Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-03-2014, 10:21 AM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
(05-03-2014 10:19 AM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 09:58 AM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  There is a hill in Israel call foreskin hill...that's disgusting...

Joshua 5:3
And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.

We have Virginville, Intercourse and BlueBall (all towns) here in PA.
Israel's got nuttin we cant make look stupid here in PA.

Thumbsup
So, then Intercourse, PA... would that be a physician's assistant in intercourse? Tongue

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 10:25 AM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
(05-03-2014 09:52 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 08:56 AM)guitar_nut Wrote:  Your trying. Lighter and easier to carry? Riiiiiiiight. What's amazing is you coming to an atheist website and trying to make sense of foreskin collection.

How much does a foreskin weigh compared to a human ear? And since you're talking about ease, let's talk about how easy an ear is to remove vs. removing the foreskin, and only the foreskin. Then let's talk about having to separate the foreskins (which have no doubt become stuck together during the trip home) before counting them all, versus dumping out a bag of ears. Your reasons for picking foreskins over any other body part are hilarious. A wise man would have probably answered "I have no real idea why they chose the foreskins."
Actually this point was first made by KC here:
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid508735
It didn't seem controversial at the time, but you can still take it up with him. I guess he's not a "wise man."

Here's his exact quote:

Quote:"It's not just an OT thing... it was a cultural thing. That and circumcision became a VERY important outward sign of being a Hebrew. No one else circumcised, so it was an easy way for the Hebrew to stand apart socially (which is what they wanted)."

This is incorrect. Other cultures practiced it, as was pointed out by docskeptic.

Quote:"During the ANE times of war, if there was a bounty for kills, foreskins would be collected as proof of the kills... because... well... they are a LOT lighter than heads and you're not going to get a man's foreskin unless you kill them."

This doesn't answer my question. Foreskin removal is not easier than ear removal, in regards to both speed and precision. Many body parts are lighter than the head; can you think of one besides foreskin? Why not the tongue? Ear? Why do you have to strip the pants off and fillet the foreskin of your enemy?

Quote:"It's kind of unfair to say that the OT was obsessed with foreskins because it's ANE literature and this practice was common during that time."

This also doesn't address anything. "Common" and "obsession" are interchangeable in many cases.

You could say that American society is obsessed with sex. You could also say that being outwardly sexual is common for our time. So which is it? Are Americans obsessed with sex, or is it a cultural norm of the times? I say both. So again, there is no real attempt to answer "Why foreskins?" other than to say "It was common." That's not an answer.

If you're going to use the tactic of piggybacking off of someone else who is better at debate than you, you might want to ensure that you grab one of their better arguments. I don't agree with KC on this particular argument. One of his points was wrong, and the other is a weak defense of the trophy selection on the battlefield. I'm taking it up with you, because you continue to redirect and give bad answers. Don't run and hide behind KC.

Why foreskins? Why not ears?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes guitar_nut's post
05-03-2014, 10:28 AM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Quote:During the ANE times of war, if there was a bounty for kills, foreskins would be collected as proof of the kills... because... well... they are a LOT lighter than heads and you're not going to get a man's foreskin unless you kill them.
[Image: frabz-WHAT-THE-FUCK-12f2ab.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes donotwant's post
05-03-2014, 11:41 AM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
(05-03-2014 10:25 AM)guitar_nut Wrote:  Here's his exact quote:

Quote:"It's not just an OT thing... it was a cultural thing. That and circumcision became a VERY important outward sign of being a Hebrew. No one else circumcised, so it was an easy way for the Hebrew to stand apart socially (which is what they wanted)."

This is incorrect. Other cultures practiced it, as was pointed out by docskeptic.
I take "no one" there to be hyperbole that really means it was uncommon. Angel

Doc just gave two references. The passage on David indicates that it was uncommon in Israel's neighbors, as you can't collect it if it ain't there to collect.

