What About Circumcision? - Why Did God Create Many Languages?

So fewer people would have to listen to you? 

I laughed out loud for five minutes.

Isang mapagmahal na Diyos ay ihayag penicillin sa halip ng pagtutuli.

You have lost me on this comment.  But, I would love to know what you have in mind.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

I believe you are saying, "A loving God would reveal, or provide, penicillin instead of circumcision."    That is true.  But, science had not yet caught up with God at that time.    As I have often said -- science comes up with a major scientific breakthrough -- and God merely say, "Been there.  Done that!"

Throughout history, God has allowed man, whom He gave the gift of "free will" and intelligence -- to make discoveries to advance our lives.   Sure, God could have given us all the wonderful scientific discoveries from day one.

But, that goes back to the old maxim, "Give a man a fish and he will be back tomorrow for another.  Teach the man to fish and he will feed his entire family"   God has allowed man to "fish" for new and wonderful discoveries for thousands of years.   And, because of this -- man has had a feeling of accomplishment -- instead of feeling like a man on divine welfare.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, once again:  Lucifer is NOT Satan.  The single reference to Lucifer, in the book of Isaiah, is not to Satan, but to Nebuchadnezzar  II. The notion that this Lucifer is Satan was not held by the early Christian fathers, but arose as a medieval era gloss on the matter.  The original text does not even use a capitalized form, but is properly translated "light bearer." Jerome's translation (the Vulgate) and the works of those notable theologians (NOT!) Milton and Dante have influenced the Lucifer/Satan misconception far more than any scholarly analyses of the use of "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12.

_______________________________

Good grief!   

One of Bill's tactics is to play dumb so you have to explain the joke. 

"What does this mean? What does this mean?"

Hi Contendah,

You tell me, "Bill, once again:  Lucifer is NOT Satan.  The single reference to Lucifer, in the book of Isaiah, is not to Satan, but to  Nebuchadnezzar II. The notion that this Lucifer is Satan was not held by the early Christian fathers, but arose as a medieval era  gloss on the matter.  The original text does not even use a capitalized form, but is properly translated "light bearer."

Jerome's  translation (the Vulgate) and the works of those notable theologians (NOT!) Milton and Dante have influenced the Lucifer/Satan misconception far more than any scholarly analyses of the use of "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12."  

My NASB Harper Study Bible, published by Zondervan, has this foot note for Isaiah 14:12:

In this particular passage (Isaiah 14:12) the title "star of the morning" (or, Lucifer) is used.   This taunt is addressed by  the denizens of Sheol to the king of Babylon (Isaiah 14:4), but the dimensions of the God-defying ambition expressed  in verses 13 and 14 surpass anything that could be put into the mouth of a mere human being (even hyperbolically).

No human king is ever represented in any ancient Semitic literature, either Hebrew or pagan, as vaunting himself to set his throne above the heights of the clouds like the Most High God.  Therefore the best interpretation of this passage is  to see in the human king of Babylon a tool in the hand of the devil himself, who has empowered and directed him in his  opposition to God's people and cause.

But, I am curious.  Since you believe that Lucifer was the king of Babylon -- who was and is Satan?

Isaiah 14:12-14 (kjv), "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!  [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!  For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will  ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."

Satan, we know was an angel, actually one of the archangels.  He was in heaven and fell from grace.

This Scripture passage tells us that Lucifer was in heaven and has fallen from grace.

Can you show me anywhere in Scripture, or in secular writings, that tells us that Nebuchadnezzar was ever in heaven and has fallen from heaven and from grace?

It is very obvious to most Bible scholars and theologians that Lucifer and Satan are the same fallen archangel -- who led one third of the angels in heaven in rebellion against God.

You say Lucifer is not Satan -- yet, every Bible scholar and theologian I have read says he IS.   So, I believe I will go with them instead of your legalistic theology.   But, hey, you do your own thing.  That is the beauty of "free will."   I presume you DO believe in "free will."

By the way, from all your past writings it is obvious that you belong to a very legalistic church or denomination.   Are you still refusing to give us a hint?   I am a Baptist flavor Christian.  What flavor are you?

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bil

I don't really see how having the wonderful and functional ******** removed has helped anyone think less of "the flesh", and I still don't see what cutting off a functional part of a human body proves to anyone, but no need to feel anyone has to explain.  I don't plan to change my view on it and don't want to argue about it, but just interesting if that was supposed to be the logic.

Hi Frog,

Just curious -- what function does the that "small part of the male body" provide?   (I first wrote f o r e skin -- but the filter frowned upon such language)    While I do not personally believe in circumcision today just for the sake of doctors earning an extra thousand dollars or more -- it is Biblical for those still in Judaism.  Fortunately for we Christians, Jesus Christ brought us out from under the Law and into the dispensation of Grace -- so, the Biblical Law of circumcision does not apply to us.

