In rejecting Paul then, one of the issues that has been raised is circumcision. Circumcision is an everlasting covenantal sign.
Genesis 17: 7-14
“7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.
… Every male among you shall be circumcised. … 11 You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. … So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
Thus, a very valid question is, how can followers of Yeshua who are not Jewish and not circumcised be part of the everlasting Abrahamic Covenant? Most orthodox Rabbi’s today would argue that they can’t be (If they are males that is. This covenantal sign is only required of the males). The Apostle Paul on the other-hand seems quite emphatic that physical circumcision is not necessary. If the Apostle Paul has been correctly understood on this issue, does this mean he is therefore anti-Torah?
Firstly, it is important to recognize that even the great Rabbi’s of yesteryear such as Maimonides (Rambam) were not certain what the purposes of circumcision were, but clearly it marked the males who were circumcised, as part of a family/group.
Circumcision also involves removing a covering. I agree with Jewish scholars that every human being was born with the heart of God. When God breathed His breath into Adam, he not only put His spirit, but also his heart (heart, in Hebrew, meaning the centre of our being, our mind, soul, strength, emotions, etc) into Adam. Since that day every single human being has the heart of God placed within him/her.
But at some point in our youth we cover this heart with our own ego, our needs, and our selfish desires. By covering our hearts we separate ourselves from our Father and the balance in our lives that a relationship with Him entails.
So when God choose Abraham, I think he instituted male circumcision as an outward sign and act of obedience to demonstrate the inward ‘uncovering’ that Abraham had and that his descendants were called to have.
Was circumcision just physical according to the Tanakh?
No, consider:
Deuteronomy 10:16 “Therefore, circumcise the foreskin of your heart; and don't be stiffnecked any longer!”
Deuteronomy 30:6 “Then ADONAI your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your children, so that you will love ADONAI your God with all your heart and all your being, and thus you will live.”
Jeremiah 4:4 "People of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, circumcise yourselves for ADONAI, remove the foreskins of your heart!...”
Lev 26:41 “...humble their uncircumcised hearts.”
This is consistent of course with the Shema and Jeremiah’s new covenant prophecy:
'And you shall love the LORD your God with all your HEART and with all your life and with all your might. And these things, which I am commanding you today shall be on your HEART... “ Deut. 6.:4-6
'But this is the new covenant which I will make with the house of Israel; after those days', declares the LORD, 'I will put my Torah within them, and on THEIR HEARTS I will write it; and I will be their God and they shall be My People.' Jer.31:31-33
So it is important, I think to see that physical circumcision is most significantly a sign that should help those circumcised and their families (and this means everyone living in the community, and therefore it includes the servants, as per Abraham) to have circumcised hearts. It is also significant that physical circumcision is only and can only, be applied to males, whereas, circumcision of the heart is for both male and female. This point alone should be cause for some serious reflection.
We then see in Acts that Gentiles joining ‘the Way’ were called to be circumcised by some of the Pharisees who followed Yeshua (Acts 15:5). Some of these Pharisees were then amazed to see the gift of Holy Spirit poured out on the gentiles of Cornelius’ house. This demonstrated their acceptance into the family of God and Yeshua without physical circumcision. (Acts 10:45). Just as Abraham was accepted by the Almighty before he and the male members of his family were circumcised, so Cornelius and his family were clearly accepted (as evidenced by the power of the Spirit of God coming upon them), before any circumcision (or baptism for that matter).
Clearly then, circumcision in a similar way to baptism, is not required for entry into the family of God, that is, for salvation. For a start, having a circumcised heart is not a once only and momentary action, but requires a journey of faithfulness to acquire.
The question then, is better clarified perhaps as, “is physical circumcision an act of obedience in the same way that baptism clearly[1] is?” (Baptism - from the Hebrew word, ‘mikvah’ which is a full immersion in water, generally to regain or establish ritual purity).
How did the Apostle Paul deal with this – brilliantly in my opinion. He said those already physically circumcised should remain so and those who weren’t did not need to. They did however, need to strive for circumcised hearts just as Moses and Jeremiah had called for.
1 Cor 7:18-19,24 “Was someone already circumcised when he was called? Then he should not try to remove the marks of his circumcision. Was someone uncircumcised when he was called? He shouldn't undergo circumcision. For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called …. So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.“
When our heart is circumcised we will act with humility and obedience such that we uphold the intent of Torah.
Some argue that Paul circumcised Timothy because of a fear of the Jews – this is not what the scripture states in Acts 16:1-3:
“Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.”
Paul clearly wanted to avoid unnecessary contention as Timothy had a Jewish mother. According to ‘halakha’ (the Way), the oldest normative definition used by Jews for self-identification is that a person is a Jew if his/her mother was Jewish. It is quite likely that Timothy’s family had been Hellenized and this might explain why Timothy had not been circumcised at 8 days.
