Why would God choose choose circumcision for His Covenant?

Thera said:

Whether circumcision prevents Aids or not, I've read doctors and nurses who say it's cleaner. Circumcision apparently reduces HPV and other diseases in the wives of circumcised men. I've spoken to mums who told of a first son being left uncircumcised, only to have to circumcise him later due to issues, and who tell that all future sons were circumcised soon after birth to prevent similar problems. I'm not saying these people are all correct, but I don't think you can just ignore them.

Click to expand...

This (above) is what I meant earlier about being either clean or unclean, etc, because of the health benefits physically, etc, especially sexually, etc...

We have soaps nowadays, and the ability to keep ourselves pretty clean physically, but they didn't a lot back then, and this, as I said, was a "secondary" reason for it, etc, and why other nations/cultures probably did it, or learned to do it also, etc...

If you've ever had a child that is not circumcised, then you know if they don't keep it clean, and you do not teach them this and enforce this, etc, then they can have "problems", etc, so you have to teach them this early on and make them always get and be in the habit of doing this always, etc, or they can have problems, etc...

But the first and foremost reason in Judaism and Christianity was to point to or at something greater, etc, something far greater, etc, as I have also already said previously, etc...

Oh, and @Thera this is not specifically directed at you, but I am just more using a part of your post or words to speak to everyone in general, etc, I hope that is OK...?

God Bless!

Joey16Vargas said:

And to be frankly, Eve was the first to sin, she was the first who fell under the snake's trap, not Adam.

Click to expand...

And the only reason Eve sinned, or took from it or touched it first, and then ate from the fruit second, etc, is because Adam had "added to or subtracted from God's words" when he was telling her what God said about it, etc, the tree and it's fruit, etc...

She saw that she did not die when she first touched it first, and the rest, as they say, is history from there, etc...

Adam basically lied to her first, etc...

So who committed the very first sin first, etc...?

And he (Adam) might have given the serpent the authority first then, to then be able to lie to, and/or deceive and/or tempt Eve first then, or in the very first place then, etc...?

Now where are you going to put the blame...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

Thera said:

I don't agree that God would give a barbaric pagan practice. Circumcision is a covenant sign, and is used even today as preventive medicine. It has been argued the Israelites were ahead of their time with respect to circumcision, due to the benefits it gives. I believe the Israelites were likely the first ones to circumcise, and other nations copied them, as they realised the benefits. Similar to many Western countries today, after observing the benefits circumcision offered the Jews.

Click to expand...

I'm only stating a common perspective, not necessarily my own. to argue it seems arbitrary because it's healthy flesh being cut away from healthy flesh so the barbaric aspect seems clear enough. One could argue we should all have routine appendectomies too as a metaphor for cutting away sin.

The covenant of circumcision started with Abraham who lived c. 1996 BC-1821 BC however documented cases go as far back as 2400–2300 BC with the Egyptians. It's tough to figure out the motivations of everything before Moses since Moses is said to have penned the entire 2500 years of history prior to him and generally speaking, this can suggest bias. I have accepted that pre-Abrahamic accounts may have widespread influence from other cultures and the purpose of these accounts are less about detailing accurate details but rather to redeem these accounts to point to God (as it seems clear the Israelites were predisposed to pagan practices upon their great exodus). By doing this Moses can de-paganize, ordain a group of accounts and unify people with accounts that are already familiar and I'm sure each tent had its own version of. The purpose is not saying "this is how it happened" but rather this is your God and give him glory.

I've generally been comfortable leaving Abrahamic accounts alone as these are unique to Israel so they would be more careful to preserve the details and there would be no outside competing accounts. But I'm not too naive to think that this itself is a bit of a flag. when no one argues with you, then you can make whatever story suits you and everyone will just believe it. There is evidence of at the very least some contextualizing in some accounts for example Issac's servant did not ask Rebekah to draw water for his camels as camels were not domesticated at the time. So at some point, the camel detail was added, perhaps because it was a more transferable reference that made better sense.

