B. A servant to the circumcision

Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers, and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy… . (Rom 15:8–9 NKJV)

In the previous blog, we introduced John the Baptist and began to examine his purpose and ministry. In John’s own testimony he clearly expressed his fundamental purpose and ministry.

I did not know Him; but that He should be revealed to Israel, therefore I came baptizing with water. (John 1:31 NKJV)

And the attempt to create a tension between his ministry and that of Christ’s was quickly put into the context of the Baptist’s understanding of his own role.

He must increase, but I must decrease. (John 3:30 NKJV)

We have also seen that John the Baptist described the twofold commission that Christ would fulfil.

 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29 NKJV)

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (Matt 3:11 NKJV)

So how are we to understand Christ’s mission in the context of the Messiah for the covenant people of God? Our opening quotation is from Paul’s letter to the covenant people of God in Rome and as always in our study of the epistles, we remind ourselves that Paul was writing as a minister of the New Covenant to those who were members of the New Covenant people of God. In other words, it always pays to remember Paul’s earlier comment in the epistle to the churches of Galatia:

For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. (Gal 4:24–26 NKJV)

And that of the writer to the Hebrews.

But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. (Heb 8:6 NKJV)

I have been taken to task on occasion for saying there are two covenants. The thrust of the criticism was that there are many covenants: Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Sinaitic (or Mosaic), Levitical, Davidic and New Covenant. (Some identify several more.) The word covenant (Hebrew – berith and Greek – diathēkē) is used more than 300 times in the Scriptures but when we encounter the phrase New Covenant it is always in contrast with the Old Covenant and the Old Covenant was the Sinaitic Covenant.

The distinction between the ministry of John the Baptist and that of Jesus Christ is due to the fact that John the Baptist was an Old Covenant man, living in an Old Covenant era and ministering to an Old Covenant people, whereas Jesus Christ was a New Covenant man, living in an Old Covenant era and ministering, initially, to an Old Covenant people. In fact, although his life was glorious it was preparatory to an even greater glory. This is the truth captured in Paul’s words to the New Covenant saints in Rome:

Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers, and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy… . (Rom 15:8–9 NKJV)

The New King James Version corrects the older translation. The KJV has ‘was a servant of’ but the preposition ‘eis’ does not mean ‘of’ it means ‘towards’. The orientation of his earthly ministry was ‘towards’ the circumcision. Notice too how Paul overleaps the whole period of the Old Covenant and sees Christ as the fulfiller of promises made to the fathers, ie the patriarchs.

This aligns with the prophecy of Zacharias:

To perform the mercy promised to our fathers

And to remember His holy covenant… . (Luke 1:72 NKJV)

And also links the time of the fathers with the later Old Covenant era.

The circumcision

That phrase, the circumcision, is used several times in the Scriptures. Its first use is in the story of Moses’, prior to the Sinai Covenant, when Moses’ wife reluctantly circumcised their youngest son and averted Moses’ death. (Ex 4:26) It is a disturbing incident that we cannot pause to examine at this point. It is clear from the narrative that Moses and Zipporah had two sons, but it seems that the issue was that one of them had not been circumcised. We might ask why this was the case.

Zipporah, the wife of Moses, was a Midianite: the daughter of Jethro the priest of Midian. She was a descendant from Midian who was a son of Abraham but not of Sarah, and consequently not from Isaac or Jacob. The people of Midian became a thorn in the flesh to the heirs of the promise. They are a people with a knowledge of Jehovah but with no covenant with him. They are frequently found in alliance with the Amalekites. They are fellow-travellers at times with the covenant people of God but never join themselves to his people. (Num 10:29ff.) So close and yet so far away. Essentially, they are Gentiles!

… being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. (Eph. 2:12 NKJV)

We might add, on the strength of Zipporah’s reaction to Moses imminent death, that the Midianites were without ‘circumcision’. I think the most likely hypothesis is that an older son had been circumcised but as the years went by Moses neglected to circumcise the second son and hence the events at the encampment.

Abraham, my friend

Here is a ‘coming shortly’ notification. I am planning to do a series of 60 blogs focussing on the life of Abraham. It will be a refurbished version of a weekly series that I did 15 years ago for publication on the Sermonindex website. Greg Gordon had requested a weekly series and I adopted the title “Abraham, my friend”. So I will not go too deeply into the record of Abraham at this point. Watch this space!

I want to make a single point at this juncture. Circumcision was the necessary sign of ownership that God required in the body of Abraham, and of all the males that belonged to Abraham. It is often thought of as the main sign of Judaism, but circumcision is much older than Sinai. It was a brand mark, in the flesh, that Abraham was required to bear as a sign that God had reckoned him to be ‘righteous through faith’. (Slaves were sometimes ‘branded’ by their owners, as their owners ‘put their name on them’) If you re-read this account you may notice that the record clearly distinguishes between Abraham’s justifying faith (Gen 15) and the cutting of the covenant (Gen. 17). Paul specifically underlines this point when he separates faith and circumcision in the experience of Abraham.

And he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also…. (Rom 4:11 NKJV)

The seal, in which someone ‘adds his seal’ or confirms is the same truth but with a slightly different imagery. It acts as a claim to say ‘this is mine’. The real sign of the Old Covenant was not primarily circumcision but rather the keeping of sabbaths.

 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily ye shall keep my sabbaths: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am Jehovah who sanctifieth you. Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that profaneth it shall surely be put to death; for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.  (Exod 31:13–14 ASV)

To refuse to keep the Sabbath resulted in excommunication from the covenant people of God by death.

The Purpose of the Old Covenant

It is natural for us to ask the purpose of the Old Covenant. Why, if God had made a covenant with Abraham which was based in faith, would God institute a Sinai covenant? Surely, each father could circumcise his son and the brand of ‘belonging to God’ would be perpetuated through the generations.

Paul, always ahead of us, asks this same question and then answers it.

 What purpose then does the law serve?  (Gal 3:19 NKJV)

There’s our question, and the answer is attached.

It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made… . (Gal 3:19 NKJV)

In fact, the law was attached. The law was placed by the side of the promise. In other words, the law was an addition AND it was only ever intended to be temporary: only until the Seed should come… . The law was a temporary attachment and only until the Seed arrived. How precise all this is. Christ, of course, was the Seed as Paul declares earlier in this chapter but during the time of his earthly ministry, he was the Seed that had not yet been sown. There could be no reproduction. A Seed that did not die must remain solitary.

Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. (John 12:24 KJV)

So the life of Christ upon earth was a continuous revelation of the nature of the Father. He was the solitary example of God’s life and character. He served the circumcision as he revealed that likeness of God in word and act in an expression of the Father’s heart throughout his earthly ministry, but even as the life was manifested, there burned another desire.

  “I came to send fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how distressed I am till it is accomplished!  (Luke 12:49–50 NKJV)

 But Jesus answered and said, “You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?” (Matt 20:22 NKJV)

His Calvary baptism would mark the end of the Old Covenant and be itself the cutting of a New Covenant. It was all Finished: the Old Covenant, the sin-bearing, the years of serving the people of the circumcision only. All was now ready for the transition.