I don't see, in the Bible, what you are referring to above. No one from the OT received all that was necessary to later acquire Eternal Life. All who had died before Christ were given an opportunity to accept Jesus as He went to Hades to preach to them. They did, however, receive the Holy Spirit to guide and lead them, as well as have the Curse lifted from their hearts. These things were assuredly done. What they did NOT have, was the debt for their sins paid for by Christ. They had to wait for that element of their Faith. But a debt is a debt and that has nothing to do with Holy Purification.
That may be. However, I never said that men in the OT had received eternal life yet. In fact I said the exact opposite. In plain English I said: " No one from the OT received all that was necessary to later acquire Eternal Life."
In this sense, then, it is too difficult for you to understand my statement?: "the faith of men in the OT achieved what was necessary for them to later acquire it."
What I've clearly said is:
1) Men in the OT do not yet have, by their faith, eternal life.
2) Men in the OT do have faith, by which they will be given eternal life later.
I never said that. Physical circumcision is a representation of what takes place [to] the human Heart after Christ Spiritually Circumcises it.
The problem with this statement is, Circumcision was an OT requirement under the Law, even though it began before the formal giving of the Law. And Christ did not come until the era of Law was coming to an end. Indeed, Christ could not have spiritually circumcised anyone before he came into the world. You can't do something in the world until you're born into it. In the case of Christ, he did preexist his human body in the form of God's word, but he was not then known as Christ. He didn't spiritually circumcise anybody that I know of, regardless--not until he began to do so by giving his people the Holy Spirit under the New Covenant.
Romans 4:11 NLT - "Circumcision was a sign that Abraham already had faith and that God had already accepted him and declared him to be righteous--even before he was circumcised. So Abraham is the spiritual father of those who have faith but have not been circumcised. They are counted as righteous because of their faith."
Now you seem to be making the same argument I had made, and which you began to argue against! I said that Abraham's faith qualified him for the eternal life to be given in the New Covenant of Christ. He had faith, and then receive Circumcision as a sign of his Covenant relationship with God. It wasn't yet Eternal Life, but it was an assurance that it would be accomplished for him.
Do you see it? Physical Circumcision is the same reflection of Spiritual Circumcision as it water baptism. It is the same exact Covenant, but from Old Testament to the New Testament, the symbols change regarding the same set of Promises and Blessings.
Sorry, but Water Baptism is not a NT "Circumcision," if that's what you're trying to say? Water Baptism started with John the Baptist under the OT Law, and it continued during Jesus' ministry, which was still in the OT.
Water Baptism is now practiced in the NT as well, but in no sense is it a kind of "Circumcision," which was a mandated practice in the legal sense. By contrast, Water Baptism is simply a ceremony enabling one to make public his or her repentance of sin, to live in relationship with Christ.
I can see that Circumcision and Water Baptism were both symbolic acts indicating a complete commitment to God. So I can accept that. But I cannot accept that Water Baptism is a legal requirement in Christianity.
Communion and gathering together are things also we're exhorted to do in the Scriptures, but they are not legal mandates. The only legal requirement is that we repent of our own ways, and cast ourselves upon Christ, to live by his Spirit.
The exhortation to follow certain symbolic practices are emphasizing not the symbols and rituals, but more what they represent. Communion would have us to remember Christ and what he did. And Water Baptism would have us express our testimony in public. We can do those things without rituals, but the rituals are good ways of doing these things.