Western accounts are fact-driven and the facts point to a final outcome no matter what that is, so we have a hard time surrounding this fact-driven perspective. Eastern accounts however are goal-driven and the details are there to support the goal, not the other way around. Because of this if a detail loses its meaning or doesn't make sense it is fluid and can be changed to communicate the goal more effectively. Accounts in the east are often told in a way it should have happened but not necessarily in the way it did happen. This is a way to give the account the best honour possible which is a higher value than facts.

Pre-flood, pre-Abrahamic or pre-Moses accounts should have flags because of the circumstances there were written under but not flags in that their meanings are corrupted but rather that their literal details are not the focus and may have been altered to fit a goal that the account is aim at communicating. The details are important as they are and should not be discarded as they should have deep significant spiritual value, just as we see with circumcision, but we shouldn't be so wooden with the details that make up the accounts. Ancient Eastern value systems are very dissimilar to modern western systems and we shouldn't try and superimpose our world view over a time completely foreign to us.

Joey16Vargas said:

Well, the OT was a bit harsh when it comes to rules and laws, but still I struggle to understand why God would ask such a thing to seal His Covenant.

Yeah I know how it happened, it was a symbol that made them God's people. I've read that for ancient deals, ancient rites, and in those days seals/alliances were sealed with blood and flesh, Ok I get it, why did God choose to harm a baby's penis in order to seal His pact?

It could have been a tattoo, an earring, a knife scar in the chest/back, etc

I've studied many wars and empires, so I'm used to read narratives about massacres, beheadings, mass rape, torture, burning, razing... And I have no problem reading things alike in the Bible (book of Joshua especially), but everytime circumcision is mentioned, I get a headache (ok, not a literal headache, but you get the idea). Seriously, if I had to choose I would gladly give up the skin of the 5 fingers of the right hand rather than losing my foreskin.

And besides, God only ask men to be marked, He never demanded that women were to have a sign too.

What do you think is the reason God choose to mark men in his most personal area?

Thank you

Click to expand...

No one knows.

It's possible that during that time, many societal laws of the hebrews where implemented by Hebrews; who possibly thought or enforced their rules by saying "God commanded it". Which every ancient world would do just to claim an authoritarian source.

It's a good law at the end just in a societal manner, but whether God 1st hand gave such rules for spiritual purposes is something that is undeterminable.

Joey16Vargas said:

Well, the OT was a bit harsh when it comes to rules and laws, but still I struggle to understand why God would ask such a thing to seal His Covenant.

Yeah I know how it happened, it was a symbol that made them God's people. I've read that for ancient deals, ancient rites, and in those days seals/alliances were sealed with blood and flesh, Ok I get it, why did God choose to harm a baby's penis in order to seal His pact?

It could have been a tattoo, an earring, a knife scar in the chest/back, etc

I've studied many wars and empires, so I'm used to read narratives about massacres, beheadings, mass rape, torture, burning, razing... And I have no problem reading things alike in the Bible (book of Joshua especially), but everytime circumcision is mentioned, I get a headache (ok, not a literal headache, but you get the idea). Seriously, if I had to choose I would gladly give up the skin of the 5 fingers of the right hand rather than losing my foreskin.

And besides, God only ask men to be marked, He never demanded that women were to have a sign too.

What do you think is the reason God choose to mark men in his most personal area?

Thank you

Click to expand...

The (seed of) life comes through the shed blood?

DamianWarS said:

I'm only stating a common perspective, not necessarily my own. to argue it seems arbitrary because it's healthy flesh being cut away from healthy flesh so the barbaric aspect seems clear enough. One could argue we should all have routine appendectomies too as a metaphor for cutting away sin.

Click to expand...

Except routine appendectomies would not affecting man in one of his most sensitive areas though...?

Which I think was "on purpose", etc...

