Circumcision

[Fez]

I could be wrong here, so please correct me if I am. I have always thought that when Jesus spoke of circumcision, he wasn't talking about circumcision of the flesh. I always thought he was talking about circumcision of the worldly sin of our old self and the rebirth of our new self in Christ.

The Bible uses physical circumcision as a metaphor for the circumcision of hte heart. Circumcision has nothing to do with being born again. Some people see "circumcision of the heart" as referencing salvation from sin, but that is not how it is used.

Circumcision of the heart refers to process of sanctification whereby we are "cutting away" old sinful habits, thoughts, etc.

I don't have any standpoint here. But reading the posts, can circumcsion (of the heart) be equated in some small way to what baptism means?

As I say, just a thought, nothing more.

[Guest shiloh357]

I don't have any standpoint here. But reading the posts, can circumcsion (of the heart) be equated in some small way to what baptism means?

As I say, just a thought, nothing more.

Calvin taught that circumcision was OT counterpart to baptism. In fact, it is his basis for infant baptism.

The New Testament teaches what I call "believer's baptism." Believer's baptism is immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is an outward testimony of an inward transformation and an act of obedience whereby one's immersion into water symbolizes our faith in a crucified, buried and risen Savior. It also symbolizes the fact that we are now dead to sin, our old life has been buried and we are now risen to walk in newness of life in Yeshua/Jesus. It is also a testimony of our faith in our future, final resurrection of the dead.

Now having said that, it is important to keep in mind that Calvin believed in a continuance of the Abrahamic Covenant to Christians. I was reading through my copy of Calvin's Institutes and what I have discovered is that it is this continuance type of theology that also appears to be the basis for his belief in infant baptism. Observe:

"It is distinctly declared, that the circumcision of the infant will be instead of a seal of the promise of the covenant. But if the covenant remains firm and fixed, it is no less applicable to the children of Christians in the present day, than to the children of the Jews under the Old Testament. Now, if they are partakers of the thing signified, how can they be denied the sign? If they obtain the reality, how can they be refused the figure? The external sign is so united in the sacrament with the word, that it cannot be separated from it; but if they can be separated, to which of the two shall we attach the greater value?" Institutes, Book 4, ch.16, Parag. 5

In the next section Calvin argues for covenant continuation:

"For it is most evident that the covenant, which the Lord once made with Abraham, is not less applicable to Christians now than it was anciently to the Jewish people, and, therefore, that word has no less reference to Christians than to Jews." Institutes, Book 4, ch. 16 Parag. 6

There some real problems as I see it, namely that circumcision applies to certain promises and blessings that baptism does not signify or point to at all.

As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

(Genesis 17:4-14)

Let us examine at least some of the blessings/promises that pertain to circumcision:

First of all, we see that circumcision is the confirmation of a covenant God cut with Abraham. More accurately, the covenant was made TO Abraham, as Abraham did not walk between the halves in Genesis 15. God says He (alone) will establish His covenant with Abraham. The word for "establish" in Hebrew signifies that God was going to fulfill this covenant continuously. The text indicates that this covenant would be fulfilled by God to every generation of Abraham's physical descendents from that point on into the eternal future, ad infininum. The following blessings are promised to Abraham in connection with his circumcision:

1. You will be the Father of many nations/Nations shall I make of you;

2. Kings will come out of you;

3. You will be exceedingly fruitful/descendents like the stars of the sky and sand of the shore;

4. I will give to you and your descendents after you the whole land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.

Now, there is another problem I see with making circumcision interchangeable with baptism:

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

(Genesis 17:10-11)

Circumcision applies only to Jewish males. Baptism is commanded to ALL believers male or female. If the rites of circumcision and baptism are interchangeable, why are not only men baptized?

My next problem pertains to Calvin's belief in covenantal continuance (What Dr. Lewis called "Continuance Theology). If circumcision was good enough for Abraham, Moses, David, Samuel and the redeemed communities prior to the New Testament why would it now be insufficient for redeemed community in the New Testament? Why would there need to be a new covenantal sign?

My final question is this: Why would 1st century Jewish believers who had already been circumcised need to be baptized if the two are completely interchangeable as Calvinism teaches? It is clear from this point alone that even Jesus and the Apostles did not see baptism as a replacement for circumcision.

