If those who are not circumcised keep the law's requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised?
Thoughts for Today:A few years ago I thought I lost my wedding ring. For several days I felt naked walking around without it -- fortunately it soon turned up. During those days I was without it, do you think I ceased to be married? Did losing my wedding ring negate my marriage vows? Of course not. My wedding ring was only a symbol of the commitment I made to my wife -- a representation of my promise -- before God.
The same is true of circumcision. Paul is basically making the point that although circumcision should mean something, the lack of circumcision wouldn't necessarily indicate a man did not follow the law anymore than losing my wedding ring meant I was no longer married. In other words, the symbol means less than a person's conduct.
Questions to Ponder:If someone saw you without your wedding ring (or spouse) would they know you were married? Is your conduct in conformity to your promise -- regardless of the symbols? If you didn't tell someone you were a Christian -- would they know? How so -- by your language, compassion, generosity, etc? Does your conduct need a little adjustment?