Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Sins Not Skins

…you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ,
(Colossians 2:11 – ESV)

Most of the believers at Colossae had not been circumcised, but Paul is telling them that they are indeed circumcised. Paul is saying that you don’t need physical circumcision and so therefore he is also saying you don’t need any other type of rite or ritual to make you right with God.

That is the point he is leading up to, giving examples of things that are not of Christ although they may seem to be good. He says we don’t need the Jewish religion and we don’t need any man made religion either. When Paul goes on and on in all of his epistles about not needing circumcision he is by extension also saying the same about any man made religious activity, he just uses the Jewish customs because that is where he came from and where his original listeners would look to. However, it most certainly applies to anything that draws away from Christ and toward what man can do to reach up to God. It isn’t about reaching, it is about reckoning. Putting off the sins of the flesh, not the skins of the flesh. It is a spiritual thing (Romans 2:29 / Philippians 3:3 / John 3:5 / Titus 3:5 / Ephesians 5:26). Even the Old Testament says that there was a bodily circumcision and another of the heart (Deuteronomy 30:6).

The circumcision of Christ is the kind of circumcision that belongs to Christ, that of the heart, not of the hands. It may seem strange that Paul is talking of a circumcision made with no hands, and then in verse 12 he goes directly into that circumcision being tied to something done with hands, namely baptism. But since he has just spoken of a circumcision made without hands, we can see that Paul is saying that baptism is symbolic.

Paul is not teaching sacramentalism here he is teaching against it. Paul implies that baptism can be turned into one of those “plausible arguments” he warned us about earlier (Colossians 2:4-10). Baptism isn’t the circumcision of Christ, it is representative of it, it identifies us with it, and it is a symbol of it. It is more than and it identifies us with more than the type of Old Testament circumcision. Baptism is not the New Testament circumcision it is something much more. It is not saying you are just a part of the visible covenant community, and part of the possibility, but part of the profession itself, a part of the invisible remnant, the elect covenant community, as well as the visible community. It is a more faith based and established individual confirmation. It isn’t wait and see; it is I saw the light.

25 comments:

Even So... said...

This will be the first of three posts on baptism, covering Colossians 2:11-13...

Dan said...

Putting off the sins of the flesh, not the skins of the flesh.

Some times your just too much. You truly are gifted in what you do.

jazzycat said...

J.D.,
Good thoughts.. I received e-mail today telling me that my "Voice of Vision" book had been mailed from the publisher. I will try to get as excited as Craver when it comes.

Anonymous said...

"verse 12 he goes directly into that circumcision being tied to something done with hands, namely baptism."

I have wondered about this in the past and have heard people say that they were saved because of their baptism. Obviosly that was incorrect but at the time I didn't have the understanding to possibly correct that.

Can't wait for the others...

P.S. Tomorrow is Tuesday.

Even So... said...

Jazzy thanks, and I'll look forward to your insights as we go through the next two verses....

Even So... said...

Paul, I am taking your nephew and Anthony to lunch tomorrow, then I will be at the church for a while after that, then home to get Margie, then marriage counseling in the evening...still want to do the prayer time, tomorrow may not work, but call me around 2 if you are able...

Garry Weaver said...

This good, thought-provoking stuff. Looking forward to the rest of it.

Anonymous said...

I was present at the Wednesday night study when you taught this, but I am still "chewing" on it. For over 20 years, I was part of a community of believers who tied baptism to salvation. And quite honestly, it made sense to me. I "see" what your saying here, I'm just having difficulty in fully "digesting" it. I also will be looking forward to your other posts on this subject. (even though I know it's an age-old debate)

donsands said...

"It is more than and it identifies us with more than the type of Old Testament circumcision."

Isn't this the crux of the different ways the Church interprets Baptism?

Looking forward to your next two lessons.

Even So... said...

Garry, thanks, see you here...

Chris, I hope I can make it palatable...

Sandman, yep, that's it, stay tuned...

Jim said...

Hey JD, good thoughts. I think you have really helped to unravel this one.

