Once Wasn’t Enough? (1)
At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make for yourself flint knives and circumcise again the sons of Israel the second time.” Joshua 5:2 NASB
The second time – “I’ve never really understood this story,” said my rabbi friend here in Parma. “It just goes on and on, repeating the same event—and it doesn’t make a lot of sense.” Quite amazing for an orthodox rabbi to admit, but I can see his point. The phrase, mol et-b`nei-Israel she•nit (“circumcise the sons of Israel a second time”) seems very strange. Let’s consider some possible explanations and objections.
Explanation 1: This doesn’t really mean each individual male in the camp. Some of them were already circumcised as noted in verse 5. Most of the adults had died, but babies who were in the company when they crossed the Sea of Reeds were circumcised in Egypt before the exodus. Certainly, these men cannot be circumcised again. It’s difficult to imagine how that could be done. The words “second time” are only a statement of general application, a summary of a group action. It’s like saying, “Solomon built the Temple.” He really didn’t build it himself. He just directed the action. So, Joshua is to direct the action of circumcising all those not already circumcised.
Objection: While it is probably true that some of the remaining community were already circumcised, this raises a question about all the rest of the community. Why wouldn’t they have been circumcised during the wilderness sojourn? If “second time” only applies to those not already circumcised, what is the explanation for not practicing circumcision after the exodus? If circumcision is so important for the covenant community, why would it need to be done again?
Explanation 2: This means that during the forty-year hiatus, one not already circumcised when they left Egypt needed to be circumcised, so God instructed Joshua to circumcise all these males now. This was a “second time” general rule. Now that they are entering the Land, God wants all the males circumcised.
Objection: If this is true, then it means that during the forty years in the wilderness the Passover could not have been celebrated since circumcision is one of the participant’s requirements. Furthermore, it means that the Levities could not have acted as priests for the same reason. Finally, circumcision seems so important that God attempted to kill Moses for his lack of compliance with his own son, so why would He grant blanket immunity to every male for forty years? There is no text to support this claim [but there are Talmudic statements]. In addition, we have Moses’ command that the Passover be celebrated every year, not every year after entering the Promised Land.
Explanation 3: The reason circumcision was not required during the forty year period (and Passover was not celebrated) is because the Israelites never knew when they would be on the move again, so there was no way to plan for the proper ritual after eight days [This is the explanation in the Talmud]. Therefore, all these rituals were set aside until the Israelites crossed into the Promised Land when their journey was finished. Now they had to be enforced.
Objection: If God provides food and water in the desert, if He gives them clothes that don’t wear out, if He controls the desert climate with a cloud and pillar, then why isn’t it possible for Him to miraculously heal the infant who has been circumcised? The entire wilderness journey is one big miracle, so why is this an exception? Furthermore, this Talmudic explanation allows that the Levites continued to practice the ritual during the forty years, apparently without harm, so that they could fulfill their roles as priests.[1] If this is so, then why isn’t it the same for all the other males?
We should note that this story is the only place that implies circumcision was not practiced during the wilderness journey. There is no verse that directly states such a fact, or the cessation of the Passover. The Talmud infers this from the phrase “second time.”
Further objection: This instruction is repeated with some clarifying additions several times in the current context (verses 5:3-8). It seems rationally illogical. If all the males were circumcised when they crossed into enemy territory, then the army of Israel was virtually out of commission for several days. In fact, verse 8 admits this. What is the point of waiting until the people would be vulnerable to perform this ritual?
One more: Circumcision is the defining physical mark of the covenant community. If it were not practiced during the forty years, then effectively these people were not part of the covenant. That seems impossible since God never dismisses them as foreigners or pagans.
No wonder my rabbi friend finds this story difficult.
Finally, we must consider YHVH’s scathing remark after Joshua fulfills this instruction (v. 9) “Then the Lord said to Joshua, “Today I have rolled away the shame of Egypt from you.” Does this mean that when Israel was in Egypt they never circumcised their male infants? If it doesn’t mean that, what is the “shame” that has been removed? How can circumcision be connected to the “shame of Egypt” unless the people stopped circumcising males while they were in Egypt (something v. 5 denies)? And if that’s true, then how was the first Passover celebrated?
An alternative:
What if this isn’t one story? What if it’s the redacted confluence of several different sources, combined because they are about the same event, but each with its own perspective. That would explain the repetitious instructions and the oddity of one view of the group followed by a clarified smaller group. Nothing explains the Talmudic inference that circumcision and Passover were postponed during the wandering in the desert. In fact, that assumption (used to justify “second time”) seems contradictory to Moses’ instruction about teaching the children about the Exodus and the fact that during the first and second years, the Passover ritual was performed. The whole text is very odd—and very controversial.
But, never fear. As soon as we get to the 10th verse, things go back to “normal.” Then you can just pretend verses 2 to 9 never really mattered, right?
Topical Index: circumcision, second time, Joshua 5:2
[1] cf. Midrash Rabba Deuteronomy 3:6 and see Tractate Yevamot 72a
