Abstract
Circumcision was the sign of a covenant in which God promised offspring, and promised blessings to and through those offspring, placed on the organ that produced offspring, given to the promised offspring of a man whose whole life story cried out for offspring. Or to put it another way - one which makes sense of the sign being given to males only - it was the sign of an inherited promise, given to the heirs, on the organ that would produce further heirs.
Baptism contains none of this "offspring" imagery; it pictures being cleansed and being raised by faith with Christ.
Therefore circumcision was for males physically born into the covenant family, and baptism is for those spiritually born again into the covenant family.
Context
As a Reformed Baptist, one of the few areas where I differ from our Presbyterian brothers is on baptism. In a nutshell, Presbyterians argue as follows:
- Old Covenant circumcision was given to the (male) babies of believers
- New Covenant baptism takes the place of circumcision
- Therefore baptism should be given to the babies of believers
There are many arguments for and against this chain of reasoning, and the correspondence between circumcision and baptism is itself debatable.
But in all the discussion, one question seems neglected, and it's a question any child might ask: "why circumcision?" In other words, why was that the Old Covenant sign in the first place?
The sign of circumcision probably had multiple meanings: cleansing, identity, and a curse for covenant breakers. But some of its features make it a strange choice to convey those meanings. And I think that strangeness points to another important meaning: offspring.
My modest proposal is this: whatever else it meant, circumcision pictured the covenant promises of offspring. And whatever else it means, baptism doesn't.
Some Meanings of Circumcision
I admit that the Bible never explicitly says that circumcision was about offspring.
Perhaps the only clearly stated meaning is that circumcision was a sign of cleansing. Interestingly, this can be seen in a law about fruit trees:
When you come into the land and plant any kind of tree for food, then you shall regard its fruit as forbidden [uncircumcised]. Three years it shall be forbidden [uncircumcised] to you; it must not be eaten. And in the fourth year all its fruit shall be holy, an offering of praise to the LORD. But in the fifth year you may eat of its fruit, to increase its yield for you: I am the LORD your God.
Lev 19:23-25
In these verses, the word translated "forbidden" is literally "uncircumcised", and it contrasts with the fruit's later states of being holy, then ceremonially clean.
Physical circumcision was supposed to mark a people set apart for God, made holy. That's why God said through Moses, who had previously had "uncircumcised lips" (Ex 6:12):
Behold, to the LORD your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth with all that is in it. Yet the LORD set his heart in love on your fathers and chose their offspring after them, you above all peoples, as you are this day. Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn.
Deut 10:14-16
And why Jeremiah warned:
Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will punish all those who are circumcised merely in the flesh-- Egypt, Judah, Edom, the sons of Ammon, Moab, and all who dwell in the desert who cut the corners of their hair, for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart.
Jer 9:25-26
It's why Isaiah spoke of a day in Zion when "there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean" (Isa 52:1).
It's also why Paul said that Christians have a circumcision made without hands (Col 2:11).
Circumcision may also have been a sign of judgment. As God said to Abraham when giving the sign:
Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.
Gen 17:14
Covenants in the Ancient Near East often came with blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience, and the curse was sometimes portrayed via animal sacrifice. Circumcision may have pictured the idea that just as the foreskin was cut off, the uncircumcised would be cut off from God's people.
Paul may have had this cutting off of the unfaithful in mind when he said:
But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!
Gal 5:11-12
Finally, in practice, we see that circumcision was a distinguishing mark for God's people. In 1 Sam 17:26, David says of Goliath, "For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God?" Similar references to Gentiles occur in many places (for example, Jdg 14:3, 1 Sam 14:6, 1 Sam 18:25, 1 Ch 10:4, Eze 31:18).
Other meanings are sometimes proposed which draw from other Ancient Near Eastern cultures, but for the sake of brevity, these will suffice.
Why That Sign?
Many things in Scripture seem strange to us because of our cultural distance. Circumcision may have had positive connotations to the ancient Israelites that we no longer understand.
Even so, if God wanted to represent cleansing, he could have done it another way. He could have commanded his people to shave their heads, or wear red robes, or remove their earlobes. For that matter, he could have had them baptized.
If God wanted to represent judgment, he could have commanded them to tattoo their heads or necks, where "cutting off" would be fatal.