It is so true that our outward expressions of obedience to Christ and His commands are nothing more than the witness of an inner reality, namely the Holy Spirit's operation in our hearts.

Anonymous said...

Jim - I understand what you're saying. Here's "the catch" for me. Why isn't the "witness" an immediate thing. Why would one want to wait until tomorrow, next week, next month, etc. And.....

....do we have the option to sprinkle or immerse and does God ordain "baptizing" babies?

I know these questions are a bit "off topic" but I think this is an important and misunderstood topic for a lot of folks.

Anyways, I know JD will thoroughly explain! Thanks for letting me bend your ear.

Craver Vii said...

I got my ears perked if you have anything to say about the difference between an "ordinance" and a "sacrament."

Even So... said...

Craver, that is a VERY good question, actually not in range of what we are talking about heree, but perhaps we can cover that soon...

IMO, those that hold to "sacrament" waffle greatly, making new categories and such when confronted with the idea that these things confer grace...what does that mean?...again, let's not dive into that here, but be on the lookout the next couple of days....

Anonymous said...

Craver vii

It's that "words mean something" thing, huh? How about the phrase "obeying" the Gospel? Translation..have you been baptized?

Craver Vii said...

Chris, are you asking whether I have been baptized? Yes. I'm what you might call a "double-dipper." My parents got me sprinkled as an infant, but when I was all growed-up, subsequent to my own profession of faith I asked my pastor to let me get dunked and make a public declaration of my belief in and identification with Jesus Christ.

Even So... said...

That would be part of obedience to the gospel, our agreeing with it in public declaration by being baptized...of course, that doesn't mean the water saves us...

You can only consciously obey to the degree you know what obedience is, and yes, we are to be baptized, and to not be baptized when you know of it and have the ability to be baptized is disobedience, and to refuse would say even more…

Marcian said...

So, with circumcision, is God giving the Israelites an outward sign of what is supposed to occur in their hearts? Or is there some other reason for it?

Even So... said...

It is that, but also a sign and seal of them being in the visible covenant community...now, the problem in the NT is that the sign and seal of baptism is also about the visible community, but the community is constituted differently, not of simply the visible covenant with the hope of the promise, but the actual, remannt, believing community, the promise fulfilled...yes, some will be baptized but be false, but it would not (should not, but these days?!) be as many percentage wise as those who were given the sign back in the OT...the OT was a sign of what was supposed to happen in their hearts, when they grew older, the NT sign is to say what HAS happened in their hearts...much more to follow in the next two days, stay tuned...

Anonymous said...

craver vii

Oops, there goes my lack in the articulation department. Actually, I was commenting on how ya'll can expound on the meaning of individual words (ordinance vs sacrament). And I was not asking if you'd been baptized. The "obeying the gospel" comment was more about a statement that I was taught that now seems so odd to me. I mean, how does one "obey" the Good News? So sorry about the confusion. My mind knows what I'm talking about...but quite often, its' the only thing that knows! :)

Even So... said...

They are just taking biblical concepts and pouring their own meaning into them and then using that meaning to bolster their own concept of things. But the premise is flawed in the first place, and the error becomes greater and greater as they go further. They may seem biblical because they use biblical words and phrases but they are not, indeed, they are creating an idol of their own imagination and dressing and disguising it in biblical sounding garb. They could use the phrase “obeying the gospel” to mean anything they wanted, whatever they believe the gospel is, marshaling a battery of supposed proof texts to corroborate their corrupted premise.

Even So... said...

How's that for gobbledygook?

Well, that is what I think of baptismal regeneration, or whatever nuance you want to spin on it saying it isn't actually that...again, much more on this in the coming days...and no I am not saying covenant theologians are by necessity baptismal regenerationists...

poker88;poker online;game poker:poker indonesia;poker online indonesia said...

Very Impressive website, keep developing it

taruhan bola;judi bola;agen bola;sbobet;judi online;bandar bola said...

I like your website and post in this

dewapoker;poker online;game poker:poker indonesia;poker online indonesia said...

Your post very useful for me , thanks