Assessing why a Black man in America would be a Christian

[BayAreaTodd827]

Have I been bamboozled into believing that the Christian faith is beneficial to me? Why have I chosen to be Christian in a "Christian nation" that historically has sought to deprive my race and gender of freedom and dignity?

I have lived some decades. I have seen people, in the name of Christianity, trample over others for their own self-serving purposes. I have witnessed men, by persuasive oratory, fool others into believing that such oratorical skill somehow makes them an authority and proprietor of truth and righteousness. I have seen this game's inevitable result - lies exposed.

I have observed the game played out time and again. Sometimes it is played by those who enter the Christian faith minded to play. At other times, it is played by those who entered the faith with a sincere passion for God, but at some point they became disillusioned by it all and decide to simply go along with the play-book because this is what the majority seem to be doing - feigning perfection.

With my education and exposure to all of this, isnt it about time that I give up the Christian mantle? After all, I am a pretty-well informed and educated person. I completed undergrad and graduate school, and I've traveled a bit. Again, I also know the games people play (whether I choose to indulge in them or not).

Am I not perpetuating the fraud by endorsing a belief system that is replete with hypocrites and deceivers?

The uncomplicated response to the last question posed is, NO! I stand by Christianity based on its own merit, not based on the actions of people who claim to be followers.

The not so easy related question might be, how, with my knowledge, understanding, and experience, am I going to convince others (particularly someone who has been jaded by what theyve seen by others), to become a Christian?

Another related question is why even bother to try?

In terms of the "why bother" question, it is because I am duty bound as a Christian to promote the Christian faith. This is part of being "faithful". Whether I succeed is outside my control. My love for God and His Son/my savior compels me to try.

It is my position that the Christian faith (based on the scriptural standard contained in what is commonly called the Bible) is the most beneficial for mankind. Bar none. It is beneficial in this life as well as for its promise of eternal life. This applies to me as an African-American and all mankind.

I invite dialogue on the topic. I am not seeking to judge anyone. I readily admit that in my dialogue my aim will be to seek to defend the faith I hold, AND, to encourage whomever might read this to become as I am - A Christian. Feel free to respond publicly or privately. I'll respond in kind.

I look forward to mutually respectful and non-judgmental dialogue.

A prelude to my thoughts...

The apostle Paul communicated a fundamental truth about the expectation and need for every able-bodied person to grow up and make decision in accordance with this growth. In 1 Corinthians 13:11 (King James Version) he says " When I was a child I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man I put away childish things.

In short, while I may have grown up in and around the Christian faith (and of course was influenced by this upbringing) I am not a Christian today simply as a result of that influence. I have lived a life where I have seen and heard many things. The culmination of this has lead me to choosing Jesus Christ. A simple but fully excercised choice.

[BayAreaTodd827]

[Replying to oldbadger]

Hello, oldbadger.

I agree that Paul taught contentment. I believe his aim was to encourage a focus upon God through Jesus Christ. I agree that a great many atrocities have been committed in the name of religion - including Christianity. But, again, the way people behave versus what Jesus exemplified and taught are ofeten very different.

In addition, lest we forget, Jesus was brutalized also. What did he do to deserve it? Nothing. As I indicated in my original post, people do things for "self-serving" purposes. Ultimately, those who murdered Jesus intended for it to secure their status. Envy and self preservation. Jesus maintained a focus on his father's will. I believe this was Paul's point.

Scriptures:
Isiah 53 - prophecy regarding Christ's suffering and death.
Matt 27ff, Mark 15ff, Luk 23ff, John 19ff - Narratuve regarding Jesus' unjust trial, being brutalized, being killed.
Acts 2:22ff - explanation as to why this was necessary and how Christ's suffering and death potentially benefits all mankind.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 12 by JehovahsWitness]

Hello, JW. Thanks for your feedback.

I believe that God is not willing that anyone should perish (2 Pet 3:9). I want to encourage people to do what is necessary to avoid such a fate.

