Does the bible mention circumcision?


6 Answers

Corey The Goofyhawk Profile
Corey The Goofyhawk , Epic has no limit, answered

Genesis 17 is about the Covenant of Circumcision that God made with Abraham. Also, check out this link for several other references. Good luck!

Ray Dart Profile
Ray Dart answered

This is easy to google, and it does. It is generally ritualistic.

Cookie Hill Profile
Cookie Hill answered

Yes the bible does speak about circumcision at Genesis 17:1,26,27 God gave the command to Abraham when he was 99 years old, it was to serve as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham. The covenant was a  promise from God that through Abraham,great blessings would eventually come to " all the families on the ground" Genesis 12:2,3

AnnNettie Paradise Profile

Yes indeed. Circumcision was a sign of the covenant that Jehovah had made with Abraham. (Genesis 17:9-13) However, in time, the nation of Israel proved unworthy of that trust by rejecting the true Seed of Abraham, Jesus Christ. Hence, they were rejected by God, and their state of circumcision ceased to have any meaning in God’s eyes. However, some Christians in the first century C.E. Insisted that circumcision was still a requirement of God. (Acts 11:2, 3; 15:5) Because of this, the apostle Paul sent Titus to “correct the things that were defective” in various congregations. (Titus 1:5, 10, 11)

Paul’s counsel is still applicable. It would certainly be contrary to the Scriptures for a true Christian to suggest that someone else’s child be circumcised. Instead of being “a busybody in other people’s matters,” a Christian leaves such personal decisions for parents to make. (1 Peter 4:15)

Ty Hibb Profile
Ty Hibb answered

Covenant of Circumcision. The covenant of circumcision was made in 1919 B.C.E., when Abraham was 99 years old. Jehovah made the covenant with Abraham and his natural seed; all males of the household, including slaves, were to be circumcised; anyone refusing was to be cut off from his people.  Later, God stated that the alien resident who desired to eat the passover (one who wished to become a worshiper of Jehovah with Israel) would have to circumcise the males of his household.  Circumcision served as a seal of the righteousness Abraham had by faith while in the uncircumcised state, and it was a physical sign of the covenant relationship of Abraham’s descendants through Jacob, with Jehovah.  God recognized circumcision until the ending of the Law covenant, in 33 C.E.  Even though physical circumcision was carried on under the Law, Jehovah repeatedly showed that he was more concerned with its symbolic significance, counseling Israel to ‘circumcise the foreskin of their hearts.’—

thanked the writer.
Charles Davis
Charles Davis commented
Please explain how Jesus could fulfill an everlasting law? Gen 17:13 states:

" So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant."

So either an unchanging God changed his mind, or was not stating what he really meant. Christians love to pick and chose what they want to read, and circumcision was not a law to be "fulfilled", it was an "EVERLASTING" law. But, on another note, it did not apply to gentiles, as gentiles were not a part of the land covenant to begin with.
Ty Hibb
Ty Hibb commented
You will always be on the opposite side when it comes to understanding the bible. It is not up for argumentation. I live you with your position and you will get no argument from me. I think you have the right to see and think as you do, fortunately so do i. The bible may explain why we don't see things the same way. So without any insults I leave you with this scripture.

1Cor 2:13-15 “ These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom but with those taught by the spirit, as we explain spiritual matters with spiritual words. But a physical man does not accept the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot get to know them, because thy are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines all things, but he himself is not examined by any man.
Charles Davis
Charles Davis commented
There was no argumentation, it was simply how you can explain a law the Yahweh at one point stated (in what you say was 1919 BCE) the law was everlasting, then in 33 CE it was fulfilled, and not everlasting.

To state I have to believe to understand it, is not an argument (not meaning argumentative) to address my understanding the bible, I just don't read things in where they don't exist. I read the bible apples for apples, oranges for oranges, not apples mean peaches, and oranges mean watermelons.

Answer Question