kill or excommunicate?

[Preach]

In the Old Testament, if a male of a Hebrew household refused to be circumcised, what would happen to that person? I have read where they would be killed or perhaps excommunicated. If this is true, who would ever refuse circumcision? Thanks.
"In Christ",
Bobby

 

[Romans922]

I dont know if they had a choice, they were all babies.

 

[CalsFarmer]

Originally posted by Preach
In the Old Testament, if a male of a Hebrew household refused to be circumcised, what would happen to that person? I have read where they would be killed or perhaps excommunicated. If this is true, who would ever refuse circumcision? Thanks.
"In Christ",
Bobby

Refusal of an adult male would result in him being expelled from the community...thus ex communicated. All male babies of Jewish parentage were circumcised as babies..adult males could be brought in to particpate as Jews and thus would require circumcision.

Also note that all of the requirements would be (and are) explained IN DETAIL to someone converting. Thus your question ias more than liklely a moot point unless that person was a captive in a war or something like that.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

"Cut off from his people" would be a technical phrase that equated to excommunication (Gen. 17:14). The fact that it sounds so violent and dramatic, and the fact that similar sins might in fact be capital crimes (one is an ecclesial penalty, the other a civil) points to an analogous relationship; see Lev. 18:22 & 29 with Lev. 20:13.

To be excommunicated is a judjment cutting a man off from life in Jesus. Though designed ideally for restoration, it is a formal declaration by the church that, so far as she can tell this person is going to hell. The thing about ecclesiastical penalties: there always is and always has been room for repentance and restoration, so long as a man lives. But when the heavenly Court convenes, there is no more room for repentance.

[Edited on 1-3-2006 by Contra_Mundum]