It's always interesting to hear how Christians in America have divided themselves among different camps concerning what lifestyle choices are holy and are not. For instance, you will find believers in Christ who both agree ad disagree with the notion that Christians are able to:

- get tattoos
- allow men to wear earrings
- drink wine or other alcoholic beverages
- listen to "secular music"

Every person is entitled to their own opinion, but when people begin to confuse holiness being attributed towards choices when they really should be considered acts of selflessness, that's when I find myself disappointed.

Paul had Timothy circumcised for the sake of the Jews they were going to be ministering to.

Yes...this is the same Paul that wrote:

Galatians 6:15
Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation.

1 Corinthians 7:19
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.

I don't believe Paul would say that "Being circumcised isn't a requirement for salvation, but it will make you a better Christian." So why have Timothy circumcised?

Did it make Timothy "more holy?" Did it "prove" he was a saint set apart for God?

No.

I believe it all comes back to the rule of not offending the weaker brother.

Here's the hard question...

When do you perform acts of selflessness to not offend a weaker brother, and when do you confront a weaker brother on their legalistic mindset?

Acts 16:3