Quote:"During the ANE times of war, if there was a bounty for kills, foreskins would be collected as proof of the kills... because... well... they are a LOT lighter than heads and you're not going to get a man's foreskin unless you kill them."
Quote:This doesn't answer my question. Foreskin removal is not easier than ear removal, in regards to both speed and precision. Many body parts are lighter than the head; can you think of one besides foreskin? Why not the tongue? Ear? Why do you have to strip the pants off and fillet the foreskin of your enemy?
Are the tongue and ear lighter than the foreskin? Which would you give up first - an ear, or part of your penis?
Quote:This also doesn't address anything. "Common" and "obsession" are interchangeable in many cases.

You could say that American society is obsessed with sex. You could also say that being outwardly sexual is common for our time. So which is it? Are Americans obsessed with sex, or is it a cultural norm of the times? I say both. So again, there is no real attempt to answer "Why foreskins?" other than to say "It was common." That's not an answer.
When speaking of a people, an obsession is necessarily common, but something common is not necessarily an obsession. It's common for Americans to wear socks, but I wouldn't say we're obsessed with them.
Quote:If you're going to use the tactic of piggybacking off of someone else who is better at debate than you, you might want to ensure that you grab one of their better arguments. I don't agree with KC on this particular argument. One of his points was wrong, and the other is a weak defense of the trophy selection on the battlefield. I'm taking it up with you, because you continue to redirect and give bad answers. Don't run and hide behind KC.
I find it amusing to hide behind KC, and will defer further questions on foreskins as war trophies to him. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
(05-03-2014 11:41 AM)alpha male Wrote:  Doc just gave two references. The passage on David indicates that it was uncommon in Israel's neighbors, as you can't collect it if it ain't there to collect.

KC was wrong on his point. The two references were two cultures, not two other people. You referenced an argument that was incorrect. End of story.

(05-03-2014 11:41 AM)alpha male Wrote:  Are the tongue and ear lighter than the foreskin? Which would you give up first - an ear, or part of your penis?

They're both lighter than the head, and weigh ounces at best. That was the argument, right? That the foreskin was chosen because it was lighter and easier to carry than a head.

As a dead soldier, I don't chose what I 'give up' as a trophy. I'm not sure what your point is here.

(05-03-2014 11:41 AM)alpha male Wrote:  When speaking of a people, an obsession is necessarily common, but something common is not necessarily an obsession. It's common for Americans to wear socks, but I wouldn't say we're obsessed with them.

Do you feel that cutting the skin off of someone's dick after you've killed them is as benign as putting on a pair of socks, and is not a sign of specific focus or desire?

My original question remains unanswered. Why foreskins?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes guitar_nut's post
05-03-2014, 01:11 PM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Speaking of ears and tongues...

Recall that there were 32 references to foreskin or circumcision in the OT.

There are 91 references to ears.

There are 89 references to the tongue.

Why isn't anyone claiming that the OT is obsessed with those, despite each being mentioned nearly 3 times more?

Oh yeah...foreskin makes you guys giggle. Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 01:13 PM (This post was last modified: 05-03-2014 01:23 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
(05-03-2014 12:35 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  My original question remains unanswered. Why foreskins?

Guitar-nut,
I gave some plausible reasons earlier on this thread. Just to throw some fuel on the fire, why confine ourselves to the foreskin? Why is God obsessed with human genitalia at all? Here's another verse:
Deut. 23:1: No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord.

Eunuchs are clumped with Moabites, Ammonites and bastards among those who cannot "enter the assembly of the Lord", whatever that means.

It is true, though, that later in the OT and in the NT, eunuchs are more socially acceptable. Why? Does God change his mind?

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 01:31 PM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Hair...55
Head...280
Eye...61
Hand...1,062!
Feet/foot...229
Angel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 01:51 PM
Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Clearly, "Foreskin" isn't non-sequitur at all. Hair, head, eye, hand, feet, foreskin. See? Totally reasonable to bring up in conversation.

Example: "I really like the way your foreskin compliments the color of your hair and eyes" or "here, hand me your foreskin that I may look through it like a telescope, then decorate your hair with it".

β€œIt is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
05-03-2014, 02:02 PM
RE: Why is there such an obsession with Foreskins in the OT
Arm...58
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: