1
“Foreigners, Pharisees and Foreskins: The Controversy Over Changing ‘Community Identity’ in the Book of Acts”[1]
by Brian K. Petersen
Introduction
What does God require in order for someone to be saved? What changes are really necessary in a person’s life before that can be experienced? These are certainly serious theological questions that the followers of Christ have been debating for centuries. However, it was a very real and a very personal issue for a “high caste” Roman man in the first century: an officer in the Roman army named Cornelius, whose story is discussed in chapters 10, 11 and 15 of the book of Acts. He wanted to have an answer from God: what must I do to be saved? And God gave an answer that revolutionized the missionary task of the early church. This paper will contend that the new paradigms for mission contained within the story of Cornelius and its aftermath are as relevant and as revolutionary today as they were in the first century. They directly address the question of whether people must change their birth community identity in order to become committed followers of Jesus Christ, i.e. those listed among ‘the saved.’
The Identity of Cornelius (Acts 10:1-4,22,30-31,34-35)
The Book of Acts says that Cornelius was born within a Roman family; he was a “Gentile,” a non-Jew. As part of the “Roman Cohort,” he was also most likely a native Roman citizen who had actually been born in Italy itself. In this narrative he was serving in the capital for the Roman government of that region, Caesarea (after all, it was named ‘CaesarCity!’). However, at some point in his life, undoubtedly through attending services at a Jewish synagogue, he had received exposure to the teachings of the Old Testament. He had learned about the one true God, the Most High. He had heard about His character, His choice of Israel, and His moral laws for humankind. In response to this influence from Judaism, Cornelius chose to lay aside any former allegiances to both the gods of the Imperial Roman army and the gods and goddesses of Roman and Greek mythology. He chose to instead worship the one and only Creator: the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It was exclusively to Him that Cornelius regularly and faithfully prayed; it was only to honor Him that he contributed out of his own funds to help the poor among the Jews.
However, Cornelius had only accepted the Jewish faith up to a point. He had never taken the step of literally becoming a ‘naturalized Jew.’ This involved a process that was called “proselyte conversion.” It was almost universally required in the first century for any non-Jew who wanted to become part of God’s chosen people, one of those who were the object of His saving activity in the world. It was something that was only for serious seekers.[2] Those with only a more casual interest in Judaism generally did not submit to the many cultural distinctives that were laid upon this category of a “full convert.” Thus, like most non-Jewish men of the first century (and certainly most Roman and Greek men!) Cornelius’ acceptance of the Jewish faith was only partial. But, knowing that Cornelius was an authentically “devout man” (10:2), a “righteous and God-fearing man” (10:22) who prayed regularly, does it make sense that he would knowingly hold back in his commitment to God?[3] What was it that was keeping him from going all the way and becoming a full proselyte to faith in the one true God? In order to gain a possible glimpse into the inner workings of a first century Roman centurion’s mind, it is essential to understand the Jewish cultural distinctives to which these proselytes to Judaism willingly submitted.
Requirements for Full Proselytes to Judaism
Naturally it primarily involved God’s Law in the Old Testament. In addition to the obvious moral imperatives, it also included such cultural things as eating and food preparation restrictions, Sabbath keeping, and the keeping of various festival celebrations. However, the Jews of that day regarded one ritual observance as far and away the most significant for non-Jewish men to embrace. Circumcision. It was by this minor surgical procedure that they could transform their socio-religious identity to that of one of God’s special chosen people. Unless they had the foreskin of their male sexual organ removed, they would forever be regarded by the Jews as merely one of the “uncircumcised” (Greek: akrobustia), a synonym for a non-Jew or Gentile, a member of those pagan nations who were still outside of God’s special concern. The normal pattern was that a non-Jewish man was first circumcised, then later immersed naked in a pool of flowing water, and finally dressed in new clothes and allowed to enter the temple in Jerusalem in order to present a sacrifice to the Lord.[4] He was now a full-fledged member of God’s chosen people.
Now why would Cornelius be hesitant to submit to this ancient surgical operation, one that had been first practiced in Egypt at least 2,400 years before the birth of Christ? It certainly couldn’t have been the pain. Cornelius was well acquainted with suffering various wounds in battle as one of the leaders of Rome’s legions, in addition to experiencing the common deprivations that are the lot of military men in every century. Then what was behind his reluctance? In order to understand the likely reasons, the overall Greco-Roman perspective on the practice of circumcision should be briefly investigated.[5]
Greco-Roman Attitudes about Circumcision
Greek culture in general and the varieties of Greek artistic expression in particular were very concerned with conceptualizing and depicting the perfect human body. They believed that each element of human anatomy was an essential component of a flawless divine creation. Therefore, if any part of such an idealized body was altered, either by congenital defects or accidental disfigurement, this goal of physical perfection could not be realized. Moreover, it was inconceivable that anyone would ever intentionally modify any part of this carefully molded body in any way; to do so would be to slap the divine creator in the face.
