Circumcision and God

[Heresis]

According to the Bible and other religious texts in the Judeo-Christian vein of theology (and elsewhere), humans were created in the image of the almighty creator. Assuming that the god in this example is omniscient and perfect in every way, as is also stated in the Bible, one can assume that the human body is free of flaws. But apparently, this is not the case, according to Genesis 17:10:

"This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

So, granting the premise that there is a god and that humans were made in his image, why must this supposed perfect creation be altered at all, never mind in such a horrendous way as hacking away at the genitals of young children?

This idea seems very illogical to me.

[cnorman18]

G'day CNorman18.

Well, that's an enlightening response.

The "medical community" once hounded out of practice another doctor that dare suggested that surgeons should wash their hands prior to doing surgery.

Oh, please. Equating obvious, proven ignorance with honest differences of medical opinion?

You know as well as I do that circumcision has some inarguable BENEFITS. Fewer infections, more easily maintained hygiene, avoidance of later difficulties (my cousin, whom I've already mentioned, had to be circumcised as an adult; his foreskin was too tight.) It is even being promoted as a way to significantly reduce the incidence of AIDS in central Africa. On the other hand, other than the extremely rare circumstance of infection and even more rare instances of botched surgery, there are NO later ill effects from a successful circumcision.

Some doctors DO oppose circumcision; but those that don't, don't for very good reasons.

But even if it was "the consensus", that would be argument ad populum, as is "99+% of them will tell you".

Nope. Not ad populum; scientific consensus, which is a perfectly valid argument. So is my 99+% remark; that's 99+% of the very people you present as wronged victims, not 99+% of everybody.

Also, your belief that it is "Jewish ritual" that makes genital mutilation a-okay shows a tendency to ignore what is occurring if it is part of your chosen religious tradition.

Uh, no. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. The issue is not that it's a religious ritual, but that it's a different procedure, done much more quickly and with significantly less pain.

Thank you for your reply.

Thank you for twisting and misrepresenting it.

You know, it's not your opposition to circumcision that I find annoying; it's your arrogant assumption that there are absolutely no reasons NOT to be opposed to it, and that supporting it is somehow prima facie evidence of barbarism, immorality, callous disregard of infants' welfare, and crude, stupid superstition. Perfectly OK to disagree with people; but I don't think it's appropriate to figuratively spit on them while you do it.

[Heresis]

There are two problems here.

First, there is much debate regarding what is meant by "created in the image of the almighty creator". However, practically no one believes it referes to man's physical appearance.

Second, the purpose of circumcision is not to make one any more or less perfect, but rather to provide a memorable sign of the covenant with Avraham. By the way, do you find all removal of the flesh to be "hacking away" or just circumcision?

Well, we definitely aren't god-like in our mental abilities, if that's what you're suggesting.

To say "practically no one believes that it refers to man's physical appearance" is speculation, as there are people that do believe that, so, what is your point here?

To your second point: that's the best way god could come up with for making the covenant memorable? By having grown men restrain a child, perforate his foreskin with a sharp rock, and then have another grown man suck the foreskin off with his mouth? Seriously?

By god declaring that unless the foreskin of males is removed, they cannot actually be part of his "family", then yes, he is implying that his creation doesn't meet his own specifications. How hard would it have been for him to just create us sans foreskin?

Does it not occur to you that God purposely put the foreskin there so that you would not have to cut off something else?

No, it didn't. Why would that be the logical conclusion to draw from that statement?

As I said, why would we have to cut ANYTHING off? Isn't baptism or just acceptance of the scripture enough? Obviously not.

Such brutal practices are evidence that man made god and not the other way around.

As far as circumcision resulting in better hygiene, that is debatable. If that is the case, as you claim, why then would god create us in such an inefficient way?

[pax]

why would we have to cut ANYTHING off??

Why not?

[Moses Yoder]

According to the Bible and other religious texts in the Judeo-Christian vein of theology (and elsewhere), humans were created in the image of the almighty creator. Assuming that the god in this example is omniscient and perfect in every way, as is also stated in the Bible, one can assume that the human body is free of flaws. But apparently, this is not the case, according to Genesis 17:10:

"This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

So, granting the premise that there is a god and that humans were made in his image, why must this supposed perfect creation be altered at all, never mind in such a horrendous way as hacking away at the genitals of young children?

