-
†. Gen 17:9b . . you and your offspring to come throughout the ages
shall keep My covenant.
The word "keep" is from shamar (shaw-mar') which means, properly: to
hedge about (as with thorns), i.e. guard, to protect, attend to. The general
meaning in this particular instance is: to preserve.
†. Gen 17:10 . . Such shall be the covenant between Me and you and
your offspring to follow which you shall keep: every male among you
shall be circumcised.
Circumcision didn't begin with Abraham. It was practiced in Egypt as early
as 2400 BC.
Circumcision doesn't serve to improve a man's physical appearance. Men
were created whole; and after God finished the six days of creation, He
inspected everything and graded it all very good. So circumcision doesn't
correct design errors; but actually mars a man's natural appearance. It
renders him somewhat disfigured so that he no longer bears a precise
resemblance to his ancestor Adam-- nor will he ever again. A circumcised
man is still a human being; just altered somewhat.
The surgery doesn't impair sexual function so we can rule out the possibility
that God imposed circumcision on Abraham and his male progeny for the
purpose of discouraging romance. After all if a man's genital nerves were to
be disabled, it would be very difficult for men to procreate-- and that would
conflict with God's promise to Abraham that he would be fruitful and become
very numerous.
†. Gen 17:11 . .You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and
that shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
The word for "sign" is from 'owth (oth). It's the very same word for the mark
upon Cain, and the rainbow of Noah's covenant. An 'owth not only labels
things, but also serves as a memory preserver; like the Viet Nam war
memorial. Abraham's circumcision, like rainbows and war memorials, is one
of those "lest we forget" reminders of important events.
†. Gen 17:12-13a . . And throughout the generations, every male
among you shall be circumcised at the age of eight days. As for the
home-born slave and the one bought from an outsider who is not of
your offspring, they must be circumcised, home-born, and purchased
alike.
Home-born slaves were those born while Abraham owned its parents. The
classification was reckoned Abraham's offspring; viz: his sons; thus
indicating that the Hebrew word zera' is ambiguous and doesn't always
identify one's biological progeny.
The Bible doesn't call ritual circumcision a baptism but it sure looks like a
species of baptism to me. Take for example the crossing of the Red Sea. The
New Testament calls it a baptism (1Cor 10:2) yet none of the people under
Moses' command got wet; they never even got damp. So baptisms come in
a variety of modes, and for a variety of purposes.
The implication is obvious: all males in Abraham's community (viz: his
kingdom) have to resemble Abraham in order to be bona fide registered
members; which means that a male Jew's genetics alone are not an eo ipso
connection to Abraham. He has to undergo the surgery too.
†. Gen 17:13b-14 . .Thus shall My covenant be marked in your flesh
as an everlasting pact. And if any male who is uncircumcised fails to
circumcise the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from
his kin; he has broken My covenant.
The "kin" in this regard is primarily Abraham but in later years came to
include one's tribal identity. Say a man's biological father was a biological
member of the tribe of Issachar, and for one reason or another never got
around to circumcising his son.
Well; until the son submits to the ritual, he cannot be counted among
Issachar's progeny. In point of fact, he cannot be counted as anybody's
progeny; not even Abraham's though Abraham is his biological ancestor.
This may seem a petty issue but in matters of inheritance, can have very
serious repercussions for the un-circumcised man. He's not only cut off from
his kin, but also from Abraham's covenant guaranteeing his posterity
ownership of Palestine and points beyond to the north, the south, the east,
and the west. The little piece of turf now occupied by the State of Israel is
but a parking lot in comparison to what God promised Abraham back in Gen
13:14-15.
To give an idea of just how serious God is about this ritual: After Moses was
commissioned to represent God in the Exodus; Yhvh rendezvoused with him
and came within an inch of taking his life over this very issue.
"Now it came about at an inn on the way that Yhvh met him and sought to
put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin
and threw it at Moses' feet, and she said: You are indeed a bloody
bridegroom to me. So He let him alone." (Ex 4:24-26)
That should be a sobering warning that anyone representing God is
supposed to set the example in all things. It's not do as I say, nor even do
as I do; but do as I have done.
Anyway, non-circumcised Jewish males aren't counted among Abraham's
community; and that was a law way before it was incorporated into Israel's
covenanted law as per Ex 12:48-49 and Lev 12:2-3.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
†. Gen 17:9b . . you and your offspring to come throughout the ages
shall keep My covenant.
