Re: Circumcision CONDEMNED by Roman Catholic Church

From: Sheldon Liberman (webmaster_at_liberman.com)
Date: 07/22/04 

Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:49:33 -0400

"Kenny Thomas" <kenny@tacep.org> wrote in message
news:erULc.949$re2.33@fe39.usenetserver.com...
> Sheldon,
>
> There are many things that I don't understand about God either. I don't
> question them, I just follow them even though it may be hard at times.
>
> I know that God commanded circumcision. I have read it many many times.
But
> I believe that things have changed. I know that you don't believe in
Christ,
> and that is fine with me, but Christ established a new covenant with God,
an
> everlasting one, one to replace all other covenants, baptism.
>
> I know that the Catholic Church may say it's okay for Jews to circumcise
> because that's what they believe, but it doesn't say that I must agree
with
> it.

Actually, Kenny, it does. While the Catholic church is unfazed by Jewish
refusal to acknowledge a "new" covenant between G-d and man, it nevertheless
maintains that the pre-existing covenant between G-d and His people is still
in force, and, in fact, the Jewish way to salvation. The church therefore
has a hands-off policy where the Jews are concerned, and you, as a Catholic,
are bound by it.
>
> I remember the story of Exodus, I know what God did to those nations. But
I
> am not doing this to stop you in particular, or the Jews in particular. If
> Jews didn't believe in circumcision I would still be doing it.

If you kill someone by accident, is he any less dead for than had you had
the intent?

Let me quote you from Leviticus:

Leviticus 26:(42) "I will remember My covenant with Jacob as well as My
covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham. I will remember the
land. (43) [For] the land will have been left behind by them, and will
have enjoyed its sabbaths while it lay in desolation without them. The
sin [they had committed] by denigrating My laws and growing tired of My
decrees, will [also] have been expiated. (44) Thus, even when they are
in their enemies' land, I will not grow so disgusted with them nor so
tired of them that I would destroy them and break My covenant with them,
since I am God their Lord. (45)I will therefore remember the covenant
with their original ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt in the sight
of the nations, so as to be a God to them. I am God. (46) These are the
decrees, laws and codes that God set between Himself and the Israelites
at Mount Sinai through the hand of Moses"

As a good Catholic, you must accept the veracity of the above passage, the
import of which is that G-d WILL NEVER, EVER, ABANDON THE JEWS, nor the
covenant that was sealed with the Patriarchs.
>
> I'm sorry you don't like what I am doing, but I just can't let it go on.
> It's not up to me of course, the people in congress and the people of the
> country would decide, and if they decide to stop it, that's all that is
> needed. Maybe they won't stop it, but I will try my hardest to get them
to.

Then you are descecrate the word of G-d and of the Catholic church.
>
> Simply because someone says something is a certain way because of religion
> doesn't mean it's right. What do you say to those who crash airplanes into
> the United States in the name of religion? Do you say "well, I am tolerant
> of your religion, I understand that you have that right and that you think
> your God wants you to do these things, so go ahead." Of course not. You
> think you are right, I think I am right, they think they are right. You
> can't accommodate everyone and every religion. We live in a civilized
> society, rules need to be made regulating things, including religious
> practices. This is something I think should be regulated.

That's faulty logic, Kenny. You can't blame religion for what people do in
its name, any more than you can blame the architect if those who buy the
building decide to turn it into a brothel. But in this case it's academic.
You declare yourself a Catholic, so your values are set out for you. Your
own church does not want you doing what you are doing, so any debate as to
whose religion is correct is moot.
>
> If I am wrong, and God wants to stop me, may he kill me now. But until
then,
> I will continue to fight for what I think is right.

I pity you Kenny, I really do. In your naivity you fail to grasp the real
teachings of the Bible: the history of mankind is soaked in the blood shed
by men doing what they thought was right, rather than seeking to understand
thay what is right is what G-d says it it is.
>
> I'm not sure what your holy scriptures say, but when Christ came he told
the
> world to love everyone, to look out for each other and to help those who
> can't help themselves. That's exactly what I am doing.

