Having sufficiently (hopefully) immersed ourselves in the
story of Abraham, such that we have now heard and comprehended the crucial
components of that story of covenant within its proper order, we can use that
for purposes of an interaction with the fourth chapter of Romans. We can
begin that interaction with the ninth verse, in possession of perhaps a new
potential for enlightenment, now hearing this portion of Paul’s argument for
Gentile justification (covenant standing) as the adjunct to all that has
preceded it and as a preface to that which is the weighty subject matter of
chapters nine through eleven. Reading then, we hear Paul asking his mixed
congregation of hearers “Is this blessedness then for the circumcision or also
for the uncircumcision?” (4:9a). This “blessedness” is of a piece with
the Abrahamic covenant (begun in chapter twelve of Genesis, with annexations
over time and the course of the text). We do ourselves a tremendous
disservice if we do not maintain our cognizance of this fact, along with the Abraham
story, as we hear the answer to Paul’s rhetorical question, which is “For we
say, ‘faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.’” (4:9b) Yes, ‘twas
Abraham’s faith---his belief that engendered an unswerving loyalty to the
covenant-making-and-keeping Creator God---that brought him into right standing
(covenant) with God.
Keying in on the order of events, as Paul elevates the
covenant marker of belief in Jesus over and against the Jewish covenant markers
of the day, Paul, as if poking and prodding at his listeners for an answer that
should be all too obvious to them, while also conveying just a little bit of
shame on those that have insisted on the necessity of circumcision to be
identified as a covenant person and so enjoy its benefits, asks “How then was
it credited to him? Was he circumcised at the time, or not?”
(4:10a) Forcing his point, the answer comes forth as “No, he was not
circumcised but uncircumcised!” (4:10b) This, when read to the
congregation by a tradent, would undoubtedly be read in such a way as to convey
the singular importance of this point when it comes to dealing with this quite
pressing and, for Paul, possibly church-and-kingdom-of-God limiting
issue.
The next verse points up what Paul sees as something that presents
an insurmountable contradiction for those that insist on circumcision (along
with Sabbath-keeping and food laws, neither of which are anywhere near the
Abraham story) as the means of entrance upon the covenant. He writes “And
he received the sign of circumcision,” which we remember was to serve as a
“reminder” of the fact of his right standing with God and the promises that had
been made to him, “as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he
was still uncircumcised” (4:11a). Now, even the most ardent defender of
circumcision as a covenant marker would not be willing to insist that Abraham
was not in covenant with God before being circumcised. Circumcision, Paul
reiterates, was the sign of what God had already determined in regards to
Abraham because of his belief. Thus, confirming his position in regards
to Gentiles and what is required of them to become covenant people (to be
justified), this order of events was neatly orchestrated by God “so that he
would become the father of all those who believe but have never been
circumcised” (4:11b). Why? “That they too could have righteousness
credited to them” (4:11c). That is, that they too could, because of their
faith, showing itself forth as an unswerving loyalty to the covenant and Creator
God of Israel as manifested in Jesus the Messiah, attain the justification that
was attained by Abraham, in advance and independent of circumcision.
Belief was and is the key, and the prophetic insistence on God’s performance of
a circumcision of the heart rings in our increasingly alert and sensitive
ears.
While proposing all of these things, Paul is still sensitive
to the position of those that are the physical descendants of Abraham through
Isaac, who have lived as the covenant people according to the dictates of the
covenant as governed by the Mosaic law (and morphed over time into the shape
that had been taken in the days of Jesus), Paul, and the early church, and who
bear this particular covenant marker because of the ongoing faith of a covenant
people. This sensitivity is well demonstrated in chapter nine, the
precursor of which is to be partially found in this statement: “And he is also
the father of the circumcised, who are not only circumcised, but who also walk
in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham possessed when he was
still uncircumcised” (4:12). There are no second-class citizens.
Bearing the mark of circumcision does not mean that one does not walk the path
of faith. Paul does not allow his hearers to lose sight of that fact that
Abraham was faithful both before and after circumcision. Circumcision did
not diminish faith. In fact, as we can see in the Abraham story, it was
the faith by which Abraham was justified that eventually led to him being
gifted with a reminder of that covenant---a unique, identifying mark.
No comments:
Post a Comment