Abraham
(By Urs, Fair Use)
Salvation and the Art of Not Wetting Your Pants
By Scout
This morning, I went for a hike. I was high up on the side of a canyon with mountains off in the distance. I stopped to take a leak and momentarily ran into a problem – a problem specific to me. I am not circumcised. So sometimes, if I am not careful, my apparatus causes the stream to go in an unexpected direction. And I thought I had wet my pant leg but I did not. I did think how that most men don’t deal with this concern. It is a logistical burden and, ironically, I am a little part Jewish. I am your actual descendant of Abraham. I can’t tell you why my parents did not get me circumcised. Probably no good reason.
My son was circumcised on the eighth day. This made me realize that the only valid Mosaic circumcision is on the eighth day per scripture. If you were circumcised as the Torah said, you were part of an elite group that would inherit the promises made to Abraham. But circumcision also has a history in the Gentile community. Historians think that circumcision has been practiced for 10,000 years. The Egyptians in the Sixth Dynasty did it. It is an ancient surgical procedure – maybe the first one.
I am curious about what the Circumcision Party, that clashed with Paul, expected First Century Gentile Christians to do about circumcisions that did not happen on the eighth day. You can’t climb into a time machine and go back and re-do historical events. Do you get a special dispensation for the wrong day from the Jewish priests so your circumcision can be rendered valid? I think originally the Circumcision Party was not making an argument that Gentiles who wanted to convert to Christianity should simply undergo circumcision. They specifically asserted in Acts 15 that it was circumcision “after the manner of Moses.” Not just any circumcision but eighth-day circumcision. I think they were contending that uncircumcised or improperly circumcised Gentiles could not be saved - ever. It was a way of saying that the promises of Christianity were for devout eighth-day Jews only. Maybe after the Jerusalem Conference, the Circumcision Party softened up a little on this.
I am glad that circumcision now is not by hands in the flesh but of the heart. Had I lived in the time of Paul, I would be disturbed if a member of the Circumcision Party sidled up to me and said that if I wanted to be a Christian and be saved I would need to get circumcised. But I have had Armstrongists tell me that I could not eat pork (I don’t like it anyway. Smells funny.) Or tell me I had to unleaven my house. Some Armstrongist denominations have little Mosaic quirks that they elevate proudly to requirements for salvation – like observing New Moons, maybe. Or believing in this or that oddity said from the pulpit. It sets them apart. And it means that they are going to the Place of Safety and will receive a better salvation and everyone else can pound sand. Because the others do not have the special knowledge that they have about New Moons. Or maybe about not eating mushrooms. Or maybe about not eating jell-o. Or whatever it is that makes them the only ones in God’s inner circle.
The Circumcision Party wanted to contain salvation. They wanted to control it and limit access. They wanted only a very few admitted to the inner circle. The Jerusalem Council blew all that away but there are some who still cling to it after 2,000 years. They also want to contain salvation. The smaller and more exclusive their denomination, the better. This plainly goes against the spirit of Christ who wanted the Gospel of salvation in Christ to be spread far and wide. Even among the Gentiles. This containment view will probably be one of the last errors to die when Christ returns. But, let me tell you, I am seriously happy that the Bible unequivocally states that physical circumcision is not necessary for salvation, even though other physical Torahic activities are not so dramatically set aside in scripture. I shudder to think what the misguided zealots might have forced on me.