Is the foreskin God's mistake?

[Jax Agnesson]

If it wasn't a mistake, why is it important to snip it off?

[Burninglight]

If it wasn't a mistake, why is it important to snip it off?

It was because God could have a covenanted people. In fact, I believe it is cleaner. Iow, there is less chance for infection. It was an Abrahamic covenant that separated believers in the one true God from the pagans, but now it is not a necessary requirement to be one of God's children.

[Muzaffar]

If it wasn't a mistake, why is it important to snip it off?

It was because God could have a covenanted people. In fact, I believe it is cleaner. Iow, there is less chance for infection. It was an Abrahamic covenant that separated believers in the one true God from the pagans, but now it is not a necessary requirement to be one of God's children.

@Jax Agnesson
It is a hygienic purpose, not a mistake.

@Burninglight
Genesis 17
13 He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 The uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people. He has broken my covenant.�

Who said that it is no more required, according to your bible God said it is an everlasting covenant and whosoever breaks this convenient "shall be cut off from his people".

[Jax Agnesson]

Some interesting and informative responses here, much appreciated. I think I understand now that circumcision isn't supposed to be for everyone, but a mark of difference.
But if cutting off the foreskin is supposed to be a sign of individual commitment to a religion or culture, should it not be offered when the individual is old enough to understand the option, and the commitment? The analogies that come to mind are the paedo/credo baptism discussion is Christianity, and ritual facial scarification at puberty in some African cultures.. Not forgetting (wish we could!) female genital mutilation.


Addressing the side-arguments regarding hygiene and sexual pleasure; infants don't have unprotected sex with other people.
Boys can be told the dis/advantages of the foreskin as part of their normal sex education,, and allowed to decide whether to have circumcision.

In either case, ISTM, the issue is one of freedom to choose.

[ttruscott]

If it wasn't a mistake, why is it important to snip it off?

Mistake??? It was created to be snipped off!

Peace, Ted

[bluethread]

Some interesting and informative responses here, much appreciated. I think I understand now that circumcision isn't supposed to be for everyone, but a mark of difference.
But if cutting off the foreskin is supposed to be a sign of individual commitment to a religion or culture, should it not be offered when the individual is old enough to understand the option, and the commitment? The analogies that come to mind are the paedo/credo baptism discussion is Christianity, and ritual facial scarification at puberty in some African cultures.. Not forgetting (wish we could!) female genital mutilation.


Addressing the side-arguments regarding hygiene and sexual pleasure; infants don't have unprotected sex with other people.
Boys can be told the dis/advantages of the foreskin as part of their normal sex education,, and allowed to decide whether to have circumcision.

In either case, ISTM, the issue is one of freedom to choose.

As Nickman has stated, at great length, there are health risks associated with circumcision. Those risks are practically nonexistant when it is done as brit milah. On the eighth day, the potasium level(clotting agent) is supposedly at the highest level one will experience in one's lifetime. That is not the reason it is done on the eighth day. It is done on the eighth day because Adonai commands it. It is just interesting to note that it is also the absolute best time to do it. The reason why it is not necessary to wait to adulthood is that it is a mark of an hereditary covenant. Therefore, even if one wishes to reject the covenant, that one can not denigh that they were not aware of it.

[Nickman]

If it wasn't a mistake, why is it important to snip it off?

Mistake??? It was created to be snipped off!

Peace, Ted

That doesn't sound optimal as stated in Genesis 1.

[Nickman]

Some interesting and informative responses here, much appreciated. I think I understand now that circumcision isn't supposed to be for everyone, but a mark of difference.
But if cutting off the foreskin is supposed to be a sign of individual commitment to a religion or culture, should it not be offered when the individual is old enough to understand the option, and the commitment? The analogies that come to mind are the paedo/credo baptism discussion is Christianity, and ritual facial scarification at puberty in some African cultures.. Not forgetting (wish we could!) female genital mutilation.


Addressing the side-arguments regarding hygiene and sexual pleasure; infants don't have unprotected sex with other people.
Boys can be told the dis/advantages of the foreskin as part of their normal sex education,, and allowed to decide whether to have circumcision.

In either case, ISTM, the issue is one of freedom to choose.

As Nickman has stated, at great length, there are health risks associated with circumcision. Those risks are practically nonexistant when it is done as brit milah. On the eighth day, the potasium level(clotting agent) is supposedly at the highest level one will experience in one's lifetime. That is not the reason it is done on the eighth day. It is done on the eighth day because Adonai commands it. It is just interesting to note that it is also the absolute best time to do it. The reason why it is not necessary to wait to adulthood is that it is a mark of an hereditary covenant. Therefore, even if one wishes to reject the covenant, that one can not denigh that they were not aware of it.

This sounds like forcing one into something that they never wanted to begin with. Dad says, "Let's go ahead and circumcise little Jimmy". Mommy says, "But what if he grows up and doesn't want it?" Dad says, "Tough titties"

This is abusive at best. It disregards what the child actually wants when they grow up. It goes along the same lines of forcing your child to go to a college they don't want to go to just because it is where you went. If it is so important to perform circumcision then it should be a decision made by the only person it affects. Circumcision doesn't do anything to the parents. They don't have to have painful boners for the rest of their life.

Why are tattoos banned until the child is 18? These are life altering and permanent. It should be up to the person whom it affects.

On the OP, Foreskin can be considered a mistake if we look at it from a secular side looking into Judaism. For them it is not. It was made to set them apart from the rest.

In reality it is a necessary part of evolution. Cutting it is a mistake

[Eliyahu]

Got it, thanks. So how do you interpret the passage at Corinthians 7:19?

Bs'd

It's a contradiction in terms of a very confused person who started a new religion and who threw overboard all the words of JC and the laws of God.

He says: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts."

But circumcision IS a command of God, and therefore circumcision counts.

And God reward those who observe His commandments, and therefore we see that circumcised people have much less chance to be infected with evil diseases than uncircumcised ones.

[bluethread]

Got it, thanks. So how do you interpret the passage at Corinthians 7:19?

Bs'd

It's a contradiction in terms of a very confused person who started a new religion and who threw overboard all the words of JC and the laws of God.

He says: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts."

But circumcision IS a command of God, and therefore circumcision counts.

And God reward those who observe His commandments, and therefore we see that circumcised people have much less chance to be infected with evil diseases than uncircumcised ones.

That could sound like a contradiction, but there is some confusion related to the fact that circumcision is a sign of the covenant. It was and still is associated with conversion to rabbinic Judaism. The point is that if one does not intend on keeping the covenant, the sign of the covenant doesn't mean anything and one need not convert to rabbinic Judaism in order to be saved.

[bluethread]

Why are tattoos banned until the child is 18? These are life altering and permanent. It should be up to the person whom it affects.

On the OP, Foreskin can be considered a mistake if we look at it from a secular side looking into Judaism. For them it is not. It was made to set them apart from the rest.

In reality it is a necessary part of evolution. Cutting it is a mistake

I am not sure about tattoos, but piercing is not illegal, many people have their babies ears pierced. As I asked you before, on a similar thread, can you provide a case where a properly performed brit milah has turned out badly.