What is the significance of circumcision?

Genesis 17:1, 22, YHVH appears to Abraham and establishes circumcision as a sign of the covenant. 

And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, YHVH appeared [Heb. ra’ah meaning “to see, look, behold, show, appear, observe, have vision, present oneself, be seen”] to Abram, and said unto him, I am El Shaddai; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

YHVH proceeds to lay out to Abraham the terms of the Abrahamic Covenant including circumcision and the fact that Sarah would give birth to a son with whom YHVH would also establish his covenant. When YHVH was done Scripture records the following in verse 22,

And [YHVH] left off talking with him, and Elohim went up [Heb. alan meaning “to go up, ascend, climb, depart”] from Abraham. (KJV)

And when He had finished speaking with him, God ascended from upon Abraham. (The ArtScroll Stone Edition Tanach)

And He ceased speaking with him; and the Glory of the Lord ascended from Abraham. (Targum Jonathan)

And when He had ended to speak with him, the Glory of the Lord ascended up from Abraham. (Targum Onkelos)

And be left off speaking with him, and God went up from Abraham. (LXX)

This text does not state how YHVH appeared or spoke to Abraham, just the fact that he did. According to the Hebrew rules of biblical interpretation (and the rules of common logic when reading anything), a scriptural text is to be taken at its literal or plain (peshat) meaning, unless the text itself suggests an allegorical (drash) or mystical (sod) interpretation. The Talmud (the Jewish Oral Law) states this in Talmud b. Shabbath 63a ( … that a verse cannot depart from its plain meaning”) and Talmud b. Yevamoth 24a (“Although throughout the Torah no text loses its ordinary meaning …”). Therefore, it is evident that YHVH appeared to Abraham in some tangible form with which humans are capable of interacting. If he did so once, we have to ask, cannot he do it again in the Person of Yeshua of Nazereth, the Messiah?

Let’s note some reasons why YHVH chose circumcision to be the sign of the Abrahamic Covenant. Remember, physical circumcision is not passé, but is still a requirement for those desiring to be priests in YHVH’s future (spiritual?) temple (Ezek 44:7, 9):

  • It is a token or sign of spiritual things—a sign which always goes before us. (Gen 17:11)
  • It signifies purification of the heart from all unrighteousness by cutting away a piece of the flesh which would otherwise be a carrier of filth and disease.
  • It is a holy seal of righteousness—the foreskin removed is round like a ring. A ring signifies a bond or union and is worn constantly even as the seal of circumcision is worn constantly.
  • Circumcision occurs at eight days of age. Eight is the number meaning new beginnings. A new heart, a consecration of the person to YHVH; the commencement of a covenant. (Gen 17:12)
  • The rite of circumcision is painful and humiliating. So is repentance and self denial of which circumcision is a picture.
  • From the penis flows the seed of life. Circumcision is a sign that the seed should and could be righteous and consecrated to YHVH.
  • In Romans 4:11, Paul teaches us that circumcision is a sign, mark or token, and a seal (placed on someone) or an impression or stamp made by a signet ring signifying ownership. Circumcision spoke of Abraham’s righteousness and the faith he had in YHVH and YHVH’s “ownership” of Abraham.

Circumcision is not a requirement for salvation (see Acts 15) or else women couldn’t be saved. Circumcision is, however, an act of obedience that indicates one’s identity with the Abrahamic Covenant model of salvation and with the people of Israel. Additionally, the Torah makes it clear that circumcision is required for all men who desire to take Passover, and those who do not keep the Passover will be cut off from Israel (Exod 12:47–48), although in the New Covenant, circumcision of the heart is the chief requirement (Rom 2:25–29; Gal 6:15; Col 2:11).

 

6 thoughts on “What is the significance of circumcision?

    • As you’ve correctly pointed out, the idea of circumcision of the heart wasn’t an invention of Paul the apostle, but is straight from the Torah. It’s the higher spiritual ideal to which physical circumcision points.

  1. I am borrowing the words of another teacher/commentator who wrote the following on this week’s portion………

    .Physical circumcision was not an issue with Paul and it should not be with us either. Paul helps explain this through his two students/talmidim: Timothy and Titus. These men are great examples of the works of the law in action:

     Timothy was circumcised as an adult to complete his Jewish heritage (Acts 16:1-3).
     Titus was not circumcised after he came to faith as an Israelite (House of Ephraim/the
    nations) (Galatians 2:3).

    Both men were correct according to the great Rabbi Saul/Paul. Both men were elders in the ekklisia/assembly of believers. Both men were among Paul’s top advisors and taught believers in all church/synagogues. More importantly these men, one circumcised and one not, were both present at all Feast days, including the Passover (Acts 16:1-3; Galatians 2:3).

    What do you think about this? This is a confusing issue to me…………

    • The author is correct and I agree with him.

      Two additions I would make though.

      First, in Ezekiel’s descriptions of the assumed millennial temple, all those entering in that temple will be circumcised both in flesh and heart (Ezek 44:9).In YHVH’s eyes, those entering it who are uncircumcised are defiling it (v. 7). Obviously, to YHVH, physical circumcision is a holiness issue, not a salvational issue (as the Jerusalem counsel ruled in Acts 15). So there is still a place in YHVH’s spiritual economy for physical circumcision. Physical circumcision (in addition to heart circumcision) shows a higher level of obedience and holiness, not a lower level.

      Second, the law of Moses stipulates that all men be circumcised in order to be part of the Passover (Exod 12:48). What I’m about to say is beyond the scope of this brief discussion, but the law of Moses (as opposed to the greater or Torah or the eternal principles thereof), it seems to me, was the administrative arm of the greater Torah that pre-existed the law of Moses. The latter contained rules and guidelines needed for a nation to function properly as such. It contained a complete legal code with penalties, a judicial system, an educational system, a taxation system, and government comprised of priests and tribal elders. For the nation of Israel to protect its spiritual integrity, Moses had to protect it from foreign or pagan defilement (spiritual pathogens), which could potentially lead to Israel’s apostasy. The circumcision requirement, to my thinking, was part of the law of Moses’ legal code for Israel regarding Passover observance, but wasn’t necessarily a requirement of the greater Torah, which applies generally to all men. My sense is that Paul in not making a big issue out of physical circumcision and was appealing to the greater or higher requirements of the Torah (involving more spiritual and heart issues; cp. Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount teaching where he brings the letter and spirit of the Torah together) and Paul was not focusing on the legal requirements of the law of Moses administrative subdivision of the Torah, which was enacted for the proper legal functioning of the nation of Israel. When Paul came along, Israel was no longer a sovereign nation that ruled itself. Timothy was half Jewish and Titus was non-Jewish, and both were from Greek nations within the Roman Empire, and so some of the strict legal aspects of the law of Moses (e.g., circumcision for Passover) couldn’t or didn’t have to be applied as long as the greater principles of Torah (i.e., circumcision of the heart) were being kept.

      I hope this makes sense, and that I didn’t confuse the issue more for you.

      Blessings!

Share your thoughts...