So, are we to assume from your post that you are pro-circumcision?  It would be interesting to know why you are for it -- if there is no medical reason applicable at the time of infancy.   Just curious.

Or is it just that you will disagree with Christian -- no matter what we say?   The sky is blue!  No, it is green!  Duh!

Y'all come back now, ya heah?

Bill

Are you able to just ask a reasonable question without adding some nasty dig about my beliefs?  And who is Christian?  Do you mean Christians?

Where did you get the idea that I would be pro-circumcision?  Oh, and my opinions don't come from any desire to be against anyone.  They are my opinions.  The functions of that skin include sensation, protection, and lubrication.  I would link to medical information, but I'm not sure that would be allowed since it would include the dreaded f word.

Here you go, Bill.  Time to educate yourself on the medical benefits of circumcision. 

http://www.circinfo.net/

I'm going to let you google images of penile cancer, which is astronomically higher in those who haven't been circumcised.  

??  I don't think they use the "dreaded F word" in medical texts.

============================

Well O No, you may not be reading the same dreaded F word medical

books as our amateur psychiatrist.

Someone should contact UNA.

_______________________________

Bill, are you really dumb or just acting the part? I know...stupid question!

You say IF no medical reason applicable at the time of infancy. Would you want that skin cut off as an adult, instead of as an infant? I can't see any sane man wanting it done later in life.

There is several health benefits in having it removed. Some are: Reduced urinary tract infections, fewer problems with erections, especially at puberty,   decrease in certain sexually transmitted infections,  almost complete elimination of invasive penile cancer, &

less urological problems.

There you go with your Duh! again. Be careful, your Christianity is showing.

I do believe that most doctors make enough money -- without making more by mutilating infants for no reason -- except greed and societal habit.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

____________________________

OMG! You & these men discussed if they were/weren't circumcised & if one or all did or didn't have any medical problems from it?

Like women don't discuss such things.  LOL!

________________________________

I'll have you know that I didn't allow a doctor to "mutilate" my baby. His pediatrician did surgery on my son so he wouldn't have the medical problems that can come from being uncircumcised.

You seem to think doctors only do it so they can have  money for their luxury car or boat payment? Could the same not be said for Pastor's that stand in the pulpit & ask for money?

____________________________

Yep, we do. Well, not circumcision but the male body.

I started to say that only women are supposed to discuss those type of things but I could see old Billy boy making something out of it.

We women can have some hott discussions that would make you men blush.

Most doctors don't even particularly like doing the procedure, make very little money off of it, and always do it only at the request of the parents. 

There are many, many men in the world who have that skin and do just fine.  A little hygiene is all that is needed to keep things functioning well, and I sure wouldn't have little girls cut down there "just in case" they might get a rare form of cancer someday.  There are very legitimate reasons not to have that done and really since it isn't illegal it is just one more topic to fight about.  It is there for reasons and does have a function.  It is as important, and while obviously men don't fall dead without it, the same could be said for females' parts.

So my point is simply that one could make a case for it and a case for not doing it.  It isn't done in many countries as it is here and the vast majority of men do just fine.  Practicing safe sex is important for everyone to prevent disease, and a little hygiene goes a long way for everyone.  It is a personal choice for a family at this point in time, so really it is up to each family to choose.

I'm not surprised Bill doesn't believe in circumcision since he doesn't believe in abortion even if the mother will die. I had a relative with cancer of the ***** and nobody wants that believe me.

True.  I used to process surgical specimens, and the only penile cancer case I saw was on a cut organ (before this surgery, I mean).  We got fairly frequent circ corrections on older boys and once in awhile an irritated skin from a man who usually had scar tissue causing trouble, but otherwise it was healthy skin from babies.  

Guess I didn't follow the rules on that one either. My husband and I agreed that the surgery was unnecessary so it was not done on our son. It does have a purpose and hygiene takes cares of any problems.

While I do agree with not having the procedure, I am sorry that your relative went through that.

____________________________

I'm sorry to hear that. Cancer is a horrible disease.

My Friend, I, too, have had close relatives die from cancer -- right there in the Shoals area.  And, over the years, I have had a number of Friends die from cancer.  And, Info, you are right.  It is not something you would wish on even an enemy -- cancer of any kind.

However, you have never read anything I have written that says I would choose to allow the mother to die to prevent an abortion.  What I have written many times is:  I would vote to allow abortion for rape, incest, and mother's health -- if we can make ALL OTHER abortions illegal.  

Over the years, I, and a number of others, have shown statistics which show that all the combined abortions due to rape, incest, and mother's health -- come to less than 3% of all abortions in America.  

So, given that, on average, ONE MILLION babies are killed via abortion every year in America -- I will vote to allow that less than 3% of abortions (less than 30,000) to be legal -- if we can vote to make the 97% of abortions which are for convenience, i;e, birth control, etc., illegal.