John Calvin relied heavily on Roman 4:11 to make his case for baptism being interchangeable with circumcision:

"Thus Paul terms it a seal of the righteousness of faiths (Rom_4:11). Let God, then, be demanded why he ordered circumcision to be performed on the bodies of infants? For baptism and circumcision being here in the same case, they cannot give any thing to the latter without conceding it to the former. If they recur to their usual evasion, that, by the age of infancy, spiritual infants were then figured, we have already closed this means of escape against them. We say then that since God imparted circumcision, the sign of repentance and faith, to infants, it should not seem absurd that they are now made partakers of baptisms unless men choose to glamour against an institution of God. " Institutes, Book 4, chap. 16, Parag. 20

The problem with the above is that Rom. 4:11 doesn't teach what Calvin is trying to force into the text. Here is what Romans 4:11 says:

And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

(Romans 4:11)

Paul is not referring to circumcision in general, but to the circumcision of ONE person, namely Abraham, himself. This is important because the text of Romans 4 is trying to show us Abraham's special place within the flow of redemptive history and the significance this holds for those of us who are saved apart from circumcision.

What I find misleading is the way Calvin misquotes Paul. Calvin states that circumcision is , "a seal of the righteousness of faith." That is not what Paul said. Again, Paul is talking specifically about Abraham. The sign of circumcision was not a seal of righteousness of faith for EVERYONE who was circumcised. It was the seal of Abraham's righteousness BY faith. It was a seal of his faith which he had BEFORE He was circumcised. Keep in mind that Abraham was justified by faith some 25 years before he was circumcised and nearly 500 years before the Mosaic Law.

[Fez]

I don't have any standpoint here. But reading the posts, can circumcsion (of the heart) be equated in some small way to what baptism means?

As I say, just a thought, nothing more.

Calvin taught that circumcision was OT counterpart to baptism. In fact, it is his basis for infant baptism.

The New Testament teaches what I call "believer's baptism." Believer's baptism is immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is an outward testimony of an inward transformation and an act of obedience whereby one's immersion into water symbolizes our faith in a crucified, buried and risen Savior. It also symbolizes the fact that we are now dead to sin, our old life has been buried and we are now risen to walk in newness of life in Yeshua/Jesus. It is also a testimony of our faith in our future, final resurrection of the dead.

Now having said that, it is important to keep in mind that Calvin believed in a continuance of the Abrahamic Covenant to Christians. I was reading through my copy of Calvin's Institutes and what I have discovered is that it is this continuance type of theology that also appears to be the basis for his belief in infant baptism. Observe:

"It is distinctly declared, that the circumcision of the infant will be instead of a seal of the promise of the covenant. But if the covenant remains firm and fixed, it is no less applicable to the children of Christians in the present day, than to the children of the Jews under the Old Testament. Now, if they are partakers of the thing signified, how can they be denied the sign? If they obtain the reality, how can they be refused the figure? The external sign is so united in the sacrament with the word, that it cannot be separated from it; but if they can be separated, to which of the two shall we attach the greater value?" Institutes, Book 4, ch.16, Parag. 5

In the next section Calvin argues for covenant continuation:

"For it is most evident that the covenant, which the Lord once made with Abraham, is not less applicable to Christians now than it was anciently to the Jewish people, and, therefore, that word has no less reference to Christians than to Jews." Institutes, Book 4, ch. 16 Parag. 6

There some real problems as I see it, namely that circumcision applies to certain promises and blessings that baptism does not signify or point to at all.

As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

(Genesis 17:4-14)

Let us examine at least some of the blessings/promises that pertain to circumcision:

First of all, we see that circumcision is the confirmation of a covenant God cut with Abraham. More accurately, the covenant was made TO Abraham, as Abraham did not walk between the halves in Genesis 15. God says He (alone) will establish His covenant with Abraham. The word for "establish" in Hebrew signifies that God was going to fulfill this covenant continuously. The text indicates that this covenant would be fulfilled by God to every generation of Abraham's physical descendents from that point on into the eternal future, ad infininum. The following blessings are promised to Abraham in connection with his circumcision:

1. You will be the Father of many nations/Nations shall I make of you;

2. Kings will come out of you;

3. You will be exceedingly fruitful/descendents like the stars of the sky and sand of the shore;

4. I will give to you and your descendents after you the whole land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.

