One is a fleshly reminder of the other. A handy reminder at that.
ECT The New Circumcision's warning
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
One is a fleshly reminder of the other. A handy reminder at that.
Interplanner
Well-known member
So: you think one reference in Deut makes it a MAJOR issue of that time. Really!
In the NT it becomes a major issue because it is continuously pit against the tradition. for ex., Galatians, Acts 15 etc. A whole 'sect' of people become called the 'circ' party, etc. Where is that out in the desert in 1400 BC?
You are totally incapable of handling the word.
"I don't ignore it, but apparently it wasn't much of an issue until Messiah came, and missing it when he came had the penalty. And yes, it does show that the Gospel was being preached then; Abraham saw Christ's day; 'the scriptures announced the Gospel in advance to Abraham' etc.
I don't see where the procedure of circ and the 'circ of the heart' overlap at all in either Gen 17 or Dt 10. And we know that Moses knew he would be replaced by Christ as the teacher. "Listen to Him" (spoken from heaven at the baptism of Christ) is a line from Deut. This validates that the old would be discarded."
"You'll say anything to avoid the truth." So says a Christian Zionist. But in his dialectic quarrel he does not say what his "truth" is about Deuteronomy 10: 16
Literal circumcision was a shadow which foretold the metaphorical circumcision of the heart which is the spiritual substance, following Colossians 2: 16-17, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
το δε σωμα του χριστου, "but the body is of the Christ," It does not mean that Christ's body is that which is spiritual. It means the substance is of the Christ, meaning that which is spiritual and eternal is of Christ, not of the flesh. σωμα, soma, which is Strong's number 4983. The meaning of body here is that it is the substance and the shadow cast from the body is not substantive. The body, is something spiritual of Christ. And the "body" is the root, foundation, substance, or essence
Christian Zionists on TOL may disagree with this interpretation of Deuteronomy 10: 16 or Jeremiah 4: 4 or Romans 2; 29. Or in their dialectic game they may say something about Deuteronomy 10: 16, or Jeremiah 4: 4 or Romans 2: 29 which is confusing and ambiguous.
I don't see where the procedure of circ and the 'circ of the heart' overlap at all in either Gen 17 or Dt 10. And we know that Moses knew he would be replaced by Christ as the teacher. "Listen to Him" (spoken from heaven at the baptism of Christ) is a line from Deut. This validates that the old would be discarded."
"You'll say anything to avoid the truth." So says a Christian Zionist. But in his dialectic quarrel he does not say what his "truth" is about Deuteronomy 10: 16
Literal circumcision was a shadow which foretold the metaphorical circumcision of the heart which is the spiritual substance, following Colossians 2: 16-17, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
το δε σωμα του χριστου, "but the body is of the Christ," It does not mean that Christ's body is that which is spiritual. It means the substance is of the Christ, meaning that which is spiritual and eternal is of Christ, not of the flesh. σωμα, soma, which is Strong's number 4983. The meaning of body here is that it is the substance and the shadow cast from the body is not substantive. The body, is something spiritual of Christ. And the "body" is the root, foundation, substance, or essence
Christian Zionists on TOL may disagree with this interpretation of Deuteronomy 10: 16 or Jeremiah 4: 4 or Romans 2; 29. Or in their dialectic game they may say something about Deuteronomy 10: 16, or Jeremiah 4: 4 or Romans 2: 29 which is confusing and ambiguous.
Last edited:
"Literal circumcision was a shadow which foretold the metaphorical circumcision of the heart which is the spiritual substance, following Colossians 2: 16-17, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. "
Remember that Razib Kahn found a correlation between the extent of belief in
a literal interpretation of scripture in denominations and mean
intelligence test scores of people in these denominations.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/05/27/biblical-literalism-and-iq/
The denomination with the highest average intelligence test scores was also
the denomination with the lowest belief in a literal scripture
interpretation, which was the Episcopalians. The denominations with the
lowest average intelligence test scores were also the denominations with
the highest level of belief in a literal interpretation of scripture, The
Assembly of God and Pentecostal denominations.
The Methodist and Presbyterians were in the high middle level on average
intelligence test scores and low middle on belief in a literal view of
scripture, and the Southern Baptists were higher on belief in a literal
view of scripture and low medium on average denomination intelligence test
scores, meaning that this finding supports the idea that there is a
relationship between level of IQ and belief in literalism, with those of
higher IQ being lower on literalism.
