Are we to be circumcised?

Well, that is truly an elites' view is it not? I should have expected it. You believe you are the only one who has true understanding of Scripture.

BTW...............you are talking to the wrong guy.....I am the guy who has always taught the importance of obedience. What I do not buy is your belief that the Laws of Moses/the 1st Covenant are STILL for the Church today.

To do that belies the sacrifice of Jesus, and His precious blood which FULFILLED the Law of the First Covenant, and established the New Covenant, Grace which is what the Church is under today.

Accusing me of "rejecting" all other Scripture is just childish.......

So you are so deep in the occult you are reading my mind and know "I believe I am the only one". For shame. There are people on this site who dare not attack and be the enemy of God directly, so they use me to attack and act as an enemy, even as far as telling lies about me. You are joining quite a crew of worldly people, skilled at being enemies but with no skill at being a Christian who supports and loves the Lord and other Christians.

I wonder why you actually make the statement that you KNOW I believe the laws of Moses that give fleshly commands are to be believed when I repeat scripture saying they are not. Surely you have read my posts, why are you telling lies about me? Is it because you don't dare lie about the Lord?

Can you copy my statement that p_rehbein rejects all other scripture? I make the statement that you are rejecting A (one) scripture when you make yourself an enemy of people who accept Christ as their Savior. I accept Christ as my Savior. Are you my enemy?

God allows people to interpret scripture differently, why do you feel that you cannot allow it? Paul spoke of this as he spoke about what foods different people believed they may eat.

I'm not mixed up.

All things in proper order. The Jews first, then later gentiles but God no longer requires circumcision because it is not part of the new covenant.

I don't have to be circumcized? What a relief!

Paul circumcised Timothy so as not to offend the Jews.

Is there a scripture where Jesus said that expressly.

Yes.

Mat 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
Mat 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Apologies, I should have been specific with my question.
Is there a scripture where Jesus says this expressly? "God no longer requires circumcision because it is not part of the new covenant."

Further, if circumscion isn't part of the new covenant, why would Paul circumcize someone so not to offend the Jews?

1Jo 3:4, Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

1Co 15:34, Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

Eph 4:26, Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:

We are obviously commanded not to transgress the law in these verses;

While it is clear from other scripture that obeying the law doesn't justify us;

But rather we obey the law because we are justified.

Just as we are not saved by works but are saved unto good works (Ephesians 2:8-10), so are we not saved by keeping the law but we are saved unto keeping the law.

While I have said in posts above that we come to that obedience in a roundabout way, through faith in Christ and through walking not after the flesh but after the Spirit.

Tit 3:3, For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.
Tit 3:4, But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
Tit 3:5, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Tit 3:6, Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Tit 3:7, That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

It should be clear that we are not saved by works of righteousness which we have done (which includes law-keeping); however, if we have been regenerated and renewed in the Holy Ghost, we will have a changed life as the result of our salvation (which includes law-keeping).

Jas 1:22, But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
Jas 1:23, For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
Jas 1:24, For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
Jas 1:25, But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

I think it goes even deeper than that. It isn't part of the way God communicated with man, God used the fleshly commands and communicated in stone. The new covenant is God communicating with us directly.

The heart of the fleshly commands of the OT was always the true command. The heart of circumcision was belonging to God. The heart of the food laws was to feed our spirit proper food. The heart of not mixing fabrics was to not mix God's ways with the ways of demons. It is important to God that we obey him from the heart, not by the fleshly commands. Those commands only acted as schoolmasters to help people obey and understand. Now we are to listen to the heart.

Yes, where God has written his law so that we are never far from it.

Amen. Many outward things of the OT are merely pointers to deeper spiritual and eternal things for us today. As you say, God was revealing this truth even in OT times. Something in man still wants physical ritual to grasp onto, but God desires a personal relationship based on faith.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

So you've never been to a church where some of the folk are really snippy?

And one shouldn't neglect to mention the ladies who are pretty and trim.

So what do you make of the passage in Exodus when God was going to kill Moses because of the physical uncircumcision of his son? Yes, it may have been Moses' heart was uncircumcised also, but how would Zipporah's circumcising affect Moses heart? And wasn't Zipporah also a gentile?

Exodus 4:24 And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.

Deuteronomy seems to indicate a similar command to that in Jeremiah.

Deut 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

What is a "foreskin of the heart"? Is there an equivalent term we use today, like "a chip on his shoulder" or a "heart full of pride"? Does the trimming off of the specifically male skin represent a cutting off of the seed of Adam, so we belong only to Christ? What, if anything, does it have to do with the sinful nature? Pride? Baptism?

/We need to read the OT scripture with the eyes of the new covenant. Under the new covenant we are to see the spirit of the Lord in the earthly commands they were given. Their commands were in stone and only symbolic of the spirit of God. Under the new covenant we cab see the spirit of God in the earthly commands.

Even the Old Covenant pointed to the New Covenant .

Deut 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

But the New Covenant makes much more sense through Jesus - it has been revealed.