Hello,
I have some questions concerning circumcision.
The 1st council of Jerusalem was concerning this issue: If they ought to circumcise Gentilles that were recently baptised, who were not following the teachings and commandments layed out in the Mosaic Law of Circumcision before?
The answer was no. There was no need.
This was not a mandatory requirement to be saved. The presiding Bishop (Saint James) concluded & summarised the council minutes and said that it was not necessary to be circumcised once u have been baptised to be saved.
Why then do we, as Coptic Orthodox men, get circumcised?? We are not jews by origin?? Why then do this to us?? :(
Secondly, Saint paul converted 2 men: One man, he was born of a Jewish mother and Greek father, he had him circumcised. WHy?
The other man, he was a complete gentile, and he did not have him circumcised. Why?
Also, why did God chose the penis to be cut, and not another part of the body??
And why is it there is no equivalent circumcision for women??
THanks
Comments
I think the key is to understand what the purpose of circumcision was in the Old Testament. God required the Jews to be circumcised. Why? It was a way of showing and confirming the covenant God made with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It was a commitment on the Jews part to worship the One True God, and not to commit themselves to any other gods. Circumcision in the Old Testament is what Baptism is in the New. It is simply a sign of us entering and accepting the covenant that God had made from the beginning. Why do people continue to get circumcised to this day? As jydeacon mentioned, it is more for medical reasons than anything else.
I haven't been circumcised...
Hmm... that's strange. Maybe if you had it cut it would help you grow more in your spiritual life?? It must decrease for you to increase. ;)
But OK, anyway, please can u answer the questions?? concerning the Acts of the Apostle and Circumcision below?
THanks
God ordered it to be so, and it was. Again, God ordered it to be so. Since there is a medical reason for it, while the intent was spiritual, it could surely have been for health reasons as well. See answer to a). Think about it. Circumcision is something that had been going on for centuries and had become ingrained into the Jewish psyche. To quit something cold turkey, after having done for so long, is an unreasonable expectation. The Gentiles did not practice circumcision, so why impose on them something that isn't necessary for salvation at all? In the first century, after Christ's ascension, one of the common thought processes was that in order to become Christian, one had to first become a Jew and then could continue into Christianity. This was a false notion and something Paul strongly opposed, which is why at the Council of Jerusalem, it was all hammered out. One did not need to become a Jew first (be circumcised) in order to become Christian.
Thanks for your answer.
However, you kinda cheated on questions a) and b) - its so easy to say "God ordered it that way, and so it was" - why?? why werent women allowed to be circumcised too!??
I think that's why they have to submit to us, we gave more than they gave. I don't think they'll ever understand how painful that can be.
Secondly, ok, he was a non circumsised male.. why on earth get him circumcised!? Why?? He didnt need it. WHy then did Paul circumcise this man!??
I know that the answers to a) and b) aren't as satisfying as you would like, but there are some things that we will not know the answers to. In Genesis, it speaks about how, as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham, Abraham was required to be circumcised as well as every male and every male child that was born, after 8 days was also supposed to be circumcised. The why, while interesting, isn't important, because it is something God has requested.
As for the story of St. Paul converting two men, if you could find a reference, I would appreciate it. I'm unfamiliar with that story.
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
I know that the answers to a) and b) aren't as satisfying as you would like, but there are some things that we will not know the answers to. In Genesis, it speaks about how, as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham, Abraham was required to be circumcised as well as every male and every male child that was born, after 8 days was also supposed to be circumcised. The why, while interesting, isn't important, because it is something God has requested.
As for the story of St. Paul converting two men, if you could find a reference, I would appreciate it. I'm unfamiliar with that story.
Sure, Paul meets a man that was half Greek and half Jewish (the mom was jewish and the dad was greek). Paul decides he should be baptised. Why?? It was Saint Paul that gave the council of jerusalem saying that circumcision was not needed for salvation. That's great. Then why circumcise this fellow??
Poor man, all that pain for no reason!?
Okay, I found the story you are talking about:
[quote=Acts 16:1-5]1. Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. And a disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek,
2. and he was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium.
3. Paul wanted this man to go with him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those parts, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.
4. Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, for them to observe.
5. So the churches were being strengthened in the faith, and were increasing in number daily.
Now, the portion I have bolded is of particular importance. The man was Jewish by virtue of his mother, and because Paul wanted him to come along and preach with him to Jews, he had the man get circumcised. This is wise on Paul's part because he does not wish to offend the Jews he is trying to convert. Jewish custom dictates that Jews should be circumcised. To have a Jew preaching and not submitting to the customs of his ancestors would have been a serious issue and all those who were listening would not have taken him seriously at all.
