Circumcision has been a controversial subject all through church history, going back to the Early Church. With many of the first believers coming from a Jewish background, it’s not surprising that they thought that circumcision should be a requirement. The gentile believers, on the other hand, were not circumcised and didn’t want to be. It took the council of the apostles to solve this; but the issue has still arisen from time to time, with the tides of opinion moving first one way, then the other.
Some beliers look at circumcision as part of the Old Testament law. While it is written into the law, circumcision actually predates the law. The first case of circumcision mentioned in the Bible was with Abraham, when God made a covenant with him. This established circumcision as a covenant act, later codified into the Law.
Circumcision is mentioned in the New Testament as well, although there we see the controversy that existed around it. Not all Christians in the Early Church were circumcised, although some did practice it. Ministers who evangelized the Jews were typically circumcised, so that they would be accepted by the people they were trying to minister to. But that doesn’t mean that it was necessary for going out and evangelizing gentiles. Amongst them, it was nothing more than a sign that someone was a Jew, not that they were a follower of Christ.
Circumcision as a Covenant Act
The first occurrence of circumcision happened when God was establishing His covenant with Abram, changing his name to Abraham. We see this started in Genesis, chapter 15, but the part we’re interested in right now is in Genesis, chapter 17. God starts out by telling Abraham that He will give Abraham and his descendants the land of Canaan as an everlasting possession, then moves on to tell Abraham what he is to do as part of the covenant:
And God said to Abraham: “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you, throughout their generations. 10 This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised; 11 and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. – Genesis 17:9-11 (and following)
Abraham is known as the “father of faith” and as such, he could no more disobey this commandment of God, than he could disobey any other that God gave him. More than that, as a man from a covenant society, he had a much better grasp of the importance of circumcision, than we ever can. He obeyed, because he wanted to have that covenant with God.
Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 26 That very same day Abraham was circumcised, and his son Ishmael; 27 and all the men of his house, born in the house or bought with money from a foreigner, were circumcised with him. – Genesis 17:24-27
This was before Isaac was born, so Isaac wasn’t circumcised at this time. Rather, he was circumcised at eight days of age. But Ishmael was. This is significant, in that Ishmale is not included in the Biblical genealogy of the people of Israel. Those were the children of Jacob, son of Isaac, who God renamed Israel. The descendants of Ishmael became many of the people who populated the Middle East and who became Muslim.
God’s choice of circumcision as a sign of the covenant is interesting, to say the least. It’s not the fact that they had to cut their flesh that was unusual, throughout the history of covenant, it was common to cut and mix the blood. But this was most often accomplished in the palm of the hand or the forearm, with the two people’s blood being mixed and leaving a visible scar. The great explorer Stanley, of “Doctor Livingstone, I presume” fame, was said to have 50 scars on his forearm, from all the covenants he had made with tribal chieftains.
Those scars gave Stanley a distinct advantage when dealing with the tribal people of Africa, who were all covenant people. When he raised his hand in greeting, they would not only see that he wasn’t holding a weapon in his hand, but that he was in covenant with a lot of other people. Messing with him meant messing with all of them, something that few people who understood the covenant would be willing to risk.
Yet God chose to have Abraham and his descendants cut their flesh in a place they would never show publicly, their foreskin. They couldn’t raise that up in greeting, showing that they were in covenant with Jehovah God. People would have to see that through other things in their lives. Abraham’s covenant with God wasn’t supposed to be something to brag to the world about; but rather, something private between the two of them.
At the same time, men who were circumcised could not hide that from their wives. They couldn’t pretend that they weren’t in covenant with God, as their wives would see the evidence of that covenant. The one person who they were to be the closest to, would know of their commitment to God. If those men failed to live up to that commitment, it would send a message to their own wife that they could not be trusted.
That circumcision would also serve as a reminder to the men so circumcised, that they were in covenant with God. They could not go to the bathroom, without being confronted with the evidence of their covenant. Such reminders may seem out of place to us today, but they are very effective in helping people to make the right choices, such as avoiding adultery.
God Takes His Covenants Seriously
Over 400 years later, God called Moses to lead the people of Israel out of bondage in Egypt. At the time, Moses had been living with his father-in-law, Jethro, in Midian. Taking his wife and son with him, Moses started the long journey from Midian, back to Egypt. Along the way, Moses was nearly killed for having broken the covenant with God.
And it came to pass on the way, at the encampment, that the Lord met him and sought to kill him. 25 Then Zipporah (Moses’ wife) took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” – Exodus 4:24-25
The Bible doesn’t actually tell us that Moses was circumcised, although it is widely believed that he was. He had been born into an Israeli family, who were in captivity in Egypt. Although he was adopted by the daughter of Pharaoh, his parents would have circumcised him on the eighth day, before that happened. As further proof that he was circumcised, Zipporah didn’t have to circumcise him, but their son.
It’s interesting that Zipporah knew to circumcise the child, as she was not of the people of Israel. Being Moses’ wife, she would have known that he was circumcised and probably asked about it. She must have taken that to heart, for when Moses was on the point of death, she knew to circumcise their son, even though she clearly didn’t want to.
I can imagine Moses and Zipporah having discussed the need to circumcise their son and Zipporah flat-out refusing to allow it. Mothers can be very protective of their children and without compelling reasons to allow the body of her son to be mutilated, she would stand firm. Apparently, the near death of her husband was that compelling reason.
This brings up another thought; that an additional purpose in God nearly killing Moses was to prove Himself to Zipporah. She had never seen God, nor seen His power. When Moses saw the burning bush, Zipporah was probably back home. Yet, they were about to head into a very dangerous situation, where the two of them needed to be in agreement. It wasn’t enough that Moses was obeying God; if his wife was against him, it could cause some serious problems, perhaps even leading to their death.
