Circumcision (Seriously How Many More Times) - Philippians 3:1-8

3:1-3 - Just like Paul had to talk to his other audiences about those who trying to corrupt the true church of God, he brings up the conversation with the Philippians as well, even though they are doing well spiritually and there was no mention of these people being a problem for them so far. Paul says, “beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.” The IM points out that Paul is being metaphoric when he says “beware of dogs,” meaning that he isn’t saying specifically the species of animal that are dogs, or anything like that, but “dogs” refers to “an unworthy person,” specifically “Judaizers- people who taught that coverts to Christianity must follow certain Jewish customs, including circumcision. I sarcasm Paul referred to Judaizers as ‘the concision’ a term that implies mutilation.” It’s like he’s saying, “watch out for those mutilators who teach false doctrine.” It’s interesting that Paul says that those who preach circumcision are incorrect, because “we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.” So he’s saying, “beware of those who preach circumcision because we are already circumcised?” That doesn’t make any sense, especially considering the gentile Christian converts certainly weren’t physically circumcised. Here’s where we can remember the phrase “circumcised of heart.” What was the purpose of circumcision? If a baby was circumcised at 8 days old, it was for the parents to dedicate that child’s life to God’s service. Clearly a baby can’t consent to the procedure, nor can they agree to dedicate their own life to God’s service, but if we consider an adult circumcising their heart, which is figurative, they can be choosing to engage in an act that dedicates themselves to obedience to God’s law and acceptance of the gospel. My first thought that this act could be baptism. Circumcised of heart might mean someone who has agreed to be obedient to God and the commandments and accepted the gospel. So, for Paul to say that they “are the circumcision,” he might be saying “we are the ones who have accepted the gospel and promised obedience.” 3:4-8 - These “dogs” who come to preach the false doctrine of requiring circumcision might have been playing the “well, we were devout Jews so we know God better than you.” Basically Paul says, “any person who comes to you saying you should listen to them because they are Jews, I’m as Jewish as they come. I was circumcised at eight days old, I’m from of the house of Israel ‘of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews’ and a Pharisee, I was so zealous for Judaism that I persecuted Christianity. But all that I did for Judaism didn’t bring me closer to the true Messiah.” There are two parts to this that are important, first is that Paul’s zeal didn’t come from the hypocrisy of wanting to stay in power like so many other Pharisees. The article on this chapter from gospeldonctrine.com says, “A zealous Pharisee, Saul saw it as his religious duty to protect Judaism from apostasy. Because the Pharisees considered Christianity a heretical sect of Judaism, he viewed his persecution of Christs as an attempt to defend Judaism. Unlike Gamaliel, who argued for tolerance of the Christians, Saul sought for the extermination of the Christians and was present at the martyrdom of Stephen. In A.D. 33, ‘breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord,’ Saul set out to find and arrest Christians in their synagogues in Damascus and bring them bound to Jerusalem for judgment before the high priest.” Unlike the Pharisees that Jesus rebuked who were passionate for their religion as a front to stay in power, Paul truly believed in the cause of Judaism and did whatever he thought was necessary to preserve its integrity. This difference is why Paul was called to the work and the other Pharisees were condemned. Second, is that Paul’s zeal for Judaism and his strict adherence to the law obscured his understanding of the truth to the point that he didn’t recognize the gospel until Jesus literally pushed him on to the ground and told him about it. The article quotes High Nibley as noting that spiritual knowledge, or what Paul called “the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord,” “is indeed knowledge worth having, and it is to be had only by revelation. It is our happy duty to announce that since the restoration of the gospel such revelation is again available to mankind, provided they heed the words of the prophets.” This explains why we can tell people about the gospel and how amazing it is all day long and until the truth is revealed to them in their own spirit, they won’t accept it and aren’t accountable for it. Everyone is on their own journey, we all have our own strengths and weaknesses and who we are and where we are spiritually has been a process spanning over eons of time and will continue for eons into the future. And it is a deeply personal and spiritual process of growth and perfection that is between God and the individual. To think that we can influence or change the growth timeline is the height of arrogance. Well, that’s not true, we can absolutely influence how someone sees the church and the gospel, for good and for bad. We can influence them for good when we are kind and friendly and happy. People want to be around other people who have those characteristics and they want to have what makes them that happy. But on the other hand we can absolutely influence others for the worse, when we are judgmental, angry, rude, or offensive, people don’t want to be around that and they definitely avoid people who attack them personally. So if we act that way towards other people, not only should we not be surprised when they reject the gospel, we also have to accept our own role in their rejection.