Ever wondered why circumcision was such a hot-button topic for Paul and why he spent so much time talking about it in his New Testament letters?
To understand Paul’s passion, we have to go back to the Old Testament. Circumcision began as a God-given sign of covenant, first given to Abraham (Genesis 17). It marked Israel as God’s chosen people and symbolized their belonging, obedience, and identity. Over time, what began as a sign became embedded in the Law of Moses, woven tightly into Israel’s religious life. By the time of Jesus, circumcision wasn’t just something you did – it was who you were. To be uncircumcised was to be an outsider… excluded and unclean.
Then, of course, Jesus comes.
And when He did, God inaugurated a New Covenant which wasn’t marked by cutting flesh, but by the transforming of hearts. He did that through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. Paul says in Romans that righteousness now comes through faith, not through law-keeping (Romans 3–4). Circumcision, once a covenant sign, was no longer the doorway into God’s people. Faith in Christ was.
And this is where things got off kilter.
Many Jewish believers – often referred to as Judaizers – struggled deeply with this shift. For them, circumcision wasn’t just a religious practice, it was their identity and their history… their proof that they belonged to God. Asking them to let go of it felt like asking them to let go of themselves. So they fought tooth and nail to protect their system. They even insisted that Gentile believers also had to be circumcised. They were basically saying, “Faith in Jesus is good, but it’s not enough.”
Paul saw the danger immediately.
So in Romans, he carefully explains that Abraham was counted righteous before he was circumcised (Romans 4:9–11). In other words, circumcision didn’t create righteousness. But once the sign was treated as not just the proof of identity – but the source of salvation – it became an enormous obstacle.
For everyone.
For Jews, it tempted them to trust in their heritage and rule-keeping rather than Christ. And for Gentiles, it turned faith in Jesus into an exclusive club with some extremely painful entry requirements (and yes, that’s an understatement!).
What was meant to identify people belonging to God had become a barrier keeping them from Him.
So Paul’s frustration wasn’t theoretical. He had seen churches fracture, believers become discouraged, and the gospel utterly distorted. That’s why he could say, with stunning clarity, that true circumcision is a matter of the heart, accomplished by the Spirit- not by external ritual (Romans 2:28–29). In other words, you can be outwardly “perfect” and inwardly unchanged. God has never been impressed by that.
And here’s where this devotional gets uncomfortably modern.
Most Christians today aren’t arguing about circumcision, but many still cling tightly to their own version of it. A religious system. A checklist. A tradition. A denominational badge. A moral résumé. We may not say it out loud, but sometimes we believe, “Yes, Jesus saves – but staying in God’s good graces depends on how well I perform.”
Paul would probably (and maybe not-so-gently) say: You might as well put lipstick on a pig! Despite the lipstick – it’s still a pig!
Anything we rely on in addition to Christ – or subtly instead of Christ – can become our modern “circumcision.” It might look respectable and feel safe. It might even be biblical in form. But if it replaces a living, trusting relationship with Jesus, it has missed the mark entirely.
Paul’s heart, especially in Romans, beats with freedom:
Freedom from proving ourselves.
Freedom from inherited systems.
Freedom to belong to God by grace alone.
So the question Paul leaves us with isn’t, “Are you properly marked?”
It’s, “Are you deeply trusting?”
The gospel doesn’t call us to protect a religious identity.
It calls us to know Christ—and be known by Him.
Former Blackout Artist 