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
Okay, I found the story you are talking about:
[quote=Acts 16:1-5]1. Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. And a disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek,
2. and he was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium.
3. Paul wanted this man to go with him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those parts, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.
4. Now while they were passing through the cities, they were delivering the decrees which had been decided upon by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem, for them to observe.
5. So the churches were being strengthened in the faith, and were increasing in number daily.
Now, the portion I have bolded is of particular importance. The man was Jewish by virtue of his mother, and because Paul wanted him to come along and preach with him to Jews, he had the man get circumcised. This is wise on Paul's part because he does not wish to offend the Jews he is trying to convert. Jewish custom dictates that Jews should be circumcised. To have a Jew preaching and not submitting to the customs of his ancestors would have been a serious issue and all those who were listening would not have taken him seriously at all.
Yes. That makes perfect sense. He was a jew to the jews and roman to the romans.
But how is it Paul became a roman?? I thought Jews and Romans didnt mix. And what was the big deal about arresting a roman?
I was reading acts, and some stuff in there was really funny.
Paul was a Roman citizen, he wasn't Roman by birth. In all honesty, I am not sure how citizenship was awarded back then and how it is that Paul became a Roman citizen. But it's no different than you or me. I am living in Canada right now. I was born here and so I possess the passport, the birth certificate and I am a Canadian citizen. However, by blood I am Egyptian, my faith, Coptic Orthodox. My roots do not change because I happen to be a citizen of another country. Now, while the Jews may not have liked the Roman occupation, there were almost certainly advantages to being a Roman citizen. But again, I am not familiar with how Paul obtained his Roman citizenship.
I think nowadays we get circumsized because of medical reasons. what reasons these are i have no clue. that is just what i have heard. this is a great question i would like to see others responses
Yes that's the reason for it now since it was replaced by baptism in the new tastement.
Hmm... that's strange. Maybe if you had it cut it would help you grow more in your spiritual life?? It must decrease for you to increase. ;)
i don't seee this funny....
[quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=5477.msg73008#msg73008 date=1182433314]
[quote author=Κηφᾶς link=topic=5477.msg73005#msg73005 date=1182433075]
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
I think the key is to understand what the purpose of circumcision was in the Old Testament. God required the Jews to be circumcised. Why? It was a way of showing and confirming the covenant God made with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It was a commitment on the Jews part to worship the One True God, and not to commit themselves to any other gods. Circumcision in the Old Testament is what Baptism is in the New. It is simply a sign of us entering and accepting the covenant that God had made from the beginning. Why do people continue to get circumcised to this day? As jydeacon mentioned, it is more for medical reasons than anything else.
OK. let's say its only for medical reasons.... what about the other issues:
a) Why was this circumcision only for men?
b) Why did it involve the penis?
c) Why werent women allowed to get circumcised. OK.. i know a lot of them don't have what we have, but that's not their fault, there could have been something else they could cut off so they too could have been circumcised also in the old testament? Why only men??
d) In the council of Jerusalem, they all decided that baptism was enough for salvation (faith and baptism). Great. So, why did Paul go and Baptise a half jewish man, and not a gentile?? What was his reasoning behind that!??
to add to what Κηφaς said:
b) you can consider midecal reasons (maybe someone who really know how to explain more about this would reply to this topic)
c) i personally consider how men were head of women and how they were resposble for them. so a man who would take of his family would only have a convenat with God....becasue through him the convennta is now upon all of his household. (and also for madical reasons)
if it would make it easier for you it's mroe for madical sexaul reasons.
I mean, there are bishops in our church that still eat only Halal meat, and this is STILL way back from the Jewish traditions. They are still living that, so thinkng that somehow circumcision is also a help to someone baptised is a sincere question.
I the fact that bishops were monks and have taken that way before becoming bishops makes i big diffrent. u think thy'll care about halal meat or not. lol,,,when they get ordaind as bishops, they have to fast a full years for becoming a bishop and resisting that big responsibilty.
and by the way the term 'halal' is more on an Islamic term. yes it goes back to Jewish faith but Muslims took it from them.
Here we may be in the presence of another possible confusion between ethnic practice and Orthodox praxis. It is most definitely not Orthodox praxis that you have to be circumcised; that was decided back at the Council of Jerusalem. In some cultures it remains the practice to circumcise men, and in some African cultures, to perform a related act upon women (this is something human rights organisations try to combat).
As St. James says in Acts 15: Hope that helps.
In Christ,
Anglian
This verse about the Council of Jerusalem has puzzled me because it seems to enjoin to eat meat prepared in the Jewish manner (kosher) yet no Christian body that I've ever heard of seems to interpret it that way, certainly not the Orthodox church.