Part of the sign for men that would be about future circumcised hearts for men, etc...

Something very close and very personal, etc...

Anyway, but I found the rest of your post very informative, there were a few things I didn't know in there, so that is why I marked it "informative", etc...

Moses could have carried this over from the Egyptians, or maybe he did not, or he may have maybe discerned some future higher purpose or meaning for it that would be only revealed at a future day and time, or maybe he did not, or maybe he knew of circumcision already, and God knew that he knew some things about circumcision already, and God chose it, knowing that Moses already knew some things about it already, as a sign of His, back then, what would then have been a completely new covenant for them back then, etc, the ancient Hebrews or Israelites back then, etc, or the Hebrews who would now soon become now Israelites very soon after that back then, etc...

And I think it is more that last one that I tend to believe, etc...

That Moses knew some things about it, but not everything about it, and God knew that Moses knew some things about it, etc, probably from the Egyptians, etc, and chose to use it as a sign of their, back then for them, "new covenant" with the Hebrews or Israelites back then, etc...

And that only God knew how He would relate the future meaning of it all, in what is now our "new covenant" now, or "New Testament" now, etc, back then, etc...

Cause God will do that with some things sometimes, etc...

Some things anyway, etc...

Even borrowing from some other cultures, but putting a new meaning to it, that wasn't even possible in or to or for, or that was not even known to be possible by those other cultures sometimes, etc...

Sometimes He will do that, etc... With some things sometimes anyway, etc...

Some say there were some things borrowed from Babylon and Babylonian culture as well, during their Babylonian captivity there also maybe, etc...?

But, thanks for teaching me a few things new, or a few more new things, etc...

I am going to have to do some thinking, and maybe some more research, on what you said, etc...

Might cause me to expand my horizons some more, or my elevate my thinking a bit more a little bit, etc...?

Thanks again...

God Bless!

Cis.jd said:

No one knows.

It's possible that during that time, many societal laws of the hebrews where implemented by Hebrews; who possibly thought or enforced their rules by saying "God commanded it". Which every ancient world would do just to claim an authoritarian source.

It's a good law at the end just in a societal manner, but whether God 1st hand gave such rules for spiritual purposes is something that is undeterminable.

Click to expand...

If they knew their people, and really fully knew their people, and the collective consciousness of that people, then they would have the "God" of that people in their minds, and would be able to fully know and discern that ones will pretty clearly, etc...

And there also had to be times when it was a very clear, maybe even very literal, and audible, inner or outer "voice" also, etc... otherwise much of the Bible, and the people in it, would be liars, and much of the Bible would be a lie, and just not true, etc... because they clearly state that in there sometimes, that is was a very clear, very audible, either inner or outer, literal "voice", etc... And a "voice" that did not, or was just not only just ever only coming just from they themselves, or just they themselves only, etc...

I believe they heard God's literal voice, etc...

Most of them most of the time anyway, etc...

Anyway,

God Bless!

Joey16Vargas said:

Well, the OT was a bit harsh when it comes to rules and laws, but still I struggle to understand why God would ask such a thing to seal His Covenant.

Yeah I know how it happened, it was a symbol that made them God's people. I've read that for ancient deals, ancient rites, and in those days seals/alliances were sealed with blood and flesh, Ok I get it, why did God choose to harm a baby's penis in order to seal His pact?

It could have been a tattoo, an earring, a knife scar in the chest/back, etc

I've studied many wars and empires, so I'm used to read narratives about massacres, beheadings, mass rape, torture, burning, razing... And I have no problem reading things alike in the Bible (book of Joshua especially), but everytime circumcision is mentioned, I get a headache (ok, not a literal headache, but you get the idea). Seriously, if I had to choose I would gladly give up the skin of the 5 fingers of the right hand rather than losing my foreskin.

And besides, God only ask men to be marked, He never demanded that women were to have a sign too.

What do you think is the reason God choose to mark men in his most personal area?

