Forsaken the Foreskin

[Koldo]

And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush; and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said: 'I will turn aside now, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.' And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said: 'Moses, Moses.' And he said: 'Here am I.'

The text clearly says it was God speaking from the bushes.

I wasn't there... I won't say I know for sure.

So? The same could be said about every event in the bible.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

What I want to know is it purely coincidental to why circumcision was done, or did they know the health and sexual benefits, or what the heck.

I cant see some deity really giving a hoot about it, or was it because Jewish people were advanced to understand why we do it and because the Gentiles did not, it was something the deemed spiritual, after all they all prayed to the same deity?

The scripture really says nothing beyond exclusiveness that man felt, when writing the scripture.

What was actually going on and where the circumcision act even came from is what I want to know.

There are so many things that are strange in origin. Who was the first person to be circumcised and what gave them that wild, crazy idea?

Same with who was the first person to look at the milk coming out of cows and decide to drink it?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What I want to know is it purely coincidental to why circumcision was done, or did they know the health and sexual benefits, or what the heck.

I cant see some deity really giving a hoot about it, or was it because Jewish people were advanced to understand why we do it and because the Gentiles did not, it was something the deemed spiritual, after all they all prayed to the same deity?

The scripture really says nothing beyond exclusiveness that man felt, when writing the scripture.

What was actually going on and where the circumcision act even came from is what I want to know.

It has nothing to do with health or "sexual benefits". It was something the Egyptian priesthood started and then it filtered down through the classes and other cultures picked up on it. Circumcision has been a cultural practice in parts of Africa and the Middle East for thousands of years. Who knows who thought it up or exactly why. Some anthropologists say that it probably started as a way for males to emulate the bleeding of female genitals, as a rite of passage into manhood as menstruation is a rite of passage into womanhood.

 

[Skwim]

It has nothing to do with health or "sexual benefits". It was something the Egyptian priesthood started and then it filtered down through the classes and other cultures picked up on it. Circumcision has been a cultural practice in parts of Africa and the Middle East for thousands of years. Who knows who thought it up or exactly why. Some anthropologists say that it probably started as a way for males to emulate the bleeding of female genitals, as a rite of passage into manhood as menstruation is a rite of passage into womanhood.

When I was in the Army Reserves one of the guys in my platoon was going to get married, but a few months before event he planned to get circumcised for health reasons.
We tried to reason with him, but . . . . . *snip* *snip* *snip*

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

When I was in the Army Reserves one of the guys in my platoon was going to get married, but a few months before event he planned to get circumcised for health reasons.
We tried to reason with him, but . . . . . *snip* *snip* *snip*

Sad. I feel bad for his penis. It's sad how some people are brainwashed into mutilating themselves.

 

[Huey09]

Sad. I feel bad for his penis. It's sad how some people are brainwashed into mutilating themselves.

Mutilate is a strong word isn't it? :sarcastic What about west africans who do ritual scarring as a sign of adulthood and are often quite proud of them? But I won't say more since the last time opened up a HUGE can of worms:cover:

 

[metis]

Moses to God: "Did I hear you right, Lord? The Arabs get all the oil and us Jews gotta cut off the ends of our what?!"

 

[Sleeppy]

Sad. I feel bad for his penis. It's sad how some people are brainwashed into mutilating themselves.

Being Catholic- you don't believe in the covenant of Abraham?

 

[Sleeppy]

The text clearly says it was God speaking from the bushes.



So? The same could be said about every event in the bible.

It also says the angel is the one who appeared in the flames. If I know correctly- the messengers and prophets both speak in God's name.

 

[Desert Snake]

Being Catholic- you don't believe in the covenant of Abraham?

Christians in general don't circumcise.

Judaism, Islam, some other religions I would guess, circumcise.

'Cultural' circumcision among Christians or non-Christians in America is it's own thing, and I don't know why they do it.

 

[Sleeppy]

Christians in general don't circumcise.

Judaism, Islam, some other religions I would guess, circumcise.

'Cultural' circumcision among Christians or non-Christians in America is it's own thing, and I don't know why they do it.

Not the point. Abraham's offspring have/had a covenant requirement to be circumcised. Jesus was circumcised, for this reason. If we're calling it sad mutilation, and the result of brainwashing-- we're also negating Abraham's covenant. As a Catholic Christian, this should be especially hard to do.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Being Catholic- you don't believe in the covenant of Abraham?

