Dake Bible Discussion BoardCircumcision v. Concision or Mutilation?

General Discussion Forum devoted to the study of God's Word in Honor of Finis J. Dake.
Hill Top
Little Children, Let No Man Deceive You: He that Doeth Righteousness is Righteous, Even as He is Righteous
Posts: 2441
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:29 pm

Re: Circumcision v. Concision

Post by Hill Top »

Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:18 pm
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 5:47 pm
If you have reservations about "concision" meaning the same as "mutilation," I would suggest that you don't understand the word "concision" as well as you should.
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 10:19 pm
Do you consider circumcisions to be mutilations?
Why do the editors of the NKJV of the bible think it?
I don't, especially as God ordained they be done on the eighth day. A day when the pain is not noted by the baby. (I have read that somewhere, but don't recall the source)
When I was circumcised, as a baby, I didn't even wake up.
Hardly consistent with a mutilation.
A single word choice by the editors of the NKJV of the bible has thrown their entire agenda into doubt.
A circumcision, properly performed and for the right reasons, is not a mutilation.
However, if improperly performed or performed for the wrong reasons, it would be a mutilation.
Agreed, but those doing the circumcising of the OT were experts in the rite.



User avatar
Spiritblade Disciple
Moderator
Posts: 1964
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 6:27 pm

Re: Circumcision v. Concision

Post by Spiritblade Disciple »

Hill Top wrote:
Tue May 17, 2022 10:33 pm
Where did you get the term "mutilation" from?
The "concision" of Phil 3:2 are the Jewish Law keepers, as opposed to the real "circumcision" who have cast off the flesh. (Col 2:11)
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 3:58 pm
Philippians 3:2 New King James Version
Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!
The New King James Version. "Mutilation" is likely a more understandable term than "concision" to most modern readers. I don't think I've ever seen or heard the word "concision" used outside of biblical references to this verse (or similar verses). "Concision" does not equal "circumcision" (as you have noted).
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 4:35 pm
What are the mutilators mutilating?
I didn't see any references to mutilation in the concordance, but I did see "burden" and "impose upon" both of which again point to the Law keepers' and their ordinances.
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 5:47 pm
Genital mutilation.
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 10:19 pm
Don't you think that definition of circumcision serves to further alienate folks from God?
To compare circumcision to mutilation seems obviously rooted in a devilish hate for God and all He instituted.
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:16 pm
It's not the definition of circumcision, though. It is the definition of "concision."
"Circumcision" is merely the removal of some of all of the foreskin of the genitals.
"Concision," on the other hand, is to cut off the genitals (either in whole or in part). Specifically, to make the genitals shorter.
Those who do not understand the KJV's use of the word "concision" should not try to prove an error in the NKJV's use of "mutilation." The NKJV (along with many other reputable English translations) is 100% accurate in its use of "mutilation."
Hill Top wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:27 pm
I guess they figured a lot of men were getting "shortened".?
Frankly speaking, I think you are jumping to undocumented conclusions.
Where else does this subject get covered in scripture?
Even once.
I think Paul thought that even circumcision properly performed, if performed in an attempt to gain right standing or salvation with God, amounted to concision (mutilation).

The same Greek word translated as "concision" or "mutilation" in this verse is used in the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint) in at least one place where it is understood to be used of mutilations like those performed by the heathen.

I believe Paul used the word on purpose to get across just how much he was against the idea of circumcision being required for salvation was at the time of his writings.



Hill Top
Little Children, Let No Man Deceive You: He that Doeth Righteousness is Righteous, Even as He is Righteous
Posts: 2441
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:29 pm

Re: Circumcision v. Concision

Post by Hill Top »

Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Sat May 21, 2022 1:07 am
Hill Top wrote:
Tue May 17, 2022 10:33 pm
Where did you get the term "mutilation" from?
The "concision" of Phil 3:2 are the Jewish Law keepers, as opposed to the real "circumcision" who have cast off the flesh. (Col 2:11)
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 3:58 pm
Philippians 3:2 New King James Version
Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!
The New King James Version. "Mutilation" is likely a more understandable term than "concision" to most modern readers. I don't think I've ever seen or heard the word "concision" used outside of biblical references to this verse (or similar verses). "Concision" does not equal "circumcision" (as you have noted).
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 4:35 pm
What are the mutilators mutilating?
I didn't see any references to mutilation in the concordance, but I did see "burden" and "impose upon" both of which again point to the Law keepers' and their ordinances.
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 5:47 pm
Genital mutilation.
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 10:19 pm
Don't you think that definition of circumcision serves to further alienate folks from God?
To compare circumcision to mutilation seems obviously rooted in a devilish hate for God and all He instituted.
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:16 pm
It's not the definition of circumcision, though. It is the definition of "concision."
"Circumcision" is merely the removal of some of all of the foreskin of the genitals.
"Concision," on the other hand, is to cut off the genitals (either in whole or in part). Specifically, to make the genitals shorter.
Those who do not understand the KJV's use of the word "concision" should not try to prove an error in the NKJV's use of "mutilation." The NKJV (along with many other reputable English translations) is 100% accurate in its use of "mutilation."
Hill Top wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:27 pm
I guess they figured a lot of men were getting "shortened".?
Frankly speaking, I think you are jumping to undocumented conclusions.
Where else does this subject get covered in scripture?
Even once.
I think Paul thought that even circumcision properly performed, if performed in an attempt to gain right standing or salvation with God, amounted to concision (mutilation).

The same Greek word translated as "concision" or "mutilation" in this verse is used in the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint) in at least one place where it is understood to be used of mutilations like those performed by the heathen.

I believe Paul used the word on purpose to get across just how much he was against the idea of circumcision being required for salvation was at the time of his writings.
Though I agree with you, without knowing Paul was using an "inside joke", his slight is lost on the readers.

If "concision" means mutilate, what does "circum" mean?
If I had to guess, it means "around". (circumference)

Either way, though, Paul is talking about the unbelieving Jews.



User avatar
Spiritblade Disciple
Moderator
Posts: 1964
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 6:27 pm

Re: Circumcision v. Concision

Post by Spiritblade Disciple »

Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 5:47 pm
If you have reservations about "concision" meaning the same as "mutilation," I would suggest that you don't understand the word "concision" as well as you should.
Hill Top wrote:
Wed May 18, 2022 10:19 pm
Do you consider circumcisions to be mutilations?
Why do the editors of the NKJV of the bible think it?
I don't, especially as God ordained they be done on the eighth day. A day when the pain is not noted by the baby. (I have read that somewhere, but don't recall the source)
When I was circumcised, as a baby, I didn't even wake up.
Hardly consistent with a mutilation.
A single word choice by the editors of the NKJV of the bible has thrown their entire agenda into doubt.
Spiritblade Disciple wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:18 pm
A circumcision, properly performed and for the right reasons, is not a mutilation.
However, if improperly performed or performed for the wrong reasons, it would be a mutilation.
Hill Top wrote:
Thu May 19, 2022 10:29 pm
Agreed, but those doing the circumcising of the OT were experts in the rite.
True. However, requiring circumcision for salvation was a misapplication of the rite. And, therefore, a mutilation.



Post Reply