Baptism/Circumcision

[mkj83]

If Baptism was meant to be the new Circumcision of the New Testament. What happened to the Females in the Old Testament

 

[Steadfast]

I think most who hold the view that they correspond would say that while they are types for each other, the types do not need to correspond exactly especially since the point of each is membership in the people of God; i.e. covenant inclusion which was certainly not denies to women just because they were not circumcised.

Also, I think they would say that while in the Old Testament, males were the custodians of the Covenant, with women being the “subsidiary beneficiaries” as it were, in the New Covenant “custodianship” is explicitly given to both “male and female, Jew and Gentile, slave and free”.

And this without destroying the correspondence.

Yes, this is my 1000th post.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Also, I think they would say that while in the Old Testament, males were the custodians of the Covenant, with women being the “subsidiary beneficiaries” as it were, in the New Covenant “custodianship” is explicitly given to both “male and female, Jew and Gentile, slave and free”.
.

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

 

[Steadfast]

1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

I believe firmly in male headship in the family in church and in society.

But what we are talking about here is salvation and covenant membership for which there is this verse:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. - Galatians 3:28

 

[TLCTugger]

I don’t know about baptism, but to be clear, The Holy Roman Church “…strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.”

(From the document, “Cantate Domino” signed by Pope Eugene IV in 1442 and affirmed by Pope Pius XII in 1952)

-Ron

 

[Publisher]

I don’t know about baptism, but to be clear, The Holy Roman Church “…strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation.”

(From the document, “Cantate Domino” signed by Pope Eugene IV in 1442 and affirmed by Pope Pius XII in 1952)

-Ron

What if one is not baptized in water and not circumcised either?

 

[puzzleannie]

If Baptism was meant to be the new Circumcision of the New Testament. What happened to the Females in the Old Testament

Baptism is not intended to be the new circumcision. Its theology is that we die to sin and rise to new life in Christ in Baptism.