The average IQ score of the Episcopalians was about 110 and the average IQ
of the Methodists and Presbyterians was about 103, with the average IQ of
the Assembly of God at about 94 and that of the Pentecostals at about 92.
To the extent that literal or physical circumcision is a result of religious belief, then the Razib Kahn finding of a correlation between belief in Biblical literalism and IQ scores would suggest that literal circumcision would be highest among the literalists.
But to what extent are circumcision rates caused by religious beliefs? Thats an empirical question and not entirely impossible to be answered.
It may be that some of the data on this issue already exists.
When the movement among medical doctors promoting routine circumcision of newborn male babies began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the rise in circumcision rates happened only in the English speaking nations of England, the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Circumcision rates did not increase among
Caucasian peoples in Europe or in Russia as the rates increased in England, the U.S., Canada and Australia. Circumcision rates did not increase then among most Oriental peoples. Circumcision rates did increase in South Korea, but not in Japan.
To interpret this data as indicating that the rise in circumcision rates was due, at least in part, to religious beliefs, you could show that the theology called dispensationalism was gaining in popularity in these five English speaking nations during the period when circumcision rates were rising. Dispensationalism was not gaining in popularity in Germany, France, Russia, etc among Caucasian peoples at this time.
It is true that in England circumcision rates dropped, I believe following World War II or soon afterward. But rates in the U.S. did not began to drop until late in the 20th century when a movement opposing the practice was having some success in reducing circumcision rates, a movement which came to include some nurses.
There is a large and interesting difference in circumcision rates during the last decades between the Northeast, the Upper Midwest and South, on the one hand, and many or most of the states of the Great Planes, the Pacific West and Texas. What cultural or other difference explains this difference in circumcision rates between the East and the West?
See: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/g...on-rates-averages-which-deceive/#.WXQTaLhIuSA
"For Americans, yes, circumcision has nothing to do with Christianity (something that would be obvious if more Americans actually read the New Testament, instead of just quoting selective passages from it). But looking more closely at the data it seems that the decline in circumcision is predominantly a function of its collapse as a normative practice in the western states!"
It is true that the New Testament opposes circumcision, but dispensationalism honors the Old Covenant and those of the physical bloodline so that following this theology may lead to a higher circumcision rate. What about Razib Kahn's finding that those who hold to a literal view of scripture have lower scores on IQ tests? Are people in the Western states more intelligent? Are they more independent thinking? Maybe. But then California, Oregon and Washington have low circumcision rates, and the more independent culture of some Great Planes states does not extend to the three Far West states.
We have to conclude that dispensationalism probably played some role in the rise of circumcision rates from about 1890 to 1946 and afterward in the U.S.until maybe 1985 though not necessarily in all five English speaking nations. But the medical doctors who promoted circumcision during this time probably had ideologies different from those of dispensationalism, which increased the circumcision rate. The most likely medical ideology was the Eugenics movement at the top of that profession during the time period of the rise of routine infant circumcision. For the medical Eugenicists, it was not only religious theology which drove their promotion of circumcision. It was also their desire to reduce the birth rate. The birth rate was reduced considerably from the World War II and Korean War age groups to the Baby Boomer generation of about 1946 to 1964,
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. "
Remember that Razib Kahn found a correlation between the extent of belief in
a literal interpretation of scripture in denominations and mean
intelligence test scores of people in these denominations.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/05/27/biblical-literalism-and-iq/
The denomination with the highest average intelligence test scores was also
the denomination with the lowest belief in a literal scripture
interpretation, which was the Episcopalians. The denominations with the
lowest average intelligence test scores were also the denominations with
the highest level of belief in a literal interpretation of scripture, The
Assembly of God and Pentecostal denominations.
The Methodist and Presbyterians were in the high middle level on average
intelligence test scores and low middle on belief in a literal view of
scripture, and the Southern Baptists were higher on belief in a literal
view of scripture and low medium on average denomination intelligence test
scores, meaning that this finding supports the idea that there is a
relationship between level of IQ and belief in literalism, with those of
higher IQ being lower on literalism.
The average IQ score of the Episcopalians was about 110 and the average IQ
of the Methodists and Presbyterians was about 103, with the average IQ of
the Assembly of God at about 94 and that of the Pentecostals at about 92.