This idea seems very illogical to me.

Actually circumcision is no longer required of Christians according to Paul. I can look up the scripture if required, somewhere in Acts. Circumcision in OT days was done as a sign that you believed God. Those who didn't believe God wouldn't be circumcised because they didn't believe it was right, just as you don't.

Circumcision in OT times would have been a way to reduce infection, as they would not have taken frequent baths and definitely would not have had showers and antibacterial soap. In fact, much of the Jewish law in OT when investigated prevents them from eating unhealthy items and keeps them safer. Such as the law to not eat pork, which in OT days would have been difficult to cook thoroughly and would have caused the intake of harmful bacteria, worm eggs, etc.

I am circumcised, and from my understanding I enjoy a better sex life because of it. Removing the foreskin makes the penis more sensitive during sex.

So far as the question about why the foreskin was put there in the first place, I wonder how the finite human mind thinks it can understand an omniscient God? Your question reminded me of this scripture in Job.

The Lord Reveals His Omnipotence to Job
38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:

2 Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.

4 Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

8 Or who shut in the sea with doors,
When it burst forth and issued from the womb;
9 When I made the clouds its garment,
And thick darkness its swaddling band;
10 When I fixed My limit for it,
And set bars and doors;
11 When I said,
This far you may come, but no farther,
And here your proud waves must stop!

12 Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
And caused the dawn to know its place,
13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth,
And the wicked be shaken out of it?
14 It takes on form like clay under a seal,
And stands out like a garment.
15 From the wicked their light is withheld,
And the upraised arm is broken.

16 Have you entered the springs of the sea?
Or have you walked in search of the depths?
17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you?
Or have you seen the doors of the shadow of death?
18 Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.

19 Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory,
That you may know the paths to its home?
21 Do you know it, because you were born then,
Or because the number of your days is great?

22 Have you entered the treasury of snow,
Or have you seen the treasury of hail,
23 Which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
For the day of battle and war?
24 By what way is light diffused,
Or the east wind scattered over the earth?

25 Who has divided a channel for the overflowing water,
Or a path for the thunderbolt,
26 To cause it to rain on a land where there is no one,
A wilderness in which there is no man;
27 To satisfy the desolate waste,
And cause to spring forth the growth of tender grass?
28 Has the rain a father?
Or who has begotten the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
And the frost of heaven, who gives it birth?
30 The waters harden like stone,
And the surface of the deep is frozen.

31 Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades,
Or loose the belt of Orion?
32 Can you bring out Mazzaroth[a] in its season?
Or can you guide the Great Bear with its cubs?
33 Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
Can you set their dominion over the earth?

34 Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,
That an abundance of water may cover you?
35 Can you send out lightnings, that they may go,
And say to you, Here we are!?
36 Who has put wisdom in the mind?
Or who has given understanding to the heart?
37 Who can number the clouds by wisdom?
Or who can pour out the bottles of heaven,
38 When the dust hardens in clumps,
And the clods cling together?

39 Can you hunt the prey for the lion,
Or satisfy the appetite of the young lions,
40 When they crouch in their dens,
Or lurk in their lairs to lie in wait?
41 Who provides food for the raven,
When its young ones cry to God,
And wander about for lack of food?

[pax]

Circumcision was the sign of God's Covenant with Abraham and his descendants. It had nothing to do with the belief of the one being circumcised considering the one being circumcised was 8 days old. The belief was supplied by the parents or guardians of the 8 day old male child.

New Covenant = new sign = Baptism.

[McCulloch]

why would we have to cut ANYTHING off??

Why not?

This was reported as a one-liner violation, but I'll answer the question anyway.

If God created us as very good, then it makes no sense that there would be any portion of the anatomy which when cut off in infancy would provide a benefit to a group of people.

[McCulloch]

According to the Bible and other religious texts in the Judeo-Christian vein of theology (and elsewhere), humans were created in the image of the almighty creator. Assuming that the god in this example is omniscient and perfect in every way, as is also stated in the Bible, one can assume that the human body is free of flaws. But apparently, this is not the case, according to Genesis 17:10:

"This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

So, granting the premise that there is a god and that humans were made in his image, why must this supposed perfect creation be altered at all, never mind in such a horrendous way as hacking away at the genitals of young children?

This idea seems very illogical to me.

Yes. Your idea seems very illogical to me as well.

