GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Romans 2  (Read 1252 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

  • Guest
Romans 2
« on: Fri Nov 30, 2001 - 06:39:56 »
Hey Gmk3!  Physical circumcision is not commanded by God under the N.T.  However, baptism is commanded.  It makes no difference whether I am physically circumcised.  It does make a difference whether I have been baptized. By the way, read Colossians 2:11-12.

Try this: In those verses you listed, substitute belief, repentance and then baptism in the place of "circumcision" then read them.  I think you will see that those scriptures do not cancel out obeying any commands that God has given.

Those are my thoughts  :0 (I love these smilies!)

Gordon

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« on: Fri Nov 30, 2001 - 06:39:56 »

Offline gmk3

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 31
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #1 on: Sat Dec 01, 2001 - 09:10:06 »
Thanks Gordon and Bill for your thoughts.  I do understand there is a big difference between the old law of circumcision and baptism.  I just wander if God looks on two people and says, "This guy here has not been baptised yet, but he lives a life that pleases me.  He takes care of the poor and sick.  He gives me all that he has everyday of the week.  Now look at this man who has been baptised.  He gives me nothing but lip service.  The first guy I see as baptised while the second breaks my heart!"  
I know that we can never understand the mind of our Awesome God, so I don't expect anyone to really respond to this unless you just feel compelled to.  It is just something that I have thought about lately and thought I would share with you.  Keep up the great studying guys!  You all push me to better my studies.  Thanks

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #1 on: Sat Dec 01, 2001 - 09:10:06 »

Offline jmfair60

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #2 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 07:28:41 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (patriciaredstone @ Dec. 01 2001,12:33)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Let me start off by stating that I do and always will teach baptism.  I definitely believe it is commanded and Jesus himself was baptised so that alone will keep me teaching it.  Now the question.  Read Romans 2:25-29.  Can circumcision in this passage be related to baptism?  Also Galatians 6:15.  I am no biblical scholar, like I have stated many times before, so I am willing to admit I have a lot of growing and maturing ahead of me. I would rather be immature and growing than be a lump on a log who thinks he has it all figured out though!  Give me some thoughts on those passages.  Thanks[/quote]
There are several reasons why circumscision is like baptism and several reasons why it is not.
The dominant symbol of circumscision not woman friendly. Circumcsion is the key to understanding the reason for Christ and his gender inclusive ministry, being born of a woman, and his personal testimony of resurrection being recieved by first by a woman. Christ was reconciling an emphatic dichotomy between men and women, a distinction that is paralleled by a further oppostion between Jew and non-Jew. Women cannot be circumscised and therefore cannot have what the Hebrews called "perfection." Circumcision is often referred to as "perfection" in many Hebrew writings. Circumcision was also a convenantal obligation -- but one that went from fathe rto son, not from mother ot son or even parent to to son, and certainly from parent to daughter, not even from mother to daughter, a relationship that does not officially exist in the Torah the way the father-son relationship does. In other words women are excluded from the spiritual world of "perfection" and "covenant." Also circumcision blood was redemptive blood. In Hebrew law it is specifically the blood of circumcision and the blood of the lamb that save. Wine thus recollects the covenant and is also a symbol for blood -- the blood drawn from the paschal lamb and the blood drawn from every Jewish male on the eighth day of his life. Bothe th ePassover seder and the circumcision rigtual use wine to recollect the blood. Their similar blessings point to the celebrative theme they have in common, the covenant with Isreal: "Blessed is God who makes a covenant." Both covenental events -- circumsision and seder -- are male dominated: obviously in the case of circumcision; only slightly less so in the case of the seder. Women were
probably present physically at the seder in NT times, but to judge by the stories told of Rabbis who attend a Passover seder overnight, the feast was largely for men, who were the sole ritual actors. The seder, too, was then, at least in part , a male covenantal cermony, featuring questions asked by a son of his fater, the rigualized passing down of the covenantal story from father to son. This would explain why only men are recorded as apostles.
The Hebrew blood rituals of circumcision and paschal lamb are both attracted and yet repelled by each other in the incarnation of Christ. Jews and Christians share an historical trajectory much like the DNA spiral: swirling around each other in mutual orbit, never coming quite close enough to coalesce, but at the same time, neither one managing to extricate itself from the pull excerised by the other until you fully understand that the reason that Christ came to the world was to save Humankind through Womankind who introduced sin into the world.
It is repellant to the blood/covenant history that the story of Jesus begins with Woman. If a rabbai of the period were telling the story, Mary would probably be only a passing mention with emphasis placed on Joseph. But then how to deal with that maternal Davidic bloodline...? But even with the family tree exposed, no rabbai would proceed to quote a woman regardless of her ancestry or messianic connections.
In the New Testament women are now connected to both the circumcision blood of the covenant which brought Hebrew men to "perfection" through the Perfect Hebrew Son of the Most High and through the blood of Womankind which ushered the Lamb into his terrestrial home of 33 years. Women are also redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, the Perfect Lamb which was slain. That blood touches us women too -- perhaps even more than men!
Christ came to save "the world" the One world which was fractured in the Garden. The fracture has God on one side, Humankind on the other, Woman on one side, Man on the other, Jew on one side Gentile on the other. This fissure is represented in the physical example of the temple curtain which was torn at the crusifixion to demonstrate that the sepearation was fading.
This promise of redemption was deliverd first by God to the Woman in the Garden and deliverd first to Woman through the line of Mary and continues to bless Womankind to this day. This is why Christ is often better news to women than to men. Men cannot bless us by proxy through their blood or their rituals or sacrifices, but Christ can. He adorns Womankind with the perfection of his perfection, his perfect Love which covers even Woman. TIKKUN![/quote]
I believe the last verse in the Romans passage is too often ignored.  What God desires is a circumcised heart, a heart with the foreskin cut away to expose a vunerable, sensitive interior.  No pretense or subterfuge.  This relates to Duet. 30:6.  It also makes "circumcision" as relevant to women as to men, although the figurism is male dominant, as was the culture at the time.  If you have a circumcised heart, much of the other things we discuss become mute points.  If one's heart is truly circumcised, whenever they realize that the Lord desires for them to do a certain thing, they simply do it.  No hemming and hawing, no attempt to circumvent God's desire, just plain and simple obedience, not out of fear of damnation but in loving gratitude for the incredible gift of salvation.