Enter Jewish minor surgery on the male sex organ: the removal of the foreskin. To us circumcision seems like such a minor, howbeit strange phenomenon; to the Greek and Roman peoples it was tantamount to allowing one’s body to be physically mutilated. Their concept of human perfection emphasized a long, tapered foreskin that completely covered the glans of the penis.[6] Therefore, they actually regarded any circumcised male as having diseased genitalia. Greek medical books described the pathology of a circumcised male sexual organ, using the term lipodermos to refer to such an anatomical deformity. To rectify such an undesirable condition, foreskin restoration therapies were advocated in order to at least cosmetically mimic the appearance of a foreskin on the body of a circumcised man. As a result of these procedures, the outward appearance of those undergoing them would be that of uncircumcised men.
This prevailing attitude of Greco-Roman culture regarding ritual circumcision eventually influenced some socially liberal Jews to use one of these common methods for restoring their foreskins. Religious Jews viewed submitting to such procedures as equivalent to renouncing the faith, so important was this traditional physical symbol to the identity of God’s chosen people.[7] However, many Jews lived outside of Palestine in areas where non-Jews were the majority and the culture much more Greek in character. Some of these semi-Hellenized sons of Abraham wanted to participate more fully in the non-Jewish society in which they lived, doing business, participating in sports or being able to more freely socialize with Gentile friends and neighbors. There were specific places that were designated for these kinds of activities, all of them exclusively reserved for men: the gymnasium, a complex of buildings suited for exercising the mind and the body, especially for training athletes; the public baths, situated within the gymnasium complex; and the actual outdoor sites for athletic competition, such as the Olympic Games. These places and activities were not only off limits to women, they were also essentially nudist in character: the word gymnasium literally means “a place to be naked.” The accepted practice was for those present to participate in the various activities without wearing any clothing. This went for bathing as well as for all aspects of physical exercise and sporting competition.
This, however, created a problem for the Jewish young men who might attend these functions.[8] Being circumcised, they looked different in the nude from everyone else present. In fact, the sight of their uncovered glans was considered lewd and socially repugnant to the various Greeks, Romans and other non-Jews who might be present.[9] Such exposure of one’s genitals without the benefit of a foreskin covering would have been comparable to the following: Imagine a present-day professor of anatomy walking into his class at a some Indian university without any clothes whatsoever, stating that his own naked body would be the visual aid for that day’s lecture. Outrageous you say? Of course! But the shock that such a provocative action would elicit from Indian students, administrators, police and parents would be equivalent to the same feelings of outrage and distress that being circumcised created in a first-century Roman bath.
Thus one can grasp how these same young Jews might have been tempted to undergo delicate operations like epispasm or other forms of cosmetic foreskin replacement.[10] Many business deals, important civic discussions and key training programs for such sports competitions as the Olympics all had their focus in settings where male nudity was not only common but expected. The alternative was either to endure continual derision, rebuke or worse from the non-Jewish members of such places or merely to sacrifice the extent of one’s social networks and mobility.
How might this common attitude toward circumcision have affected Cornelius’ continued unwillingness to undergo the operation and thus fully become a member of God’s people? Obviously, he was a man with significant status, influence, and responsibility in the Roman context. What might it have communicated to his peers, his superiors, even to his men if he had walked into the place for training or the local baths, having just become full member of the Jewish nation? What symbolism would be communicated through his newly circumcised sex organ? This was not just a random act of body modification, similar to piercing one’s ear or nose. It was a “demonstration event” or “self-identity marker” that revealed how a particular non-Jewish man would transfer himself to another sociological community, from Roman or Greek culture to Jewish culture.[11] According to evangelical scholar Scot McKnight, circumcision was “the ritual that separated the Jew from the Gentile (at least in Jewish perception) and therefore it would have been the act that permitted the would-be convert to cross the boundary and enter the community.”[12]
The fact that this issue of having to change his cultural community was probably a factor in Cornelius’ thinking can be inferred from the answer to prayer that he received from God. This is variously described in the tenth and eleventh chapters of Acts.
