please try

Hey

Welcome back once again to the Naked Bible Podcast.

In a series of previous podcasts, we looked at several well-known creeds and how they

articulate the doctrine of infant baptism and juxtaposed what we found with how the same

creeds describe salvation by grace alone through faith. We saw pretty quickly that there

are significant internal contradictions when those two items are compared. The language

is honestly muddled and confusing. Additionally, we saw how the creeds failed to think through

the fundamental link struck by Paul in Colossians 2, 11 and 12 between baptism and circumcision. I

noted at the beginning of our series that if the two rights are theologically linked, then what you

can or cannot say about one ought to be consistent with what you can and cannot say about the other.

The creeds never seem to have thought about the importance of that balance. Now having shown you

the confusion, it's time for some solutions. Let not your heart be troubled or your mind

confused any longer. The difficulties evaporate with some simple, straightforward adjustments in thinking.

Adjustments that I think are no more magical than being consistent with what is said and not said

on both sides of the baptism and circumcision tandem. Let's look first at circumcision. What did

it actually do and what didn't it do? Let's start with the latter. What circumcision did not do for

its recipient? First, circumcision neither provided nor insured salvation nor did it lessen anyone's

sinful impulse. The Old Testament story is dramatically clear that most circumcised Israelites

apostacized, turning to idolatry, prompting the curse of Yahweh in the form of the exile.

The fact that Israelite men were circumcised meant nothing with respect to their spiritual inclination

or destiny. In fact, Paul specifically denies such an equation in Romans 4, where he labors to make

...