i dont mean why did God require it, but rather why that, of all things? i guess i have never really thought about it before from that standpoint. e.g., do we know if any other cultures practiced this at the time of Abraham?
TK
Why circumcision?
Why circumcision?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)
From what I understand, Egyptians and other pagan cultures also practiced some form of circumcision (the Philistines being a notable exception). I do not know what its significance was in these cultures—whether its value was viewed as religious, hygienic, or aesthetic. Emmett probably knows something about this, having been schooled in these matters more than myself.
As a Christian, I probably see the significance of the particular practice, as commanded by God to Abraham, from a different viewpoint than that of a Jew.
That the act was intended to be a "sign" of a covenant relationship with God is beyond dispute (Gen.17:11), but why have such a "sign" where nobody could see it? Why not a tattoo on the hand or the forehead, or something more visible?
I believe the reason is related to the value of the ritual as a "type" of something spiritual—namely, the "circumcision of the heart." While the Old Testament alludes to this connection (e.g., Deut.10:16; 30:6/ Jer.4:4), the New Testament treats the latter as the complete replacement of the former (Phil.3:3/ cf. Rom.2:28-29).
So why should the male organ be chosen as the type of the spiritual "heart"? I see two reasons:
1) The male organ is the most private or (publicly) invisible member of the body. This corresponds to the fact that the heart is the part of the man seen by none but God (1 Sam.16:7);
2) The male organ is the instrument of a man's "fruit-bearing." Abraham's "life-ministry" was to bring forth a "seed." The conduit for that which is produced for God must be "clean" and consecrated to God. Fleshly circumcision was the means of indicating this.
For our part, our ministry is not necessarily related to the production of physical offspring (though an individual's primary contribution to the kingdom of God may still prove to be in the rearing of godly offspring—Mal.2:15). All believers are expected to produce "fruit" for God, of a spiritual sort (John 15:1-6). The metaphorical "heart" is the conduit for this fruit in the inner man (e.g., Rom.5:5), as the male organ is that for producing physical fruit. Thus that which is produced for God must come from a clean and consecrated "heart" (Ps.24:3-4; 51:10/Matt.5:8/ James 4:8)—spoken of as a "circumcized" heart.
By contrast, a tattoo on the hand or the forehead speaks symbolically of the outward and visible behavior that shows where one's heart is at (Rev. 13:16; 14:1).
This, at least, is how I have come to understand the matter.
As a Christian, I probably see the significance of the particular practice, as commanded by God to Abraham, from a different viewpoint than that of a Jew.
That the act was intended to be a "sign" of a covenant relationship with God is beyond dispute (Gen.17:11), but why have such a "sign" where nobody could see it? Why not a tattoo on the hand or the forehead, or something more visible?
I believe the reason is related to the value of the ritual as a "type" of something spiritual—namely, the "circumcision of the heart." While the Old Testament alludes to this connection (e.g., Deut.10:16; 30:6/ Jer.4:4), the New Testament treats the latter as the complete replacement of the former (Phil.3:3/ cf. Rom.2:28-29).
So why should the male organ be chosen as the type of the spiritual "heart"? I see two reasons:
1) The male organ is the most private or (publicly) invisible member of the body. This corresponds to the fact that the heart is the part of the man seen by none but God (1 Sam.16:7);
2) The male organ is the instrument of a man's "fruit-bearing." Abraham's "life-ministry" was to bring forth a "seed." The conduit for that which is produced for God must be "clean" and consecrated to God. Fleshly circumcision was the means of indicating this.
For our part, our ministry is not necessarily related to the production of physical offspring (though an individual's primary contribution to the kingdom of God may still prove to be in the rearing of godly offspring—Mal.2:15). All believers are expected to produce "fruit" for God, of a spiritual sort (John 15:1-6). The metaphorical "heart" is the conduit for this fruit in the inner man (e.g., Rom.5:5), as the male organ is that for producing physical fruit. Thus that which is produced for God must come from a clean and consecrated "heart" (Ps.24:3-4; 51:10/Matt.5:8/ James 4:8)—spoken of as a "circumcized" heart.
By contrast, a tattoo on the hand or the forehead speaks symbolically of the outward and visible behavior that shows where one's heart is at (Rev. 13:16; 14:1).
This, at least, is how I have come to understand the matter.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
makes sense to me.. and at least God required that it be done at a time that won't be remembered by the child, unlike some cultures that perform it as a rite of passage into manhood.
TK
TK
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)