If God wanted a distinguishing mark, he could have chosen something that all Israelites could receive and that everyone could see.
Instead - and think how strange this is - God chose:
- a distinguishing mark... that would almost never be seen
- a sign of cleansing... that only cleansed one part of the body
- a sign of public judgment... on the most private part
- a sign of "cutting off"... that wouldn't kill
- a sign of inclusion... that only half God's people could receive
The last point is especially significant. Did women not need cleansing? Did women not need a sign of inclusion in God's people? Would women not be judged for breaking the covenant? There may have been a reason for women to be excluded from the sign, but surely it would need to be a good reason.
And in fact, women were included in many other things. Both men and women were sprinkled with the blood of the covenant in Exo 24:8, both were to assemble to hear the law in Deu 31:12, both were to eat the Passover in Exo 12:47, both contributed to the temple in Exo 35:29. Yet women were excluded from the covenant sign. What would justify this?
I'd like to suggest that all apparent incongruities make sense in the context where circumcision was given: the life of Abraham and the promises God gave him. The promises of the covenant explain the strangeness of the sign.
Nice To Meet You, Mr. Cursed
The covenant sign of circumcision was first given to a man named "Abram." The ESV footnotes say that "Abram" means "exalted father."
In English, many of us have names whose meanings are obscured by roots in other languages. "George", for example, comes from the Greek word γεωργός, meaning "farmer" (literally "earth worker"). Others have names that were invented recently just to sound good, like "Braxton" or "Renesmee", and don't mean anything in particular. But if your name is an English word like "Joy" or "Hunter", everyone knows what it means and may consider whether it fits you.
Abram's name was like that. His parents named him "Abram" to express their aspirations. Everyone who met him knew what it meant.
"Hi, I'm 'God Is My Help'", Eliezer would say. "Nice to meet you", Abram would reply, "I'm 'Exalted Father'".
But after 75 years of introductions, Exalted Father was still childless.
In a time when infertility might be seen as a curse, Exalted Father's life was one of tragic irony. Maybe there were smirks behind his back.
Then God called him.
Promises Delayed
As we read Abram's story, let's see his name as the ancients would have.
Now the LORD said to [Exalted Father], "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." So [Exalted Father] went, as the LORD had told him, and Lot went with him. [Exalted Father] was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.
Gen 12:1-4
He met the living God! And his cursed life was about to be blessed. "Exalted Father" would be a great name after all.
Even better, in 12:6 God also promised the land of Canaan to this childless nomad and to his future children.
And then... years passed. By Gen 15, when God repeated his promise, Exalted Father was discontent.
After these things the word of the LORD came to [Exalted Father] in a vision: "Fear not, [Exalted Father], I am your shield; your reward shall be very great." But [Exalted Father] said, "O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?" And [Exalted Father] said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.”
Gen 15:1-2
"I'm going to bless you", God said. But Exalted Father replied, in essence, "with what?" All the promises depended on offspring.
In reply, God showed him the stars.
And he brought him outside and said, "Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be." And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
Gen 15:5-6
And yet... more years passed.
By Gen 17, Exalted Father was 99 years old. His wife Sarai was 89. In 18:11 we read that "the way of women had ceased to be with" her. In Rom 4:19 we read that his body "was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old)" and that her womb was barren. Heb 11:11-12 says the same.
Then God appeared again, and he... gave them a child? No. He changed Abram's name. To remove the sad irony? No. To increase the dramatic tension.
The next week down at the well, he'd be saying, "actually, now my name is 'Father of a Multitude.'"
Imagine the looks he'd get!
Circumcision: The Sign Of Offspring
It was in this context - this life aching with unfulfilled hopes and promises - that God gave the covenant sign of circumcision in Genesis 17. Note the repeated references to offspring.
When [Exalted Father] was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to [Exalted Father] and said to him, "I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly." Then [Exalted Father] fell on his face. And God said to him, "Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called [Exalted Father], but your name shall be [Father of a Multitude], for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God." And God said to [Father of a Multitude], "As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."/ Gen 17:1-14 (ESV)
Note the covenant promises God makes here:
- This covenant is with you and your offspring
- Many nations will be your offspring
- The land of Canaan will be the "everlasting possession" (or "inheritance") of you and your offspring
- I'll be your God and the God of your offspring
Clearly, the most important thing here is relationship with God. But that's all wrapped up with a repeated word: offspring.
