Wasn't it Paul, rather than Jesus, who said that?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Forsaken the Foreskin
- Thread starter The Sum of Awe
- Start date
Wasn't it Paul, rather than Jesus, who said that?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Not entirely sure.
Huey09
He who struggles with God
It was paul, but James the just and Peter also were said to have waned in that genitles didn't have to follow the dietary laws or require circumcision.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
I thought Jesus inferred it. I don't have a Bible at hand, so finding a verse isn't easy. I like using /actual/ Bible to quote from.
Christianity and circumcision: Why Christians need not be circumcised
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
Jesus was circumcised. He says of circumcision that it is of Moses, passed down from the fathers- namely Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He compares it to his making a man whole on the Sabbath.
He also says, in John 5
`I have come in the name of my Father, and ye do not receive me; if another may come in his own name, him ye will receive; how are ye able -- ye -- to believe, glory from one another receiving, and the glory that [is] from God alone ye seek not? `Do not think that I will accuse you unto the Father; there is who is accusing you, Moses -- in whom ye have hoped; for if ye were believing Moses, ye would have been believing me, for he wrote concerning me; but if his writings ye believe not, how shall ye believe my sayings?'
Also in John 6
Jesus answered and said to them, `This is the work of God, that ye may believe in him whom He did send.' They said therefore to him, `What sign, then, dost thou, that we may see and may believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers the manna did eat in the wilderness, according as it is having been written, Bread out of the heaven He gave them to eat.' Jesus, therefore, said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread out of the heaven; but my Father doth give you the true bread out of the heaven; for the bread of God is that which is coming down out of the heaven, and giving life to the world.'
`Verily, verily, I say to you, He who is believing in me, hath life age-during; I am the bread of the life; your fathers did eat the manna in the wilderness, and they died; this is the bread that out of the heaven is coming down, that any one may eat of it, and not die.
----Gives you more of an idea of what Jesus thinks about Moses. He says that Moses did not give them bread out of heaven- which would be true anyway you look at it. Jews are more inclined to say God Himself sent manna out of heaven. But Jesus also makes the point that the Israelites were sustained by something perishable, nevertheless being from heaven, and perished.
He also says, in John 5
`I have come in the name of my Father, and ye do not receive me; if another may come in his own name, him ye will receive; how are ye able -- ye -- to believe, glory from one another receiving, and the glory that [is] from God alone ye seek not? `Do not think that I will accuse you unto the Father; there is who is accusing you, Moses -- in whom ye have hoped; for if ye were believing Moses, ye would have been believing me, for he wrote concerning me; but if his writings ye believe not, how shall ye believe my sayings?'
Also in John 6
Jesus answered and said to them, `This is the work of God, that ye may believe in him whom He did send.' They said therefore to him, `What sign, then, dost thou, that we may see and may believe thee? what dost thou work? Our fathers the manna did eat in the wilderness, according as it is having been written, Bread out of the heaven He gave them to eat.' Jesus, therefore, said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread out of the heaven; but my Father doth give you the true bread out of the heaven; for the bread of God is that which is coming down out of the heaven, and giving life to the world.'
`Verily, verily, I say to you, He who is believing in me, hath life age-during; I am the bread of the life; your fathers did eat the manna in the wilderness, and they died; this is the bread that out of the heaven is coming down, that any one may eat of it, and not die.
----Gives you more of an idea of what Jesus thinks about Moses. He says that Moses did not give them bread out of heaven- which would be true anyway you look at it. Jews are more inclined to say God Himself sent manna out of heaven. But Jesus also makes the point that the Israelites were sustained by something perishable, nevertheless being from heaven, and perished.
kashmir
Well-Known Member
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*
why does it seem like it was up to you and who ever else to decide what is right or wrong for someone else to do with their own body?
The health/sexual benefits are valid and it's really no one business to tell anyone else to "reason" with someone on what they do with their body.
Mutilation?
Brain washed?
Never met a guy yet that considered it those things, nor have ever met a female that considers me to be mutilated.