Thank you

Click to expand...

Totally hear you on this.

My guess is that God chose it because it in some way relates to fertility, "seed". Which I've come to suspect probably refers to sperm. Maybe that's why it's a male thing, the female contribution is invisible without a microscope.

Neogaia777 said:

If they knew their people, and really fully knew their people, and the collective consciousness of that people, then they would have the "God" of that people in their minds, and would be able to fully know and discern that ones will pretty clearly, etc...

And there also had to be times when it was a very clear, maybe even very literal, and audible, inner or outer "voice" also, etc... otherwise much of the Bible, and the people in it, would be liars, and much of the Bible would be a lie, and just not true, etc... because they clearly state that in there sometimes, that is was a very clear, very audible, either inner or outer, literal "voice", etc... And a "voice" that did not, or was just not only just ever only coming just from they themselves, or just they themselves only, etc...

I believe they heard God's literal voice, etc...

Most of them most of the time anyway, etc...

Anyway,

God Bless!

Click to expand...

Unless you've went back in time and interviewed each and every Hebrew person alive back then to even know what any of them thought, then this assumption of yours is a hunch.

When it comes to rules and such there is always a need of authority. If some random person came to you and told you, you must do such and such, would you just follow this guy or would you want to know what authority he has to order you to do something?

Back then, the Jews did not have rulers, kings, Pharaohs, etc like other nations did therefore, so how would rules just get established? Why would they listen to some guy? So "God" could have been made as the authority of such rules even if not all rules where given by him first hand.

When you think of it, why would your spirituality take great significance on you slicing a skin off your privates?

Cis.jd said:

Unless you've went back in time and interviewed each and every Hebrew person alive back then to even know what any of them thought, then this assumption of yours is a hunch.

When it comes to rules and such there is always a need of authority. If some random person came to you and told you, you must do such and such, would you just follow this guy or would you want to know what authority he has to order you to do something?

Back then, the Jews did not have rulers, kings, Pharaohs, etc like other nations did therefore, so how would rules just get established? Why would they listen to some guy? So "God" could have been made as the authority of such rules even if not all rules where given by him first hand.

Click to expand...

So, you don't believe Abraham heard from God at all...? Or Moses did not ever...? Or any of the other significant people in the OT, like many of the Prophets, etc...? None of them heard directly from God in a very clear and very obvious "voice" that was not coming from themselves and themselves only huh...?

Cause if you believe that, then I would say you absolutely do not have "any kind of faith whatsoever at all", etc, and I think that's very, very sad, etc, basically calling them all liars, etc...

Or what about all the miraculous happenings, that were supposed to be the evidence that they heard directly from God, and what they called "the true God", etc...? All of them are just lies and false lying stories also...? or what, etc...?

Again, if you believe that, then I feel very, very sorry for you, etc...

Besides, many, many other nations tried to do that with their gods, etc, but it was only Israel, and the Hebrews, who's was shown out to be or truly have any kind of "true God" at all, etc...

And again, if you don't believe "any of this", etc, then, no offense, but "what are you even doing on here"...? Cause this is a Christian and believers only forum, etc, and you don't even sound like a believer to me anymore, etc...

I believe every single law in the OT law covenant was given to them directly by God in and of the OT or the Holy Spirit, etc...

And if you do not yet believe the same, then I feel very, very sorry for you, etc... As I think you do not have any kind of faith all whatsoever in maybe anything at all whatsoever maybe, etc...

And how does that make you any different than an atheist, etc...?

That's why I ask you "what are you even doing on here", etc...?

Cis.jd said:

When you think of it, why would your spirituality take great significance on you slicing a skin off your privates?

Click to expand...

It was to seal a covenant or a pact, and a brand new one back then, etc, one of the, then, brand new law covenant back then, etc, and if you don't understand that, then I don't know what exactly to say to you, etc...