Now, there is another problem I see with making circumcision interchangeable with baptism:

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

(Genesis 17:10-11)

Circumcision applies only to Jewish males. Baptism is commanded to ALL believers male or female. If the rites of circumcision and baptism are interchangeable, why are not only men baptized?

My next problem pertains to Calvin's belief in covenantal continuance (What Dr. Lewis called "Continuance Theology). If circumcision was good enough for Abraham, Moses, David, Samuel and the redeemed communities prior to the New Testament why would it now be insufficient for redeemed community in the New Testament? Why would there need to be a new covenantal sign?

My final question is this: Why would 1st century Jewish believers who had already been circumcised need to be baptized if the two are completely interchangeable as Calvinism teaches? It is clear from this point alone that even Jesus and the Apostles did not see baptism as a replacement for circumcision.

John Calvin relied heavily on Roman 4:11 to make his case for baptism being interchangeable with circumcision:

"Thus Paul terms it a seal of the righteousness of faiths (Rom_4:11). Let God, then, be demanded why he ordered circumcision to be performed on the bodies of infants? For baptism and circumcision being here in the same case, they cannot give any thing to the latter without conceding it to the former. If they recur to their usual evasion, that, by the age of infancy, spiritual infants were then figured, we have already closed this means of escape against them. We say then that since God imparted circumcision, the sign of repentance and faith, to infants, it should not seem absurd that they are now made partakers of baptisms unless men choose to glamour against an institution of God. " Institutes, Book 4, chap. 16, Parag. 20

The problem with the above is that Rom. 4:11 doesn't teach what Calvin is trying to force into the text. Here is what Romans 4:11 says:

And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

(Romans 4:11)

Paul is not referring to circumcision in general, but to the circumcision of ONE person, namely Abraham, himself. This is important because the text of Romans 4 is trying to show us Abraham's special place within the flow of redemptive history and the significance this holds for those of us who are saved apart from circumcision.

What I find misleading is the way Calvin misquotes Paul. Calvin states that circumcision is , "a seal of the righteousness of faith." That is not what Paul said. Again, Paul is talking specifically about Abraham. The sign of circumcision was not a seal of righteousness of faith for EVERYONE who was circumcised. It was the seal of Abraham's righteousness BY faith. It was a seal of his faith which he had BEFORE He was circumcised. Keep in mind that Abraham was justified by faith some 25 years before he was circumcised and nearly 500 years before the Mosaic Law.

Wow Shiloh! A very comprehensive answer that needs a bit of digesting. Thanks for taking the time and answering my question in so much detail

[Guest]

>>>>>()<<<<<

I could be wrong here, so please correct me if I am. I have always thought that when Jesus spoke of circumcision, he wasn't talking about circumcision of the flesh. I always thought he was talking about circumcision of the worldly sin of our old self and the rebirth of our new self in Christ.

The Answer To This Question Will Become Obvious When One Discovers

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? John 14:9

Just Who It Was That Talked Face To Face

And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. Exodus 33:11(a-b)

With Grandpa Moses

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.

And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. Genesis 17:10

You See

O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth. Isaiah 37:16

You See

Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Colossians 1:13-17

And Here We See The LORD'S Instructions On The Fleshly Heart

Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings. Jeremiah 4:4

And Maybe This Will Help Clarify The Two

What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Romans 4:1-3

Are Men Saved By Their Works?

Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. Romans 4:9

Or By Their Faith

And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. Romans 4:11-13

In Jesus

And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. Romans 4:21-25

Alone

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

>>>>>()<<<<<

Believe

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6

And Be Blessed

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:16-18

Love Joe

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. John 5:24-25

For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. John 5:26-29

[Openly Curious]

# 1) Did Jewish people who joined the church continue to circumcise?

#2) do Jewish Christians circumcise today? As per the covenant with Abraham that is.

Romans 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumsion is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.

