Getting Biblical in Daily Life
Circumcision
To snip or not to snip? That is the question.
More specifically, it's the big question of Paul's day. Did converts to Christianity have to also follow Jewish law? Did Gentile men who wanted to follow Christ have to be circumcised? And what does this mean for us today?
Paul comes down pretty clearly on the "No" side of this argument. He maintains that foreskin is just fine for anyone who loves Jesus. He doesn't see circumcision as a literal requirement. Instead, he sees it as a symbolic quality:
For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is everything! (Galatians 6:15)
See, for Paul, circumcision isn't a thing you do, it's a thing you are. You're either oriented toward God or you're not. Having an intact member doesn't make you worse than someone who doesn't. It's what's inside that counts.
This all ties in with his feelings about Christians following Jewish law. Paul believes that Jesus' life and death have brought us into a new relationship with God. Now, God doesn't need us to worry about following all kinds of nit-picky laws. He just wants us to have faith in Christ, says Paul.
Paul is so adamant about this that he warns the folks in the churches in Galatia of the consequences should they give in and go for the ol' snip snip:
Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law. (Galatians 5:2-3)
Basically, if you obey one law, you might as well obey them all. And if you're spending all your time worrying about getting in good with God by following every single law in the Torah (there are 613, so it's kind of time consuming), then you're kind of missing the point of this whole Jesus thing.
Despite the fact that Christians aren't required by their faith to be circumcised, circumcision is a standard practice in most American hospitals. Many parents undergo the procedure for aesthetic reasons (doesn't everyone want their son to have a pretty penis?). The American Academy of Pediatrics also recommends circumcision for newborn boys because it can help prevent the spread of STIs.
But there are a growing number of parents and organizations who see infant circumcision as immoral and dangerous. Since babies can't consent to the procedure, some parents don't think it's fair to remove healthy skin that can't be put back if the kid decides he wants it later. Other folks regard circumcision as nothing less than genital mutilation.
What does Paul think? Well, he's mainly opposed to Christians being circumcised for religious reasons. If you do it just because the look of foreskin just creeps you out, well, then you're probably okay. As long as you don't think it's a sign of holiness—because, says Paul, intact member or not, you're no better than anyone else.
Slavery
This topic seems like a no-brainer. There's no way Paul, a disciple of Christ, could have supported slavery, right? Oh, we're sorry to disappoint you…
Paul actually refers to slavery pretty directly a couple times. In Galatians, he uses enslavement as a metaphor for life under Jewish law:
You are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God. (Galatians 4:7)
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1)
Basically, following Jesus is like being let go after a lifetime of forced servitude. Free at last, right? So Paul is saying that being a slave is a pretty crappy gig. The hours are long and the pay is terrible. Slaves everywhere are nodding their heads in agreement.
But while Paul recognizes that slavery sucks big time, it's clear he didn't mean the whole "there is no longer slave or free" (Galatians 3:28) thing literally. Paul never calls slavery morally wrong or says that slaves should be released from captivity.
In his letter to Philemon, Paul sends Onesimus, a runaway slave, back to his owner. Paul is forced to lay it on pretty thick to get Philemon to take Onesimus back. Paul even offers to pay off any debts Onesimus owes to Philemon. Um, maybe you should take it out of Onesimus' check, Philemon. Oh, that's right—you're not paying him.
Paul does very gently hint, though, that it would be nice if Philemon would be so kind as to not keep a fellow Christian as his servant:
I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do your duty, yet I would rather appeal to you on the basis of love […] Perhaps this is the reason he was separated from you for a while, so that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother […] Confident of your obedience, I am writing to you, knowing that you will do even more than I say. (Philemon 1:8-9, 15-16, 21)
Yeah, Paul soft peddles this one really hard. Compare this to his thoughts on circumcision and you might think that keeping your foreskin in place is way more important than whether or not you force other human beings to do unpaid manual labor every day.
Why all the shoulder shrugs for slavery? Well, today, we look on owning humans as an obvious evil, but two thousand years ago, slavery was just a way of life in the Roman Empire (source). Foreigners and prisoners of war were routinely kept as slaves. Sometimes Romans would even sell their children into slavery. Jews were also allowed to keep slaves, though there were at least rules about how they should treat them (source).
Because slavery was such a part of daily life, rocking the boat would have been very dangerous. Imagine the kind of stink eye that would be directed towards the followers of Jesus if they went around saying that Christian slaves should be freed or try to escape. The chance for martyrdom would have come a whole lot quicker, that's for sure.
On the bright side (yeah, there's one), Paul occasionally puts a nice spin on it:
You were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. (Galatians 5:13)
[Jesus] emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form. (Philippians 2:7)
Here Paul seems to be saying that a life of servitude is laudable and that slaves have a Christ-like quality. Not only did Jesus serve the world like a slave, but Christians are called to do the same thing. Sure, it's not the Emancipation Proclamation, but it's a start.
Sadly, a lot of these verses from Paul have been used to defend slavery in the past. Jefferson Davis, the President of the Confederate States of America said, "[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God [...] it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation" (source). He's right that slavery was around in biblical times, but you know what? Too bad.
There were also Christians who used the Bible to support abolition efforts (source). In his 1857 book, God Against Slavery, Rev. George Cheever argued that the letter to Philemon showed the immorality of slavery and that Paul only returned Onesimus because he knew that Philemon would treat him kindly as a fellow Christian (source). Here's hoping, at least.
Eventually, the majority of Christian churches would come out against slavery as well:
• In 1696, Quakers in Pennsylvania stood in opposition to the slave trade (source).
• John Wesley, the founder of Methodism and life-long opponent of slavery, declared that "liberty is the right of every human creature" (source).
• In 1839, Pope Gregory XVI issued a statement saying that slavery was "contrary to the laws of justice and humanity" (source).
• Northern and Southern Baptists even severed ties with each other over the issue of slavery (source).
Though slavery is more or less a thing of the past in developed countries around the world, there are still places where the institution lives on. Even in the United States, human trafficking, a type of slavery, is still a terrible problem. We're guessing Paul wouldn't have been down with that.