The word "keep" is from shamar (shaw-mar') which means, properly: to
hedge about (as with thorns), i.e. guard, to protect, attend to. The general
meaning in this particular instance is: to preserve.
†. Gen 17:10 . . Such shall be the covenant between Me and you and
your offspring to follow which you shall keep: every male among you
shall be circumcised.
Circumcision didn't begin with Abraham. It was practiced in Egypt as early
as 2400 BC.
Circumcision doesn't serve to improve a man's physical appearance. Men
were created whole; and after God finished the six days of creation, He
inspected everything and graded it all very good. So circumcision doesn't
correct design errors; but actually mars a man's natural appearance. It
renders him somewhat disfigured so that he no longer bears a precise
resemblance to his ancestor Adam-- nor will he ever again. A circumcised
man is still a human being; just altered somewhat.
The surgery doesn't impair sexual function so we can rule out the possibility
that God imposed circumcision on Abraham and his male progeny for the
purpose of discouraging romance. After all if a man's genital nerves were to
be disabled, it would be very difficult for men to procreate-- and that would
conflict with God's promise to Abraham that he would be fruitful and become
very numerous.
†. Gen 17:11 . .You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and
that shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
The word for "sign" is from 'owth (oth). It's the very same word for the mark
upon Cain, and the rainbow of Noah's covenant. An 'owth not only labels
things, but also serves as a memory preserver; like the Viet Nam war
memorial. Abraham's circumcision, like rainbows and war memorials, is one
of those "lest we forget" reminders of important events.
†. Gen 17:12-13a . . And throughout the generations, every male
among you shall be circumcised at the age of eight days. As for the
home-born slave and the one bought from an outsider who is not of
your offspring, they must be circumcised, home-born, and purchased
alike.
Home-born slaves were those born while Abraham owned its parents. The
classification was reckoned Abraham's offspring; viz: his sons; thus
indicating that the Hebrew word zera' is ambiguous and doesn't always
identify one's biological progeny.
The Bible doesn't call ritual circumcision a baptism but it sure looks like a
species of baptism to me. Take for example the crossing of the Red Sea. The
New Testament calls it a baptism (1Cor 10:2) yet none of the people under
Moses' command got wet; they never even got damp. So baptisms come in
a variety of modes, and for a variety of purposes.
The implication is obvious: all males in Abraham's community (viz: his
kingdom) have to resemble Abraham in order to be bona fide registered
members; which means that a male Jew's genetics alone are not an eo ipso
connection to Abraham. He has to undergo the surgery too.
†. Gen 17:13b-14 . .Thus shall My covenant be marked in your flesh
as an everlasting pact. And if any male who is uncircumcised fails to
circumcise the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from
his kin; he has broken My covenant.
The "kin" in this regard is primarily Abraham but in later years came to
include one's tribal identity. Say a man's biological father was a biological
member of the tribe of Issachar, and for one reason or another never got
around to circumcising his son.
Well; until the son submits to the ritual, he cannot be counted among
Issachar's progeny. In point of fact, he cannot be counted as anybody's
progeny; not even Abraham's though Abraham is his biological ancestor.
This may seem a petty issue but in matters of inheritance, can have very
serious repercussions for the un-circumcised man. He's not only cut off from
his kin, but also from Abraham's covenant guaranteeing his posterity
ownership of Palestine and points beyond to the north, the south, the east,
and the west. The little piece of turf now occupied by the State of Israel is
but a parking lot in comparison to what God promised Abraham back in Gen
13:14-15.
To give an idea of just how serious God is about this ritual: After Moses was
commissioned to represent God in the Exodus; Yhvh rendezvoused with him
and came within an inch of taking his life over this very issue.
"Now it came about at an inn on the way that Yhvh met him and sought to
put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin
and threw it at Moses' feet, and she said: You are indeed a bloody
bridegroom to me. So He let him alone." (Ex 4:24-26)
That should be a sobering warning that anyone representing God is
supposed to set the example in all things. It's not do as I say, nor even do
as I do; but do as I have done.
Anyway, non-circumcised Jewish males aren't counted among Abraham's
community; and that was a law way before it was incorporated into Israel's
covenanted law as per Ex 12:48-49 and Lev 12:2-3.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=