The answer to your first question, is yes, the Jewish believers did continue to circumcise even after joining the church and these were Judaizers teaching that the Gentile Christians should obey the Jewish laws and in addition to that they had to believe in Christ. These Judaizers didn't believe that Paul was an apostle not one of the original twelve and the Judaizers by discrediting Paul's teachings and calling him basically an imposter so the Judaizers were making great head way by doing so but Paul stood his ground. There was a lot of contentions and strife because the Judaizers did not want to stop following the law but they wanted salvation at the same time but it just don't work that way.

Between Peter and Paul they had a strong opposition with one another (Galatians 2:11-21) because Peter began keeping or following the Jewish law again. The Jewish law said, that the male children had to be circumcised on the 8th day from there birth. Jesus himself was brought to the temple on the 8th day to be circumcised by Mary and Joseph in obedience to the law (Genesis 17:10-14) this was before the law was given by the law of Moses (Leviticus 12:2-3) (Luke 2:21-40--good read AAA) (Exodus 13:2; 22:29) (Numbers 3:13)

The Jews today do circumscise their children I imagine in many different ways that is available to them and how they want to handle it. Iin our day we have hospitals that does this service according to the will of the parents circumscion was a sign of either uncleanliness or cleanliness before God as it showed a seperation between the Jewish nations and the Gentiles. But curcumscion of the flesh couldn't save anyone it was only the circumscion of our heart that Jesus did by his own blood. It was an outward act in the flesh that caused the men of Israel to be clean. But today a Jew is one inwardly, and circumscion is that of the heart, in the spirit, and "NOT" in the letter,whose praise is "NOT" of men, "BUT" of God. This is the faith that Abraham had in (Genesis ) and in (Romans 4) where it was counted unto hm as righteousness. When Abraham offered up his own son Issac as a sacrifice believing that God would provide a sacrifice as when Abraham was about to slay his son he looked up and there was a ram caught up in the thicket a picture of the heavenly Father who gave his only begotten Son as a sacrifice as the Lord God provided a spotless lamb who would be the Saviour of the world as his blood was shed for all that would come and receive atonement in the blood that cleanses us as white as snow.

Galatians 3:6-15; 16-18 Hebrews 6:13-20; = 7:10, 11 ,13, 14, 19, 21, 28; = 8:5, 7, 8, =9; 1,8-10, 16-22 hope made some sense

[oldzimm]

I could be wrong here, so please correct me if I am. I have always thought that when Jesus spoke of circumcision, he wasn't talking about circumcision of the flesh. I always thought he was talking about circumcision of the worldly sin of our old self and the rebirth of our new self in Christ.

The Bible uses physical circumcision as a metaphor for the circumcision of hte heart. Circumcision has nothing to do with being born again. Some people see "circumcision of the heart" as referencing salvation from sin, but that is not how it is used.

Circumcision of the heart refers to process of sanctification whereby we are "cutting away" old sinful habits, thoughts, etc.

I think that was the point I was trying to make, thank-you shiloh.

[EricH]

I can tell you that if I was Abraham my question would have been, How come Noah got a rainbow?

[Believer1997]

I can tell you that if I was Abraham my question would have been, How come Noah got a rainbow?

[nebula]

The covenant with Noah was also with the Earth.

[UncleAbee]

Quotes by shiloh357 - "Are you equally opposed to African American Christians, Hispanic Christians, Korean Christians, etc.?"

That's what we see. God only sees Christians. We should try to see it more like God does. You said it yourself in your folowing quote on Gal 3:28 - "What Paul is talking about is that God recognizes no ethnic pedigree, gender, or social status in terms of who may be saved. No one regardless of ethnicty, gender or social status has any advantage or disadvantage where accss to God grace is concerned." If God does not recognizw all these things then why do we seek to?

I said "In the 1st century Jews who became Christians attempted to make others follow certain Mosaic laws." And you replied "No, that was judaizing cult. It was decided that the Gentiles did not need to be circumcized. It did not address Jewish people at all."

If God treats all the same and the Gentiles don't need circumcision for salvation then why would the Jews? Does God save one in one manner and another differently?

"The New Testament does not EVER condemn circumcision. It condemns the belief that circumcision is a necessary pre-condition for salvation."

Then why force your congregation to perform a worship ritual that God doesn't care for? They do it because they believe it is necessary to please God. It does not. Now, doing it won't make your soul lost. If you want to do it for your own personal satisfaction that is one thing but doing it to please God is another matter.