Blessings,
Cheryl

islaywhisky@hotmail.com
Christopher

God of course does not have male body parts and for sure has no “skin” or “foreskin”.

If we only needed Jesus’ teaching on the Sermon on the Mount, then Jesus would not have needed to raise up Apostles to give us His teaching that isn’t recorded in the four gospels. There is much to learn about suffering, servanthood, sacrifice and patience as well as the foundation of the gospel that tests all false gospels.

Since God gave man the foreskin as a sign of sin in the first place and even Jesus had his removed by the submission of His parents, surely God can decide on what He does and doesn’t want His covenant people to do. It was in effect until Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection and now the fulfillment is in Christ so is no longer needed as a sign.

Thanks for the support of women in ministry. That is very much appreciated.

By definition, Christianity is founded upon the life and teachings of Christ Jesus. We should look no further than the Sermon on the Mount. There we will learn all we need.

God is LOVE. How does love apply to the circumcision of males, young or old? What is ‘loving’ in the act of painfully removing a healthy and hugely beneficial part of a male’s genitals which God gave him as his birthright?

By the way, I totally support the concept of women in ministry. They have as much value as men in ministry - possibly more.

Christopher

“Through the fall of Adam sin entered into the world, and all men in Adam have consequently sinned. For the paternal sperm (i.e., seed) conveys the corruption from generation to generation.” (Luther: in A History of Christian Thought, J. L. Neve, Muhlenberg Press, Philadelphia, 1946, vol.1, p 230.)

Luther also made a clear difference between the seed of the woman and the seed of man so that it was only the male seed that passed inherited sin to all of us.

While I am not a Calvinist, I certainly can quote from Calvin too:

“We are not corrupted by acquired wickedness but do bring an innate corruptness from the very womb. . . All of us, therefore, descending from an impure seed come into the world tainted with the contagion of sin.” (Calvin, Institutes, Book 2, Chapter 1, Section 5.)

Ulrich Zwingli said:

“Original sin is inherited, a sickness (morbus est et conditio: it is both the disease itself and the condition), but not a guilt. . . . It is the root of all individual sins and it makes self-redemption impossible.” (Zwingli: in Neve, ref.2, p.244.)

This original sin cannot be “washed away” by baptism as the Catholics suppose. It can only be dealt with by Jesus Christ who alone came through the seed of the woman.

UK: from 35% to about 3% (less than 1% among Christians)
Australia: 90% to 12.6%
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans, less than 1% among whites)
South America and Europe: never above 3% (includes many of the world’s most Christian countries eg Poland, Spain, Italy, Brazil)

UK: from 35% to about 3% (

Why is that only the USA seems to find medical needs for circumcisions at a later age though? The rate is 1 in 150 in the UK. It just looks like they’re trying to find reasons to do it. The other possibility is that parents used to be told to retract their sons’ foreskins, and this itself causes problems.

It’s actually less painful to be circumcised when you’re older - you can use general anaesthetic, and you don’t have to separate the foreskin (in Scotland, hospitals will perform circumcision for Muslims, but the child must be at least six months old, so that general anaesthetic can be used). In most countries, 99% of Christian males are intact, and 99% of them have no problems. If there is a problem and they need to be circumcised, then it’s easier to have it done later on anyway.

drops in male circumcision:
USA: from 90% to 56%
Canada: from 47% to 14%
UK: from 35% to about 3% (

i just think that’s ‘amazing’ - but Paul was all about forwarding the gospel …. i think that this illustration of two opposite ‘practices’ in Ch 15 and 16 of Acts is a warning to us on taking too ‘literally’ specific local actions taken in the early church such as stuff that is discussed in the gender debate… ???

on a purely ‘medical’ note… on my dad’s side, my hubby’s side and my brother in law’s side there have been at least one or two circumcisions done after the age of 10 due to serious infections. God has given me three daughters - so i am thankful it’s a ‘non’ issue for us! but these poor blokes went through circumcision at ages where it was not only painful but very embarrasing… not sure about official stats - but ‘local’ ones seem to be a lot higher than ‘1%’. (based purely on medical, not religious reasons that is!)

God bless you all!

kerryn

Thanks for quoting the commentaries. I have Keil and Delitzsch’s also. Good quotes.

BTW Don, a couple people have asked if you knew about the Christian egal discussion forum at http://equalitycentral.com/. Seems you are getting a name for being a Christian scholar with a heart of grace.

Although I rarely appeal to commentaries because I believe that the Bible is the final say, let me copy a few words from other commentaries showing that the foreskin is indeed identified with sin, corruption, evil, body of sins etc.

John Wesley’s explanatory notes:

Jer 4:4 - Circumcise - Put away your corruptions. Heart - Let it be inward, not outward in the flesh only.

