Circumcision: who invented it?

[bgruagach]

I thought I'd throw into the conversation the fact that circumcision has been practiced by the aborigines in Australia and South America for a long time before Europeans ever ventured there too.

It seems to be a practice that was taken up all over the planet. I'm not sure it can be pinned down to just one original location or group.

[Abogado del Diablo]

Joseph Campbell (in his book "Primitive Mythology") details an aboriginal practice among many tribes in Australia involving a procedure called "subincision" of the penis. Upon reaching the age of adulthood (I think it was age 13, but I don't recall for sure), a boy would be ritualistically "kidnapped" from his mother's home by the men of the tribe and put through a coming of age ritual through which he dies as a boy and becomes a man.

The ritual included cutting long incision along the underside of the boy's penis, thereby giving him a symbolic vagina and completing him as a man with both a penis and vagina. The purpose was to co-opt the feminine myth of reproductive power.

[Postmaster]

Would it be no surprise to tell you that the person who wrote the Di Vinci codes has a Jewish mother? I've actually researched the Di Vinci Codes and going into my research with an open mind, I come out with the conclusion it's a bunch of crap. Judaism is an amazing faith by far but not only because Christianity was born from it but for many pioneering reasons, I mean Judaism plays a big role in Western thinking.

Politicians had no choice but to take on Christianity because it was spreading extremely fast and becoming extremely popular and if you were to do a bit of reading you will understand that originally Christianity was spread by martyrdom and not the sword. Many Christians died by the sword.

[I, Brian]

Ayai-yai!! If we ever have an awards system, I nominate this one already under "Discussion that make you physically cringe".

As for discussion on the spread of Christianity - let's see a new thread on that as a discussion issue, instead of this thread, please.

[Postmaster]

There is absolutely no need for a discussion on the spread of Christianity because the evidence is enormous for anyone with a reasoning mind to see that in first few hundred years it was spread by martyrdom and that's about it really, anyone who doesn't agree is probably only due to justification for other ideas which is fair enough and nothing wrong with it.

[Abogado del Diablo]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

There is absolutely no need for a discussion on the spread of Christianity because the evidence is enormous for anyone with a reasoning mind to see that in first few hundred years it was spread by martyrdom and that's about it really, anyone who doesn't agree is probably only due to justification for other ideas which is fair enough and nothing wrong with it.

Actually, I disagree that it was spread by martyrdom the first two centuries. Or at least I disagree that that fact is established.

There is very little historical evidence of how it was spread (or even what it was) until the middle of the Second Century. Some aspect of it was certainly connected to the pagan mysteries and Neo-platonic philosophy (the earliest "apologists" and the authentic Pauline epistles are more about Neoplatonist notions of the Divine Logos and Hebrew "Wisdom" as revealed in a secret revelation contained in the Hebrew Scriptures then they are about a historical Jesus).

Some aspect of it was certainly connected to apocalyptic sects inspired by Jewish mysticism of the day. Indeed, the historical record DOES confirm that eductated, Greek-speaking Jews of the Diaspora were engaged in synthesizing Jewish mysticism, Greek philosophy and the pagan mysteries in cosmopolitan places like Alexandria. One obvious example: Philo the Pythagorean.

The real problem is that the actual historical records were systematically altered and destroyed to create a false impression of unity in the faith in the first two centuries - creating a misleading image of unity both in the theology and history as understood by early believers. There is enough of the historical record recovered to demonstrate a clear absence of unity in how the faith was interpreted. The historical accounts written by Eusebius survived because they were sympathetic to a certain version of that history and appear to have been written for the very purpose of composing a sympathetic history for the Roman Church. Dissent from this historical view was then systematically destroyed. Does that mean that Eusebius account is wrong? No. However, unfortunately, it does leave us with a vague and unreliable historical record of the first two centuries of Christianity that may and probably was influenced by political forces at the time of Rome's adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Empire.

[Postmaster]

Are all those stories of them many many Christian martyrs not enough? I would encourage anyone to travel and see with there own eyes, because something’s still remain in the air. Go to the Greek islands to see glass coffins of Christian martyrs skeletons still in Churches including many tombs and stories. We're talking about a country which invented philosophy without theological figures and the original inventors of the evolutionary theory and democracy, what went wrong? The religion phenomenon will hit everybody one day.

Seek and you shall find.

Politics and religion are 2 different things just as they are today in democratic society.