I will give you the less that 30,000 -- if you will vote to save the lives of the other 970,000 babies killed via abortion in America, each year.

Yes, these are true statistics.  Many of us have shown the source over the years.  If you doubt, try Google.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, have you seen the statistics that correlate a causal effect between legalizing abortion and our current (and now fairly long) decline in violent crimes in America? 

And since you are once again trying to hijack your own thread, it is obvious from your world view that God is the greatest abortionist of all.  Why is that?  ©

What is circumcision?

Male circumcision is a surgery to remove the ********, a fold of skin that covers and protects the rounded tip of the *****. The ******** provides sensation and lubrication for the *****. In most cases, circumcision is elective surgery, which means there isn't a medical reason for it. If circumcision is done, it is usually done soon after birth.

In the United States, about 60 out of 100 boys are circumcised, and about 40 out of 100 are not.² Worldwide, the rate of circumcision is much lower.³

See a picture of a ***** before and after circumcision .

When should a baby not be circumcised?

If you do not want your baby to be circumcised, he should not be circumcised. Circumcision is a decision you make because you want it for your baby.

Your doctor may feel that it's not safe to circumcise your baby if the baby is sick or weak, has a problem with his *****, has a family history of bleeding problems, or was born early (premature) and is not yet ready to go home.

What can I expect after circumcision?

Some swelling and slight bleeding are normal after circumcision. Your baby may be fussy and have trouble sleeping for the first few days. He may feel some pain for a few days when he urinates. For about 2 weeks, he may feel some pain whenever urine or stool touches the tip of the *****.

Your baby will probably start feeling better within 3 to 4 days after circumcision. Even though he may feel better, his ***** may look worse. The ***** will usually look better about 7 to 10 days after circumcision.

What are the risks of circumcision?

Problems from circumcision are not common. If they occur, they are usually short-term, such as minor bleeding or infection. Other possible problems include pain and irritation of the tip of the *****.

Long-term problems are even more uncommon, but they can include damage to the opening of the urethra, heavy bleeding, severe infection, or scarring.

Some people have concerns that circumcision can decrease sensitivity in the *****. Some people also wonder if circumcision disrupts the bonding that occurs between mother and son during breast-feeding. But there is not a lot of research about these concerns.

Are there benefits to circumcision?

If your son is healthy, circumcision most likely will not affect his health either way. There may be some slight health benefits for circumcised males, but these must be weighed against the risks. Most experts in the United States agree that these possible benefits are not reason enough to choose circumcision.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend circumcision as a routine procedure for newborn males. When making this policy, the AAP looked at the possible benefits, risks, and costs of the procedure.¹ Other major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, agree with the AAP policy.

In the first year of life, urinary tract infections (UTIs) happen less often in circumcised boys than in boys who are not circumcised. But UTIs are not common. No studies support having circumcision done to prevent UTIs.^{4, 5, 6}

Some studies in other countries have shown that circumcised men are a little less likely than men who have not been circumcised to get a sexually transmitted disease (STD), including HIV.^{7, 8} But circumcision will not  prevent STDs and HIV, and it should not be done solely to prevent these problems.

What if I decide to keep my son's ***** natural?

Your child was born with a natural ***** and it is safe and healthy to keep it that way if you decide to do so.

When cleaning your son's natural *****, be careful not to force the ******** to retract. As your son gets older, teach him how to wash and care for his *****. It's important to keep your son's ***** clean whether he has been circumcised or not.

There may be reasons later in life when your son may need a circumcision. A boy or man may have problems retracting the ******** or may have swelling of the ******** that requires circumcision. But these problems are rare.

Circumcision is not just done in newborns. Keep in mind that your son can decide on his own later in life if he wants a circumcised *****.

If you need more information, see the topic   Circumcision.

Children's Health

And all this because I ask why your god gave man a f o r e skin only to tell him to cut it off.

Circumcision = Fun later in life. Women only like their music funky.

Some say only more hygiene is needed for the uncut? How many guys do you know that wash their hands after they take a whiz? Need I say more?

I have no idea what your first paragraph says and it makes no sense to me.  I assure you men who aren't circumcised have plenty of fun, and many, many women in the world are fine with men staying naturally equipped.  Not sure what that has to do with funky music...but I assure you women do not like funky men parts cut or intact...ewww.

You know, it seems a bit simpler to wash our bodies than to cut off whatever we might not want to wash later on...lol.  If a guy chooses not to wash after he goes there are more problems in his life than whether or not his favorite part is suitably covered or not.  Using that logic I guess I better shave my kids' hair now so they never have to worry about washing their hair.  I decided to just teach all my kids how to wash instead of am****ting various possible future annoyingly dirty parts...lol...but that's just me

What does circumcision have to do with many languages anyway.

Does it make you talk different? I know a guy who gave himself

a circumcision by way of zipper, he couldn't talk for a week.

But they did manage to save one of his eyes.