In John Gill’s exposition of the Bible he says:

and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; this is the true spiritual circumcision; and they that are possessed of it are the circumcision, the only truly circumcised persons; and they are such who have been pricked to the heart, and thoroughly convinced of sin; who have had the hardness of their hearts removed, and the impurity of it laid open to them; which they have beheld with shame and loathing, and have felt an inward pain on account of it; and who have been enabled to deny themselves, to renounce their own righteousness, and put off the body of the sins of the flesh: and though men are exhorted to do this themselves, yet elsewhere the Lord promises to do it for them, Deu_30:6, and indeed it is purely his own work; or otherwise it could not he called, as it is, “circumcision without hands”, and “whose praise is not of man, but of God”, Col_2:11, and the reason of this exhortation, as before, is to convince those Jews, who were circumcised in the flesh, and rested and gloried in that, that their hearts were not circumcised, and that there was a necessity of it, and they in danger for want of it; as follows:

lest my fury come forth like fire; to which the wrath of God is sometimes compared, Nah_1:6 and is sometimes signified by a furnace and lake of fire, even his eternal wrath and vengeance

Matt Henry’s commentary on the bible says:

(Jer_4:4): “Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the foreskin of your heart. Mortify the flesh and the lusts of it. Pare off that superfluity of naughtiness which hinders your receiving with meekness the engrafted word, Jam_1:21. Boast not of, and rest not in, the circumcision of the body, for that is but a sign, and will not serve without the thing signified. It is a dedicating sign. …Circumcision is an obligation to keep the law; lay yourselves afresh under that obligation. It is a seal of the righteousness of faith; lay hold then of that righteousness, and so circumcise yourselves to the Lord.”
II. The danger they are threatened with, which they are concerned to avoid. Repent and reform, lest my fury come forth like fire, which it is now ready to do, as that fire which came forth from the Lord and consumed the sacrifices, and which was always kept burning upon the altar and none might quench it; such is God’s wrath against impenitent sinners, because of the evil of their doings.

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown’s commentary says:

Jer 4:4 -
Remove your natural corruption of heart (Deu_10:16; Deu_30:6; Rom_2:29; Col_2:11).

Keil & Delitzsch Commentary:

“Circumcise you to the Lord” is explained by the next clause: remove the foreskins of your heart. The stress lies in (Hebrew text won’t copy); in this is implied that the circumcision should not be in the flesh merely. In the flesh all Jews were circumcised. If they then are called to circumcise themselves to the Lord, this must be meant spiritually, of the putting away of the spiritual impurity of the heart, i.e., of all that hinders the sanctifying of the heart; see in Deu_10:16. The plur. (Hebrew text won’t copy) is explained by the figurative use of the word, and the reading (Hebrew text won’t copy), presented by some codd., is a correction from Deu_10:16. The foreskins are the evil lusts and longings of the heart.

NET notes:

9 tn Heb “Circumcise yourselves to the LORD and remove the foreskin of your heart.” The translation is again an attempt to bring out the meaning of a metaphor. The mention of the “foreskin of the heart” shows that the passage is obviously metaphorical and involves heart attitude, not an external rite.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary

Jer 4:3-4 -
Jeremiah then used two metaphors to show the need for repentance. The first metaphor pertained to farming. Just as a farmer does not sow his seed on unplowed ground, so God does not sow His seed of blessing in unrepentant hearts. The men of Judah and… Jerusalem needed to break up the unplowed ground of their hearts through repentance. The second metaphor came from the Jewish practice of circumcision. Circumcision was a sign of being under God’s covenant with Israel (cf. Gen_17:9-14). The men, though circumcised physically, needed to circumcise their hearts so that their inward condition matched their outward profession (cf. Deu_10:16; Deu_30:6; Jer_9:25-26; Rom_2:28-29).
Unless Judah did exercise true repentance — not just outward profession — God’s wrath would be released and would burn like fire against the people. And once God’s wrath was released no one could quench it.

Deu 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn.
Deu 30:6 And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.
–
And the other 2 refs to heart circumcision:
Jer 4:4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD; remove the foreskin of your hearts, O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest my wrath go forth like fire, and burn with none to quench it, because of the evil of your deeds.”
Rom 2:29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

So I can agree with all these verses and you can, we just see them differently, we explain the metaphor differently. Being a Greek thinker, I used to believe that one should seek for the ONE truth and then try to convince everyone of it. As I become more Hebraic, I realize that on SOME things there are many truths as there are many ways to see it. I try as much as possible for each to find their own truth and let each be. Of course, each should have enough info on context and culture to make an informed decision about what works for them. And always be willing to learn more and change, when more evidence comes in. And of course we all seek to have a relationship with God, who is Truth, capital T.