(More Bible studies available @ www.marktabata.com)
It is written:
Genesis 17:10-12-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. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not your descendant.
I still remember a particularly animated group of men that I was studying the Bible with in our church jail ministry. I had proposed that we look at, “Questions And Objections To Christianity.” (It was bound to be a detailed and lively study, as quite a few of the guys were very animated that night).
We fielded everything that night from the gods of paganism, the goodness of God, UFOs, the purpose (s) God had in making Hell, etc.
During this hotbed of discussion, one of the men raised an intriguing objection to the Bible.
We will call him, “Brad.”
Brad: Okay, you want to know why I don’t believe in following the Bible?
Mark: Please.
Brad: Are you sure? Because I am pretty sure that you won’t like it.
Mark: I really would like to know where you are coming from. We will listen, and then we will talk and study to figure things out.
Brad: Aight. Well, I refuse to believe in and worship a God Who wants men to practice child abuse.
Mark: I am not sure what you mean. Are you talking about God telling parents to discipline their kids?
Brad: No. I am talking about circumcision. Why would I want to follow a God Who tells fathers and mothers to abuse their boys by cutting off a piece of their (expletive)? Why would you want to worship a God Who wants you to do that to your boy?
(End Of Conversation)
Brad’s concerns are certainly worthy of examination.
What should we make of this?
Let’s study.
In the Old Testament, circumcision (the removal of the foreskin of the penis) was primarily the seal of a covenant between God and mankind. Some have pointed out that this rite testifies that there is nothing too personal or intimate that a person cannot share with God.
This is, of course, very true.
Yet circumcision was also a reminder to the Jewish people that they owed their very existence to God Himself. As Michael Heiser points out:
“When God told Abraham to be circumcised, he was past the age of bearing children and his wife, Sarah, was incapable of having children (Gen 18: 11). Nevertheless, it would be through Sarah’s womb (Gen 17: 21; 18: 14) that God would fulfill His promise of innumerable offspring to Abraham (Gen 12: 1–3). God’s covenant with Abraham could only be realized by miraculous intervention. The miraculous nature of Isaac’s birth is the key to understanding circumcision as the sign of the covenant. After God made His promise to Abraham, every male member of Abraham’s household was required to be circumcised (Gen 17: 15–27). Every male—and every woman, since the males were all incapacitated for a time—knew that circumcision was connected to God’s promise. It probably didn’t make any sense, though, until Sarah became pregnant. Everyone in Abraham’s household witnessed the miracle of Isaac’s birth. From that point on, every male understood why they had been circumcised: Their entire race—their very existence—began with a miraculous act of God. Every woman was reminded of this when she had sexual relations with her Israelite husband and when her sons were circumcised. Circumcision was a visible, continuous reminder that Israel owed its existence to Yahweh, who created them out of nothing.” (Michael Heiser, I Dare You Not to Bore Me with the Bible, 18-19 (Kindle Edition); Bellingham, WA; Lexham Press)
What an irony!
Those who contend that circumcision is a horrible form of abuse overlook the fact that it was designed to to be an incredible reminder of God’s goodness!
Think of how circumcision points to Jesus.
Colossians 2:11-15-In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
Just like the foreskin was removed in circumcision, so sin is removed in the act of baptism.
Just as the father was to circumcise the son, so the Father circumcises those who become His children.
Just as circumcision was connected with blood, so baptism in Christ is connected with His blood.
What amazing and beautiful ways that circumcision points the penitent to the glory and work of Jesus!
Second, as important as circumcision was in the Old Testament, it is not a requirement in the New Testament.
Galatians 5:6-For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.
While Christians learn from the principles and prophecies of the Old Testament (Romans 15:4; 1 Corinthians 10:1-12), we do not live under the Old Law (Romans 7:4). We live under a better covenant (Hebrews 7:22), which has a better hope (Hebrews 7:19), is established on better promises (Hebrews 8:6), and with better sacrifices (Hebrews 9:23). Indeed, through Christ we have expectation of better rewards in Heaven (Hebrews 10:34) and a better city (Hebrews 11:14-17), connected with a better resurrection (Hebrews 11:35).
Circumcision looked forward to salvation in Christ, which is granted when a believer repents of his sin and is baptized into Him (Galatians 3:26-29).
Third, with these things being said, it must also be pointed out that there are undeniable health benefits for males who are circumcised.
