Is 'circumcision' here simply another way of saying 'being a Jew' (a noun instead of a verb)?
Edited by luke, 18 June 2003 - 06:35 PM.
0
8 replies to this topic
#1
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 3,175 posts
Tau
Posted 18 June 2003 - 06:32 PM
ummm, why, as Romans 3:1-2 says, is there much profit in circumcision?
Is 'circumcision' here simply another way of saying 'being a Jew' (a noun instead of a verb)?
Is 'circumcision' here simply another way of saying 'being a Jew' (a noun instead of a verb)?
#2 Guest_chairete_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 June 2003 - 06:49 PM
Is this perhaps an example of Hebrew 'parallelism' where the same idea is repeated in two different ways?
What advantage then has the Jew
or
What is the profit of circumcision.
(parallel ideas are in the same colo(u)r.
There are other examples of this in the New Testament.
What advantage then has the Jew
or
What is the profit of circumcision.
(parallel ideas are in the same colo(u)r.
There are other examples of this in the New Testament.
#3
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 3,175 posts
Tau
Posted 18 June 2003 - 07:03 PM
Thanks Chairete - that's rich
(Ho ho! see what I did there? That's rich. What a punster!)
(Ho ho! see what I did there? That's rich. What a punster!)
#4
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 34,244 posts
Omega
Posted 18 June 2003 - 08:55 PM
I think the profit of circumcision is for the moyl. ^_^
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.
______________________________________________________________________
I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”
Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”
Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)
______________________________________________________________________
Apologetics
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”
Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)
______________________________________________________________________
Apologetics
#5
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 3,175 posts
Tau
Posted 18 June 2003 - 09:05 PM
Fortigurn, on Jun 18 2003, 09:55 PM, said:
I think the profit of circumcision is for the moyl. ^_^
What's a moyl?
#7
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 3,722 posts
Tau
Posted 18 June 2003 - 09:14 PM
Prov 25:2
" It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."
Prov 27:17
" Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
" It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."
Prov 27:17
" Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend."
#9
-
- Christadelphian MD
-
- 3,175 posts
Tau
Posted 18 June 2003 - 09:19 PM
HA HAR! I get it! wow, your pun is so much better than the one I did further up there!
The profit of circumcision is for the moyl! I like it!
The profit of circumcision is for the moyl! I like it!
Edited by chairete, 08 September 2003 - 09:19 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