I am glad we agree. The idea of a god making a covenant with a genetic group of people involving the rite of circumcision does not make sense at all.

[Moses Yoder]

Circumcision was the sign of God's Covenant with Abraham and his descendants. It had nothing to do with the belief of the one being circumcised considering the one being circumcised was 8 days old. The belief was supplied by the parents or guardians of the 8 day old male child.

New Covenant = new sign = Baptism.

Actually there were many people circumcised as adults, when they believed God and joined the Jews. You can still join the Jews today, and if you are a male and not circumcised you must become circumcised in order to join them. If interested in joining the Jews, there are instructions here; http://www.beingjewish.com/conversion/b ... ewish.html

Of course, you will also have to learn to read Hebrew.

[Heresis]

why would we have to cut ANYTHING off??

Why not?

What kind of an answer is that? Why not hack off parts of your body? Well, it's considered inhumane for one, and second, self-mutilation and mutilation in general is pretty painful to the person experiencing it.

The Bible also holds that "if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off" and the same is said of the eyes. I doubt that you hold these passages in as high regard as you do the ones referring to genital mutilation, unless you have cut your hands off and gouged out your eyes, in which case, there is nothing I can say to convince you of the evil being perpetrated in these verses.

The fact that no Christian in this thread can actually agree on what the exact purpose of circumcision is, seems to prove my point.

Circumcision in OT times would have been a way to reduce infection, as they would not have taken frequent baths and definitely would not have had showers and antibacterial soap. In fact, much of the Jewish law in OT when investigated prevents them from eating unhealthy items and keeps them safer. Such as the law to not eat pork, which in OT days would have been difficult to cook thoroughly and would have caused the intake of harmful bacteria, worm eggs, etc.

That seems to be a very archaic way of solving the problem of bad hygiene. Couldn't god just as easily have explained the germ theory of disease or, I don't know, that bathing is essential to staying healthy? Why go straight for the genitals? The same with pork. Could he not just have explained the proper way to store and handle such meat? These practices evolved from ignorance of the natural world, again, proof that god had no part in the creation of these rituals.

I am circumcised, and from my understanding I enjoy a better sex life because of it. Removing the foreskin makes the penis more sensitive during sex.

That's actually not true. Studies have shown that uncircumcised males are actually MORE sensitive during sexual activities because of the friction caused by the foreskin, among other things.

[scourge99]

G'day CNorman18.

Well, that's an enlightening response.

The "medical community" once hounded out of practice another doctor that dare suggested that surgeons should wash their hands prior to doing surgery.

Oh, please. Equating obvious, proven ignorance with honest differences of medical opinion?

You know as well as I do that circumcision has some inarguable BENEFITS. Fewer infections, more easily maintained hygiene, avoidance of later difficulties (my cousin, whom I've already mentioned, had to be circumcised as an adult; his foreskin was too tight.) It is even being promoted as a way to significantly reduce the incidence of AIDS in central Africa. On the other hand, other than the extremely rare circumstance of infection and even more rare instances of botched surgery, there are NO later ill effects from a successful circumcision.

Some doctors DO oppose circumcision; but those that don't, don't for very good reasons.

But even if it was "the consensus", that would be argument ad populum, as is "99+% of them will tell you".

Nope. Not ad populum; scientific consensus, which is a perfectly valid argument. So is my 99+% remark; that's 99+% of the very people you present as wronged victims, not 99+% of everybody.

Also, your belief that it is "Jewish ritual" that makes genital mutilation a-okay shows a tendency to ignore what is occurring if it is part of your chosen religious tradition.

Uh, no. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. The issue is not that it's a religious ritual, but that it's a different procedure, done much more quickly and with significantly less pain.

Thank you for your reply.

Thank you for twisting and misrepresenting it.

You know, it's not your opposition to circumcision that I find annoying; it's your arrogant assumption that there are absolutely no reasons NOT to be opposed to it, and that supporting it is somehow prima facie evidence of barbarism, immorality, callous disregard of infants' welfare, and crude, stupid superstition. Perfectly OK to disagree with people; but I don't think it's appropriate to figuratively spit on them while you do it.

In relation to male circumcision, can you explain what YOU think of other religious and cultural practices that are performed on children.
1) female hoodectomy (a type of female circumcision)
2) tattooing
3) ear gauging
4) ear piercing
5) lip plating