Christian Zionists and antisemitism

[Brownie]

Well I never knew that, I feel quite queasy now, gone right off cornflakes.
(Hee hee, will have to tell my old man why he has a bit missing.)

HH said: "It was done as a matter of routine by the midwives who managed home deliveries (the great majority of births). No physician was ever involved. The midwife would ask the mother if she "wanted him done" and that was that. She carried a special little implement in her black bag to enable her to perform the task. "

Midwives relied on tips back then.....

[ad_orientem]

So what about the quote from Spud then? Did God get it wrong or told Abraham a lie; a bit of primal spin.

It was for a certain people for a certain time. Christ instituted new sacraments of initiation.

[Harrowby Hall]

Midwives relied on tips back then.....

... and home deliveries are done by Amazon not by midwives ...

[floo]

Let's be deadly serious for a minute, there must be men on this forum who are circumcised and women who have men who've been circumcised.  Did they suffer?

(My husband is circumcised and has no idea why, remembers nothing about it.  Must have happened when he was a baby.  He's not Jewish.)

My husband and his older brother were circumcised by the midwife as babies. Their evangelical Christian parents wanted them done as they thought that was what God required  No doubt it was painful, but of course they don't remember that now, but that is no excuse for having had it done for no better reason than thinking the sky fairy wished it.

[Harrowby Hall]

In most cases Floo, religion had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to circumcise. It was really not much more than a fashion decision: the fashion was to have your boys circumcised.

There was a belief that they were doing the right thing for their little boys. That it would be "better" for them.

It was almost certainly not a "parental" decision, I doubt that men were ever consulted - baby care was not their responsibility.

[floo]

In most cases Floo, religion had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to circumcise. It was really not much more than a fashion decision: the fashion was to have your boys circumcised.

There was a belief that they were doing the right thing for their little boys. That it would be "better" for them.

It was almost certainly not a "parental" decision, I doubt that men were ever consulted - baby care was not their responsibility.

In my husband's case it was definitely a parental decision. His mother told me about it.

[Brownie]

From what I've heard, circumcision is still common practice in the States.
In African countries it is routinely done, not for religious reasons but cultural.
Ah well.

Mr Kellogg was certainly mistaken in thinking that circumcision stops shenanigans.

[jeremyp]

The 'myth'

No need for the scare quotes.

states that the world would be blessed through Abraham's seed. This was fulfilled in the death and resurrection of Christ.

So what, it was still a disastrous way to guide 20th century geopolitics.

God's glory was in the Temple until the Exile, when it left and didn't return until Jesus came. Jesus then left it desolate (Matthew 23) and so it is no longer a sacred site and belongs to whoever can hold it.As I said, the original purpose of the British offer of land in East Africa that was part of the British Empire, was to protect Jews, because they were being persecuted. They were eventually given Palestine on the basis that they wouldn't accept anywhere else. (Although there were also strategic reasons)

They were lucky that anybody was offering them anything. Other displaced peoples don't get to be given free countries 2,500 years after their ancestors lost control of them the first time.

[Brownie]

Reading this thread made me wonder when Sass will be back from wherever she's gone;  regardless of what some posters  think about her long quotes, she grasps and conveys the meaning/message behind the Biblical stories very well..

(I do realise "the meaning" will not be worth anything to a non-believer but even so it is interesting and helpful in understanding people's beliefs better.)

[Nearly Sane]

Reading this thread made me wonder when Sass will be back from wherever she's gone;  regardless of what some posters  think about her long quotes, she grasps and conveys the meaning/message behind the Biblical stories very well..

(I do realise "the meaning" will not be worth anything to a non-believer but even so it is interesting and helpful in understanding people's beliefs better.)

Just to note as per post in Banned Posters thread, link below, Sassy is currently suspended


http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=6939.50

[Harrowby Hall]

The 'myth' states that the world would be blessed through Abraham's seed. This was fulfilled in the death and resurrection of Christ. God's glory was in the Temple until the Exile, when it left and didn't return until Jesus came. Jesus then left it desolate (Matthew 23) and so it is no longer a sacred site and belongs to whoever can hold it.

Not much of a prophecy, was it!

According to the Old Goat Herder's Book of Myths and Fairy Tales, there were 42 generations between Abraham and Jesus.

A quick calculation suggests that if each individual in each generation had just two children, by the time of Jesus, Abraham's seed would have accounted for than 400,000,000,0000 individuals. Just about anyone on Planet Earth alive at that time would have been qualified to fulfil the prophecy. Most, I suspect, several times over.

And for that THAT we have the international instability that now afflicts us?

[Jack Knave]

It was for a certain people for a certain time. Christ instituted new sacraments of initiation.

That is not what God said in the quote that Spud put up. It said It would accept none other than those with this sign, else they would have broken Its covenant. God also says it is an everlasting covenant.

From Spud's post:-

13Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

[ippy]

My husband and his older brother were circumcised by the midwife as babies. Their evangelical Christian parents wanted them done as they thought that was what God required  No doubt it was painful, but of course they don't remember that now, but that is no excuse for having had it done for no better reason than thinking the sky fairy wished it.

Floo does your husband ever go out wearing a white scarf?

ippy

[ad_orientem]

That is not what God said in the quote that Spud put up. It said It would accept none other than those with this sign, else they would have broken Its covenant. God also says it is an everlasting covenant.