To the extent that literal or physical circumcision is a result of religious belief, then the Razib Kahn finding of a correlation between belief in Biblical literalism and IQ scores would suggest that literal circumcision would be highest among the literalists.
But to what extent are circumcision rates caused by religious beliefs? Thats an empirical question and not entirely impossible to be answered.
It may be that some of the data on this issue already exists.
When the movement among medical doctors promoting routine circumcision of newborn male babies began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the rise in circumcision rates happened only in the English speaking nations of England, the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Circumcision rates did not increase among
Caucasian peoples in Europe or in Russia as the rates increased in England, the U.S., Canada and Australia. Circumcision rates did not increase then among most Oriental peoples. Circumcision rates did increase in South Korea, but not in Japan.
To interpret this data as indicating that the rise in circumcision rates was due, at least in part, to religious beliefs, you could show that the theology called dispensationalism was gaining in popularity in these five English speaking nations during the period when circumcision rates were rising. Dispensationalism was not gaining in popularity in Germany, France, Russia, etc among Caucasian peoples at this time.
It is true that in England circumcision rates dropped, I believe following World War II or soon afterward. But rates in the U.S. did not began to drop until late in the 20th century when a movement opposing the practice was having some success in reducing circumcision rates, a movement which came to include some nurses.
There is a large and interesting difference in circumcision rates during the last decades between the Northeast, the Upper Midwest and South, on the one hand, and many or most of the states of the Great Planes, the Pacific West and Texas. What cultural or other difference explains this difference in circumcision rates between the East and the West?
See: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/g...on-rates-averages-which-deceive/#.WXQTaLhIuSA
"For Americans, yes, circumcision has nothing to do with Christianity (something that would be obvious if more Americans actually read the New Testament, instead of just quoting selective passages from it). But looking more closely at the data it seems that the decline in circumcision is predominantly a function of its collapse as a normative practice in the western states!"
It is true that the New Testament opposes circumcision, but dispensationalism honors the Old Covenant and those of the physical bloodline so that following this theology may lead to a higher circumcision rate. What about Razib Kahn's finding that those who hold to a literal view of scripture have lower scores on IQ tests? Are people in the Western states more intelligent? Are they more independent thinking? Maybe. But then California, Oregon and Washington have low circumcision rates, and the more independent culture of some Great Planes states does not extend to the three Far West states.
We have to conclude that dispensationalism probably played some role in the rise of circumcision rates from about 1890 to 1946 and afterward in the U.S.until maybe 1985 though not necessarily in all five English speaking nations. But the medical doctors who promoted circumcision during this time probably had ideologies different from those of dispensationalism, which increased the circumcision rate. The most likely medical ideology was the Eugenics movement at the top of that profession during the time period of the rise of routine infant circumcision. For the medical Eugenicists, it was not only religious theology which drove their promotion of circumcision. It was also their desire to reduce the birth rate. The birth rate was reduced considerably from the World War II and Korean War age groups to the Baby Boomer generation of about 1946 to 1964,
Last edited:
As is often the case in your posts, northwye, that whole piece is rife with one causal fallacy after another.
Fact of the matter is, that as with the wide spectrum within, say, the Emotional/Overly Emotional, so within the Literal/Too Literal.
Higher Formal Education or lack thereof not only may or may not greatly impact said dynamic, but said dynamic is more a function not only of the makeup of the individual, but is context driven.
Thus, the successful Attorney at Law, Medical Doctor, etc., (one context) who is nevertheless, a fervent Pentecostalist (a different context).
And that first article you cited warned against allowing oneself causal fallacy.
Lol - obviously, you ignored that warning, and as a result, ended up taking it's findings too literally.
You are obviously out to back up that you are onto something.
Your obviously left unexamined bias only proving detrimental to your being able to look at what you are looking at, objectively.
Your post reminded me of the following (from merely one aspect within my own "formal" education)...
Acts 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
In other words...
Acts 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.
Their detractor's causal fallacy is also obvious - but to them.
But you go right ahead and marvel at supposedly "unlearned and ignorant men" if that is what floats your boat.
Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12
Fact of the matter is, that as with the wide spectrum within, say, the Emotional/Overly Emotional, so within the Literal/Too Literal.
Higher Formal Education or lack thereof not only may or may not greatly impact said dynamic, but said dynamic is more a function not only of the makeup of the individual, but is context driven.
Thus, the successful Attorney at Law, Medical Doctor, etc., (one context) who is nevertheless, a fervent Pentecostalist (a different context).
