Journal: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal
Volume: DBSJ 29:1 (NA 2024)
Article: Does Baptism Replace Circumcision? A Comparative Analysis
Author: Peter J. Goeman

DBSJ 29 (2024) p. 79

Does Baptism Replace Circumcision? A Comparative Analysis

Peter Goeman1

Many theologians believe that there is an obvious connection between circumcision and baptism. This belief is perhaps most prevalent in the Reformed paedobaptist community, but it also exists among some Reformed Baptists. For the Reformed paedobaptist, the belief that baptism has replaced circumcision is a critical argument in support of infant baptism. Thus, the majority of this article will interact with the Reformed paedobaptist literature on the subject.

John Calvin summarized the typical Reformed argument when he wrote the following:

Now we can see without difficulty the similarity and difference of these two signs. The promise…is the same in both, namely, that of God’s fatherly favor, of forgiveness of sins, and of eternal life. Then the thing represented is the same, namely, regeneration. In both there is one foundation upon which the fulfillment of these things rests. Therefore, there is no difference in the inner mystery, by which the whole force and character of the sacraments are to be weighed. What dissimilarity remains lies in the outward ceremony, which is a very slight factor, since the most weighty part depends upon the promise and the thing signified. We therefore conclude that, apart from the difference in the visible ceremony, whatever belongs to circumcision pertains likewise to baptism.… By this it appears incontrovertible that baptism has taken the place of circumcision to fulfill the same office among us.2

Similarly, Zacharias Ursinus, who represented the generation after Calvin, noted in his Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, “Baptism occupies the place of circumcision in the New Testament, and has the same use that circumcision had in the Old Testament.”3

DBSJ 29 (2024) p. 80

Some more recent theologians, like Robert Booth, connect circumcision and baptism so closely that they assume any argument against infant baptism is also an argument against infant circumcision. Booth writes, “This clear connection between the two covenant signs of circumcision and baptism creates a difficult problem for opponents of infant baptism, for any argument against infant baptism is necessarily an argument against infant circumcision.”4

The above citations are but a few of the many statements from Reformed paedobaptists about the connection between circumcision and baptism. There is remarkable unity among Reformed paedobaptists on this point. The idea that bapti...