Never ever seen a church that requires it of men either.
In fact 3 of my cousins are atheist, were not raised in a religious household and all their boys are circumcised.
I am sure there are some that do circumcise because of religious beliefs, but that still doesn't make it brainwashing.
Just because people believe in God, doesn't automatically make them brainwashed, after all, how many religious people actually follow the word of God fully and completely?
WBC is an example of being self brainwashed, because even they don't follow the word of God, they do what they want and actually ignore most of what Jesus said.
To everyone.....
I wonder what you think of men who get their penis mutilated and reformed into a hole.
Or those that get piercing down there, or their tongue and/or other parts of their body.
Specially those huge rings one puts in their ears, that stretches the loop so bad it can never be the same again.
Is that brainwashing too?
What a about tattoos all over ones body?
Cosmetic surgery?
Breast enhancements?
The list goes on and on of people mutilating their bodies and not a one is does for health purposes and is for self enjoyments.
That's addresses at everyone.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Never said it was up to me or anyone else. However, recognizing that circumcision in adult males has no health benefits that would outweigh the surgical process we all felt it appropriate to try to reason him out of it. It's something friends do for friends: they try to steer them straight when they believe they've gone off track..
And in this case what are they? And believe me, he was hardly so primitive as to neglect proper hygiene, something more easily done on a circumcised penis.
Last edited:
kashmir
Well-Known Member
man, you spend a lot of energy worrying about what someone else does with their body.
Perhaps you should lobby to deem it illegal?
BTW can you explain what risks are involved from someone that has one done, you the side affects?
BTW what you "believe they've gone off track" is pretty empty by itself.
I also gather since he neglected hygiene, he isn't eligible for a circumcision then, by your standards?
"bro, you sure you want to have a circumcision, guys that do, are at risk (?) and the side affects are (?)
I wasn't referring to using religious reasons to circumcise as "brainwashing". I was referring to people making that decision due to ignorance of human genital anatomy and because of superficial cultural reasons like "it looks better".
Are you referring to sex reassignment surgery (SRS)? That is an attempt to treat a real medical condition and is not done for mere cosmetic purposes or health issues that don't exist.
Most tattoos and piercings don't alter the function of an organ. Stretching your earlobe doesn't change the function of your ears or damage it (if done correctly).
kashmir
Well-Known Member
Who the heck does it because it looks better? :sarcastic
Lmao
what difference does that make?
Its mutilation and from what I read, most guys that had it done, wish they never did because their sex life is not what they thought it would be.
In short, organisms are not part of the deal.
And it is cosmetic, because they are trying to alter their physical gender.
Same with breast implants, other than the case of cancer, it's purely cosmetic.
Odd that complete genital mutilation is ok in your eyes, but the removal of a small piece of skin, that makes sex better and has health benefits, you criticize.
Neither does circumcision, and those things are purely cosmetic and you approve of them yet criticize circumcision, which is done for actual positive benefits.
And things people do to their body for cosmetic reasons, are actually a form of brainwashing, as they are convinced they will be more "beautiful for having it done"
It's ok that a person gets their whole body mutilated for cosmetic reasons, can even have their genitalia completely destroyed, yet a tiny piece of skin, is mutilation to you.
Mind boggling.
A lot of people. That's a very common argument I hear for it when debating it.
People who have vaginoplasty SRS are not "men". They're transsexual women. Those people shouldn't have had penises in the first place. Transsexualism is a serious medical problem and hormone therapy and surgery are treatments for it. There are trans women who kill themselves or castrate themselves because their gender dysphoria is so unbearable.
How do you know that circumcision makes sex better? Have you had sex with while having an intact penis and then had sex while having a circumcised penis?
What health benefits? The vast majority of human males, past and present, have intact penises and they're getting along just fine, so are the non-human males that have prepuces. Women have the clitoral hood, which is the same as a foreskin, and they do just fine, too.
Circumcision changes the structure and the function of the penis.
You haven't provided evidence of any of those "positive benefits".
