Gen 17:23-27 | KingComments | STEP | Abraham obeys God and circumcises his house. He does not wait with this, but does it “in the very same day” (cf. ). He brings, spiritually speaking, his whole house upon the foundation of death. That is the only way to receive the blessing promised by God. Later there is talk of the circumcision of all Israel ( ). This is just as necessary if Israel is to inherit the blessing of the promised land. In this context, it is good to pay attention to the doctrine that ‘baptism has replaced circumcision’. This is how it says in the Heidelberg Catechism, at Sunday 27, question 74. Now that is not the Bible and therefore it is important that we check whether what is said there is in accordance with the Bible. Of the reference texts quoted in Sunday 27, question 74, only Colossians 2:11-12 contains something about a connection between ‘circumcision’ and ‘baptism’. We should therefore read this text carefully, because it is possible that we read what it does not say. This is the case when we read the text from the idea that the church replaced Israel. As a result, it is said that God has now made His covenant with the church instead of with Israel. Added to that, circumcision is given a meaning that is alien to what God means by it when He institutes the circumcision. This institution we find here in Genesis 17. Here it becomes clear that circumcision is the sign of God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants. The offspring of Abraham is the people of Israel. Every Israeli boy must be circumcised on the eighth day after his birth. Those who believe that God has a covenant with the church in this time say that the sign of this is no longer circumcision, but baptism. Therefore, it is said, children of parents going to church must be baptized. After all, these children must be included in God’s covenant with the church. In order to prove this reasoning, they appeal to Colossians 2 ( ), among others. Now let us look at that text. The Bible text reads: “In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism” ( ). First of all, it is striking that there is talk of “a circumcision made without hands”. So it is not the same act as with Israel. That would make room for baptism, because that is really something else than circumcision. But we continue to read: “in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ”. Here we find the explanation of circumcision. It is about “the removal of the body of the flesh”. This means that the sinful flesh is judged. This happened when Christ underwent judgment on the cross ( ). The believer is freed of what used to characterize him: the flesh. It is ‘removed’, it may no longer play a role. And how did that happen? “By the circumcision of Christ.” Of course, this can never refer to what literally happened to Him on the eighth day ( ). To what it must be applied then? As said: To the judgment He received on the cross. Here it becomes clear that circumcision has not only a literal, but also a spiritual meaning ( ). If we now continue to read in Colossians 2, we see that “the circumcision of Christ” is followed by “buried with Him in baptism” ( ). That is also clear: After death’s judgment on the flesh, the burial follows in baptism. If we read carefully, the conclusion is simple: the circumcision is not the burial, but the judgment. Thus, the circumcision is not replaced by baptism, but baptism as a picture of the burial follows the circumcision.

‏ Genesis 17:23-27

Abraham Circumcises His House

Abraham obeys God and circumcises his house. He does not wait with this, but does it “in the very same day” (cf. Psa 119:60). He brings, spiritually speaking, his whole house upon the foundation of death. That is the only way to receive the blessing promised by God. Later there is talk of the circumcision of all Israel (Jos 5:2). This is just as necessary if Israel is to inherit the blessing of the promised land.

In this context, it is good to pay attention to the doctrine that ‘baptism has replaced circumcision’. This is how it says in the Heidelberg Catechism, at Sunday 27, question 74. Now that is not the Bible and therefore it is important that we check whether what is said there is in accordance with the Bible. Of the reference texts quoted in Sunday 27, question 74, only Colossians 2:11-12 contains something about a connection between ‘circumcision’ and ‘baptism’.

We should therefore read this text carefully, because it is possible that we read what it does not say. This is the case when we read the text from the idea that the church replaced Israel. As a result, it is said that God has now made His covenant with the church instead of with Israel.

Added to that, circumcision is given a meaning that is alien to what God means by it when He institutes the circumcision. This institution we find here in Genesis 17. Here it becomes clear that circumcision is the sign of God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants. The offspring of Abraham is the people of Israel. Every Israeli boy must be circumcised on the eighth day after his birth.

Those who believe that God has a covenant with the church in this time say that the sign of this is no longer circumcision, but baptism. Therefore, it is said, children of parents going to church must be baptized. After all, these children must be included in God’s covenant with the church. In order to prove this reasoning, they appeal to Colossians 2 (Col 2:11-12), among others.

Now let us look at that text. The Bible text reads: “In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism” (Col 2:11-12). First of all, it is striking that there is talk of “a circumcision made without hands”. So it is not the same act as with Israel. That would make room for baptism, because that is really something else than circumcision. But we continue to read: “in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ”. Here we find the explanation of circumcision.

It is about “the removal of the body of the flesh”. This means that the sinful flesh is judged. This happened when Christ underwent judgment on the cross (Rom 8:3). The believer is freed of what used to characterize him: the flesh. It is ‘removed’, it may no longer play a role. And how did that happen? “By the circumcision of Christ.” Of course, this can never refer to what literally happened to Him on the eighth day (Lk 2:21). To what it must be applied then? As said: To the judgment He received on the cross. Here it becomes clear that circumcision has not only a literal, but also a spiritual meaning (Rom 2:28-29).

If we now continue to read in Colossians 2, we see that “the circumcision of Christ” is followed by “buried with Him in baptism” (Col 2:12a). That is also clear: After death’s judgment on the flesh, the burial follows in baptism.

If we read carefully, the conclusion is simple: the circumcision is not the burial, but the judgment. Thus, the circumcision is not replaced by baptism, but baptism as a picture of the burial follows the circumcision.