In Christ
Aidan
A good question. I suspect that it comes down to a matter of practice.
I do know Christians who either do not eat read meat, or abstain from all meat products; and, of course, during the periods of fasting in the Church, we should all follow the guidance in abstaining from meat and other animal products.
In Christ,
John
To understand circumcision we go back to the first man who was ordered by God to perform this act, which is basically taking a piece of flesh and cut it off! Abraham received this this sign as a seal of his faith (Romans 4:11) Now, what was this faith of Abraham? Basically, that God could give life from death!
Sarah had a "dead" womb, but God would create life out of it.
Abraham had to leave his country and go to a dead desert, and God would give him life.
Isaak had to be offered, but God would give him life (how else would Abraham have zillions of descendents?)
Now, this is exactly what happens during circumcision. We take a piece of the human flesh (I can't find another answer why specifically this body part, except the medical reason like Kefas said), we cut it off and the rest of the body gets life, because it's counted with the people of God.
The exact same thing happens in baptism: the old man dies and the new man gets life and becomes a member of the Body of Christ.
Some good and interesting thoughts, but they don't detract from what was said at the Council of Jerusalem. Circumcision was the symbol of the old covenant - baptism of the new. Is that not so?
In Christ,
Anglian
I was just sharing some views on what the act of circumcision had to do with baptism, because it was kind of an eye opener for me when I first heard it, it placed everything in perspective :)
By the way, i have journal articles on the subject if anyone is interested. But i cant attach them because the server wont allow them to be uploaded as they are too big.
Ma salaama,
Matt
i think male circumcision is wrong nowadays, it should be the babies choice
if we suggested all female babies should be circumcised just as we do to males, people would see this as a gross infraction of human rights (its become illegal in many countries)
for me this only shows how warped the cultural acceptance of male circumcision is.
oh and btw did you know the foreskin has over 20 000 nerve endings? thats crazy ... all that... gone :o
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php?topic=5477.15
In Christ
Theophilus
Infection of the penis i.e. phimosis, balanitis, a very slight reduced incidence of urinary tract infection, cancer of the penis etc. are quite uncommon and can be avoided by proper hygiene for the most part and with prevention of accumulation of smegma. I hardly see this as a sales breaker.
The 2 random controlled trials that suggested that routine circumcision reduced HIV transmission (lancet 369, Feb 2007), by the way, is controversial, and is thought not to apply to Western populations.
Why did St. Paul allow Timothy to be circumcised but not Titus? Well, the short answer is that Timothy was a Jew, as his mother was Jew, and he had to observe the Jewish law. Remember St. Paul saying “When I was with the Jews, I lived like a Jew to bring the Jews to Christ” 1 Corinthians 9:20.
So why did St. Paul not circumcise Titus. Again for a simple reason, Titus was not a Jew and circumcising him will be counterproductive in preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles “burdening the Gentile believers” Acts 15:10.
P.S There is more on circumcision on the following link http://www.cirp.org/pages/cultural/glass2/
In Christ
Theophilus
I love your argument. Well documented and well thought. However, as you mentioned this issue is still debated by many scientists and there is no definite answer. As you also mentioned personal hygiene and Christian behaviors will contribute more to a healthy body. Living in the west is a also bonus. But what about the majority of the world populations who don’t even have clean drinking water?
I believe circumcision should not be a doctrine forced by the church and have nothing to do with ones salivation. But looking at it from the health angle every parent or adult must make an educated decision for himself or his children.
In Christ
Theophilus
Circumcision helps in reducing the risk of infection because the foreskin is an ideal place, traps moisture and is warm, for bacteria infestation. Circumcision even reduces the risk of HIV. I hope anyone in the medical field, such as maboosta, will comment more on this. But as for know here is a link that supports the above statement:
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php?topic=5477.15
In Christ
Theophilus
same thing for females... the 'clitoral hood' is an "ideal place, traps moisture and is warm, for bacteria infestation".. you dont see anyone cutting that up
jeez man, one shower a day and you wont get any of these infections... and how the heck can being circumcised help reduce the risk of getting HIV?? thats just stupid, having sex with a prostitute while being circumcised wont give you any protection i dont believe that.... i could circumcise my daughter and she would probably regret it, same goes for my son
oh and btw, there is a greater chance of breast cancer so the best thing to do is to remove the breast glands of young girls or at least remove them at the first sign of trouble without trying any alternative treatments first in order to preserve the breast(women, how do you like it now?????????)
i think i know now why the Bible says that money is the root of all evil-- the only advantages for circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!! its nothing but barbaric torture... and ill repeat this again: 20 000 of the 24 000 nerves GONE if circumcised
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. (Galatians 5:6)