REAL CIRCUMCISION Devotion 4 of 39 "For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision." – Tomorrow:
"For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. (Rom 2:25-29, NKJV)
It is tragic that so very little is known of "circumcision" within the modern church. It was a most significant ordinance, acquainting men with tokens of a Divine covenant. In its various forms, the word "circumcise" is mentioned no less than fifty-three times in Scripture. Before the Law (Gen 17:11,12,13,14,23,24,25,26,27; 21:4; 34:15,217,22,24; Ex 4:26; 12:44,48). During the Law, or period of the First Covenant (Lev 12:3; Deut 10:16; 30:6; Josh 5:2,3,4,5,7,8; 7:22,23; Jer 4:4; 9:25; Lk 1:59; 2:21; John 7:22). In the time of the New Covenant (Acts 7:8; 10:45; 11:2; 15:1,5,24; 21:21; Rom 2:25,26,27,28,29; 3:1,30; 4:9,10,11,12; 15:8; 1 Cor 7:18,19; Gal 2:3,7,8,9,12; 5:2,3,6,11; 6:12,13; Eph 2:11; Phil 3:3,5; Col 2:11; 3:11; 4:11; Tit 1:10).
Circumcision in the flesh was not an end of itself – that is, it was not simply a commandment to be obeyed. Rather, it was related to the covenant God made with Abraham – a covenant to bless the whole world through his Offspring, which ultimately was Christ. For this reason, the Lord called it "the COVENANT of circumcision," given to Abraham (Acts 7:8). Therefore, it was a visible sign of an otherwise intangible covenant. Abraham was to circumcise all the males within his house as a token of this covenant of blessing. Thus it is written, "And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you" (Gen 17:11).
Fleshly circumcision was also called a "sign" and a "seal" of the righteousness imputed to Abraham through his faith (Rom 4:11). That is, it was Abraham's token that the righteousness God had imputed, or credited, to him, was as real in his spirit as the circumcision was in his flesh.
Although circumcision was required under the Law, it was itself superior to the Law. This was the means of identifying the people with Abraham, the one who "had the promises" (Heb 11:17). The promises of sure blessing were not given to Israel, but to Abraham, the progenitor of Israel. Israel had the promises by virtue of the identity with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – the "fathers." Circumcision was their sign and seal of inclusion in that covenant.
Also, during the time of the First Covenant, God revealed there was a higher form of circumcision that would be performed by himself – one that would involve an essential change in the nature of man. Moses promised, "And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live" (Deut 30:6). Therefore, although circumcision in the flesh was a sign and a seal of the covenant God made with Abraham, it was also a type, or shadow, of a higher form circumcision that would be performed upon the heart. When that higher circumcision was accomplished, there would be no further need for circumcision in the flesh.
When Jesus entered into the arena of warfare, He made mention of circumcision, declaring that it was often performed on the Sabbath day (John 7:22). In so doing, He showed how even circumcision in the flesh was higher than the Law, which did not allow for tedious activity on the Sabbath day.
During the ministry of the Apostles, certain Jews sought to bind fleshly circumcision on those who believed in Christ. They seemed to have a sound basis for doing so, for God had spoken quite clearly of the necessity of circumcision. Thus, they reasoned, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved" (Acts 15:1). On yet another occasion, certain of the Pharisees who believed affirmed of new disciples, "That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses" (Acts 15:5). Still others, who went out from the Apostles and elders, declared "Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law" (Acts 15:24). These uninformed teachers had focused their attention on the early requirement, yet had not seen the temporality of circumcision in the flesh – that it was to yield to the circumcision of the heart, or a change in character.
These unlearned teachers were actually trusting in a procedure, unaware that the coming of the Messiah inducted men into a new era with new benefits and a new circumcision. Circumcision in the flesh, though God-ordained, was not intended to be permanent. It confirmed a promise, but was to give way to that promise when it came to pass. It sealed the covenant made with Abraham (not the one at Sinai), yet was to be abrogated when that covenant of blessing was fulfilled in the coming of the promised Seed, Jesus Christ (Gal 3:16).
OUR TEXT
Our text is addressed to Jews who were still placing an emphasis upon circumcision. They had not yet seen the glorious effects of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, and the change that is wrought in those who are in baptized into Him. They were placing confidence in being called a Jew, which was confirmed by their circumcision, and resting in the Law (Rom 2:17). They could correlate their circumcision with the Scriptures and Divine requirements – at least they thought they could. They boasted in the sign and seal of the covenant, but appeared abysmally ignorant of the covenant of blessing itself.
The Spirit reasons with such individuals to show them how utterly foolish their conclusions were. He challenges them with a statement that is most arresting. "Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised" (Rom 2:25, NIV). He is not speaking of circumcision during the time of the Law, but of attempting to inculcate it upon those who are in Christ, or trust in it as though being circumcised now covered the corruption that was in the individual.
In effect, the text states that if no essential change has taken place in the individual, the ultimate personal "form" under the law – circumcision – is utterly worthless. In fact, if the person is fundamentally disobedient, continually breaking the Law, he is no different from those who have no token of the covenant at all. Keep in mind, the Spirit is not speaking of those living prior to Christ, but of those living after His resurrection and enthronement in glory.
All of this may appear quite useless in our day, when circumcision is not an issue among professing Christians. However, the Spirit is elucidating a principle here that most certainly applies to our time. He is confronting the tendency of men to trust in form, to rest in procedure, and to gather confidence from something they themselves have done.
In order to throw down these imaginations, He points to a form God Himself instituted before the Law – circumcision. It was a form with both purpose and validity for the time. If, under Christ, the individual wants a God-ordained form to be the basis of confidence, or the ultimate proof of acceptance, that form must be matched by perfect obedience to the Law. The form has value ONLY if it is matched by a godly life. That is the point being made.
While circumcision is no longer a valid form in Christ Jesus, there is still a form that has relevance for believers. That particular form is baptism, in which the individual experiences the circumcision of the heart. This circumcision is performed by Christ Himself, not man, and is therefore called "the circumcision of Christ" (Col 2:11-12). This is why baptism is called "the FORM of the doctrine" (Rom 6:17), which "doctrine" is the Gospel of Christ.
Right here the pertinence of the text before us becomes apparent. Just as surely as there were Jews who based their confidence upon circumcision, there are professing Christians who base their confidence upon their baptism in water. However, form has no profit if there is no corresponding change in character. To be more precise, when an individual was baptized, if the heart was not circumcised, the form has no profit. To state it another way, if the person was not inducted into Christ, the form was worthless. That is why confidence cannot be in the form itself. It must be in the One who operated on the person in the form. As it is written, "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of THE OPERATION OF GOD, who hath raised him from the dead" (Col 2:12).
As with circumcision, baptism is a God-ordained form. Those who debate about the necessity of being baptized are as foolish as someone in Abraham's house, or under the Law, debating about whether or not circumcision was essential. However, Abraham and his progeny were never told to trust in their circumcision, and believers are never told to trust in their baptism.
If men are to be righteous, it will be because they have faith. Further, if their seeming obedience is not supported by the work of God within that obedience, it is as worthless as being circumcised while continuing to break the Law.
PRAYER POINT: Father, in the name of Jesus, help me to see Your work as greater than my subjection to it.