And if you believe at all in Jesus, or the NT, or the NC, etc, then the NT says it had significance in a symbolism of circumcising peoples hearts, etc, specifically with men's specifically hard hearts most especially, etc...

Anyway,

God Bless!

Neogaia777 said:

So, you don't believe Abraham heard from God at all...? Or Moses did not ever...? Or any of the other significant people in the OT, like many of the Prophets, etc...? None of them heard directly from God in a very clear and very obvious "voice" that was not coming from themselves and themselves only huh...?

Click to expand...

Never said that. i'm talking about laws, especially societal laws. It's rather misrepresenting for you to make it a general statement that every body just didn't hear God. Read the context of my post first, before blasting me with "you are not a believer". There is a difference between having a realistic look into the scriptures, and just simply not believing.

I'm saying that not every law dealing with Hebrew culture and society should be assumed to have been given 1st hand from God. The enforcing of laws could have been believed or just claimed to have an appeal to authority, but we don't need to believe that God went down and told random Hebrews that in order for you to have pack with him you have to slice the skin off your penis, even just by explaining it, it is rather a silly thing.

Neogaia777 said:

This (above) is what I meant earlier about being either clean or unclean, etc, because of the health benefits physically, etc, especially sexually, etc...

We have soaps nowadays, and the ability to keep ourselves pretty clean physically, but they didn't a lot back then, and this, as I said, was a "secondary" reason for it, etc, and why other nations/cultures probably did it, or learned to do it also, etc...

If you've ever had a child that is not circumcised, then you know if they don't keep it clean, and you do not teach them this and enforce this, etc, then they can have "problems", etc, so you have to teach them this early on and make them always get and be in the habit of doing this always, etc, or they can have problems, etc...

But the first and foremost reason in Judaism and Christianity was to point to or at something greater, etc, something far greater, etc, as I have also already said previously, etc...

Oh, and @Thera this is not specifically directed at you, but I am just more using a part of your post or words to speak to everyone in general, etc, I hope that is OK...?

God Bless!

Click to expand...

I have been a moderator on an intact board for the past 10 years. At birth and for many years after, the foreskin is bonded to the glans by the balano-preputial membrain, this prevents it being pushed back and doing so against it can cause damage. Many boy's foreskins do not go back until puberty. All that needs to be done while it is adhered is the outside wiped. Using soap underneath on mucosal skin can cause irritation and in some people yeast.

People tried to link circumcision to hygiene when it was not given by God for this at all. Nothing could be cleaner then a child's bonded foreskin, its very design is to keep it clean. Little girls take far more patient cleaning.

"Some doctors urged the surgery as a means of preventing paraphimois,
venereal infection, penile cancer, and even to prevent cervical cancer
of women (said to be caused by the introduction of irritant material by
the uncircumcised husband during coitus).

More modern references have further added to the positive effects of
male circumcision. Current medical sources, both personal and web-based,
indicate these are some other advantages: reduction of urinary tract
infections, reduced inflammation of the glans or foreskin, and reduced
inability to retract the foreskin (balanitis).

And there are more advantages for women, too, if their male partner is
circumcised. Besides decreasing chances of cervical cancer, chances are
lessened for acquiring HPV (human papillomavirus [technically classified
as a sexually transmitted infection]) and BV (bacterial vaginosis)."
-
My own father had to have Circumcision done when he was 60.
Because the constant infections he was having, boy did it hurt.

Biblical Accuracy, why the 8th Day?

Circumcision that Jesus received eight days after his birth.

Why Circumcision ?

Science found many health and hygiene benefits
from Circumcision, even helps from getting aids.

Why day eight? Is there any good, scientific
rationale behind such a command?

"On the eighth day, the amount of prothrombin present y is elevated
above one-hundred percent of normal—and is the only day in the male’s
life in which this will be the case under normal conditions.

Science has proven this is the best time for clotting to occur.
Of course God knows what is good for us, before we do.

