examples to those in the Congregation of Messiah...I would not pressure them right away to become circumcised.....But, for those whom are claiming to be observant and whom are leaders and examples in a Messianic congregation and/or community....this is a whole different matter altogether. Such a one must be held accountable.


Dear Loving Neighbor,

I believe you have misunderstand Sha'uls (Paul's) words. He was not saying that you can fully keep without being circumcised. In regards to Avraham, once he was made aware of the covenant of circumcision....he immediately got circumcised. Brother, if you have a heart for , I encourage you to follow in the footsteps of Avraham....

“Avraham took Yishma'el his son, all who were born in his house, and all who were bought with his money; every male among the men of Avraham's house, and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the same day, as G’d had said to him.” - Beresheet/Gen. 17:23

Furthermore, per the instruction given in parashah "Bo", the children of Israel were circumcised along with the foreigners whom kept Pesach with them. You cannot even technically keep Pesach without being circumcised...

"When a stranger shall live as a foreigner with you, and will keep the Pesach to YHVH, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one who is born in the land: but no uncircumcised person shall eat of it.

One law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you."
- Shemot/Exo. 12:48-49

The above passage covers both people groups (those born native and those coming from the outside of Yisrael) whom wish to be apart of Am Yisrael.

"Thus did all the children of Yisra'el. As YHVH commanded Moshe and Aharon, so they did."
- Shemot/Exo. 12:50

Notice that above passage is given immediately after the instruction for circumcising is given for both the native born Yisraelite and the foreigner….it says the children of Yisrael did as YHVH commanded Moshe and Aharon….that means everyone that kept Pesach (including the mixed multitude) was circumcised….everyone that left Egypt after keeping Pesach where circumcised!

What kind of observancy would we have if it was characterized by people running around uncircumcised and not keeping Pesach??

You seem to be accusing some here on the forum of not having a valid circumcision in the eyes of G'd. Please be more careful with your words in the future as you have absolutely no proof of this (scripturely or otherwise). I am indeed circumcised and have not violated the covenant of Avraham...Furthermore, once the foreskin is removed...it -cannot- be removed again. In fact, in Judaism when a new convert that has already been circumcised joins the covenant, the prodedure is to draw a small drop of blood from the area in question (*if they have already been circumcised as an infant). Again, circumcision does not take place at that time as the individual has already been circumcised. No one circumcised as an infant has a say in the matter (Jew or Gentile)....it is although a much different case when it is the choice of the adult whom needs to be circumcised.

Many Jewish people have been circumcised more out of tradition instead of a heart felt sincere desire to join the spiritual covenant of Avraham. This is true for many Jewish people because the majority of them and their parents are secular. So, because they were circumcised out of tradition instead of a personal belief in the Avrahamic covenant, should they be recircumcised at adulthood when they have a choice? Should these many Jewish people grill their parents for the sincerity in which they had them circumcised? And, if it was just out of tradition would it be unacceptable in the eye's of G'd as a valid circumcision as such a one later turns to Him and His and is no longer secular?? That is rediculous! But, that argument is one that is parallel to what you a proposing.

Circumcision is what is required. The does not give any instruction other than one must be circumcised. And again, if done at birth...neither Jew or Gentile has a say in the matter. Therefore, if the Jew or Gentile that later turns to and all it's covenants is already circumcised, if they are in agreement with the covenant of Avraham...the requirement has already been fulfilled. As you will find out if you ever become circumcised, once the foreskin is completely removed...one cannot be circumcised again.

I do not believe that anything happens by chance. Many in the US have been circumcised. Was it by chance? I think not. I believe this was done by the direct will of Almighty G'd. If the consent of the human mother and father is effective when circumcising their child and bringing them into the Avrahamic covenant...how much more our Heavenly father?

To be honest, I think you are just trying to point the finger at everyone else but yourself and avoiding the right thing to do. But, If you do not claim to be observant and do not claim to be a part of Am Yisrael...than I have less of a disagreement with you. But, I think the problem here is that people want to feel like they are observant without actually keeping some of the commands given in (which in all reality they are perfectly capable of doing).

Dear brother, you are new in , please continue to study without coming to any firm conclusions when it comes to setting aside any commandments or setting any new trends.

I believe we have reached an impasse in this thread. This thread will be temporarily locked until someone feels they truly have something new to say on the matter. If that is the case, please send me a PM indicating so, and I will re-open the thread.

Shalom aleychem chaver v'chaverim,

Reuel