And that first article you cited warned against allowing oneself causal fallacy.
Lol - obviously, you ignored that warning, and as a result, ended up taking it's findings too literally.
You are obviously out to back up that you are onto something.
Your obviously left unexamined bias only proving detrimental to your being able to look at what you are looking at, objectively.
Your post reminded me of the following (from merely one aspect within my own "formal" education)...
Acts 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
In other words...
Acts 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.
Their detractor's causal fallacy is also obvious - but to them.
But you go right ahead and marvel at supposedly "unlearned and ignorant men" if that is what floats your boat.
Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12
Spoiler
http://www.nomorefakenews.com/
This is the web site of Jon Rappoport, who I believe, is Jewish. His site is called "No More Fake News"
This is linked on Rappoport's web site: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/07/20/matrix-logic-verses-real-logic/ "
Bookmark the permalink.
Matrix logic and Real logic
Jul
20
by Jon Rappoport
Matrix logic and Real logic
by Jon Rappoport
July 20, 2017
Included in the The Matrix Revealed is a full 18 lesson Logic & Analysis course, with a teacher’s manual, detailed lesson plans, and a final exam. It’s not a seminar or a workshop or a quick “survey.”
Logic, these days, has been replaced in schools with a mind-control apparatus that involves the following:
EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS EQUAL.
EVERYBODY HAS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WHOLE.
CRITICAL THINKING LEAVES PEOPLE OUT OF THE GROUP AND IS THEREFORE PREJUDICIAL.
If you favor this new formulation and think it’s useful, I have condos on Jupiter for sale.
The point of modern education, more and more, is the GROUP.
“Good people belong to the group.”
“The Group is everything.”
“If you don’t belong to the Group, you have a mental disorder.”
Why is all this emphasis put on the Group?
The answer to that question also gives you the reason logic isn’t taught in schools anymore:
The independent self-sufficient individual is being phased out.
The independent individual who knows how to think and make lucid judgments on his own is a threat to the EMERGING RELIGION OF GLOBALISM.
The emerging religion of Globalism is a fuzzy image of THE GROUP.
The hive.
The colony.
The nest.
The planet.
Mother Earth.
Some people think education has been hijacked for the purpose of training children to become robotic workers for the State. That’s partly true, but I beg to differ. Actually, education is the proving ground for the religion of the Group. That is its real goal. And it’s been the goal for some time.
This religion doesn’t need or want logic. Logic would be disruptive. It would differentiate one student from another. It would reveal there are ways to analyze information that actually come to valid conclusions. Logic isn’t fuzzy. It doesn’t promote the all-inclusive hive."
You could call what Rappoport is talking about - the lack of logic in the thinking of people at this point in time - irrationalism. The lack of logic is part of tearing down the foundations of our civilization in the West, which was created out of Biblical Christianity, the Gospel of Christ, not Roman Catholic religion, not dispensationalism or any other false doctrine. Our Civilization was also created upon the family. Both Biblical Christianity and the family nourished and supported the individual. In order to create a totalitarian world government, and a collectivist society, the foundations of the Western and especially now the American culture must be severely weakened and destroyed. The use of the dialectic game, allied with what is called fake news, is part of this tearing down.
This is the web site of Jon Rappoport, who I believe, is Jewish. His site is called "No More Fake News"
This is linked on Rappoport's web site: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/07/20/matrix-logic-verses-real-logic/ "
Bookmark the permalink.
Matrix logic and Real logic
Jul
20
by Jon Rappoport
Matrix logic and Real logic
by Jon Rappoport
July 20, 2017
Included in the The Matrix Revealed is a full 18 lesson Logic & Analysis course, with a teacher’s manual, detailed lesson plans, and a final exam. It’s not a seminar or a workshop or a quick “survey.”
Logic, these days, has been replaced in schools with a mind-control apparatus that involves the following:
EVERY POINT OF VIEW IS EQUAL.
EVERYBODY HAS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WHOLE.
CRITICAL THINKING LEAVES PEOPLE OUT OF THE GROUP AND IS THEREFORE PREJUDICIAL.
If you favor this new formulation and think it’s useful, I have condos on Jupiter for sale.
The point of modern education, more and more, is the GROUP.
“Good people belong to the group.”
“The Group is everything.”
“If you don’t belong to the Group, you have a mental disorder.”