Cis.jd said:

Never said that. i'm talking about laws, especially societal laws. It's rather misrepresenting for you to make it a general statement that every body just didn't hear God. Read the context of my post first, before blasting me with "you are not a believer". There is a difference between having a realistic look into the scriptures, and just simply not believing.

I'm saying that not every law dealing with Hebrew culture and society should be assumed to have been given 1st hand from God. The enforcing of laws could have been believed or just claimed to have an appeal to authority, but we don't need to believe that God went down and told random Hebrews that in order for you to have pack with him you have to slice the skin off your penis, even just by explaining it, it is rather a silly thing.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, and I apologize, OK... I misunderstood what you meant, and even greatly misunderstood what you meant, and so, I am sorry, and do sincerely apologize, OK...?

But, as for the societal laws, or whatever, I still think Moses or some other Prophet that heard from God was consulted and were very much involved, etc, and they, those Prophets, always sought out direct revelation and guidance from God in almost all decision making matters just about all of the time, if not all of time always, etc, and they (those laws) were also very appropriate for that society and/or culture, and their quote/unquote "laws", and/or beliefs at the time, during that day or age or time, etc...

Anyway, I'm sorry about the rest, OK... I guess I kind of overreacted a little bit, and I apologize, OK...?

God Bless!

coffee4u said:

I have been a moderator on an intact board for the past 10 years. At birth and for many years after, the foreskin is bonded to the glans by the balano-preputial membrain, this prevents it being pushed back and doing so against it can cause damage. Many boy's foreskins do not go back until puberty. All that needs to be done while it is adhered is the outside wiped. Using soap underneath on mucosal skin can cause irritation and in some people yeast.

People tried to link circumcision to hygiene when it was not given by God for this at all. Nothing could be cleaner then a child's bonded foreskin, its very design is to keep it clean. Little girls take far more patient cleaning.

Click to expand...

Well, without getting "too personal", etc, let's just simply say you should just "trust me" on this, OK, etc, because I know about this, etc, and lets just leave it at that, OK...

God Bless!

Joey16Vargas said:

What do you think is the reason God choose to mark men in his most personal area?

Click to expand...

Circumcision removes something that is in the way.

In the physical, it removes the extra skin that is not absolutely needed in the function of a man's private parts for reproduction, and as others have mentioned, it removes what harbors dirt, bacteria/disease and resists regular cleaning of the area.

In the spiritual, it removes the hard heart that stands in the way of receiving God's words, and allows us as the recipients of His grace to be receptive to them...instead of automatically rejecting them as we have historically done.

Circumcision, like marriage, is a physical picture of a spiritual relationship.

Neogaia777 said:

God chose it

Click to expand...

this is the one I'm going with. It doesn't matter who did it first or what is borrowed from what. What matters is God chose them. So whatever accounts and words are used to describe these events they are important and we should value them simply because God's chose them.

We have soaps nowadays, and the ability to keep ourselves
pretty clean physically, but they didn't a lot back then...

Click to expand...

God’s Soap Recipe
God’s Soap Recipe

Numbers 19, where the Israelites were instructed to prepare
the “water of purification” that was to be used to wash any person
who had touched a dead body.

"At first glance, the water of purification sounds like a hodge-podge
of superstitious potion-making that included the ashes of a red heifer,
hyssop, cedar wood, and scarlet wool.

But this formula was the farthest thing from a symbolic
potion intended to “ward off evil spirits.”

On the contrary, the recipe for the water of purification stands
today as a wonderful example of God’s brilliance, since the recipe
is nothing less than a procedure to produce an antibacterial soap.

Joey16Vargas said:

Well, today's circumcision is mostly a esthetic surgery, there are more uncut men than the cut ones. Plus cleaning under your foreskin takes about 15-20 seconds a day

Click to expand...

It was a possibility that came to mind. I think the medical reason given for performing the procedure to such a large extent in America in the 20th century was that it was hygienic.