Excuse me, but as a Christian they're **your** Holy Scriptures as well, and
your failure to know them calls into serious doubt your commitment to your
faith. As for loving everyone, that's all well and good, but also mentioned
in the Torah long before JC was born.
>
> "'You have heard that it was said 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a
> tooth.'

That's a misconception. It refers to the monetary compensation you must pay
to someone you injure physically. It has nothing to do with revenge or the
struggle with evil, they being discussed separately.

>But I say to you offer no resistance to one who is evil. When
> someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other to him as well. If
> anyone wants to go to law with you over your tunic, hand him your cloak as
> well. Should someone press you into service for one mile, go with him for
> two miles. Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn your back on
one
> who wants to borrow. You have heard that it was said 'You shall love your
> neighbour and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and
> pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your
heavenly
> Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and on the good, and causes
> rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love
you,
> what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And
if
> you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the
pagans
> do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect. But
> take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see
them;
> otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you
> give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the
> synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to
> you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let
> your left hand know what your right is doing, so that your almsgiving may
be
> secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.'"

I actually agree that one good be charitible without desire for reward, even
a reputational one. On the other hand, We are obligated to set example so
that others will follow. However, none of this is germain to the topic at
hand. And your denegration of Jews is duly noted.

>
> "Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts. But I shall show you a
> still more excellent way. If I speak in human and angelic tongues, but do
> not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. And if I have
> the gift of prophecy, and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I
> have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am
nothing.
> If I give away everything I own so that I may boast, but do not have love,
I
> gain nothing. Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, love is
not
> pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own
> interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, it
does
> not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all
> things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love
> never fails. If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if
> tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing. For
> we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes,
the
> partial will pass away. When I was a child, I used to talk as a child,
think
> as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish
> things. At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to
> face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully as I am fully
> known. So faith, hope, love remain, these three; but the greatest of these
> is love."

