Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
And of course, Moses and the people in the desert knew all of that...
true circumcision, as Jesus pointed out, is a change of heart and mind towards God. As usual, the Jews had a symbolic act for the real meaning.
Jesus said that - and we as Christians, hold to that command - but where is it WRITTEN??? Place yourself into the Jew of 50 AD's position. What is HE going to ask? "Where is it written that circumcision is done away with?" Nowhere. The concept of Circumcision's abolishment would be based on something....unwritten! What occured during Acts 15 should be quite obviously the death knell of Sola Scriptura. Christians practicing something NOT WRITTEN!
I am not arguing against the Christian position. I am arguing against Sola Scriptura and how it was NEVER practiced until Luther decided to make his own state church.
Regards
I don't find ANYWHERE in that statement that Jews no longer have to circumcise their boys. If I remember, Jesus was circumcised, and I would be willing to bet that EVERY Jewish male was circumcised during the time of Christ.
Regards
He taught a deeper, spiritual knowledge of the Torah. That is what is meant by "new wine in old bottles." If you put new wine (new Torah) into old ways (Pharisees, who liked their system better than God's) the old wine bottles explode. They can't handle it. You need new bottles, people with uncircumcized hearts, who love God to carry the new wine.
And yes, the Jews were aware of many things we aren't even aware of today. After all, they stood in God's Presence.
Does circumcision get one into Heaven? It was but an outward sign of obedience. A symbol. What is the first law? To love thy God with all thy heart... You need a new heart to be right before God. A deeper truth to an old symbol.
Yes, by His death and resurrection the price has been paid. All those whom Christ came to redeem stand blameless before God because He took upon Himself to pay for their sins, as ordained by our merciful God from before the foundation of the world.
To add further requirements to Christ's perfect atonement is to belittle the gift itself.
Did Christ pay for your sins, or not?
Before baptism we are in bondage of original sin and after baptism we are free from it, but at all times we are made in the image of God and thus not beasts. I see another, later, post from you that appears to contain a more pointed question and I'll get to it shortly.
Well, they weren't aware of a Suffering Servant being the Messiah. Even the Apostles weren't aware of that...
Regards
Rather than answer my question, you are merely changing the subject! It is clear from Acts 15 that Christians do NOT follow Sola Scriptura. Nowhere does the Old Testament do away with circumcision. What would the "Protestant" of 50 AD say to all of this? "where is that in the bible"!!! You are in the same boat as the Judaizers.
Isn't it obvious that Christians did not and still do not need to follow "Bible alone"?
Regards
They should have been. After all their teachers studied Isaiah.
Did Christ die for the "sin of the world" or not? But yet, you claim that Jesus only died for the elect...
Regards
New wine, new hearts,new bottles.
It is only Christians AFTER the fact that put together Isaiah's suffering servant verses and the Messiah. Only after the Resurrection event. Apparently, the message of God's Salvation plan was foretold in hidden ways.
Regards
Again, what does this have to do with unwritten commands? If the Church is to follow Sola Scriptura, then what about Acts 15? Can you answer that?
The prophet told them the time of the coming of the Messiah. The leaders of the people kept it from them. Jesus was angry with the leaders for this very reason, and told them so. Because they did not know the time of their visitation, their temple was destroyed and they were dispersed, just as Moses told them they would be. They had no excuse, none of them.
Ro 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: Ro 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.
1Co 7:19
Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
Plus circumcision is a sign of the old covenant. We have a new covenant, a new testament, and consider the old done away with.
Which is why Christ said "Ye must be born again", or "You must have a change of heart." When Jane Fonda says "I'm a Christian, but not a "born-again" Christian", she may as well say, "I'm a Christian, but not a Christian."
I agree with all of the things you said.
However, none of them address the question I asked, and that is "What written command of the OT gives the Apostles the power to do away with circumcision"? I am Catholic, of course I agree that Christ brought about a new Covenant, gave the Apostles the power to bind and loosen, etc...
But if the first Christians believed in SOLA SCRIPTURA, then the actions of the Apostles in Acts 15 clearly goes against this "man-made rule". There is nothing in the Old Testament that gives men the power to overrule God's "everlasting" Covenant. Yet, men in 47 AD got together and did precisely that...
I know WHY! But tell me about how Sola Scriptura fits in there.
Please address the question, if you can.
Regards
This is how I understand the claim that the Apostolic Church, East and West, is messianic Judaism. I believe it is close to what Agrarian was saying.
If the Jews of the 1st century, en masse, had accepted Christ, then they and their heirs to this day would have developed a church that would have been in essentials identical to the Catholic or Orthodox Churches. The differences with what we actually have today and what they would have developed would have been important but they would not have been any greater than the differences between the Orthodox and the Catholic. They would be primarily differences of discipline: relative authority of the bishops, leavened/unleavened bread, celibacy, fasting, etc. There would have been differences in terminology. Possibly, Jerusalem and not Rome would have been the papal see, and Hebrew and not Latin/Greek combo would have been the universal language of the Church.
The Church would have remained hierarcical, sacramental and liturgical, because historical Judaism is hierarcical, sacramental and liturgical. The Scripture would have been seen embedded in Tradition and unseparable from it. Synergism between the man of free will and the Divine Grace would have been the theological norm.
That was not to be and so what we now know as Judaism is a religion that rejected not only Christ, but also the faith of the Old Testament fathers. When we look to the modern synagogue we see a mixture of the pre-Christian covenantal remnant, the loss of levitical priesthood, linked in the mysterious ways to the rejection of Christ the Eternal Priest, and layers of post-Christian theological development that is of no relevance to the question on hand.
We also have many Jews converting to Christianity and some of them are opting for one or another Protestant community, with which they blend their ethnic flavor. God bless them for that. Post-Christian Judaism has a natural affinity with Protestantism in that the former suffered the loss of priesthood through the rejection of Christ the Priest, and the latter -- through anticlericalism of Luther and his followers. To see modern Jewish converts to Protestantism as validating it is to see one error attempting to validate another.
Now let us look at the relationship that the New Testament established with the Old. In that, we clearly see a radical new light revealing its meaning. No longer do we read the Old Testament independently of the New. The precepts of the Old Testament are obeyed not because God gave them to Moses but because, and inasmuch as, Christ validated them, or reason validates them as natural law. The continuity of the Divine Revelation does not mean uniformity. Christians do not circumsize babies but they baptize them; eat pork and lobster; venerate icons and pray to Mary and saints; offer the eternal sacrifice of Christ at Golgotha and not cattle and fowl. Had the Jews accepted Christ when St. Peter preached to them, they would be baptizing babies, celebrating the Eucharist and venerating the statues and icons with us. One day, we all will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.