Quote:
Originally Posted by puritancovenanter  The sign didn't signify the same thing for his children necessarily. But it was a sign of a covenant that had national promises also that were not necessarily spiritual promises. Some of the promises to Abraham and his seed (not the seed which is Christ) were outside of the Everlasting Covenant as Abraham and Ishmael found out. Baptism in the New Testament is a picture of one who is buried in Christ and forgiven of sin. That is not necessarily so with the Covenant of Circumcision. |
I respectfully disagree. That is something you're reading into Romans 4 but is not in the passage itself. You have to understand that, from my perspective, I see your pre-suppositions as forcing you to make Paul say much more than he does in Romans 4. My Confessional understanding of the passage is different and doesn't require me to read anything into it at all. In Romans 4, the passage says that circumcision is a sign of the faith that Abraham had while still uncircumcised. In the context of the passage, all the baggage about it being a National and physical symbol is completely a-contextual. In fact, Romans 4 is laboring the fact that Abraham had nothing to boast in as far as the flesh goes, which is why he is introduced as
our example. By importing the rest into the passage you would completely wreck the point that Paul is making. He would be better served to leave circumcision out of the example as it is fleshly in your understanding.