Why is all this emphasis put on the Group?
The answer to that question also gives you the reason logic isn’t taught in schools anymore:
The independent self-sufficient individual is being phased out.
The independent individual who knows how to think and make lucid judgments on his own is a threat to the EMERGING RELIGION OF GLOBALISM.
The emerging religion of Globalism is a fuzzy image of THE GROUP.
The hive.
The colony.
The nest.
The planet.
Mother Earth.
Some people think education has been hijacked for the purpose of training children to become robotic workers for the State. That’s partly true, but I beg to differ. Actually, education is the proving ground for the religion of the Group. That is its real goal. And it’s been the goal for some time.
This religion doesn’t need or want logic. Logic would be disruptive. It would differentiate one student from another. It would reveal there are ways to analyze information that actually come to valid conclusions. Logic isn’t fuzzy. It doesn’t promote the all-inclusive hive."
You could call what Rappoport is talking about - the lack of logic in the thinking of people at this point in time - irrationalism. The lack of logic is part of tearing down the foundations of our civilization in the West, which was created out of Biblical Christianity, the Gospel of Christ, not Roman Catholic religion, not dispensationalism or any other false doctrine. Our Civilization was also created upon the family. Both Biblical Christianity and the family nourished and supported the individual. In order to create a totalitarian world government, and a collectivist society, the foundations of the Western and especially now the American culture must be severely weakened and destroyed. The use of the dialectic game, allied with what is called fake news, is part of this tearing down.
Interplanner
Well-known member
In other words, northwye, the Group Think you are obviously oblivious you belong to, vs the Group Think you just as obliviously think you are exposing as being only the other side's dark alley.
And this country began on the Roman Catholic Imperialist ideology your Reformed tradition not only never really loosed itself from, but continued forward in.
The whole "God inspired country" nonsense this country is said to have been founded on is nothing more than the Roman Catholic's / Reformed Tradition's "spiritual Israel" Replacement foolishness.
One would think you Replacementists would see the obvious contradiction in your assertion God will never again deal with a nation on the basis of nation, only for you to also assert your "God inspired nation" nonsense.
And many a Dispy has yet to let go of said inconsistent aspect of said Group think, to this very day.
In fact, such take issue to being challenged to consider it in light of their supposed Dispensationalism.
Again, these are many issues, not a "one size fits all," and each is not only relative to the particular context each individual places each issue in, but each individual often perceives a context another individual might, or might not.
:think:
Rom. 5:8
And this country began on the Roman Catholic Imperialist ideology your Reformed tradition not only never really loosed itself from, but continued forward in.
The whole "God inspired country" nonsense this country is said to have been founded on is nothing more than the Roman Catholic's / Reformed Tradition's "spiritual Israel" Replacement foolishness.
One would think you Replacementists would see the obvious contradiction in your assertion God will never again deal with a nation on the basis of nation, only for you to also assert your "God inspired nation" nonsense.
And many a Dispy has yet to let go of said inconsistent aspect of said Group think, to this very day.
In fact, such take issue to being challenged to consider it in light of their supposed Dispensationalism.
Again, these are many issues, not a "one size fits all," and each is not only relative to the particular context each individual places each issue in, but each individual often perceives a context another individual might, or might not.
:think:
Rom. 5:8
Spoiler
Because it goes hand in hand with the obvious but to him - his illogic, to begin with.
Rom. 5:8
The nations of Israel are not churches, they are nations.
This nation (the U.S.) was given the choicest land on the planet.
And Ephraim also did fine: England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Canada. New Zealand, Australia.
Was this by accident or by design?
"They shall wet you with the dew of heaven and seven times shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men and gives it to whomever He chooses."
The Most High did us right. Jacob's birthright.
Right Divider
Body part
I understand that logic is not an area where you have any knowledge, but this single reference proves your "new circ" WRONG.
There are MORE references, but I only needed one to prove your idea wrong.
You are totally incapable of handling anything.
"Why here North? it's a separate topic."
Yes, within church theology Jon Rappoport and his insights about the absence of logic in the utterances of the Marxist Left - and of the mainstream media - is off in some far off different compartment. I don't know if Rappoport is aware of what the Marxist version of the dialectic game is and how its quite similar to what he first called Fake News. He was the first to call what the mainstream media was saying Fake News.
I wonder if John Coleman, if he is still alive, would agree with you.
