ABRAHAM AGAINST CIRCUMCISION, A FORMIDABLE BIBLICAL BREAKTHROUGH

---

Rajeev March 17, 2012 4:52 am (Pacific time)

Good point Brian. I think the guys at DG stuck this excerpt onnlie because of it's timely and funny Avatar reference: And that's not even in the manuscript. I imagine Piper might be preaching on being obedient to God's call for us to live lives of humility and to be seen as Christians, from Philippians 6:12-18. Perhaps he was tying in 2Tim3:16-17, to tell us that the scriptures are sufficient for instructing us to be competent for this.I think, maybe what might be throwing some viewers off (especially if they're not familiar with Piper) is his God is telling you today rhetoric. He's not one for speaking on behalf of the Lord much, except for what the Lord has spoken through the scriptures. So I imagine he's got some texts in mind (that didn't make it to this two-minute clip) to validate his invitation from God to spend time in the scriptures and be shaped by them.Would that make sense?

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 25, 2010 9:52 am (Pacific time)

Laura won't answer; She is sheltering behind the millenary sectarism and dogmatism of her religion. We thank her all the same because she's served the cause of the child, unconscioulsly it is true, but usefully.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 23, 2010 8:47 am (Pacific time)

I may not have expressed myself very clearly saing that birds are "excluded from the sacrifice", which is wrong. Actually, they are put apart. My hint is that this symbolizes the fact that birds do not have a foreskin and, therefore, are not divided.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 20, 2010 1:11 am (Pacific time)

A last point: the Jewish commentaries quoted by Lisa are all taken from Books of the Bible that are very posterior to Genesis, which makes a relationship with it totally irrelevant.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 19, 2010 5:55 am (Pacific time)

I'coming to thank Lisa again; she is bringing a formidable information with her translation by American rabbis; indeed, they speak of "a land to inherit" whereas the French rabbis speak of a simple "possession". This supports the thesis of the Sabbah brothers that the "God" in question in Gen 15 and Gen 17 is not an immaterial God but the man-God, the Egyptisn pharaoh. Thank you, Lisa.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 18, 2010 8:41 am (Pacific time)

Sorry, in my second message the words: "the third one" (is reported) are missing.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 18, 2010 8:38 am (Pacific time)

"All truth passes through three stages: First it is ridiculed; Then it is violently opposed; Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer, 1788-1860

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 18, 2010 7:43 am (Pacific time)

By the by, my translation is an absolutely litteral translation into English from the French Rabbinate one (from the Hebrew). It is therefore just as authorized as yours. Anyway, it is very little different from it.

---

Sigismond (Michel Hervé Navoiseau-B November 18, 2010 7:14 am (Pacific time)

That makes 3 and not 2 Covenants. The first one is granted by Abram's God-father, the second one is imposed and a reported in the Book of Deuteronomy, is from equal to equal: "The Eternal talked with you face to face…" (5: 4), which is very different from a Covenant with Abram lying with his face on the ground as in the prior Covenant.

---

Sigismond November 18, 2010 7:05 am (Pacific time)

Thanks, Lisa, for giving us the Orthodox interpretation, very Orthodox indeed! However, your official comment does not explain the differences between Gen 15 and Gen 17, which I am the first to do.

---

Lisa November 17, 2010 2:40 pm (Pacific time)

Let's try this from an accurate Jewish translation of Torah:

Breishit 15:7-11

And He said to him, "I am the Lord, Who brought you forth from Ur of the Chaldees, to give you this land to inherit it." And he said, "O Lord G-d, how will I know that I will inherit it?" And He said to him, "Take for Me three heifers and three goats and three rams, and a turtle dove and a young bird." And he took for Him all these, and he divided them in the middle, and he placed each part opposite its mate, but he did not divide the birds. And the birds of prey descended upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away.

Now, let's see the Jewish commentary about the significance of not dividing the birds:

but he did not divide the birds: Since the idol-worshipping nations are likened to bulls, rams, and goats, as it is said (Ps. 22:13): “Many bulls surrounded me, etc.,” and Scripture states (Dan. 8:20): “The ram that you saw, the one with horns, represents the kings of Media and Persia,” and Scripture states (ibid. verse 21): “And the he-goat is the king of Greece.” And the Israelites are likened to young doves, as it is said (Song of Songs 2:14): “My dove, in the clefts of the rock.” Therefore, he divided the animals, as an allusion that the nations will gradually perish. “But he did not divide the bird,” as an allusion that Israel will exist forever. [from Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer , ch. 28; Targum. Ps. 22: 13]

This section has absolutely nothing to do with circumcision which is clearly specified to be a part of the Jewish covenant with HaShem.

---

Luke Easter November 17, 2010 3:19 pm (Pacific time)

More on the NIVIntroduction to the updated NIV Translators’ notes for the updated NIV The Committee on Bible Translation Translation detail and copyright information Editor's Picks Zondervan NIV Matthew Henry Commentary $32.99$21.99 You Save $11 (33%) Prophecy and Hermeneutics: Toward a New Introduction to the Prophets $23.00 NIV Life Application Study Bible: Limited Anniversary Edition, Hardcover $29.97$26.99 You Save $2.98 (10%) See more books at the Bible Romans 2:17-29 (New International Version) "The Jews and the Law" 17) Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; 18) if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19) if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20) an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth, 21) you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22) You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23) You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24) As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” 25) Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26) So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27) The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker. 28) A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29) No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

---

Anonymous November 17, 2010 11:13 am (Pacific time)

I had my appendix removed..they cut me open and removed an organ. I remember as a kid. We were a poor family, could not afford a dentist. I had teeth that were eaten to the gums. The first dentist I visited was in Navy boot camp, they basically had me tied up, and the dentist guy was laughing about how much he drank the night before while opening my gums. I dont remember the circumcision trauma, felt like I was a very balanced kid. The navy boot camp dentist tho? 30 years later, and it still haunts me. Just to put things in perspective.

[Return to Top]

---

©2025 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.