Wonderful. You've embraced a "feel good" religion, and I have embraced a "do
good" religion. Now can we get back on topic?
>
>
>
> --
> K.T.
> Private Investigator MOCert.
> www.tacep.org
>
> Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
> http://forums.tacep.org/
>
> "Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
> others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero
>
> Contact Information:
> Y! - soccer00kid
> MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
> AIM - #Private#
> Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
> Postal Mail -
> Kenny Thomas
> PO Box 713
> Stockton, MO 65785
> "Sheldon Liberman" <webmaster@liberman.com> wrote in message
> news:tGTLc.30209$Gf7.1129890@news20.bellglobal.com...
> >
> > "Kenny Thomas" <kenny@tacep.org> wrote in message
> > news:74QLc.828$re2.709@fe39.usenetserver.com...
> > > Sheldon,
> > >
> > > I'm sorry you don't like how I post my messages. I hate hunting
through
> a
> > > bunch of replies to find one relevant sentence, I just go back to the
> > > previous post and find it.
> >
> > And I am simply explaining to you why top posting is considered
improper.
> > You will, obviously, continue to do as you see fit.
> > >
> > > I am Catholic, I respect other's religions, including the Jewish
faith.
> > > However, there is something morally wrong with circumcision. I am not
> > doing
> > > this to attack the Jewish faith, I am doing this to prevent harm from
> > being
> > > done to individuals.
> >
> > I don't question your sincerity: I am pointing out that being an
adherent
> to
> > whatever faith you chose to embrace means to subserviate yourself to its
> > teachings, not to pick and choose among them. The Jews are the standard
> > bearers in this regard. We have no idea why we are required to obey some
> of
> > the laws we are given, laws like keeping kosher, not wearing wool and
> linen
> > together in the same garment. What we do know is that if it's G-d's
word,
> > it's good enough. For who are we to question His wisdom?
> >
> > A faithful Catholic will accept the truth of the Torah, even if he also
> > believes G-d changed the terms of it later on. And in it, G-d orders
> > circumcision. So the question becomes, who are you, as a fallible human
> > being, to consider as immoral something G-d himself ordained?
> >
> > You consider yourself a good Catholic, and, without the intent of
offence,
> I
> > cannot fathom how. The Catholic Church may frown on circumcision for
> > Catholics, but it is equally disenchanted with any attempts to sway the
> Jews
> > from their own particular way of serving their creator.
> > >
> > > I would like to ask you something in all seriousness. Please, don't
> attack
> > > me for this or call me names for not knowing the answer, but, if you
had
> a
> > > baby boy tomorrow, and the law prevented infant circumcision, but
after
> > the
> > > age of 18 a male can decide to circumcise himself, would that be
> allowed?
> >
> > I suspect that Jews would simply fly to jurisdictions where it was not
> > banned, have the bris performed, and come home. However, I believe, in
all
> > honesty, that any country that would pass such a law would suffer the
> wrath
> > of G-d, just as all countries inhospitable to Jews have done in the
past.
> > Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with the history of the Jews in
> > exile, that is, after having read sections in the Bible that warns the
> > nations not to mistreat Jews.
> >
> > You fail to consider the pain and suffering that would be caused to Jews
> and
> > Muslim that would not be allowed to be circumcised. The vast majority of
> > them would chose to be circumcision at whatever age they were legally
able
> > to do so, but at such an age it would be much more painful than had they
> > done it at birth. Moreover, knowing they were not not part of G-d's
> > covenant when they were required to be is apt to cause great
psychological
> > trauma, all because you and your band of merry men think your
> sensitivities
> > should be imposed on the rest of the world.
> >
> >
> > >I
> > > also have another question, there are many groups out there that are
> made
> > up
> > > completely of Jewish people that oppose circumcision. They still
perform
> > the
> > > bris, but it is an alternate one that removes no skin at all. Would
this
> > be
> > > a possibility?
> >
> > No. That would imply that something is justifyable simply because there
> are
> > people doing it. Those Jews aren't executing G-d's will, they're
executing
> > their own. On the other hand, they don't hold themselves out religiously
> as
> > you do; thus you hold yourself out to a higher standard.
> >
> > > I'm also curious, why must you remove all of the skin? As far
> > > as I know God wasn't too specific, all he said is to circumcise the
> flesh
> > of
> > > the foreskin, and you know, to be honest, a circumcision doesn't have
to
> > > mean you have to cut anything off, circumcise just means to "cut
> around,"
> > > and as I'm sure you have, I have cut my finger before with a knife on
> > > accident, and that doesn't mean my finger was cut off. Not that these
> > would
> > > be acceptable to me either, but I would be far more comfortable with
> > > something like that than I would a complete alteration of someone's
> body.
> > Or
> > > is it just Jews cut the entire foreskin off because of tradition? If
> it's
> > > just tradition couldn't the tradition be broken and just allow the
> things
> > I
> > > mentioned before be performed?
> >
> > Actually, what you should know about Judaism is that the Torah comes in
to
> > forms, written and oral. The written Torah tells us what G-d's law is,
the
> > Oral Law (which has since been written down in such a way as to not
> > transgress the pronciple of Oral Transmission) contain the explaination
of
> > the Written Torah. specifically how to execute the laws. The Oral Law,
as
> > well as the discussion by which Jewish Law is encoded, and the
Rabinnical
