Question: 

I have a question about something you said in a CD on Science and God I got from IPI.  You stated that circumcision was done on the eighth day due to Vitamin K levels being 120% above normal during this period.  And thus making the procedure safer to save the Hebrew boys for Gods purpose, correct?  You also stated that there are some health reason related to circumcision… ie  A certain cancer being prevented by circumcision.  This also increasing the probability of survival of the Hebrew nation.  But why would it not be a requirement for the early Christians as well?  I know circumcision also had perhaps a symbolic meaning and making the early Christians do it would perhaps be confusing.  But the health risks of cancer would still be there correct? 

Answer:

As I am sure you are aware, those who are under the "law of Christ" are not under the law of Moses.  Colossians 2:16-19 tells us that we are no longer judged by obedience to the Law of Moses.  Jesus did not cancel the law of Moses, but he fulfilled it, making us no longer liable to obey these commands (Matthew 5:17-18).  Paul reminds us in Galatians 2:21 that righteousness is not gained through the law (of Moses).  Like Colossians 2 tells us, these laws (Sabbath, animal sacrifies, circimcision and so forth) were a mere shadow of the reality we have in Christ.  Specifically, Paul tells us that circumcision in Judaism is a foreshadow of baptism in the New Testament (Collossians 2:11-12).  The Jews became part of physical Israel by physical circumcision, while be become part of spiritual Israel (the church) through spiritual circumcision, which is baptism.

For all these reasons, Christians are definitely not required to obey the Old Testament laws such as circumcision of male children.  Salvation is no longer a matter of obeying a litany of physical laws such as are found in Old Testament. Having said that, you raise the question of the health benefits of circumcision.  Even if God no longer requires Christians to circumcise their sons on the eighth day, would it not still be a good idea to circumcise.  A similar question could be asked with regard to particular kinds of meat.  If it is of health benefit to avoid certain kinds of meat, why did God not require Christians to avoid shellfish and carnivores?  The answer is that physical health is not the key.  The key issue for God is not physical health but spiritual health.   In the New Testament we have spiritual "laws" and principles.  Generally the Old Testament "shadows" are about the physical, whereas their New Testament equivalents are about the spiritual.  We are, of course, free to take the Old Testament advice on types of meat and even on circumcising our children, but it is no longer a matter of law.

Is male circumcision of great health value today?  I would say that the health benefit today is far less than what it was during the time of the ancient Jews.  First of all, most of us take regular showers or baths.  Second, if one is a Christian, then one will not be taking part in the risky sexual behavior whose danger might be partially reduced by male circumcision.  Although there might be less chance of cancer, this is a relatively rare type.  I believe the health advantage of circumcision is relatively small today.  However, if I were asked for my personal advice, I would suggest parents circumcise their male children, but it certainly is not a requirement of Christianity, and besides, there may be cultural implications in certain countries of which I am not aware.  Bottom line, we have freedom in Christ (Galatians 5:1), and you are free to do this or not, but God would not want us to impose this as law.

John Oakes, PhD