In the NT, it is beyond question that circumcision is abrogated as a sign of membership in the church. Circumcision, in light of Christ’s coming, is no longer a covenantally significant sign and thus is not required for believers, whether they are Jewish or Gentile (see Acts 15:1–35; Gal 1:6–9; 2:11–16; 6:15; 1 Cor 7:18–19).
In Christ, the previous covenants have come to fulfillment, and, as such, the covenant sign of circumcision is no longer necessary; it has served its purpose. Now, in Christ, and the creation of the “new man” (Eph 2:11–22), the law-covenant has been fulfilled and the God-given divisions tied to that law-covenant have been removed so much so that Paul can proclaim, “Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation” (Gal 6:15).
In this new era, a new covenantal sign, baptism, has been established to testify of the gospel and to identify one as having become the spiritual seed of Abraham, through faith in Messiah Jesus. But unlike circumcision, baptism is not a sign of physical descent, nor is it a sign that anticipates gospel realities. Rather it is a sign that signifies a believer’s union with Christ and all the benefits that are entailed by that union.
No doubt, baptism is analogous to circumcision in that it is an initiatory rite, but it is not a mere replacement of it. Nowhere does the NT say that circumcision is now unnecessary because baptism has replaced it. That would have been the most logical answer to the Judaizers, if the paedobaptist position was correct.
This answer is never given because baptism is a new rite, applied to each person who has repented and believed, who has been born of the Spirit, united to Christ, and has demonstrated that he has entered into the new covenant realities inaugurated by our Lord.
Schreiner, T. R., & Wright, S. D. (2006). Believer’s baptism: sign of the new covenant in Christ (pp. 156–157). Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group.
Comments