Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pharisee Circumcision(Mutilation) vs Biblical Circumcision

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pharisee Circumcision(Mutilation) vs Biblical Circumcision

    Not sure this is accurate, but the idea of an all-knowing God can differentiate what is and what is not mutilation.

    The Pharisees in the Bible are known to add new laws and regulations distorting religion and scaring away people who may be interested. Religion is corrupted since immemorial but God
    isn't.


  • #2
    Just proves how we were all "fucked at the drivethru".

    Comment


    • #3
      I disagree with the statement that religion is corrupt, but only that "organized" religion such as the photo you posted is. I also believe in karma as well... if you look at the world from a vantage that you can't change the past, but can change the future, the world and your life will have so much more meaning. That is the reason I chose to restore and I feel like I can speak for many people here. God did not make that poster of a "biblical circumcision"... man did and obviously didn't look at the bible before preaching. Its hypocrites like that which make this world shitty for us who went through that FUCKED UP DRIVETHROUGH!

      Comment


      • #4
        Notably, according to the bible, Moses didn't have anyone circumcised during the 40 years in the desert. The practice was reinstated by Joshua.

        Comment


        • #5
          Was someone already circumcised when he was called? Then he should not try to remove the marks of his circumcision. Was someone uncircumcised when he was called? He shouldn’t undergo b’rit-milah. - 1 Corinthians 7:18 (Complete Jewish Bible)

          http://www.covenantcircumcision.info...vs_Periah.html
          http://www.circumstitions.com/Xy.html
          Last edited by r5K; 03-26-2018, 08:22 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Orthodox Christian canon forbids circumcision. De-circumcisioning in and of itself does not beget eternal life, rather Christ does. Salvation comes through life in the Church more readily. I came to Orthodox Christianity while restoring. I figure I was in the process at the time, so I am free to continue as long as it does not interfere with my being saved throughout my life on this Earth.

            Be well and do not over-dwell on the matter. God is merciful. If you have questions, an Orthodox priest, bishop and the Orthodox Saints are the best people to turn to for further clarity.

            Comment


            • #7
              This is accurate. Mordecai Ben Nissan made it one of his criticisms of Talmudic JudaismClick image for larger version

Name:	gm.jpg
Views:	53
Size:	476.2 KB
ID:	59728

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by SensitivityTrainer View Post
                Orthodox Christian canon forbids circumcision. De-circumcisioning in and of itself does not beget eternal life, rather Christ does. Salvation comes through life in the Church more readily. I came to Orthodox Christianity while restoring. I figure I was in the process at the time, so I am free to continue as long as it does not interfere with my being saved throughout my life on this Earth.

                Be well and do not over-dwell on the matter. God is merciful. If you have questions, an Orthodox priest, bishop and the Orthodox Saints are the best people to turn to for further clarity.
                I think this is a good approach, if we are to be successful we need a cold moralistic approach.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ProspectOfNature View Post
                  Not sure this is accurate, but the idea of an all-knowing God can differentiate what is and what is not mutilation.

                  The Pharisees in the Bible are known to add new laws and regulations distorting religion and scaring away people who may be interested. Religion is corrupted since immemorial but God
                  isn't.
                  Mordecai ben nissan made this a major point. Martin Luther also pointed it out

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	gm.jpg
Views:	58
Size:	476.2 KB
ID:	59731

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In Anan Ben Davids discussion around the crime of mayhem, he explicitly states that the Old Testament cnsiders mayhem to be on an equal footing as murder. Yes thats right literal murder. But, just as we cannot kill someone for violating a law with a death penalty attached to it so too we cannot apply the maxim of "eye for eye and tooth for tooth." Its often seen as an argument against judaism that this is not applied to male genital mutilation, but when cross examined with the points made above it becomes very clear what the problem is.

                    Mayhem is actually a specific and clearly defined crime- one that includes all cutting off of any part of a persons body, the California Penl Code even includes cutting a sliver off of someones ear as mayhem, and therefore as a FELONY. There is not, however, any statute stating that this does not apply for whatever reason to cutting off a ersons prepuce but only if the victim is male, underaged and his so-called "parents" "agree for him." Without any such statute anyone who has anything to do with this is amultiple felon by definition.

                    However this is ignored because we like to pretend as if this had some larger meaning than being simply a manifestation of human barbarism, the use of violent force against children.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by FatalStrategies View Post
                      California Penl Code even includes cutting a sliver off of someones ear as mayhem, and therefore as a FELONY. There is not, however, any statute stating that this does not apply for whatever reason to cutting off a ersons prepuce but only if the victim is male, underaged and his so-called "parents" "agree for him."
                      https://www.cnn.com/2011/10/02/healt...law/index.html
                      -Ron Low
                      [email protected]
                      847 414-1692 Chicago

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Did he specify that the foreskin is not considered a part of a childs body based on whether or not the parent decides it is?
                        If so this would amount to a codification of discrimination into law, not that the 14th amendment will ever be enforced.

                        I never put any faith in the state to begin with. It exists to serve current power relations. The narcaccistic parents of america are unwilling to admit that they are horrible people, they cannot allow it to be banned anywhere because the distortions of values must be total, they cannot allow justice to be demonstrated anywhere, and in addition to this doctors are making literal billions off of this racket.

                        I like Ayn Rands idea of a strike- we take no part in the ideological structure of society. Not only do we not mutilate our sons genitals, we shun anyone who does, and we focus on changing the culture enough so that young males growing up today have the ability to think for themselves. We must point out that they have no obligation to obey their parents, their parents have no right to complain about any extreme behavior on their part-on our end we should stop caring about society's needs, deliberately defy social convention.

                        next time thereis an AAP conference we should show up drunk then ask them whether or not they think the women subject to clitorectomies in the United States by american surgeos in the 1960s should be compensated. Then we should confront them on their normalisation of so-called "correctional surgeries" for intersex children and "gender affirming" surgeries for supposedly trans children. Only afterwards should male Genital Mutilation enter the mix. the focus has to be perpetually and systematically shifted from why wehave a problem with it to why they have such a need to justify it.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X