> > laws which are designed to prevent accidental violation of G-d direct
> > commandments, come together to form the Talmud, which has much more to
say
> > about how the bris milah is to performed than does the written Bible.
> > >
> > > --
> > > K.T.
> > > Private Investigator MOCert.
> > > www.tacep.org
> > >
> > > Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
> > > http://forums.tacep.org/
> > >
> > > "Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights
of
> > > others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero
> > >
> > > Contact Information:
> > > Y! - soccer00kid
> > > MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
> > > AIM - #Private#
> > > Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
> > > Postal Mail -
> > > Kenny Thomas
> > > PO Box 713
> > > Stockton, MO 65785
> > > "Sheldon Liberman" <webmaster@liberman.com> wrote in message
> > > news:eqOLc.28714$Gf7.1079234@news20.bellglobal.com...
> > > >
> > > > "Kenny Thomas" <kenny@tacep.org> wrote in message
> > > > news:V4ILc.760$re2.674@fe39.usenetserver.com...
> > > > > Sheldon,
> > > > >
> > > > > I always remove the message I am responding to on purpose, if I
> don't
> > > and
> > > > > the conversation gets long the message becomes large in size and
> with
> > > all
> > > > > the carrots (>) and HTML mark-up it gets hard to decipher. I just
> > assume
> > > > > people can read the previous message and see what I am replying
to.
> > > >
> > > > Well, you assume wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Top posting is considered a breech in netiquette since it makes it
> > > difficult
> > > > to follow the flow of a discussion and forces the reader to search
> below
> > > to
> > > > find the relevent reference. That being the case, how more so would
it
> > be
> > > > unseemly to cut the entire reference from your reply?
> > > > >
> > > > > I know that I can expect outside comments, but the comments I made
> > were
> > > > not
> > > > > about circumcision but about homosexuality and the evil that it
is.
> > The
> > > > > topic was not circumcision at that time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regardless, as I have said many times, I have nothing against the
> > Jewish
> > > > > people or faith. You are free to practice what you like for now,
but
> > > yes,
> > > > I
> > > > > am fighting to change that. Not because Jews practice it, but
> because
> > > > > circumcision itself is wrong. My reasoning has nothing to do with
> your
> > > > faith
> > > > > or the faith of anyone. To me, circumcision is not a religious
> matter.
> > > >
> > > > Well, to us it is. And since it is the position of the Catholic
church
> > > that
> > > > you should not interefere with the beliefs of Jews, whose own road
to
> > > > salvation runs through their faith, you are de facto subordinating
> > > > Catholicism to your personal sensitivities. You are therefore not a
> > > > Catholic, just someone who has some common beliefs with those who
are.
> > > >
> > > > Have you heard the maxim that "the road to h-ll is paved with good
> > > > intentions "? Jews don't believe in the concept, at least not the
same
> > way
> > > > Christians do, but the saying itself has value. It means that if you
> go
> > > > against the teachings of the Bible in favor of something that makes
> more
> > > > sense to personally, you are de facto elevating your personal wisdom
> > above
> > > > its Author.. That's a grave sin indeed.
> > > >
> > > > Moreover, by attempting to inflict harm on the Jews--and don't
delude
> > > > yourself into thinking that a ban on circumcision wouldn't be
> extremely
> > > > harmful to Jews--you or show a total lack of gratitude not only to
> those
> > > to
> > > > made possible your faith, but those who fought tooth-and-nail
against
> > the
> > > > Roman practice of feeding Christians to the lions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > K.T.
> > > > > Private Investigator MOCert.
> > > > > www.tacep.org
> > > > >
> > > > > Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
> > > > > http://forums.tacep.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > "Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the
rights
> > of
> > > > > others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero
> > > > >
> > > > > Contact Information:
> > > > > Y! - soccer00kid
> > > > > MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
> > > > > AIM - #Private#
> > > > > Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
> > > > > Postal Mail -
> > > > > Kenny Thomas
> > > > > PO Box 713
> > > > > Stockton, MO 65785
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • ZIONISM
    ... Israel, the land of the Jewish people. ... Zionists believe that the Jews have a divine right to the ... based on the promises that God made to Abraham in the book of Genesis: ... “On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your ...
    (soc.culture.jewish)
  • Re: Covenant
    ...  Why do you think that God didn't choose to make a specific ... Covenant about successorship until this Dispensation? ... the absence of religion would be ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Switching fag babies condemned by fags
    ... came to kill everyone, and destroy them, especially the weak and old, the jews ... These books weren't written by God. ... You want to debate what they really mean? ... Go study some comparitive religion. ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: talk.origins faq Hitler claim part 3
    ... >>claimed that God was on his side and he was doing the work of God. ... (as well as the past history of scapegoating Jews in Christianity) ... So quoting Hitler's own words is hatespeech against religion? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: I want to be Jewish!
    ... the Jews have ... without the religion, right? ... How do we KNOW that God ... ability to flip on a 'faith' switch where my brain will just forget all ...
    (soc.culture.jewish)