(Text Only)
Title: The Issue of Circumcision
I. The Oxymoron
v9 (read) Having proclaimed victory in his argument of salvation by faith alone, apart from works, and apart from the Law, Paul now moves his discussion to address a further Jewish criticism of his argument, which is this: How does circumcision figure into the Christian equation?
The Jews looked at Paul’s argument at this point and basically said, “Okay, Paul, you are making some very convincing arguments that Abraham was perhaps justified by his faith, and not by his work, but what about circumcision. Surely you, Paul, a Pharisee, understand the importance of the sign of the covenant! It was given by God himself to Abraham as an outward sign that we are his people! So how can the uncircumcised possibly be his people?”
Another way to say this: In order to fulfill the law of the O.T., Gentiles must become Jews before they can become Christians.
For many of the Jews, the issue wasn’t that Gentiles were being converted to Christ, it was that they somehow were leapfrogging The O.T. and becoming uncircumcised believer. For a Jew the term “uncircumcised believer” was an oxymoron. Like “jumbo shrimp” “civil war” or “country music”
II. The issue was “when”
v10-11 (read) Pauls provides an absolutely devastating answer. He simply looks back to the text and says, “When, exactly was Abraham justified by his faith?” Paul’s answer is as plain as the O.T. scripture in Gen 17:10 that he’s referencing. Abraham was justified before he was given the command to be circumcised and to circumcise his descendants.
Paul understood circumcision to be just what is was (verse 11). Circumcision is a sign of the seal of God’s covenant, not the covenant itself!
Again, the work was a result of the faith. The faith is what justifies, not the work. The faith comes first, the work follows.
Paul recognized the Jews had lost this, and he was lovingly, patiently re-teaching them correctly.
Point: When we recognize a flaw in the theology, or methodology or a fellow believer, do we use the same type of patient, loving care for the brother or sister in error, or do we barge in, guns blazing, eager to enlighten them with all of our wisdom?
Now why was Paul able to teach them in this patient, thorough manner?
Because he loved them.
We don’t always love people before we teach them.
But Paul did. And Christ did.
III. So who qualifies?
V12 (read) This is a radical idea to the Jews. Paul flatly states that Abraham is the father of the faith, not just to the Jews, but also to the Gentile believers! He says that there are two categories, those of the circumcision, and those who “walk in the steps of faith.”
So Paul, a self-proclaimed Jew among Jews, blameless before the Law, a Pharisee, is saying that circumcision, by itself, does nothing. Circumcision is a sign of a belief, but it is not the belief! Going to church is a sign of your belief, not the belief itself. Singing hymns is a sign of the belief you have, not the belief itself. Giving tithes is a sign of the belief, not the belief itself. The difference?
You can fake the sign, you can’t fake the belief.
An easier way to make the arguement is to ask this question: Did all Jews go to heaven? Did all Jews believe? Heck no! Most of the Jews rejected Christ himself! Just like today, millions of Jews, complete with the sign of circumcision, and the geneologies to link their blood directly to Abraham, are destined to Hell because they have the sign, but not the faith.
My point: Don’t be a good looking Christian. Be a real Christian!