So, if circumcision was a sign and a call to have a circumcised heart, what did Paul say on this issue?
Romans 2:28-29 A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.
Also in Ephesians he states, “Therefore, remember your former state: you Gentiles by birth - called the Uncircumcised by those who, merely because of an operation on their flesh, are called the Circumcised - at that time had no Messiah. You were estranged from the national life of Isra'el. You were foreigners to the covenants embodying God's promise. You were in this world without hope and without God. But now, you who were once far off have been brought near through the shedding of the Messiah's blood. For he himself is our shalom - he has made us both one and has broken down the partition which divided us by destroying in his own body the enmity occasioned by the Torah, with its commands set forth in the form of ordinances. He did this in order to create in union with himself from the two groups a single new humanity and thus make shalom, and in order to reconcile to God both in a single body by being executed on a stake as a criminal and thus in himself killing that enmity. Also, when he came, he announced as Good News shalom to you far off and shalom to those nearby, news that through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. (Eph. 2:11-18, CJB).
The partition/enmity or hostility/separation spoken of here is that between Jew and Gentile and is present because of the flesh (circumcision vs uncircumcision – the physical difference) and Torah (obedience to God’s commands versus ignorance of God’s commands – the difference in actions - that is, that Gentiles did not know Torah).
Thus, both Yeshua and Paul showed a way forward, a way in which Gentiles could become part of the Commonwealth of Israel without needing to become Jewish.
What about Ezek 44 especially verse 9 though? Doesn’t this scripture make it explicit that both physical and spiritual circumcision is necessary?
“And the LORD said to me, Son of man, mark well, see with your eyes, and hear with your ears all that I shall tell you concerning all the statutes of the temple of the LORD and all its laws. And mark well the entrance to the temple and all the exits from the sanctuary.
And say to the rebellious house, to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: O house of Israel, enough of all your abominations, in admitting foreigners, uncircumcised in heart and flesh, to be in my sanctuary, profaning my temple, when you offer to me my food, the fat and the blood. You have broken my covenant, in addition to all your abominations. And you have not kept charge of my holy things, but you have set others to keep my charge for you in my sanctuary.
9 “Thus says the Lord GOD: No foreigner, uncircumcised in heart and flesh, of all the foreigners who are among the people of Israel, shall enter my sanctuary.- Ezek 44:5-9
Context of course is crucial. The Almighty is speaking through Ezekiel here to those in the priesthood who had failed in their commission. HaShem is making it clear that the foreigners such as the Gibeonites whose impiety (seen through their uncircumcised flesh and hearts) made them unworthy to enter the sanctuary and perform the priestly duties there.
Thus, while it is not always possible to tell if someone has a circumcised heart, it is often easy to tell those that clearly don’t. Those whose behaviour is unrighteous, who fail to show the proper reverence for the Almighty, demonstrate by their immoral actions that they do not have circumcised hearts (and some, because they were foreigners, did not have circumcised foreskins either).
Also, the reference to entering the sanctuary, is a reference to attending to priestly duties there, not to the status of someone’s salvation. For example, while Ezekiel may be clearly indicating certain strict requirements for priestly service in the sanctuary, we see from passages such as Isaiah 56:6-7 that these requirements do not also apply to salvation.
Isaiah 56:6-7 “And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”
Ask most orthodox Rabbi’s and they will say that Gentiles can have a place in the Coming Age without becoming Jewish and in fact, to some degree have greater power and name. In fact, Isaiah 56, a part of which has been quoted above, is a great declaration of this.
Thus, it would seem that physical circumcision is not a barrier to entry into the community of faith; the Commonwealth of Israel, but that, for men, it is
either a necessary act of obedience at some later stage in their walk,
or the physical act is replaced by the ‘spiritual’, that is, that the sign is seen through the reality it points to namely, the circumcision of the heart.
It is argued by some that physical circumcision may still be desirable to show a unity of spirit, that is, that those of the ‘graft’ demonstrate their unity and humility in being grafted into the cultivated olive tree through this action. Personally, though I see this as unlikely for the practical reason, that few would ever know if a gentile male has been circumcised as an adult to show his loyalty and support to the Commonwealth of Israel.
Thus, at this stage of my study, I believe the evidence points most strongly to the fact that the circumcision of the heart is a valid way in which the covenant can be fulfilled and a means by which Gentiles, both male and female, can in fact enter into the Abrahamic covenant. Therefore, I also believe that the Apostle Paul has not demonstrated apostasy through his position on this issue, but that his ‘midrashic’ comments have shown the true intention of circumcision as Moses and Jeremiah had before him.
Paul Herring
April 2011
[1] Note that John the Baptist (the Immerser) saw baptism as a step of repentance, and did not wish to baptize any who were not already showing signs of this repentance: “ Bear fruit in keeping with repentance… I baptize you with water for repentance, …” (Matt 3:7-8,11)
No comments:
Post a Comment