From Spud's post:-

13Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

The Gospels tell us that God instituted a new covenant. Christ shows us that the Jews didn't understand God's covenant with Abraham at all. They are slaves to law and will be condemned bybthe law unless they convert to Christ. Circumcision of the flesh is not necessary to be a descendent of Abraham. Faith in Jesus Christ and a circumcised heart through baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity is what makes us descendents of Abraham.

[Harrowby Hall]

Errr .... how do you circumcise a heart?

[Brownie]

Paul speaks about  that in Romans 2, saying that circumcision as practiced by the Jews is an outward sign of the covenant with the Lord, however if they are sinful the circumcision is of no value.   His argument is that we need to focus on the spiritual rather than physical and if we allow the Holy Spirit into our hearts we will be purified;  he uses "circumcision" as a metaphor for this.

(And before anyone says, when he speaks of "heart" he does not mean the muscular organ in the middle of our chest)

[Nearly Sane]

Paul speaks about  that in Romans 2, saying that circumcision as practiced by the Jews is an outward sign of the covenant with the Lord, however if they are sinful the circumcision is of no value.   His argument is that we need to focus on the spiritual rather than physical and if we allow the Holy Spirit into our hearts we will be purified;  he uses "circumcision" as a metaphor for this.

(And before anyone says, when he speaks of "heart" he does not mean the muscular organ in the middle of our chest)

So what does he mean?
And why is 'he' right?

[Brownie]

Christians cannot be tied to the old traditions which are meaningless without inner conviction. 

[Nearly Sane]

Christians cannot be tied to the old traditions which are meaningless without inner conviction.

so inner conviction is the thing that determines whether someone is a Christian? So the Westboro Baptists are Christians?

and is a_o lacking the inner conviction? Or is he right that if you are circumcised you cannot get to heaven?

[Brownie]

The 'inner conviction' comes from the Holy Spirit who opens our eyes to truth.
I certainly don't believe everyone who claims to be Christian has the gift of the Holy Spirit, throughout history there are records of those who speak and behave in ways that indicate they have lost touch with God, and so it continues. 

[Brownie]

I came across this site quite by accident when looking up something else;  thought I'd post it here as it is very relevant to this thread.  It gave me the creeps just a bit but does illustrate what Steve was talking about in the op.

http://www.cfoic.com/biblical-israel-or-west-bank/?gclid=CJLIwsum1M4CFckp0wodZH0AOA

From the section:'  "Reasons why a Christian should support Israel" :

REASON #3–

BECAUSE GOD’S GIFT AND CALL ON ISRAEL HAVE NOT BEEN REVOKED. Romans 11:28 “but as regards the election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and call of God are irrevocable.”  The covenant with Abraham has not been replaced by the New Covenant. The eternal covenant God made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their descendants has NOT been set aside.


That contradicts much of what we have been saying in posts above.
---
Further to all that I spent some time a while ago trying to explain to a couple of people that the attitude of Israelis is not generally favourable towards Christian Zionists.  To no avail of course.
On that topic I thought the article below was pretty good:

http://www.jewishpost.com/archives/news/Israels-Most-Hated-Friend.html

[Nearly Sane]

The 'inner conviction' comes from the Holy Spirit who opens our eyes to truth.
I certainly don't believe everyone who claims to be Christian has the gift of the Holy Spirit, throughout history there are records of those who speak and behave in ways that indicate they have lost touch with God, and so it continues.

But they'll just say you have lost the 'inner conviction' and lost touch with God

[Brownie]

Oh very likely, water off a duck's back.

[Jack Knave]

The Gospels tell us that God instituted a new covenant. Christ shows us that the Jews didn't understand God's covenant with Abraham at all. They are slaves to law and will be condemned bybthe law unless they convert to Christ. Circumcision of the flesh is not necessary to be a descendent of Abraham. Faith in Jesus Christ and a circumcised heart through baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity is what makes us descendents of Abraham.

So God got it wrong with the everlasting bit then? God had a change of heart?

[Spud]

I came across this site quite by accident when looking up something else;  thought I'd post it here as it is very relevant to this thread.  It gave me the creeps just a bit but does illustrate what Steve was talking about in the op.

http://www.cfoic.com/biblical-israel-or-west-bank/?gclid=CJLIwsum1M4CFckp0wodZH0AOA

From the section:'  "Reasons why a Christian should support Israel" :

REASON #3–

BECAUSE GOD’S GIFT AND CALL ON ISRAEL HAVE NOT BEEN REVOKED. Romans 11:28 “but as regards the election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and call of God are irrevocable.”  The covenant with Abraham has not been replaced by the New Covenant. The eternal covenant God made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their descendants has NOT been set aside.


That contradicts much of what we have been saying in posts above.
---

Hi Brownie,
The covenant God made with Abraham was conditional upon him walking before God and being blameless (Genesis 17:2). Circumcision was an outward sign of this. If Israel did not keep the covenant, God was not obliged to keep it. Hence the oppression of Israel by the Philistines, the Exile, etc.
After the Exile, Israel was restored to the land in fulfillment of prophecy. But when the Messiah came they rejected him, and also persecuted the church. I'm not aware of any prophecy of them being re-gathered to Palestine after having done that. In Romans 11 Paul speaks about the conversion of the Jews. J.B.Jordan thinks this took place in the years preceding AD 70. It's not future to us.