Chist-cucks:Why would God order Abraham to circumcise all his desendents?

In Genesis 17, God tells Abraham to circumcise himself and his decedents:

> 9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
> 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
> 11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

Circumcision is clearly evil because it violates the child's right to bodily integrity. Modern human rights groups are opposing it and the practice has been banned in some countries.

Doesn't this mean that God commanded someone to do evil?

Attached: Rembrandt_Abraham_en_Isaac,_1634.jpg (682x992, 102K)

Christians didn't practice circumcision in Europe.
Only Amerimutt Jew slaves do (Including atheists).

Circumcision is not a Christian practice, it's a Jewish one.
Kys kike.
Sage

>Calling the DemiUrge god.

But they believe that God commanded it at one time. Doesn't that mean God commanded people to do evil?

The god of the Old Testament is the god of the Jews and the Jews alone. He doesn't say, "I'm the only god," He says "I'm better than other gods." He commands the Hebrews to take other's lands and genocide them.

Psalm 147:19-20
"He has revealed his word to Jacob, his laws and decrees to Israel.
He has done this for no other nation; they do not know his laws."

The old Cathar Christians believed that the god of the New Testament and the god of the Old Testament were two separate beings. The Cathars believed that the god of the Old Testament was Satan.

Just because you think something is good doesn't mean that God thinks it's good, and the same goes for evil.

All humans are born evil because of sin and because of that, we can have very distorted views about good and evil sometimes. But God did write the 10 commandments into our hearts so we at least know a little bit about what God thinks is good and evil (like murder, theft etc.).

Cutting half of your son's dick off signalled to the other members of the tribe that you're truly one of them. Those who didn't circumsize their children were expelled, leaving only group members who really meant it seriously and who were ready to make sacrifices.
>Tldr it's a feature of these religious groups that made them stronger

God knew the kikes would turn out to be scum so he trolled them into cutting their penises. He knew Christians, the Israel of God, would be his chosen people so he gave us a much better covenant.

You don't think that modern human rights groups and ethicists understand good and evil? Their arguments seem very logical and reasonable to me when it comes to circumcision.

Does bible ever provide a logical reason as to why it not evil? Or is your argument simply "God did it, therefore it must be okay"

>desert
>hot
>not much water to bathe
>smegma

Yeah, minimizing that problem was kind of important.

Does that really justify the act of harming another unconsenting person? What if God had ordered them to kill a stranger in order to prove their loyalty? Would the killing be justified?

Where does the bible say this is done for hygiene reasons? If that was the reason, shouldn't God have made it clear so that people woundn't keep doing it for thousands of years?

Different times, different culture

>God knew the kikes would turn out to be scum so he trolled them into cutting their penises.
God trolls entire groups of people over thousands of years?

>YHWH
>jewish prophet (Abraham)
>Christian

burgermuttwalmart education at its best.

How do time or culture difference make harming another person moral?

Because jews are gay and subconsciously manifest this by cutting their dicks and their slaves' dicks.

Modern circumcision only started in 400AD, before that it removed a lot less tissue.

You can justify violating the NAP from the ends of such a policy. So circumcision kept them intact as a nation.

Attached: 1489358759828.jpg (500x375, 31K)

God set up his people to become satan so that all mankind could be saved.

See:

It means the abrahamic religions don't worship God

Attached: 1530126895818.jpg (295x295, 39K)

Getting sand in your forskin is bad. People didnt understand hygiene so you tell them god will rape you forever unless you do it.

They put a little plastic ring on the penis. Then put a rubber band over it and the foreskin. The skin dries up and falls off just like the umbilical cord does. No cutting.

>Modern circumcision only started in 400AD, before that it removed a lot less tissue.
It is still violating the child's right of bodily integrity.

>You can justify violating the NAP from the ends of such a policy. So circumcision kept them intact as a nation.
You can't justify violating the NAP based on the good of the majority. That is clearly a utilitarian argument.

Also, why couldn't God have given them an less harmful tradition, like singing, to keep them together as a people?

Only very few Christians actually understand God. Pagans were much more aligned with what God originally means. God isn't a trinity and he didn't father a human son. God is the all-encompassing Order that no-one can elude.

>You can't justify violating the NAP based on the good of the majority. That is clearly a utilitarian argument.

Of course you can, if you aren't autistic. If the survival of all of humanity depended on pricking someone's finger, is it justified? Your ancestors survived based on violating the NAP because if they didn't, some other group would wipe them out.

>Also, why couldn't God have given them an less harmful tradition, like singing, to keep them together as a people?

That's the benefit of middle knowledge with omniscience, God would know what would work

Attached: 1500224786407.jpg (700x934, 135K)

Of course

New testament clearly says circumcision of the soul not the flesh
Shill faggit

He knew the Jews were destined to be cunts.
And not the good kind of cunts.

How has anything about God led you to believe the NAP applies to Him?

Paul clearly said circumcision was no longer required (not that it's stopped many christfags from doing it anyway).

So why didn't God just order them to clean themselves? They would clearly follow his orders regardless of whether they understood them.

>He doesn't say, "I'm the only god,"
He does.
>Isaiah 45:5: "I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:"

>Of course you can, if you aren't autistic. If the survival of all of humanity depended on pricking someone's finger, is it justified?
Not if that person does not consent. The "end justifies the means" is not ethical in deontological ethics.

See:
(You)

See

>Quoting English translations like it has any kind of authority over the original text

Attached: 1479722336115-pol.jpg (473x472, 38K)