Acts 16, 3, circumcised

[endaman]

Hi, i’m reading through Acts

3 and Paul, who wanted to have him as a travelling companion, had him circumcised. This was on account of the Jews in the locality where everyone knew his father was a Greek.

Why did Paul have Timothy circumcised? Should it not have mattered because of Christ?

-EM

 

[Della]

From Haydock’s Bible Commentary:

Ver. 3. Circumcised him. Not to obstruct the conversion of the Jews; and because it was still lawful to observe the Jewish ceremonies, though the obligation of keeping the old law had ceased. (Witham) — This St. Paul did in order to gain the Jews, and make Timothy acceptable to them. (Tirinus) — To the Jew, says he, (1 Corinthians ix. 20.) I became a Jew, that I might gain the Jews. If he refused to circumcise Titus, in order to vindicate the Christian’s independence of the Mosaic ceremonies; he now submits to the observance of them, to shew there is nothing of itself bad in them, and that they might without crime be practised, till time by degrees had abolished them. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxii. ad S. Hieronymum)

Circumsion is still okay for Christians. Chritians don’t do this for religious reasons but only health now days. St. Paul was doing what he himself had recommended–that of taking the weaknesses of others into consideration instead of flaunting our freedoms before them, as in the case of eating meat offered to idols. He says idols are nothing, so the meat is fine to eat, but if a brother takes offense, it’s better to not eat the meat so your weaker brother won’t be scandalized.

Also, the first Council of Jerusalem ordered the Gentile Christians to not eat meat that had been strangled, per OT disciplines. They did this to assuage the Jewish believers who would have been scandalized. But, being only a discipline and not part of the moral law, which does not change, it no longer applies or matters. I hope that helps.

 

[SonCatcher]

Timothy, because of his unique parentage, was regarded as a Jew to the Jews and a Greek to the Greeks. The Greeks couldn’t have cared less whether he was circumcised.

The council of Jerusalem addressed its instructions to the Gentile Christians. There is good reason to believe that Jewish Christians were expected to continue following Jewish customs. If not, Jewish non-Christians would have been scandalized, thinking the Jewish Christians had abandoned their faith, which is not the case. Rather, they came into a more perfect form of it.

It is on account of these that Timothy was circumcised, to prevent scandal among them.

 

[bzkoss236]

Christians don’t do this for religious reasons but only health now days.

Well… that is debatable, considering the healthcare we have today, it isn’t really necessary unless there is an emergency. I would venture to say it is more for money now-a-days.

Anyways, to the OP: I will agree that in that time it was done for health reasons, since it was harder to stay clean in that area in that era, and it could cause serious health issues. So if one was to travel, especially in the way that they did, this would make it harder to stay clean if you didn’t have anywhere to bathe. Jesus made it clear that it was no longer a covenant, because he established a new covenant with baptism and of Himself.

 

[TimothyH]

Timothy, because of his unique parentage, was regarded as a Jew to the Jews and a Greek to the Greeks. The Greeks couldn’t have cared less whether he was circumcised.

The council of Jerusalem addressed its instructions to the Gentile Christians. There is good reason to believe that Jewish Christians were expected to continue following Jewish customs. If not, Jewish non-Christians would have been scandalized, thinking the Jewish Christians had abandoned their faith, which is not the case. Rather, they came into a more perfect form of it.

It is on account of these that Timothy was circumcised, to prevent scandal among them.

John, actually, the Greeks would have been disgusted by circumcision.

Greeks were much more open to public nakedness than were Jews but the exposed glans of the penis was abhorrent to them. They were disgusted by circumcision which exposed the tip of the male organ. Have a look at the first chapter of 1 Maccabees when you get a chance.

Alexander the Great conquered the entire known world, including Israel, and wanted to hellenize all people. He wanted the entire world speak Greek, worship like the Greeks and act like the Greeks. The Greeks built gymnasiums in Jerusalem where they exercised naked, and built public baths. Devout Jews were disgusted by this but many Jews wanted adopted the ways of the Greeks and commited complete apostasy, going so far as to have their circucision surgically reversed.

He authorized them to observe the ordinances of the Gentiles. So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom, and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covenant. They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil. (1 Maccabees 1:13-15)

This is in Scripture. They actually had their circucision surgically reversed! The history of the surgical “Correction” of circumcision - a procedure known as Epispasm - is discussed in an article by Robert G. Hall at cirp.org/library/restoration/hall1/.

Greeks cared a great deal about circumcision.