[Admin Edit: Spyware links removed - Postmaster, get that harddrive cleaned. ]

[Abogado del Diablo]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Are all those stories of them many many Christian martyrs not enough? I would encourage anyone to travel and see with there own eyes, because something’s still remain in the air. Go to the Greek islands to see glass coffins of Christian martyrs skeletons still in Churches including many tombs and stories. We're talking about a country which invented philosophy without theological figures and the original inventors of the evolutionary theory and democracy, what went wrong? The religion phenomenon will hit everybody one day.

Seek and you shall find.

Politics and religion are 2 different things just as they are today in democratic society.

I didn't say there weren't martyrs. There certainly were. I simply stated that the official history that the faith was spread by martyrdom in the first two centuries C.E. is dubious.

It's not an issue of religion or politics (well, some politics are involved). It's an issue of historical evidence, or the lack thereof, and the interpretation of what has been preserved.

[Postmaster]

apologies, in that case you are correct

[dauer]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

[color=black]Would it be no surprise to tell you that the person who wrote the Di Vinci codes has a Jewish mother?

No. Nor do I see what relevance it has to the discussion.

I've actually researched the Di Vinci Codes and going into my research with an open mind, I come out with the conclusion it's a bunch of crap.

Well it is a book of fiction. What do you expect to find?

Politicians had no choice but to take on Christianity because it was spreading extremely fast and becoming extremely popular

What's your point?

and if you were to do a bit of reading you will understand that originally Christianity was spread by martyrdom and not the sword. Many Christians died by the sword.

There is nothing unusual about their deaths. There were many more Jewish martyrs due to numbers alone. Masada, the asara harugei malchut also known as the ten martyrs, and countless others who went unrecorded. Only Judaism has remained a religion of martyrs throughout time. Christianity became the religion of the persecutor, the one who makes martyrs out of others. Christianity spread because it paganized itself with a dying god born to a woman impregnated by a god, offered salvation based on faith instead of focusing on the individual's actions, etc.

There was very little original in the message of Christianity.

Dauer

[Postmaster]

No. Nor do I see what relevance it has to the discussion.

I feel it does have relevance to this discussion

Well it is a book of fiction. What do you expect to find?

Dan Brown has publicly stated that if he was to write it as a historical account he wouldn't change much.


And as for the rest of what you say, it's a matter of debate I suppose, as all the rest we say. Soooo, who knows.

[dauer]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

I feel it does have relevance to this discussion[/color]

Would you care to explain how so I can understand where you're coming from?

Dan Brown has publicly stated that if he was to write it as a historical account [/color]he wouldn't change much.

Are those his exact words? If they were, they're rather vague. And either way, what exactly does this have to do with our conversation? I never endorsed his book nor did I endorse his theories.

And as for the rest of what you say, it's a matter of debate I suppose, as all the rest we say. Soooo, who knows.[/color]

True true.

Dauer

[Postmaster]

Would you care to explain how so I can understand where you're coming from?

Well first off, I just want to make clear that I have nothing to hide, I have no hate I have no problem with Judaism, I see other religions and I would say if only they were more like Judaism , but you got to remember that when I speak I simply speak from my point of view. Judaism is a religion that in my view needs plenty justification, not only because Jewish people are one of the most Diaspora people on the planet and living in other societies where there is Islam, Christianity, and just about any other religion but also because they are still awaiting GODS messenger. Also Judaism is very distinctive in many ways, from circumcision, to dressing ect ect, now I'm not even saying Christianity is perfect but like I said from Baha'i point of view from doing a lot of reading on it recently I realised that it's tradition and disconnection that causes negativity towards people, and both sides are just as responsible to deal with it, as Jew and say as a Muslim and even a Christian and I was simply saying that circumcision is an extreme, old and worthless tradition, however this is purely my point of view. Hope that also clears why I mentioned Dan Browns mother is Jewish and nothing else.

[dauer]

PM,

Honestly, I have no idea what any of this has to do with the Di Vinci Codes at all. I never mentioned the book and I have no idea why you mentioned it, nor do I understand why it matters that Dan Brown's mother is Jewish. If it clarifies anything, I never read it. Maybe that's why I don't follow. But I just don't see the connection at all.

[Postmaster]

Well the Di Vinci Codes is a version of Christianity that many people have started to believe as truth that is a totally says Chrsit was only a teacher, no one divine and the Romans used him for political benifits. Can you believe hat even the Vatican is pissed off with the book and even made a public announement about it being totally lies.

Other then that, hope I haven't offended you and if you are a practising Jew I'sd certainly recomend you carry on