What's mind boggling is your ignorance of what the foreskin is, what transsexualism is and why it's false equivalency to compare the two.
Wow, how did we start talking about transsexualism in a thread about an OT passage. So tired of thread derailments.
So tired of thread derailments.
kashmir
Well-Known Member
so what?
Then if its cosmetic to them, your argument still fails, if you support all other cosmetic procedures.
Scuse me but men who been circumcised get along just fine too.
Figured you would eventually bring the female genitalia into this, which is actual mutilation, done to mutilate, unlike male circumcision.
Dont goal post this, you are the one claiming its mutilation and brainwashing.
Where is your evidence?
Function of the penis?
What function is changed?
I gave examples of actual mutilation, sorry if you cant relate.Wow, how did we start talking about transsexualism in a thread about an OT passage.
Consistency here is not happening.
If people are against circumcision, then don't do it, but to claim its mutilation and brainwashing, first have to prove that, no one has.
It's all emotional pleas.
Plus, huge double standards are valid as well;
It's like "Don't tell me how to live my live, but I get to tell everyone else how to live theirs"
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
How could one possibly know that?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If one feels that the Torah is at least in some way valid, then I would suggest that they would recognize that circumcision of Jewish boys is also valid. As for gentiles, it is not required by Torah.
To me, if one doesn't believe in being circumcised, then I recommend that they don't get circumcised or have any of your sons be circumcised, and then maybe it's best if they let others make their own decisions.
To me, if one doesn't believe in being circumcised, then I recommend that they don't get circumcised or have any of your sons be circumcised, and then maybe it's best if they let others make their own decisions.
Skwim
Veteran Member
It's kind of amusing that you characterize a passing interest as "worry" so as to fire off a cheap shot---a sign of desperation perhaps? I don't know how your mind works, but pulling up knowledge from memory is a no -brainer. Takes a mere nano-second or two.
Sorry to hear that such an effort evidently requires "a lot of energy" of you.?????
Obviously all this inane blather is a smoke screen cover up your inability to answer a simple question: "What are the health benefits to adult male circumcision." This comes as no surprise of course, and neatly undermines your credibility. Perhaps we can have a more productive conversation after you remove the chip from your shoulder. Until then, have a good day.
so what?
Then if its cosmetic to them, your argument still fails, if you support all other cosmetic procedures.
Scuse me but men who been circumcised get along just fine too.
Figured you would eventually bring the female genitalia into this, which is actual mutilation, done to mutilate, unlike male circumcision.
Dont goal post this, you are the one claiming its mutilation and brainwashing.
Where is your evidence?
Function of the penis?
What function is changed?
I gave examples of actual mutilation, sorry if you cant relate.
Consistency here is not happening.
If people are against circumcision, then don't do it, but to claim its mutilation and brainwashing, first have to prove that, no one has.
It's all emotional pleas.
Plus, huge double standards are valid as well;
It's like "Don't tell me how to live my live, but I get to tell everyone else how to live theirs"
I'm not going to continue this conversation with you unless you stop your inane ranting. I am not your health teacher. I think you mentioned that you're almost 50 years old, and you don't know about the basic anatomy of your own body? That's shameful. That's almost like a woman not knowing what the clitoris is. You can go look up what the foreskin is and what it does. You have not provided any proof at all of these supposed benefits of circumcision and you don't even understand what mutilation is in the first place. Plus, no one told anyone how to live their lives. Stop putting words into people's mouths.
We're far from being on the same page.
Last edited:
If He wanted humans to be circumcised, it stands to reason that He would've created us that way in the first place.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If He wanted humans to be circumcised, it stands to reason that He would've created us that way in the first place.
That's like a close friend of mine who refuses to fly, saying that if God wanted us to fly he would have given us wings instead of arms.
Sometimes He leaves some responsibility to us, and I do tend to believe that this is a consistent theme in scripture. BTW, under halacha, circumcision is the only body piercing/cutting technique involved that's allowed in Judaism, with the exception of health concerns.