While I have spoken with many from your group, I do not subscribe to the Watchtower doctrine about earth's destiny. I believe this physical earth, at some point, will cease to exist.

Ok that's fine, but do you subscribe to the Bible?

"The righteous will possess the earth and they will live forever on it." Ps 37:29

"As for the heavens, they belong to Jehovah, but the earth he has given to the sons of men." Ps 115:16

"For this is what Jehovah says, The Creator of the heavens, the true God, The One who formed the earth, its Maker who firmly established it, Who did not create it simply for nothing,* but formed it to be inhabited." Isaiah 45:18

"Happy are the mild-tempered, since they will inherit the earth." Matthew 5:5

Do you think the above scriptures speak the truth? Can we trust these words as if God said them Himself?

[BayAreaTodd827]

[Replying to post 16 by 2timothy316]

Hey, JW. Hope you're well. I want to say that most all JW's I've met have been very respectful. My position is not an affront on you personally, neither am I in a position to judge your choices.

With regard to your two questions, yes I subscribe to the Bible. And, yes I believe the scriptures you've cited are true. I differ with you on the interpretation (obviously).

Rather than go back and forth, let me ask you simply this...is physical circumcision required for Christians in view of the following passage?:

Genesis 17:13 KJV
[13] He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

If so, how do you reconcile this with the following?:
Colossians 3:10-11 KJV
[10] And have put on the new man , which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: [11] Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 12 by JehovahsWitness]

Hello, JW. Thanks for your feedback.

I believe that God is not willing that anyone should perish (2 Pet 3:9). I want to encourage people to do what is necessary to avoid such a fate.

Of course which is why we all preach from door to door and in the streets to friends, colleagues and family online and in the real word ... billions of hours, using every means possible ... we are doing all we can to help people to change. That said Jesus compared the last days to the days of Noah, so some people will die. It saddens God but Jesus indicated that would be a future reality.


JW

[JehovahsWitness]

...is physical circumcision required for Christians in view of the following passage?:

Genesis 17:13 KJV
[13] He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

If so, how do you reconcile this with the following?:
Colossians 3:10-11 KJV
[10] And have put on the new man , which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: [11] Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

The first passage in Genesis was speaking of ABRAHAM many thousands of years before Christianity existed. Circumsission was eventually incorporated into the Mosaic law for the desendants of Abraham, the Israelites.

The second passage is part of the Christian bible and part of the law for Christians. The first Elders declared regarding requirements for Christians the following...

ACTS 15:28, 29
It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond these essential requirements: You must abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals, and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things

There is no mention above of physical circumcision being a required for Christians.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 16 by 2timothy316]

Hey, JW. Hope you're well. I want to say that most all JW's I've met have been very respectful. My position is not an affront on you personally, neither am I in a position to judge your choices.

I am well, thanks. JWs are looking for friends of peace and truth seekers. We are not looking for fights. Only wish to present what we have found to others (as Jesus commanded) and let them compare it to their views. Then let others judge for themselves what they want to follow.

With regard to your two questions, yes I subscribe to the Bible.

That's good! I know of no other place God's words can be found.

And, yes I believe the scriptures you've cited are true. I differ with you on the interpretation (obviously).

Interestingly, I gave no interpretation with my reply. I only quoted a few scriptures that said verbatim the Earth would last forever and asked if you thought what they said was true. Though, if you wish to interpret those scriptures into something else...are you interpreting them to mean something else for the sake of truth or to fit a belief? What's your motive to change the meaning of the quoted scriptures?

Rather than go back and forth, let me ask you simply this...is physical circumcision required for Christians in view of the following passage?:

Genesis 17:13 KJV
[13] He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

If so, how do you reconcile this with the following?:
Colossians 3:10-11 KJV
[10] And have put on the new man , which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: [11] Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

The Bible says,

"But he is a Jew who is one on the inside, and his circumcision is that of the heart by spirit and not by a written code. That persons praise comes from God, not from people." - Romans 2:29.

Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness. - Romans 10:4

We are those with the real circumcision [of the heart], who are rendering sacred service by Gods spirit, - Php 3:3

Circumcision does not mean a thing, and uncircumcision means not a thing, but observance of Gods commandments does."1Co 7:19.

Physically circumcised or not doesn't matter if a person's heart isn't exposed to God. This is not a new idea. Moses told Israel: You must circumcise the foreskin of your hearts and not harden your necks any longer. Jehovah your God will have to circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, that you may love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul for the sake of your life. (De 10:16; 30:6)

The physical circumcision is no longer required because 'Christ was the end of the Law'. Yet circumcision of the heart is not only required today but has always been required.

[BayAreaTodd827]

[Replying to post 20 by 2timothy316]

Hey, JW. Thanks. I've read everything you posted.

I want to make this simple. Genesis 17:13 refers to an "everlasting covenant" involving physical circumcision. Yet, we both agree that "physical" requirement is no longer necessary.

In other words, "everlasting" in that passage does not mean without end as we might naturally conclude. We should always be diligent about and willing to know the whole counsel of God as found in scripture. Do you agree?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 20 by 2timothy316]

Hey, JW. Thanks. I've read everything you posted.

I want to make this simple. Genesis 17:13 refers to an "everlasting covenant" involving physical circumcision. Yet, we both agree that "physical" requirement is no longer necessary.

In other words, "everlasting" in that passage does not mean without end as we might naturally conclude. We should always be diligent about and willing to know the whole counsel of God as found in scripture. Do you agree?

So are you saying that circumcission IS a requirement for Christians?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 21 by BayAreaTodd827]


Everlasting or time indefinited?

In Genesis 17:13 the God's cicumcission covenant is referred to as being "everlasting". However the word translated as "forever" in most English bibles olam (owlam) has a much broader meaning that the English "forever" or "everlasting".

The Hebrew word "olam" basically means where "the end cannot be seen", this can of course mean you cannot see the end because there is no end (it's "everlasting" or "eternal") OR because the end is obscure or has not been revealed. Thus in some cases (depending on the context) the word can be refering to something that is simply long-lasting rather than eternal.

This is reflected in the fact that the LXX the Hebrew olam is mostly translated the Hebrew "olam" as aon or (sometimes) aionios. The Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott shows that this equivalent Greek word aion meant "a period of existence", such as "life-time", "life", "an age", "generation", "posterity" (ho mellon aion), "a long space of time", "of old", "for ages" (ap aionos), "a definite space of time", "an era", "epoch", "age", "period", and so on.


source: http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5769.htm

The following bibles reflect the flexibility of the Hebrew term used in the original:

Douay-Rheims Bible
And my covenant shall be in your flesh for a perpetual covenant.

Young's Literal Translation
he is certainly circumcised who is born in thine house, or bought with thy money; and My covenant hath become in your flesh a covenant age-during;

New World Translation
Every man born in your house and every man purchased with your money must be circumcised,+ and my covenant in your flesh must serve as a lasting covenant

CONCLUSION: A close examination of Genesis 17:13 reveals that God intended the circumsission covenant he made with Abraham to remain in force a "long time" but not necessarily forever.

[BayAreaTodd827]

[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

Good morning, JW/Jehovah's Witness,

Again, I want to keep this simple. This current discussion revolves around my expressing to you that I do not subscribe to the Watctowef narrative which states that our current physical earth will not have an end. You cited the word "for ever" in Psalms 37:29. I maintain my stated position.

I agree with you that the word "everlasting" in Gen 17:13 did not necessarily mean without end. Of course physical circumcision is not necessary for the Christian. My point is just as Gen 17:13 use of the word "everlasting" does it mean "without end", the same could (and does) apply to Psalms 37:29 use of the word "for ever". Question, does the following apply to Christians (note the words "for ever"). There are many other similar examples we can explore.

Leviticus 23:30-31 KJV
[30] And whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people. [31] Ye shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

My friend, again, I do not subscribe to the Watchtower doctrine on this issue. I believe you are in error. I believe your interpretation of scripture in this regard is askew.