The Prayer of Cornelius (Acts 10:4-5,22,30-35,43-48; 11:13-18)
Cornelius was a man of consistent prayer. When he met Peter, he told him about the vision of the angel that he had experienced: “Four days ago to this hour, I was praying in my house during the ninth hour and behold, a man stood before me in shining garments, and he said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard…. Send therefore to Joppa and invite Simon, who is also called Peter, to come to you….’” (10:30-32). Thus, God had heard whatever it was that Cornelius had been praying; an answer would now be coming to him through a human messenger named Peter.
When Peter was later asked to recount the story of this incident, he summarized what Cornelius had first told him in this way: “…he reported to us how he had seen the angel standing in his house, and saying, ‘Send to Joppa, and have Simon, who is also called Peter, brought here; and he shall speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.’” (11:13-14) From this it can be inferred that God’s answer to Cornelius was to ensure he and his family, employees and friends received the message about salvation in Christ. Therefore, it’s clear, as was mentioned at the beginning of this paper, that Cornelius wanted to know how he and his household could be saved. But why did such an earnest seeker as Cornelius, who had already been responding to all of the spiritual light that he’d received, really have to ask this question?
The answer appears to be fairly obvious: in the eyes of the Jews and even some of the Jewish believers in Christ, especially those who were Pharisees, Cornelius’ faith in God was simply not enough. If a non-Jew wanted to become part of God’s chosen people, he had to first literally become a Jew, circumcision and all. But this prospect of exchanging his social identity, becoming a Jew and thus leaving much, if not all, of his Roman heritage, was evidently more than Cornelius could accept. Of course he wanted to be right with the Most High God; he desired more than anything to live a life pleasing to Him. Naturally that meant obeying His moral standards, but why did it have to necessitate such a radical cultural change as well? Thus it’s very possible that Cornelius may have been petitioning God along these lines:
Do I really have to become a Jew to be saved? Lord, can’t I just follow you as a Roman? I know that there are many things in my culture that go against the moral teachings of the Old Testament and of Christ. But certainly not everything about our customs and our social relationships is evil! Please, God, answer me! And not just for my sake alone, but also for the sake of all the other Romans I know who need to be saved as much as I do (but do not want to become Jewish).
God’s Answer and Peter’s Paradigm Shift (Acts 10:28-29,34-48)
How did God respond to such questions? Do non-Jews have to leave their own community, their own family, and their own culture and then become attached and identified with a new sociological group? Is that part of the price of experiencing His salvation?
God demonstrated His divine brilliance in the way that He created just the right answer for Cornelius in the heart and mind of Peter. First He gave Peter a very disturbing vision: a sheet filled with a unclean animals (e.g. pigs!) and a heavenly command to kill and eat. He had no idea as to its meaning, since doing such a thing was unthinkable for him as a Jew. Then God spoke to Peter a second time, instructing him to accompany a Roman soldier and household servants to the house of their commanding officer (Cornelius) in Caesarea, some forty kilometers away. Peter’s natural inclination would of course be to refuse both of these commands. After all, eating unclean animals (10:14 - “I have never eaten anything unholy or unclean….”) and even entering the house of a Gentile was a violation of his Jewish faith (10:28 – “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him.”). But Peter went ahead and obeyed what the Lord had told him, aided only by the Lord’s cryptic summary of the new truth that was being revealed: 10:15 - “What God has cleansed no longer consider unholy.”[13]
The trip from Joppa to Caesarea was at least an overnight journey. It’s likely that Peter used much of that time to reflect and to pray. It was undoubtedly a very agonizing experience for him, as his gut reaction to the vision demonstrates: 10:14 – “By no means, Lord!”. God gave Peter new insights through several methods: a vision, its divine interpretation, and his anticipated crisis of conscience regarding whether he should actually set foot into the home of a non-Jew for the first time in his life. By the time he had arrived in Caesarea and began interacting with this foreign household, he had already come to a conclusion that was unthinkable for Jews of his day: 10:34 – “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right, is welcome to Him.” God is no longer concerned only with the Jewish people? He welcomes individuals from every people group, every culture? From the common perspective of first-century Israelites, this represents a brand new conceptualization of how non-Jews are put right with God. Contrary to what Peter and other Jews had grown up believing, it was NOT to be through the procedures established for proselyte conversion, the ones whereby a Roman or Greek became part of the Jewish nation. Therefore, a staggering new paradigm of ‘cultural inclusion’ was being revealed to the first almost exclusively Jewish disciples of Christ: circumcision, Jewish dietary restrictions, Sabbath keeping, etc. are all now irrelevant as far as the salvation of non-Jews was concerned![14]