search
top

Circumcision, Salvation and the Feasts

Published by Rob Skiba March 9, 2015 at 1:40 PM

My thoughts on the issues of circumcision, salvation and the Feasts. I’m not telling anyone what to do. I’m merely stating what I believe based on my studies on these topics. Take it or leave it.

More and more people are realizing the it’s time to ditch the pagan celebrations of X-mess and Ishtar day and get back to the actual HOLYdays of the Feasts of YHWH (Leviticus 23). The first one of which is Passover, which is to be done FOREVER. It never ended. In fact, Yeshua clearly said as He partook of the last one before His crucifixion, “Do THIS in remembrance of me,” which meant, from THAT POINT ON the feast which had ALWAYS been a remembrance Feast, would no longer JUST represent a remembrance of the Exodus, but after His death, burial and resurrection, it would be a remembrance of what He, the Passover Lamb of YHWH had done. But as people begin to study the Feasts, they see things like…

Exodus 12:

47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it.

48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

50 Thus did all the children of Israel; as the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.

So now, everyone is going bonkers over the issue of circumcision. *sigh* This stuff is not rocket science folks! Why are you making it all so complicated???? Everyone seems to want to point to Acts 15 and say that we – former Gentiles – don’t need to be circumcised. OK great. Go back and read the WHOLE CHAPTER for yourself. Pay CLOSE ATTENTION to what the issue was really about in verse 1:

Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

THAT was the problem folks! Trusting in circumcision BEFORE salvation as a requirement FOR it. Keep reading the rest of the chapter in THAT context. Then, keep going and read chapter 16, where you will see that Timothy apparently made his CHOICE to get circumcised RIGHT AFTER the Jerusalem counsel meeting wherein circumcision was agreed to NOT be a requirement for Gentiles. What’s up with that?? Consider what is said in Acts 15:21 (the one verse in that chapter all the antinomians LOVE to conveniently leave out of the discussion)…

Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

So, let’s break down the Acts 15 decision…

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/10981612_10153212297947754_5716234180291381238_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=b2941581774282bafd4fcd75e0471fc4&oe=5CE8B2DB

I grew up Baptist. As a Baptist, Baptism was a BIG ISSUE. They always stressed the need for new believers to do it AFTER praying for salvation as an act of obedience and public expression of their faith. It was however NEVER FORCED on anyone, nor required for them to do BEFORE salvation. So, just as new believers choose to walk in “obedience to our Lord’s command” and get Baptized “when they are ready” to make that public commitment, so also it would appear that Timothy did what he did (get circumcised) in Acts 16. Some may read Acts 16 and disagree with that, but then you will really have a problem with your view of Paul if you do. Either Timothy did it voluntarily of his own choosing or Paul was being a hypocritical dictator with a knife.

Acts 16:

1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:

2 Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium.

Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.

4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.

5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

Wait! What??? The churches were “so established” by the taking of a man, whose father was a Greek and having him circumcised!!?? They just had a big counsel meeting in Acts 15 stating that circumcision was NOT required for the Greeks! OK, are you with me here? Do you see what’s going on? Now, you have Paul having Timothy circumcised while going forth with the decree made at the counsel that it was NOT required… and the churches they were establishing were done so AFTER THIS MANNER! So, at this point you have a choice. Either Paul was a total hypocrite and he FORCED Timothy to do it after the decree that no Greek had need of doing so and they then established churches after the manner of what he just did – or, Timothy decided he WANTED to do it… likely after learning more about Moses on the Sabbath day (just as it is stated in Acts 15:21). Churches were then established based on the requirements set forth in the pic above. Seems to me the latter makes the most sense.

 Do NOT take my word for any of this! Read it and study it out for yourself. Pray and see what the Holy Spirit leads you to think/do in this reguard. I frankly don’t care to set up penis inspection stations and have no desire to even ask anyone if they are circumcised or not. That’s your business. I don’t need to know it. I’m just trying to figure all of this stuff out myself and these are the conclusions I’ve come to concerning this issue. Now, this may be “TMI” but I was circumcised as a baby. BUT I can tell you, that having studied what I’ve studied for the past 5 years, I would do exactly what Timothy did if I were not circumcised, because it is my desire to learn and get as much out of the Feasts of YHWH as I can – in obedience to what the Word tells me to do. That’s just me. You do whatever you feel led to do or not do. [Please read this paragraph as many times as it takes to prevent you from going psycho on me for this post in the comments below]

Just as baptism is a step of POST salvation WILLFUL obedience, so also I would say anyone who wants to take that step of obedience POST salvation for circumcision in order to partake of Passover is doing so, because they want to make that commitment just as Timothy did. The whole issue Paul was fighting against was those who made circumcision a PRE salvation issue. They made it a requirement FOR salvation (Acts 15:1), when in fact, it is supposed to be a decision someone makes on their own in order to walk in obedience as they MATURE IN salvation, with a desire to observe that which is taught by Moses every week on the Sabbath (Acts 15:21).

Paul – on several occasions – made it clear that the Feasts were VERY important to him. He made every effort to partake of them. He then said, “IMITATE ME” (1 Cor. 11:1) as he imitated Christ, who likewise KEPT THE FEASTS. Simple really. Yeshua kept the Feasts. Paul imitated him. He told his converts to imitate what he did. BUT in order to do that, according to Moses, you had to be circumcised.

Circumcision is NOT required for savlation. Scripture is abundantly clear on that. The Feasts are FOREVER. Scripture is abundantly clear on that. Circumcision is required in order to keep Passover. Scripture is abundantly clear on that. Disobedience is sin. Scripture is abundantly clear on that. Grace covers our failures. Scripture is abundantly clear on that. So, now you have a choice. Walk in obedience or pile on the need for grace so that sin may abound… something Paul said, “God forbid” that we should do (Romans 6:1,2). Will you go to hell if you don’t get circumcised. No. Circumcision is NOT required for your salvation! But if you are going to make baptism a requirement for POST salvation obedience, you have no right to say that circumcision is not required in the same fashion concerning obedience in the observation of the Feasts in accordance with the commandments of Exodus 12.

In conclusion:

Exodus 12 makes it abundantly clear that Passover is not to be done by uncircumcised males. I didn’t write it. Read it for yourself.

The issue in Acts 15:1 was Judaizers making circumcision a requirement FOR salvation. The rest of Acts 15 was about minimal requirements for new (formerly wild olive tree) Believers to walk in fellowship with the rest of the CULTIVATED olive tree. Once they came into that fellowship, it was CLEAR that “Moses was preached everywhere on the Sabbath” (Acts 15:21). As such, they would hear the Torah preached and learn about the Feasts. Then, as the Spirit moved them (as opposed to the Judaizers), they could FREELY decide what they wanted to do next concerning things like Passover and the accompanying rules for such, as in circumcision. Obviously Timothy made his decision and in the very next chapter (Acts 16), we see him going through with it, with PAUL be leading the way. They then established churches based on all of this.

Again, I am NOT telling you to believe this. I am NOT a Judaizer. I am NOT claiming I have it all figured out. These are just my conclusions based on what I have read and studied on the issue. Do your own research. Pray and come to your own conclusions.

– Rob Skiba




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

top