BTW, all my icons have been replaced with plain boxes containing red X's.  Anyone else having this problem

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #2 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 07:28:41 »

Offline patriciaredstone

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Manna: 4
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #3 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 09:42:13 »
???

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #3 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 09:42:13 »

Offline spurly

  • All glory to God and to Jesus the Son!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15743
  • Manna: 319
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #4 on: Fri Jan 03, 2003 - 20:56:03 »
AHA!  It seems this discussion was going on long before the \"Are Unbaptized Believers Lost\" article was posted on this site!

Maybe this discussion goes all the way back to the early church fathers.  And maybe, just maybe, we will never have an answer :0  on this side of heaven.

Kevin (By the way, this was the second oldest thread in the theology section)

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #4 on: Fri Jan 03, 2003 - 20:56:03 »



Offline gmk3

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 31
  • Manna: 0
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #5 on: Fri Nov 30, 2001 - 03:10:27 »
Let me start off by stating that I do and always will teach baptism.  I definitely believe it is commanded and Jesus himself was baptised so that alone will keep me teaching it.  Now the question.  Read Romans 2:25-29.  Can circumcision in this passage be related to baptism?  Also Galatians 6:15.  I am no biblical scholar, like I have stated many times before, so I am willing to admit I have a lot of growing and maturing ahead of me. I would rather be immature and growing than be a lump on a log who thinks he has it all figured out though!  Give me some thoughts on those passages.  Thanks

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #5 on: Fri Nov 30, 2001 - 03:10:27 »

Offline Bill

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
  • Manna: 15
  • Senior Member
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #6 on: Fri Nov 30, 2001 - 18:51:04 »
gmk3

It seems to me that there is a difference in principle between circumcision as spoken in Romans 2:25 and baptism.  One differece is we are under grace rather than law.  

The principle in Gal 6:15 is appicable to baptism if we boast that it saves us.

I believe that we should be baptized because Christ was and He said we should baptize diciples.

I agree with the latter part of your post.  I constantly have to request God's help or I begin to believe I have all the answers.