Her declaration of “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” sounds almost like a curse; but in the context of covenant, it can be seen as a declaration of their covenant. They were both covenant people, with a much different understanding and reverence for blood, than what we have today. Their marriage covenant had, in a way, been sealed afresh, by the blood of circumcising their son.
Circumcision in the Law
While circumcision, as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham didn’t need to be included in the Old Testament Law, God included it anyway, removing any ambiguity that might later cause confusion.
And on the eight day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. – Leviticus 12:3
Although this brief reference is the only place that God commanded circumcision in the Law, it is not the only place where He mentions it. Interestingly enough, when God instituted the Passover celebration, in Exodus, chapter 12, He made circumcision a requirement for celebrating it.
And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the ordinance of the Passover: No foreigner shall eat it. 44 But every man’s servant who is bought for money, when you have circumcised him, then he may eat it… 48 And when a stranger dwells with you and wants to keep the Passover of the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as a native of the land. For no uncircumcised person shall eat it. – Exodus 12:43-44, 48
This is the only one of the Biblical festivals where God makes this distinction. Why should Passover be different than Pentecost, Yom Kippur or any of the others? It’s because the Passover represents the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the ultimate covenant sacrifice of all, who died to restore our covenant relationship with God the Father. For someone who is not part of that covenant to eat the Passover uncircumcised, would be seen by the Jews as an insult to God.
Circumcision has been practiced by the Jews throughout history, even unto today. Both religious Jews and those who are Jewish by birth, but not practicing the Jewish faith circumcise their boy babies at eight days of age, usually with a lot of ceremony. This is the same time that they are given their names.
Circumcision in the New Testament
Circumcision exists in the New Testament and was a common practice amongst Jews who accepted Christ as their Messiah. We are told in Luke, chapter 2, that Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day, according to Jewish tradition and the Law. This eliminates any possibility that circumcision is sinful for the New Testament believer, for Jesus lived His life fully without sin.
Nevertheless, this became a point of contention amongst the believers of the Early Church, some of whom taught that one had to be circumcised to be saved (Acts 15:1). These were mostly believers in Christ who had come from the party of the Pharisees, who, as we all know, were very legalistic. In response to this dispute, Paul and Barnabas were sent to the apostles in Jerusalem, seeking resolution on this matter.
Paul and Barnabas reported to the apostles, who met together deciding that it was not good to lay the full burden of the Law on new believers. Rather, they chose to only lay a few basic requirements on them, in addition to their faith. Circumcision was not included in these requirements. This was sent out to the church in other cities in a letter (Acts, chapter 15).
The apostles had recognized that no physical sign was going to make one holy, as holiness must come from within; from the heart. True circumcision was therefore a circumcision of the heart, which manifested in one’s actions. This was always God’s intention.
And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the hearts of your descendants, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. – Deuteronomy 30:6
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision what which is outward in the flesh; 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heat, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. – Romans 2:28-29
Roman Catholics typically practice circumcision. Their theology, ever since the Second Vatican Council, has been that God’s covenant with the Jewish people still remains in effect. We are “grafted into the vine” (Romans 11:24-25), therefore we are beneficiaries of that covenant. As such, it made sense to the Catholic Fathers that we should practice circumcision. This does not mean that if you aren’t Catholic, you should reject circumcision; but it doesn’t mean that you have to either.
From a purely medical point of view, circumcision makes sense in some cases. There are a few different conditions which indicate a necessity for circumcision; but this is circumcision later in life. As for circumcising babies, which is what usually happens, circumcision can be seen to be preventative, in that it eliminates the possibility of yeast infections between the foreskin and the glans.
Circumcision in Other Religions
While we know of circumcision from Judaism and the Old Testament, the nation of Israel in the Bible hasn’t been the only ones to practice circumcision. As I mentioned earlier, Ishamel was circumcised the same day that his father, Abraham, was. Therefore, Muslims also practice circumcision. A number of other Middle Eastern people also practice circumcision, apart from any requirement from Islam. This includes Egyptians, Coptic Christians, and Eastern Orthodox Christians.
In some cultures, circumcision is seen as a rite of passage, for young men passing through puberty. This is apart from any religious reasons for circumcision. Many of the tribes of sub-Saharan Africa practiced circumcision, as well as the Mayan and Aztec cultures in Mesoamerica.
Worldwide, roughly 30% of males today have been circumcised. Some were circumcised for religious reasons, while others for cultural or health religions. In all religions which practice circumcision, it is seen as a sing of covenant, just as it was in the Old Testament.
Female Circumcision
Female circumcision is different from male circumcision, as females don’t have a foreskin. There is also no Biblical or other religious requirement for it. Nonetheless, the practice of female circumcision or “female genital mutilation” (FGM) has been in practice amongst some people groups for over 2,000 years.
FGM differs greatly from male circumcision in that there is no religious or medical need for it. Rather than removing the foreskin, the protruding part of the clitoris was removed, generally during puberty, so as to be seen as a rite of passage. This greatly reduces sexual pleasure for women who have had the procedure.
We don’t know exactly where this practice originated, but it is believed that it began in ancient Egypt. Some scholars have stated that the practice was mostly carried out in the aristocracy. That point of view holds that the practice was a sign of distinction, albeit a rather cruel one. Others believe it originated with the slave trade in Africa, where black women were taken as slaves in Arab cultures. Regardless of where it began, it is supported by cultural beliefs amongst those groups who practice it.
Removal of that part of the clitoris could be nothing more than a means of controlling women, especially their sexual desires. A woman who is much less likely to receive an orgasm, is much less likely to become involved in adultery, as the benefit would not outweigh the cost. Regardless of the reason, there is no Biblical support for this practice, in either the Old or New Testament. It is not practiced in either Jewish or Christian culture.