Circumcision... Again - 1 Corinthians 7:18-28

There is one aspect of inter-faith marriage that Paul addresses that was pretty unique to the situation in ancient Corinth, and that was marriages between devout Jews and Christians. Because Christ lived and taught among the Jews first before the gospel went to the gentiles, there was a majority of Christian converts who came from Judaism. This would mean that Jewish couples who were married and only one spouse converted to Christianity would suddenly find themselves in inter-faith relationships.

Anciently the Jews had a very strict policy of marrying within their own religion, which led to a distain for gentiles and an off-limits attitude about marriage with them. However, now that converts are learning to abandon the notion of “Jew” and “Gentile” and instead consider themselves all Christians, the topic of marriage within previously forbidden groups needs to be addressed.

In verse 14, Paul asks at the end, “else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” I had absolutely no idea what this meant, and turns out I wasn’t the only one. The gospeldoctrine.com notes, “As Joseph Smith was working on the translation of the Bible, he was already familiar with Mormon’s doctrine on the subject of infant baptism, ‘I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children… little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world’ (Moroni 8:9,12). He knew that the Corinthian children could not be considered unclean and received section 74 of the Doctrine and Covenants in connection with this verse.”

D&C 74:2-7 says, “Now, in the days of the apostles the law of circumcision was had among all the Jews who believed not the gospel of Jesus Christ. And it came to pass that there arose a great contention among the people concerning the law of circumcision, for the unbelieving husband was desirous that his children should be circumcised and become subject to the law of Moses, which law was fulfilled. And it came to pass that the children, being brought up in subjection to the law of Moses, gave heed to the traditions of their fathers and believed not the gospel of Christ, wherein they became unholy.

Wherefore, for this cause the apostle wrote unto the church, giving unto them a commandment, not of the Lord, but of himself, that a believer should not be united to an unbeliever, except the law of Moses should be done away among them, That their children might remain without circumcision and that the tradition might be done away, which said that little children are unholy; for it was had among the Jews; But little children are holy, being sanctified through the atonement of Jesus Christ; and this is what the scriptures mean.” 

What I’m getting out of this is that Paul was advocating marriage only between people who agreed to raise their children within the gospel, as opposed to the Law of Moses. Even though the topic is specifically circumcision, that is more the overall theme. If parents were to have their sons circumcised then it would indicate to the children that the law of Moses was to be the prescribed religion to follow which would make the gospel meaningless in the lives of the kids as they grew up.

The article quotes Genesis 17:14 which tells the Jews, “the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul should be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.” The article continues, “What could be more serious for a believing Jew than to have his son grow up uncircumcised? On the other hand, the Christian wife believed that the necessity for such things was done away in Christ.”  

It’s about who’s religion will take priority in the lives of the children that result from a marriage, and even though this is about Jews and Christians specifically, we can apply that to any inter-faith marriage modernly as well. Even within differing Christian sects, these same issues can play out. And it’s not just a matter of the children not being raised in the gospel, but it’s also about promoting peace in the home and unity within the married couple. Differing opinion on religion is such a contentious way to begin a marriage. I mean, marriage is hard enough as it is, but you put different religions, cultures, languages, expectations, etc. in there and it’s a recipe for disaster.

Another point that Paul makes in using the example of circumcision to highlight the differences in inter-faith marriages, is that little children are holy regardless of the status of their foreskin. If we think about it, in ancient Judaism, having your son circumcised at 8 days old didn’t suddenly confirm a lifetime commitment to righteousness for the baby. The circumcision is really done to for the parents to commit to raising that child in the religion with vigor. It is a commitment from the parents much more than it is a promise from the child. 

It seems like Paul talks a lot about being contented with our lot in life and learning “let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.” He also advocates for people to marry if they want, but a lot of the other stuff that he talks about, I don’t really understand.