Consider:
“But this finding should have surprised no one. Almost fifty studies have found the moist, thin foreskin much more susceptible to all kinds of sexually transmitted diseases.23 Thomas Quinn of the National Institutes of Health comments, “The finding suggests that circumcision should be advocated, just as we advocate condoms. We’ve got to do everything we can to decrease . . . [AIDS] transmission.”24 Of course, circumcision and condoms are not the best protection against AIDS. God’s command to keep sex within marriage protects against AIDS for sure (see chapter 15). But Africa proves that if every male is circumcised, a population has fairly good (though far from perfect) protection against AIDS. Vaccinations use this same concept of partial protection. If everyone is partially protected, many epidemics can be kept in check. Thus circumcision can be seen as a way to “vaccinate” a society against AIDS. This dramatically reduces the number of AIDS carriers and, thus, the number of innocent victims within a population…The protective effects of circumcision have been long known. As far back as 1932 Dr. A. L. Wolburst found that circumcision protects against the often fatal penile cancer. He reviewed hundreds of cases and made a startling discovery. Of 1,103 cancers, not a single case occurred in a Jewish man. Why were Jews protected? Almost four thousand years ago God told Abraham to circumcise every male child. Since then, Jews have faithfully circumcised every generation. Dr. Wolburst suspected that this circumcision protected Jewish men against penile cancer. Since then three large studies have proven Dr. Wolburst’s hunch. In over 521 men with penile cancer, not a single circumcised man was found.25 Worldwide since 1930, doctors have not reported even ten circumcised men with penile cancer. Penile cancer stands alone as the only cancer that can be virtually eliminated by a simple preventive procedure—circumcision. It is 99.9 percent effective in preventing this horrible disease. That’s tremendous! After years of research, science has demonstrated the most effective way to prevent infant urinary tract infections and penile cancer. But science did not arrive at this conclusion because of any laboratory steam it had generated. No! A long train of statistics pulled science up discovery hill. These statistics existed only because generations had followed God’s command to circumcise every infant boy…It took some time, but even the American Academy of Pediatrics started to come around. Remember their statement of 1971: “There are no valid medical indications for circumcision in the neonatal period.”26 By 1989 their statement had changed: Properly performed newborn circumcision prevents [penile problems] . . . and has been shown to decrease the incidence of [penile] cancer…. It may result in a decreased incidence of urinary tract infections…. Newborn circumcision is a rapid and generally safe procedure when performed by an experienced operator…. Newborn circumcision has potential medical benefits and advantages as well as disadvantages and risks. When circumcision is being considered, the benefits and risks should be explained to the parents and informed consent obtained.27 What an amazing turn around! In less than two decades, they reversed their stand. They no longer say, “No valid indication.” Now they list the benefits and recommend that parents give “informed consent,” as required for all medical procedures.…Dr. Edgar Schoen, the original chairman of the Task Force on Circumcision, has completely changed his mind: “Largely on the basis of subsequent publications, I personally agree with Dr. Wiswell that current evidence indicates that the benefits of newborn circumcision outweigh the risks of the procedure.” 28 What an amazing statement! Remember, this man’s original Task Force had concluded that newborn circumcision had “no valid medical indications.” Things moved so much faster than they did in the days of Dr. Semmelweis. Dr. Wiswell has lived to see his conclusions vindicated. “Religion, Not Science” Nonetheless, some retreat to attacking circumcision because it is a “ritualistic” and “cruel” practice, “rooted in traditional and cultural values”: Obviously, circumcision originates from religion, not from science. Would any institutional ethics committee have approved experimental surgical removal of the foreskin of male infants in an attempt to decrease urinary tract infections or even cancer? 29 Indeed! Doctors would never have thought of setting up an experiment to research the benefits of cutting off foreskins. Rather, the “experiment” was designed in God’s ancient health manual, the Bible. As the third millennium approached, science finally closed in on the experiment’s results: “none of these diseases.”” (S. I. MD McMillen, David E. MD Stern, None of These Diseases: The Bible’s Health Secrets for the 21st Century, 1130-1280 (Kindle Edition): Grand Rapids, MI: Published by Revell a division of Baker Publishing Group)
Again:
“Regarding the medical benefits: Pediatrics, the flagship journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, published a study of circumcision that concluded: “. . . now there is much stronger evidence about protective medical benefits associated with circumcision. . . .” 4 In 2014, Dr. Jonathan Mermin of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention wrote, “The scientific evidence is clear that the benefits [of male circumcision] outweigh the risks.” And Dr. Aaron Tobian, a Johns Hopkins University researcher, added, “The benefits of male circumcision have become more and more clear over the last 10 years.” Among the medical benefits are a lower risk of urinary tract infections, a reduced risk of some sexually transmitted diseases in men, protection against penile cancer, and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female partners. Regarding sexually transmitted diseases, in 2013, the United States National Institutes of Health published the following: “Three randomized trials in Africa demonstrated that adult male circumcision decreases human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) acquisition in men by 51% to 60%. . . . “Two trials demonstrated that male circumcision reduces the risk of acquiring genital herpes by 28% to 34%, and the risk of developing genital ulceration by 47%. . . . “Using mathematical models and cost-effectiveness analyses, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/ AIDS (UNAIDS) and the World Health Organization adopted a policy advocating male circumcision in countries and regions with heterosexual HIV epidemics. . . .” Many African countries demand that their male citizens get circumcised. Other than sexual abstention, circumcision is the best way to reduce the risk of contracting AIDS. However, the case for Jewish circumcision in no way rests on its having medical benefits. Even if there were no medical benefits, the case for a Jew continuing the oldest practice of the Jewish religion, practiced for nearly four thousand years, sometimes under threat of arrest and even death, is profound. (That case is made below.)” (Dennis Prager, The Rational Bible: Genesis, 277-279 (Kindle Edition): Washington, DC: Regnery Faith)
Circumcision is not child abuse.
While circumcision is not necessary for salvation, there are undeniable health benefits which people should.
Brad is an example of someone who was sincerely seeking the truth of God about this matter. When he learned of how the medical benefits of this rite point to the scientific foreknowledge of the Bible and the wisdom of God, he began to carefully consider becoming a Christian.
May we follow his example and go further-submitting to the Lord as His Word teaches.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.