There's a religious aspect and also a socio-cultural aspect. I think the circumcision thing was mostly a way of explaining a cultural practice that was already long in existence. As with most things in the Bible, the symbolism, metaphor and allegory tends to be the most important thing. I also don't believe that the OT is literal history (not all of it, anyway). Do I really believe that God ordered the Jews to cut off a part of their penis in order to have a Covenant with Him? Or that He was going to kill Moses for not circumcising His son? Or that God killed Onan for not getting his late brother's wife pregnant? Or that God ordered the Israelites to commit genocide? No. The OT is very tribalistic and has a somewhat limited view of God that is developed as it progresses until the true nature of God is finally fully revealed in the Person of Jesus Christ.

God never really meant for humans to be circumcised, anyway. Adam was not circumcised. Neither were other righteous males like Abel, Noah and Enoch. The circumcision of the flesh is a more crude and superficial foreshadowing of the circumcision of the heart. The New Covenant in Jesus Christ releases us from such barbaric things. The Apostles recognized that and so released Christians from the practice of cutting off a part of their bodies to be one of God's people.

 

[Desert Snake]

Not the point. Abraham's offspring have/had a covenant requirement to be circumcised. Jesus was circumcised, for this reason. If we're calling it sad mutilation, and the result of brainwashing-- we're also negating the truth behind Abraham's covenant.

Well, you'll notice that I don't refer to circumcision in that sort of manner. You do have a point in that, the Covenant is requiring such, if the commandment isn't negated, by other commandments or theology, it stands.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Not the point. Abraham's offspring have/had a covenant requirement to be circumcised. Jesus was circumcised, for this reason. If we're calling it sad mutilation, and the result of brainwashing-- we're also negating Abraham's covenant. As a Catholic Christian, this should be especially hard to do.

Catholic theology allows for a very wide range of views. You find a vast array of views within the Catholic Church on various matters, but we all have certain things in common.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Mutilate is a strong word isn't it? :sarcastic What about west africans who do ritual scarring as a sign of adulthood and are often quite proud of them? But I won't say more since the last time opened up a HUGE can of worms:cover:

Yeah, that's another topic.

 

[Sleeppy]

There's a religious aspect and also a socio-cultural aspect. I think the circumcision thing was mostly a way of explaining a cultural practice that was already long in existence. As with most things in the Bible, the symbolism, metaphor and allegory tends to be the most important thing. I also don't believe that the OT is literal history (not all of it, anyway). Do I really believe that God ordered the Jews to cut off a part of their penis in order to have a Covenant with Him? Or that He was going to kill Moses for not circumcising His son? Or that God killed Onan for not getting his late brother's wife pregnant? Or that God ordered the Israelites to commit genocide? No. The OT is very tribalistic and has a somewhat limited view of God that is developed as it progresses until the true nature of God is finally fully revealed in the Person of Jesus Christ.

God never really meant for humans to be circumcised, anyway. Adam was not circumcised. Neither were other righteous males like Abel, Noah and Enoch. The circumcision of the flesh is a more crude and superficial foreshadowing of the circumcision of the heart. The New Covenant in Jesus Christ releases us from such barbaric things. The Apostles recognized that and so released Christians from the practice of cutting off a part of their bodies to be one of God's people.

Your Church does not believe that the OT was completely accurate?

 

[Desert Snake]

Your Church does not believe that the OT was completely accurate?

It isn't just the C.Church, Christians generally don't circumcise, many people of the book don't circumcise.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Your Church does not believe that the OT was completely accurate?

The Church has never viewed the OT to be taken as completely literal. For example, we don't believe that the creation story is literal. Truth exists on far deeper levels than just the superficial. But whether God did actually order the Israelites to practice circumcision or it was a form of justification for a practice that already existed, the point is that it was not God's original intention and was a foreshadowing of something far greater.

 

[Desert Snake]

Jesus was circumcised, for this reason.

I'm pretty sure Jesus said it was fine to not circumcise.

 

[Sleeppy]

The Church has never viewed the OT to be taken as completely literal. For example, we don't believe that the creation story is literal. Truth exists on far deeper levels than just the superficial. But whether God did actually order the Israelites to practice circumcision or it was a form of justification for a practice that already existed, the point is that it was not God's original intention and was a foreshadowing of something far greater.

I agree.