WCBC Blog

I have been reading through the book of Acts and just read through Acts 15. Where we find the first real doctrinal conflict in the early church, the debate over exactly what a person must do to be saved. Some of the Jews were teaching that unless a person was circumcised he could not be saved. Peter gives the first exhortation then Paul and Barnabas gave an account of how God had been doing great things among the gentiles. They make it clear that salvation is fully faith based and has no room for any works or conditions.
Then I read on to Chapter 16 and came upon a very interesting passage of scripture.

Acts 16:1-3 “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: 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.”

My first thought was “Paul, you just made it clear that a person does not have to be circumcised to saved, so why in the world did you make timothy get circumcised?” Paul just fought against legalism and now he seems to be a part of it. Legalism is one of the biggest dangers within the church, and something that Christians who try to live a holy life are often accused of. But what we have to look at is why did Paul make Timothy get circumcised?

Timothy’s mother was Jewish while his father was a Greek, a gentile. For the ministry this was a great asset because Timothy had access and knowledge of both cultures. He would be accepted and respected in the Jewish and Greek culture which would be very helpful as he traveled with Paul preaching the gospel. However as an uncircumcised Jew he would be looked at by the Jews as someone who had renounced his Jewish history and heritage, causing a pretty large stumbling block to the Jewish people. So the choice was simple, Timothy could enjoy his liberty of not having to be circumcised it would not affect his salvation or even his spiritual state or he could limit his liberty. He voluntarily chose to do what he doesn’t have to do so that he could have a more impactful ministry among the Jewish people. Timothy chose to limit his liberty to extend his ministry.

The issue was not legalism but serving God effectively. Timothy did not look only at himself and say “Hey I have liberty I can do whatever I want, Paul don’t be a legalist and tell me what to do. If the Jews get there heart right they will accept me as I am”. No, Timothy cared more about the ministry and other people then he did about what he could or could not do.

Our hearts should not be looking for how far our liberty can take us without causing us to sin, but should be saying what can I do to most glorify God and have the most impact on other people for Him. If that means restricting my liberty in what I watch, wear, say, go or whatever else then it’s well worth it to have an impact for Him. As Paul says we must value all things as dung compared to Christ.
Its not legalism, its serving effectively.