Offline patriciaredstone

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Manna: 4
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #7 on: Sat Dec 01, 2001 - 20:33:05 »
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (gmk3 @ Nov. 30 2001,01:10)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Let me start off by stating that I do and always will teach baptism.  I definitely believe it is commanded and Jesus himself was baptised so that alone will keep me teaching it.  Now the question.  Read Romans 2:25-29.  Can circumcision in this passage be related to baptism?  Also Galatians 6:15.  I am no biblical scholar, like I have stated many times before, so I am willing to admit I have a lot of growing and maturing ahead of me. I would rather be immature and growing than be a lump on a log who thinks he has it all figured out though!  Give me some thoughts on those passages.  Thanks[/quote]
There are several reasons why circumscision is like baptism and several reasons why it is not.
The dominant symbol of circumscision not woman friendly. Circumcsion is the key to understanding the reason for Christ and his gender inclusive ministry, being born of a woman, and his personal testimony of resurrection being recieved by first by a woman. Christ was reconciling an emphatic dichotomy between men and women, a distinction that is paralleled by a further oppostion between Jew and non-Jew. Women cannot be circumscised and therefore cannot have what the Hebrews called "perfection." Circumcision is often referred to as "perfection" in many Hebrew writings. Circumcision was also a convenantal obligation -- but one that went from fathe rto son, not from mother ot son or even parent to to son, and certainly from parent to daughter, not even from mother to daughter, a relationship that does not officially exist in the Torah the way the father-son relationship does. In other words women are excluded from the spiritual world of "perfection" and "covenant." Also circumcision blood was redemptive blood. In Hebrew law it is specifically the blood of circumcision and the blood of the lamb that save. Wine thus recollects the covenant and is also a symbol for blood -- the blood drawn from the paschal lamb and the blood drawn from every Jewish male on the eighth day of his life. Bothe th ePassover seder and the circumcision rigtual use wine to recollect the blood. Their similar blessings point to the celebrative theme they have in common, the covenant with Isreal: "Blessed is God who makes a covenant." Both covenental events -- circumsision and seder -- are male dominated: obviously in the case of circumcision; only slightly less so in the case of the seder. Women were
probably present physically at the seder in NT times, but to judge by the stories told of Rabbis who attend a Passover seder overnight, the feast was largely for men, who were the sole ritual actors. The seder, too, was then, at least in part , a male covenantal cermony, featuring questions asked by a son of his fater, the rigualized passing down of the covenantal story from father to son. This would explain why only men are recorded as apostles.
The Hebrew blood rituals of circumcision and paschal lamb are both attracted and yet repelled by each other in the incarnation of Christ. Jews and Christians share an historical trajectory much like the DNA spiral: swirling around each other in mutual orbit, never coming quite close enough to coalesce, but at the same time, neither one managing to extricate itself from the pull excerised by the other until you fully understand that the reason that Christ came to the world was to save Humankind through Womankind who introduced sin into the world.
It is repellant to the blood/covenant history that the story of Jesus begins with Woman. If a rabbai of the period were telling the story, Mary would probably be only a passing mention with emphasis placed on Joseph. But then how to deal with that maternal Davidic bloodline...? But even with the family tree exposed, no rabbai would proceed to quote a woman regardless of her ancestry or messianic connections.
In the New Testament women are now connected to both the circumcision blood of the covenant which brought Hebrew men to "perfection" through the Perfect Hebrew Son of the Most High and through the blood of Womankind which ushered the Lamb into his terrestrial home of 33 years. Women are also redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, the Perfect Lamb which was slain. That blood touches us women too -- perhaps even more than men!
Christ came to save "the world" the One world which was fractured in the Garden. The fracture has God on one side, Humankind on the other, Woman on one side, Man on the other, Jew on one side Gentile on the other. This fissure is represented in the physical example of the temple curtain which was torn at the crusifixion to demonstrate that the sepearation was fading.
This promise of redemption was deliverd first by God to the Woman in the Garden and deliverd first to Woman through the line of Mary and continues to bless Womankind to this day. This is why Christ is often better news to women than to men. Men cannot bless us by proxy through their blood or their rituals or sacrifices, but Christ can. He adorns Womankind with the perfection of his perfection, his perfect Love which covers even Woman. TIKKUN!

Offline patriciaredstone

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 865
  • Manna: 4
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Romans 2
« Reply #8 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 09:35:16 »
Yes, John! And Romans 3 brings it all together. The uncircumcised "are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be recieved by faith." The circumcised were confused. They understood that circumcision was redemptive. At the point this was written they had not grasped the perfection of the sacrifice of the Firstborn Son. Since Christ was the final blood sacrifice (blood sacrifice for every male Jew began on the eighth day with his own blood) there is no more need for sheep, goats or humans.

And yes, I have little x's too.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Romans 2
« Reply #8 on: Sun Dec 02, 2001 - 09:35:16 »

  • Guest
Romans 2
« Reply #9 on: Thu Dec 13, 2001 - 14:47:03 »
gmk,

I have often wondered about the very same passages.  These passages say that the most important thing to God is the condition of the heart and the new creation.  While the Jews were concerned about the physical act of circumcision and who was circumcised and who was not, in the CofC we're often concerned about who is baptized and who is not, and if they're not are they really are brothers/sisters, and if they are baptized, were they baptized the right way, with the right motive, etc.  Perhaps we should not be so concerned with who has done what but look at people as God does, look at their hearts.  When we find someone who claims to be a Christian instead of first wondering if they are baptized and making sure it was by immersion and all the other specifics, maybe we should look at their hearts.  Maybe we should concern ourselves with the person's love for God and how they display that in their lives.  I'm not saying we should stop teaching baptism either, but maybe God is not as concerned with the physical baptism in water as much as we are???

 

     
anything