The promise of offspring was the key to all the others. He couldn't possess the land without offspring - one old man against the Canaanites. He certainly couldn't possess it forever. He couldn't bless the world alone.
And note the sign, which also serves as a covenant condition: "Every male among you shall be circumcised... throughout your generations... Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
So was the sign related to the promise? Here's how I see the connection.
Circumcision was the sign of a covenant in which God promised offspring, and promised blessings to and through those offspring, placed on the organ that produced offspring, given to the promised offspring of a man whose whole life story cried out for offspring. Or to put it another way - one which makes sense of the sign being given to males only - it was the sign of an inherited promise, given to the heirs, on the organ that would produce further heirs.
If that's correct, then this very private sign makes sense. It was a physical reminder of the covenant.
And it pointed forward to Christ, "the offspring to whom the promises had been made" (Gal 3:19), through whom "all the families of the earth shall be blessed" (Gen 12:3).
As he circumcised a boy, I can imagine an Israelite saying "you, son of Abraham, are an heir of God's promises, and you'll be passing them on right here." And he could warn, "he who forsakes God's covenant will not inherit blessings; his heirs will be cut off like your foreskin; he will not be part of blessing the whole world; he will not be connected to the Offspring."
So what does this tell us about baptism in the New Covenant?
A Different Sign for a Different People
In the New Covenant, those Old Covenant promises have been fulfilled. God did make of Abraham a great nation. Kings came from Abraham, and so did prophets and priests.
Gloriously, "the offspring to whom the promises had been made" (Gal 3:19) has come, and through Christ, "all the families of the earth" (Gen 12:3) have been blessed.
As we all know, Jesus, like Jacob, had 12 sons, who became his 12 apostles, the founding members of the 12 Christian tribes. Me, I'm a Matthewite.
No! That's not what happened. Jesus had no sons, and his 12 apostles established no tribes. Jesus was "cut off out of the land of the living" (Is 53:8), and yet "he shall see his offspring" (Is 53:10) - not those who are born as his descendants, but those who are born again by faith.
In Christ, the Jew-Gentile distinction is no more (Gal 3:27-28). The church is "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession" (1 Pe 2:9, compare Exo 19:5-6) - but not a physical nation. The church is a people from every nation, in every nation. Christian aren't building an earthly kingdom one baby at a time, looking forward to the Messiah coming to rule it. We aren't passing down a promise of heirs to our heirs.
Instead, we proclaim to our children, our neighbors, and all nations that the Messiah has come and the doors are open to everyone.
And the sign has changed.
Circumcision was a sign of cleansing and inheritance, given to the physical heirs. Baptism is a sign of cleansing and resurrection, given to the spiritually resurrected.
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:3-4
Freed from the need to picture offspring and inheritance, the sign of baptism is public, visible, and given to both men and women.
The sign is different, and we Baptists believe that the recipients should be different: not the physical offspring of God's people, but all (and only) those who are born again.
Wrapping Up
There are many questions I haven't addressed. Indeed, many books have been written on this subject, and my own previous drafts had too many tangents to be readable. But the core of my proposal is simple: the sign of the covenant reflects the promises of the covenant.
Circumcision was about offspring. It was the sign of an inherited promise, marking physical heirs who would receive the promises given to Abraham. Whatever else it signified - cleansing, covenant identity, judgment - its distinctive features, namely, that it was given only to males and on the organ of reproduction, point to its connection with the promise of offspring, and ultimately, with The Offspring.
The absence of those features in baptism is not arbitrary; it reflects the change in the New Covenant, where we no longer perpetuate the line of promise, but die and rise with the Offspring, the king born in Bethlehem.
If you disagree, I'd like to challenge you to consider what else may explain the strange features of circumcision and the story of God's covenant with Abraham.
Of course, this is a secondary issue, a matter of discussion between believers. But in my view, if we see the Old Covenant sign rightly, it not only signifies cleansing, but points beyond the people descended physically from Abraham, and points forward to those who inherit his promise by faith; it points to the Offspring who would "purify for himself a people for his own possession" (Titus 2:24)