genderless (imported) wrote: Fri May 30, 2008 9:13 am
Can't forget Is. 56:4-5 There is some difference between Jewish and Gentile
regulations. Remember the circumcision argument.
Just what, I’m sure, a number of you have feared – another lecture on the Bible from Jesus.
While scattered through the Old Testament are several negative statements about eunuchs (despite at least two of the prophets having been eunuchs themselves – Daniel and Nehemiah), as Genderless points out, Isaiah 56:4–5 is very eunuch-positive:
Isaiah 56
3 [D]o not let the eunuch say, “I am just a dry tree.”
4 For thus says the Lord:
who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant,
5 I will give, in my house and within my walls,
jlc9292 (imported) wrote: Thu Apr 10, 2008 1:34 pm
a monument and a name better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. [NRSV]
This is fully compatible with the eunuch-positive statement in Matthew 19:12:
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. [KJV]
Genderless then points out the differences in regard to the importance of circumcision, though without giving any details. This gives me an entry for a brief lecture on PaulÂ’s Epistle to the Galatians, where he clearly states that circumcision is no longer required for Christians.
Galatians 5
2 Now I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.
3 I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law.
4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.
5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we wait for the hope of righteousness.
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love.
7 You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth?
8 This persuasion is not from him who calls you.
9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump.
10 I have confidence in the Lord that you will take no other view than mine; and he who is troubling you will bear his judgment, whoever he is.
11 But if I, brethren, still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? In that case the stumbling block of the cross has been removed.
12 I wish those who unsettle you would mutilate themselves!
and later
Galatians 6
12 It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh that would compel you to be circumcised, and only in order that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ.
13 For even those who receive circumcision do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh.
14 But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. [RSV]
Why would Paul spend such an inordinate amount of space condemning circumcision? On factor that most seem to overlook is the obvious one of audience. This letter was addressed specifically to the churches of Galatia, a region that is now in central Turkey.
Galatia was the home of the faith centered in the Mother of the Gods that was the most serious competitor to Christianity in the early centuries of the faith. As IÂ’ve pointed out in other posts, the Vatican is built on top of the ruins of the largest temple to the Mother of the Gods in Rome and the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore (the largest church in Rome dedicated to Mary, Mother of God) is built on top of the site where the testicles of new priests of the Mother of the Gods were buried after they were castrated.
Both Roman law and Roman popular thought of the period saw castration and circumcision as closely related. Male genital mutilation was male genital mutilation. Both were equally condemned in law (though allowed in practice).
Paul was struggling to convert the inhabitants of Galatia to his vision of Christianity. The major competition was the priests of the Mother of the Gods, all of whom had been castrated. Paul seeks to dissuade his audience from getting circumcised. His motivation is critical: “Paul saw circumcision as an especially problematic ritual in a context in which ritual castration was practiced.” (Elliott 2004, 233)
PaulÂ’s letter implies that the Galatians seek deeds of power through circumcision, just as the galli, the priests of the Mother of the Gods, do through their castration. PaulÂ’s emphasis on cursing and blessing thoughout the epistle also mirrors their importance to the galli and their followers.
Paul, in essence, creates a choice for the Galatians – they can either stay with Paul’s gospel or opt for circumcision, which would take them back into the world dominated by the Mother of the Gods and away from Christ.
BIBLIOGRAPY:
Elliott, Susan, 2004. Cutting too close for comfort: PaulÂ’s Letter to the Galatians in its Anatolian cultic context. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). 391 pp.
