Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So, what you're saying is, before the fall god designed circumcised penis', and after the fall, he designed them to not be circumcised, and the procedure is punishment for sin, but it's ok, because that's how they were designed in the first place?Remember the fall? In the beginning, man and woman didn't wear clothes. If wearing clothes, you don't really need excess skin for protection. Circumcision just removes the excess skin, not part of the male genitals.
No. God knows what He designed and what He designed for.So, what you're saying is, before the fall god designed circumcised penis', and after the fall, he designed them to not be circumcised, and the procedure is punishment for sin, but it's ok, because that's how they were designed in the first place?
Nope. Circumcision is painful, not pleasurable. Who would do it just for the fun (i.e. without God telling him to)? Benefits include hygiene, less abuse (i.e. masturbation), reduced likelihood of disease, better sexual function, more pleasure for wife. Even if you don't believe the studies, you should accept that there are studies that conclude these things. Its kind of a difficult one to explain for all the guys in a culture to undergo it (even to this day!), without an all-knowing God having commanded it.By "sensitive" I'm sure you also mean pleasurable?
And I think you're overestimating the benefits of being circumcised.
You misunderstand; circumcision removes skin responsible for pleasure sensation.Nope. Circumcision is painful, not pleasurable. Who would do it just for the fun (i.e. without God telling him to)? Benefits include hygiene, less abuse (i.e. masturbation), reduced likelihood of disease, better sexual function, more pleasure for wife. Even if you don't believe the studies, you should accept that there are studies that conclude these things. Its kind of a difficult one to explain for all the guys in a culture to undergo it (even to this day!), without an all-knowing God having commanded it.
A common sexual problem for men today (at least according to the media) is premature [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. According to some studies, circumcision improves sexual function by reducing over sensitivity in males. This in turn translates to improved satisfaction in females.You misunderstand; circumcision removes skin responsible for pleasure sensation.
LOL... and cutting off your foot can reduce the cost of socks by half.A common sexual problem for men today (at least according to the media) is premature [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. According to some studies, circumcision improves sexual function by reducing over sensitivity in males. This in turn translates to improved satisfaction in females.
Its a bit different, given that feet always provide an obvious benefit. It sounds as if your tactics are simply to dismiss without consideration fairly plain evidence supporting biblical creation and the Creator's intervention in history. This doesn't really surprise me, but it does show why you will continue to state there is no evidence, even when basic and indisputable evidence is provided.LOL... and cutting off your foot can reduce the cost of socks by half.
Evidence of circumcision by ancient cultures is not evidence of a creator or design.Its a bit different, given that feet always provide an obvious benefit. It sounds as if your tactics are simply to dismiss without consideration fairly plain evidence supporting biblical creation and the Creator's intervention in history. This doesn't really surprise me, but it does show why you will continue to state there is no evidence, even when basic and indisputable evidence is provided.
So, what would be a bizarre and painful ritual that no one would normally inflict on himself is recorded as being commanded by God in the bible, is still practiced by devotees to this day, has benefits recognised by modern science and medicine, was picked up by a variety of cultures, and on analysis, appears to have been commanded to be performed on the day most appropriate for it, and yet its all a coincidence? I think you're the one who isn't thinking things through.Evidence of circumcision by ancient cultures is not evidence of a creator or design.
'Yay circumcision... but I'll let you guys figure out that germs, not demons, are responsible for disease on your own.' -god
You haven't really thought this creator/id hypothesis completely through, I'm guessing.
Do you write this poorly on purpose?
I think you're the one who isn't thinking things through.
It is almost as if creationists have admitted to themselves, subconsciously, that they cannot actually offer any positive supporting evidence FOR their mere beliefs, and are content to simply attack 'the other.' This is true, whether the creationist is a one-line snark master, or a verbose citation and quote bombing autodidact.
How many people a year die from being uncircumcised, vs. how many people died from germs until the discovery of penicillin?So, what would be a bizarre and painful ritual that no one would normally inflict on himself is recorded as being commanded by God in the bible, is still practiced by devotees to this day, has benefits recognised by modern science and medicine, was picked up by a variety of cultures, and on analysis, appears to have been commanded to be performed on the day most appropriate for it, and yet its all a coincidence? I think you're the one who isn't thinking things through.
Masturbation.Circumcision Reduces abuse? What on earth does that mean?
I disagree with this. Parental consent should be given for all medical procedures, irrespective of the perceived risk/severity.My two boys were circumcised as infants . I wasn’t asked if I wanted it done or not . I’m still not sure if I would have said to do it or not IF they'd have asked me. Of course this was about 40 years ago.
Yeah, but what of these was actually found to be healthy for the people, and at the time it was performed? And even going back to the ancient cultures, I'm sure most would even admit (with the descriptions), that the rituals were given by demons (tyrant-like "gods").You realize that there are plenty of bizarre rituals in plentiful ancient cultures that were supposedly commanded by their gods for them to perform, right?
Benefits include hygiene, less abuse (i.e. masturbation)
That's not the topic of discussion. You can't change the topic just because the evidence goes against you.How many people a year die from being uncircumcised, vs. how many people died from germs until the discovery of penicillin?
If your god exists, then he's a jerk.
Apparently from the links I posted previously. I agree it would be difficult to measure, and I never read how it was actually done.Is this actually true? Is there some study somewhere which details the amount of masturbation people who are circumcised versus those who are not?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?