Printable Page

ASK THE RABBI - WINTER 2001-2002

In your book (the refutation paper) you quote from Rabbi Bill Klimeck concerning the Greek words ‘akrobustia’, ‘peritome’, and ‘aperitome’. As I understand his postulation these words have been somewhat misrepresented by the English equivalents ‘uncircumcision’, circumcision’, and ‘uncircumcised’ respectively.

Now, you and Rabbi Klimeck seem to be supporting the idea that the word ‘akrobustia’ is in fact a technical term referring not to "uncircumcised Gentiles" but rather to "tossed-away foreskinned Efrayim". In this way the House of Isra’el is recognized to be the "castoffs" or the "cast aways", referred to by those who are the "circumcised", that is, Judah. To be sure, Rabbi Klimeck states that "these meaning must by substituted back into the English verses where the word ‘uncircumcision’ is found, in order to see that it is the House of Israel in exile that is being addressed by Paul whenever he uses this particular word."

My question is in using this definition of the Greek word ‘akrobustia’ how do we define Papa Avraham’s state in Romans chapter 4? To be sure, Sha’ul uses this Greek word in verse 10 to say teach that righteousness was credited to Avraham before the act of his circumcision. Read quite literally verse 11 seems to say that Avraham received the sign of ‘peritome’ (circumcision) as seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being ‘akrobustia’ (uncircumcised). Clearly we cannot read this verse to mean that Avraham was like those of Efrayim who were indeed circumcised prior but now were living in "tossed-away foreskin" rebellion. Using Rabbi Klimeck’s definition as applied to the "Gentiles" in Galatians 2:7 we of course can of course conclude that Efrayim need not undergo the Judean’s form of b’rit milah because they are already "b’rit milah-ed". You seem to make this connection in his statement "they had been circumcised previously, and as the akrobustia if Israel, did not need further circumcision." R. Ariel b. Lyman

Brother Moshe RESPONDS: Regarding Romans 4:11. Yes but remember Avraham's father Terah, and his father's pagan family had also known the ways of Yahweh, as descendants of Noach, who was obviously circumcised. But rather than walk in that obedience, Terah tossed it away and thus so did Avraham as he followed his father Terah, until Yahweh renewed covenant with him. This is why Rav Shaul used the term akrobustia and not aperitome in Romans 4:11 because like Ephraim Israel the house of Terah HAD KNOWN BUT departed the ways of perfect Noach, and had become akrobustia and was found to be in akrobustia (backslidden) when Yahweh renewed the covenant sealing it with the token of peritome. There you have it. rm