Is circumcision always a good thing, or can it be a sin?

[Thera]

I was watching another poll thread titled "Circumcision", where the question was "Why must we be circumcised?" The options were "To be saved" or "To keep the law". In addition to the first of these options being an outright heresy and the second close behind it, who knows what the author expected women to do! Perhaps he was taking Ecclesiastes 7:28 too far? Anyway, despite being asked to include other options in the poll, he did not, so I decided I would try and create a less biased poll, which was not only open to one gender and was more scripturally sound.

As Christians know, circumcision was a commandment of God to Abraham and all his descendants - all the males had to be circumcised. When Jesus came and fulfilled all of the law, all the demands of the Old Covenant, including circumcision, were fulfilled in Him. So although some now say the Law (and/or circumcision) is obsolete, I think that they really mean it is fulfilled in Christ (the New Covenant is in Him and through Him).

Paul had some damning words for those trying to compel believers to be circumcised in Galatians, despite the fact it was non-negotiable for one to have his or her males circumcised under the Old Covenant. But the same Paul had circumcised Timothy to help witness to the Jews, as Timothy's mom was Jewish but hadn't done the bris herself. In modern times, as with many other laws in the Old Testament, circumcision is said to improve hygiene, and is recommended by the World Health Organisation as a health measure for males (which also benefits their wives). So to me, like many things, whether Christians should circumcise their males depends on motive.

 

[Lost4words]

If we not meant to have that 'skin' then God would have created man without it

 

[RDKirk]

Paul had some damning words for those trying to compel believers to be circumcised in Galatians, despite the fact it was non-negotiable for one to have his or her males circumcised under the Old Covenant. But the same Paul had circumcised Timothy to help witness to the Jews, as Timothy's mom was Jewish but hadn't done the bris herself. In modern times, as with many other laws in the Old Testament, circumcision is said to improve hygiene, and is recommended by the World Health Organisation as a health measure for males (which also benefits their wives). So to me, like many things, whether Christians should circumcise their males depends on motive.

It appears that Paul might have had multiple reasons, but salvation would not be among them.

 

[1213]

Is circumcision always a good thing, or can it be a sin?

I think it depends on what is the reason to do so. If person doesn’t reject God and doesn’t have wrong reason for it, then I think it is not a sin.

 

[Hieronymus]

It's not always a good thing, but it's not a 'sin' as far as i can tell.

 

[Tolworth John]

There is only one reason and that is on the grounds of health, if the foreskin is infected or it is too large preventing the passing of urine or for any other medical reason.

 

[Thera]

If we not meant to have that 'skin' then God would have created man without it

I guess the counter to this is that if the excess skin was so important, why did God command circumcision in the Old Testament?

However, I'm pleased that all so far seem agreed that it has nothing to do with keeping the Law, which is impossible at best, and a fool's errand if one attempts.