Gharib
I want Khilafah back
"it is obligatory for men to be circumcised."
Why?
The Benefits of Male Circumcision read that.
Your god make a design error?
i see a statement, but no proof.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
"it is obligatory for men to be circumcised."
Why?
Your god make a design error?
i see a statement, but no proof.
lol,why god wants circumcision to happen?
if that skin is unnecessary and is to be circumcised, then god wont be placing skin over that.
muslims believes god exists for the reason he created everything perfect, so no alterations is to be done to our body, doing so it means god lack skill in creating body perfectly. So circumcision is unislamic.
of course it is an error according to you people, so you are doing circumcision.
he placed the skin so that we may circumcise and have low risks to contracting sexualy trasnmitted diseases, one example HIV.
lol , you should be proud for a god like that.
I AM PROUD OF MY GOD. I LOVE HIM MORE THAN ANYTHING THAT EXISTS.
i see a statement but no proof.
you say your god is the real one, then tell me why are you cutting your nails when they grow? is that because your god has made an error?
lol , surely your god is great, lol
if god dont want humans to struggle of diseases, he wont be placing unnecessary skin. big contradiction in islam.
Well, but Esalam, you need your heart to survive, but you do not really need a foreskin to survive. Surely god could have created you without the foreskin if it would have made for a more perfect design.
I only see two possibilities here - either man is not a perfect desing, or circumcision should not be needed (at least not as the default action - only if some trouble were to occur, like with a heart failure).
Your analogy with nails is also not accurate as while nails grow back, your foreskin wont. So it would be more like surgically removing your nails so they can never grow back. You'd wonder what the point of that would be wouldn't you?
wow really. so how many times are you going to change your statements?
why shouldn't he place the foreskin? no one would be able to have a circumcision if there was no foreskin.
i changed my statements? only added more words, meaning is the same.
there are problems from the foreskin. circumcision was not practised up until the time of Abraham (as). i posted a link in the previous page, go chech it out.
so why cut them at all. you'd wonder why we cut them even though they grow back.
Allah knows why he has created the foreskin. and man with his knowledge has discovered that it should be cut off. same exalple as the appendix? why is it there? it is known that people who do not have problems with it go and remove it, just like those who do have problems with it. how do you explain that?
Hey, it doesn't really matter - I'm not going to start debating if there are problems or not - even if there are, you remove the foreskin long before any symptoms are (could be) present. Something that is so messed up that it practically needs to be removed at birth clearly doesn't shout "perfect creation!" to me.
Because unlike the foreskin, the part of the nail that we cut is not living tissue! Same goes for hair.
Well, but you know that I have a very simple explanation for all that, don't you?
so you are telling a muslim what islam is about?
if i use the same logic as you then why did your god (if he exists) create the heart when so many people have heart attacks and die due to heart failure? so many people require new hearts but alteration to the body is not allowed according to you. how does your god explain that?
Which was kind of the point... if placing the skin there in the first place makes is more probably to catch diseases, and then you place it there so that some people may take it off and lower the risks of them catching those diseases...wow really. so how many times are you going to change your statements?
why shouldn't he place the foreskin? no one would be able to have a circumcision if there was no foreskin.