Finsoninlaw wrote:The Bible makes it clear that circumcision only applied to Jews, to their slaves and to converts of Judaism (Gen. 17:10-14, Exod. 12:48). All other people were described as uncircumcised, even those who practised circumcision (Jer. 9:25-26). Circumcision never applied to Christians (Acts 15:5-11), and anyone who doubts this should read Acts 15 and the letter of Paul to the Galatians ( Gal .5: 1 - 6 ) carefully, noting how and why these passages say that circumcision is not needed.
Whoa...hold on there, Pilgrim .... Just because most of us can't be "a*sed" to bother with this ancient Biblical nonsense, doesn't mean that we don't understand the history of it all ...
Some of the early Christian debates involved this very subject, so critical to the practice of Judaism.... There was a rather fierce debate about this matter in Christianity's early years and it eventually prevailed...probably all by the time of the Nicene Creed... that it wasn't necessary as Christians were largely "governed" by the New Testament, unlike the Jews who are essentially, in Christian parlance, "Old Testament" people.... There are Christian groups who do practice circumcision, though.
The Greeks and the Romans were generally opposed to circumcision calling it what essentially it is, bodily mutilation....
....and I thought such views had been debunked.... a little bit like the "proven health fact" that if you don't eat you won't get food poisoning...Finsoninlaw wrote:
Though , male circumcision is clinically certified to be more healthy and make circumcised men perform better and get more attracted to women than the uncircumcised male .
....So who signed this "clinical certification" you mention???....Dr. Rubenstein??... ...And all the rest of this seems more like "facts" created to support a pre-determined point of view.... I can't see any meaningful way of objectively determining these things......