loveroftruth: I cant really tell if it is just my mind working hyper or that the thought process is legit, however, I could not help delving into this wonderment of how humans EVER managed to know that the fore skin of a male child conceals the real deal and that it will be the right, safest, healthiest erotic thing to do. Removing the foreskin, alias : 'Circumcision' of the male child.

A close look at the male genital at birth does not reveal any sign that anything is missing that needs correction nor does It give hint of any defect. How did the thought/reason to cut of the fore skin come about ?

To me, it looked as though such an effort was pulling a VERY BIG risk.

How did man come to know that it should be Circumcised and that it will be well at the end ?

Was the first Circumcision a trial and error process ?

Why will those ancient man ever seat and contemplated such an act ?

Please, can all and sundry help me out hear ?

Am I missing something

Please, can all the "wise men" of this world come in and help!

The Atheistic view point to this issue is also very much wellcomed.

*Am all ears now*

JuanDeDios: Well, my own wondering - why did God create something, only to realise his error and demand a surgery immediately the child is born to correct things?

JuanDeDios: Well, my own wondering - why did God create something, only to realise his error and demand a surgery immediately the child is born to correct things?

PastorOluT: Smile, atheist will definitely run from this thread 'cos circumcision gives credence to the bible n God.

JuanDeDios: Well, my own wondering - why did God create something, only to realise his error and demand a surgery immediately the child is born to correct things?

loveroftruth: It tells alot more than the 'covenant issue.
The knowledge of how it will turn out and the like, seem to reveal an inside knowledge of the human anatomy.

Its one thing to want to do something its another to get it right spot on.

If in an attempt to make a covenant with you I demand for something as delicate as your Adam's apple, then its no longer a laughing matter or a thing to joke with sake of 'covenant', not to talk of other multitude of people of divers Nations keying onto it.

Without a contrary opinion, circumcision may just be that significant thing that potends alot and not just a 'covenant' thing.

Thank you though, for your imput input.

Zikdik: I think that, though I can't speak for everyone, atheists are against it. It is not just atheists who are against circumcision.
The idea of forcing an infant onto a table and
cutting off erogenous tissue from him is barbaric. I bet you feel happy now
You don't have to be an atheist to be opposed to
such an idea.
I do have a contempt towards religious ideas that
demand the circumcision of infants, but I mostly
have a contempt towards circumcision because of
what has been removed without the person's
permission. You should also have a contempt against immunization since its also was done to you without your permission...
The foreskin has three major functions.
1. It prevents the glans (head) from becoming dry
and numb. The glans is a mucous membrane and
is not meant to be exposed to the outside
environment. Why not try un-circumcising yourself or try not circumcising your kids should you have one...
2. The foreskin reduces friction during sex,
increasing pleasure for both partners.
3. The foreskin itself contains 20,000+ nerve
endings directly contributing to sexual pleasure.
Having these removed permanently removes an
enormous portion of a man's sexual pleasure.
It that sense, yes. You have been damaged. Don't use the word You, that's generalizing an idea that is meaningful only to your person and those who choose to follow you down your path..... What you say is what becomes of you

Zikdik: I think that, though I can't speak for everyone, atheists are against it. It is not just atheists who are against circumcision.
The idea of forcing an infant onto a table and
cutting off erogenous tissue from him is barbaric.
You don't have to be an atheist to be opposed to
such an idea.
I do have a contempt towards religious ideas that
demand the circumcision of infants, but I mostly
have a contempt towards circumcision because of
what has been removed without the person's
permission.
The foreskin has three major functions.
1. It prevents the glans (head) from becoming dry
and numb. The glans is a mucous membrane and
is not meant to be exposed to the outside
environment.
2. The foreskin reduces friction during sex,
increasing pleasure for both partners.
3. The foreskin itself contains 20,000+ nerve
endings directly contributing to sexual pleasure.
Having these removed permanently removes an
enormous portion of a man's sexual pleasure.
It that sense, yes. You have been damaged.

loveroftruth:

I will address your post from different angles and at different times.

Meanwhile, for starters, are you circumcised ?

loveroftruth: Assumption! Some people may say.

Is it just the bible that contains the first instance pf circumcision ?

Well, you have said yours, let others also have their say.

It is not all that subscribes to the bible as you do, what do they/those set of persons think about it ? I want to know.

Meanwhile, thanks for your imput.

PastorOluT: Smile, atheist will definitely run from this thread 'cos circumcision gives credence to the bible n God.

Zikdik: I think that, though I can't speak for everyone, atheists are against it. It is not just atheists who are against circumcision.
The idea of forcing an infant onto a table and
cutting off erogenous tissue from him is barbaric.
You don't have to be an atheist to be opposed to
such an idea.
I do have a contempt towards religious ideas that
demand the circumcision of infants, but I mostly
have a contempt towards circumcision because of
what has been removed without the person's
permission.
The foreskin has three major functions.
1. It prevents the glans (head) from becoming dry
and numb. The glans is a mucous membrane and
is not meant to be exposed to the outside
environment.
2. The foreskin reduces friction during sex,
increasing pleasure for both partners.
3. The foreskin itself contains 20,000+ nerve
endings directly contributing to sexual pleasure.
Having these removed permanently removes an
enormous portion of a man's sexual pleasure.
It that sense, yes. You have been damaged.

loveroftruth: It tells alot more than the 'covenant issue.
The knowledge of how it will turn out and the like, seem to reveal an inside knowledge of the human anatomy.

Its one thing to want to do something its another to get it right spot on.

If in an attempt to make a covenant with you I demand for something as delicate as your Adam's apple, then its no longer a laughing matter or a thing to joke with sake of 'covenant', not to talk of other multitude of people of divers Nations keying onto it.

Without a contrary opinion, circumcision may just be that significant thing that potends alot and not just a 'covenant' thing.

Thank you though, for your imput.

loveroftruth:

I will address your post from different angles and at different times.

Meanwhile, for starters, are you circumcised ?

Zikdik:
No

Zikdik: I think that, though I can't speak for everyone, atheists are against it.

Zikdik:
It is not just atheists who are against circumcision.
The idea of forcing an infant onto a table and
cutting off erogenous tissue from him is barbaric.

Zikdik:
You don't have to be an atheist to be opposed to
such an idea.

Zikdik:
I do have a contempt towards religious ideas that
demand the circumcision of infants,

Zikdik:
but I mostly
have a contempt towards circumcision because of
what has been removed without the person's
permission.

Zikdik:
The foreskin has three major functions.
1. It prevents the glans (head) from becoming dry
and numb.

Zikdik:
The glans is a mucous membrane and
is not meant to be exposed to the outside
environment.

Zikdik:
2. The foreskin reduces friction during sex,

Zikdik:
increasing pleasure for both partners.

Zikdik:
3. The foreskin itself contains 20,000+ nerve
endings directly contributing to sexual pleasure.

Zikdik:
Having these removed permanently removes an
enormous portion of a man's sexual pleasure.

Zikdik:
It that sense, yes. You have been damaged.

Zikdik: I think that, though I can't speak for everyone, atheists are against it.

loveroftruth: Ok, its very obviouse that the atheist have nothing to offer here.
Though most of them if not all carry a circumcise manhood, it does not tickle their fancy to enquire how come some one cut their manhood and how it came about.

Well, I do, and I wish to find out why it is no other person cared to ask.

How did circumcision come abou ?

Your answer pls.