-Tim-

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Probably St Paul wanted him to be able to join him in teaching in the synagogues; so he would have to conform to Jewish teaching.

 

[thistle]

Well… that is debatable, considering the healthcare we have today, it isn’t really necessary unless there is an emergency. I would venture to say it is more for money now-a-days.

Anyways, to the OP: I will agree that in that time it was done for health reasons, since it was harder to stay clean in that area in that era, and it could cause serious health issues. So if one was to travel, especially in the way that they did, this would make it harder to stay clean if you didn’t have anywhere to bathe. Jesus made it clear that it was no longer a covenant, because he established a new covenant with baptism and of Himself.

Here in the Philippines (85% Catholic country) all (well I can’t certify all but you know what I mean) male Catholic children are circumcised.

 

[jcrichton]

Hi, i’m reading through Acts

3 and Paul, who wanted to have him as a travelling companion, had him circumcised. This was on account of the Jews in the locality where everyone knew his father was a Greek.

Why did Paul have Timothy circumcised? Should it not have mattered because of Christ?

-EM

…it is interesting that St. Paul speaks about “having a word with St. Peter” on a similar matter but he himself seems to be double dipping… what we have to take into account is that Jesus’ followers had been immersed in Judaism… Jesus’ Ministry lasted only but a few years (some say between 2 1/2 and 3 years)… so it is very human of the early Christians to still consider some of the Jewish customs as natural as receiving the Holy Eucharist is to Catholics… conversely, it was only after the constant rejection, exile, and persecution that the Apostles stopped gathering in the synagogues in their attempt to Preach the Gospel!

I think those impending changes is the reason why Jesus revealed that there was much that He still needed to convey to them (the Church) but that they were not yet ready to Receive it–He would send the other Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, and it would be Him Who would bring them to the fullness of Truth!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[po18guy]

From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 3. Circumcised him. Not to obstruct the conversion of the Jews; and because it was still lawful to observe the Jewish ceremonies, though the obligation of keeping the old law had ceased. (Witham) — This St. Paul did in order to gain the Jews, and make Timothy acceptable to them. (Tirinus) — To the Jew, says he, (1 Corinthians ix. 20.) I became a Jew, that I might gain the Jews. If he refused to circumcise Titus, in order to vindicate the Christian’s independence of the Mosaic ceremonies; he now submits to the observance of them, to shew there is nothing of itself bad in them, and that they might without crime be practised, till time by degrees had abolished them. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxii. ad S. Hieronymum)

 

[endaman]

Here in the Philippines (85% Catholic country) all (well I can’t certify all but you know what I mean) male Catholic children are circumcised.

This is interesting, I wonder if there are many other countries where circumcision is practiced by Catholics? Or for that matter do many Catholics in western countries practice circumcision?

-EM

 

[thistle]

This is interesting, I wonder if there are many other countries where circumcision is practiced by Catholics? Or for that matter do many Catholics in western countries practice circumcision?

-EM

I’m not saying its done for religious reasons. I’m just saying it is the custom here in a Catholic country.

 

[Della]

I’m not saying its done for religious reasons. I’m just saying it is the custom here in a Catholic country.

It’s the custom in the USA, as well. Most male babies are circumcised for health reasons, not for religious reasons. In Paul’s day it meant something more, but in modern times, unless one is Jewish, it doesn’t separate people in Christian countries by religious observance as it once did.

 

[LucyLight]

It’s the custom in the USA, as well. Most male babies are circumcised for health reasons, not for religious reasons. In Paul’s day it meant something more, but in modern times, unless one is Jewish, it doesn’t separate people in Christian countries by religious observance as it once did.

It certainly has been the custom in the USA. According to the CDC however, the percentage of males circumcised dropped to 54.7 % in 2010.The numbers have been declining and it may be less than 50% that are now circumcised. So this custom is becoming less popular in the U.S.

cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6034a4.htm?s_cid=mm6034a4_w

 

[PJM]

=endaman;9821157]Hi, i’m reading through Acts

3 and Paul, who wanted to have him as a travelling companion, had him circumcised. This was on account of the Jews in the locality where everyone knew his father was a Greek.

Why did Paul have Timothy circumcised? Should it not have mattered because of Christ?

-EM

Paul was [is] many splendend things. He absolutely had to have a keen sense of political awareness. This is what prompted this action.

Were Paul taching and presching today, your understanding MIGHT have more merit? But that too would depend on where and to whom he was preaching.

In FIANL analysis Paul took this action in order that CHRIST, not Timothy would be the MAIN topic:thumbsup:

God Bless,
Pat /PJM