Transformational Marxism has tried to diminish the spiritual power of the Gospel, and produce a Christianity which is more literal in its interpretation and less spiritual and subtle. Such a spiritually diminished Gospel makes it easier for Transformational Marxist to continue its "long march through the institutions."
John Coleman, a former British Intelligence Agent, said "
"The United States is where we must begin our fight to turn back the tide threatening to engulf us, and where we must meet, and defeat these internal conspirators."
See:
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/johnc...luminati.shtml
John Coleman lists 21 goals of the New World Order. Here are some of these goals, including number 13, "To continue to build up the cult of Christian Fundamentalism begun by the British East India Company's servant Darby, which will be misused to strengthen the Zionist State of Israel."
"2. To bring about the utter destruction of all national identity and national pride, which was a primary consideration if the concept of a One World Government was to work.
3. To engineer and bring about the destruction of religion, and more especially, the Christian Religion, with the one exception, their own creation, as mentioned above.
10. To weaken the moral fiber of the nation and to demoralize workers in the labor class by creating mass unemployment."
Yes, within church theology Jon Rappoport and his insights about the absence of logic in the utterances of the Marxist Left - and of the mainstream media - is off in some far off different compartment. I don't know if Rappoport is aware of what the Marxist version of the dialectic game is and how its quite similar to what he first called Fake News. He was the first to call what the mainstream media was saying Fake News.
I wonder if John Coleman, if he is still alive, would agree with you.
Transformational Marxism has tried to diminish the spiritual power of the Gospel, and produce a Christianity which is more literal in its interpretation and less spiritual and subtle. Such a spiritually diminished Gospel makes it easier for Transformational Marxist to continue its "long march through the institutions."
John Coleman, a former British Intelligence Agent, said "
"The United States is where we must begin our fight to turn back the tide threatening to engulf us, and where we must meet, and defeat these internal conspirators."
See:
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/johnc...luminati.shtml
John Coleman lists 21 goals of the New World Order. Here are some of these goals, including number 13, "To continue to build up the cult of Christian Fundamentalism begun by the British East India Company's servant Darby, which will be misused to strengthen the Zionist State of Israel."
"2. To bring about the utter destruction of all national identity and national pride, which was a primary consideration if the concept of a One World Government was to work.
3. To engineer and bring about the destruction of religion, and more especially, the Christian Religion, with the one exception, their own creation, as mentioned above.
10. To weaken the moral fiber of the nation and to demoralize workers in the labor class by creating mass unemployment."
:rotfl:
Yep, a lot of people don't take the Father's blessings seriously. You're not the first.
:rotfl:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Irony...
Interplanner
Well-known member
OK, perhaps the word new should not be used but it is of the 'heart,' not the ritual in Gen 17. Big deal. The point of the OP is that the same phrase was warned: 'the (failure to obey) will be cut off from his people.' It is not the medical procedure in question when this is used the 2nd time in Acts 3.
Where was the circumcision party in 1400 BC out in the desert with Moses? Nada. But they are the issue in NT background. They were not 'circ. of the heart' and that is what they were to repent of. Agreed? Or is the only kind of thing you know how to say is a generalized putdown?
Fact is, that is your assertion those passages are saying those kinds of things.
You did not prove that is what said passages are talking about.
Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12
Right Divider
Body part
Let's say for the sake of discussion that Jacob had twelve sons.
Almighty God told Jacob a nation and a company of nations would proceed from him.
"I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body." (Genesis 35:11)
This means a nation and a company of nations had to proceed through one of those twelve sons.
Let's see if we can narrow it down.
"Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel — he was indeed the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s bed his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel, so that the genealogy is not listed according to the birthright." (1 Chronicles 5:1)
The birthright should have gone to Reuben since he was the eldest son, but because of his incest he disqualified himself.
So the birthright belonged to Joseph.
"Now when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him so he took hold of his father’s hand to remove it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. And Joseph said to his father, 'Not so, my father, for this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.'
But his father refused and said, 'I know, my son, I know. He also shall become a people and he also shall be great, but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he and his descendants shall become a multitude of nations.'"
Manasseh was to become a great nation and Ephraim a multitude of nations.
Based on these scriptures, who do you say is the great nation and the multitude of nations.
Looking at the world today it seems simple to me.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Since there are 3 questions there, you have non-communicated, which seems to be par lately. I would enjoy talking with you, but not when you are trying not to be understood.