Changes

|publisher=''The Truthseeker'' |format=

Many have wondered why God would create men with a [[foreskin]] with documented protective, immunological, [[foreskin sensitivity| sensory]], and sexual [[Foreskin#Physiological_functions| physiological functions]] only to require that it be cut off after eight days of life. [[Lisa Braver Moss]] (1991) wrote:<blockquote> I am a Jew and I question circumcision. I have been questioning circumcision ever since I learned of the rite as a girl. At that time I questioned circumcision because it seemed wrong to cause pain to infants and because it seemed strange to surgically alter a healthy God-given part of the body. As I grew into adulthood I added questions. I continue to add them. I question circumcision because of its risks. I question it because it is seen by many as a perfunctory act rather than a spiritual one. I question it because it seems to require parents to take advantage of their infant's dependence and weakness. I also question it because of the paradox that those who support infant circumcision often cringe at the idea of circumcision of an older child as a puberty rite. I am sure all of these concerns are familiar to health professionals, who also question circumcision.  […] Finally, there is a slightly more esoteric concern. I question infant circumcision because it seems to me that a person's age should not affect our attitude towards his suffering. In other words, if we find the circumcision of older children offensive, we should find infant circumcision equally offensive. The most significant reason we as a society continue to practice infant circumcision, both medically and ritually, is that we do not respond to the suffering of infants in the same way we respond to the suffering of older children and adults. As parents our connection with our newborns is a very tenuous one, however strong it may feel when we first hold our little one and look into his or her eyes. The tenuousness of the bond only becomes apparent when we compare it to our bond with our older children. I personally could not subject my five-year old, or my two-year-old, to circumcision now for any reason other than absolute life or death necessity. This is not to say that it was easy for me to do at their birth, only that it would be impossible now. It is precisely this phenomenon that the advocates of routine neonatal circumcision are articulating when they advise parents to get it over with now because if one were to wait until the baby were older one would never do it. There is a way in which our infants are strangers to us as compared to our older children.<ref name="moss1991">{{REFweb |url=http://gaamerica.org/symposia/second/moss.html |title=The Jewish Roots of Anti-Circumcision Arguments |last=Moss |first=Lisa |author-link=Lisa Braver Moss |website=gaamerica |date=1991-04 |accessdate=2020-04-27 |format=PDF}}</ref></blockquote> Michael Glass (2003) reports contradictions between the Abrahamic covenant story (Genesis 17) and other Hebrew Scripture.<ref name="glass2003">{{REFweb |url=http://www.cirp.org/pages/cultural/glass3/ |title=What the Bible Reveals About Circumcision and Sexual Violence |last=Glass |first=Michael |init= |publisher=Circumcision Reference Library |date=2003-04 |accessdate=2022-11-08}}</ref>

Some contemporary Jewish parents feel that [[circumcision]] is a painful [[amputation ]] that inflicts [[pain]], physical, [[Sexual effects of circumcision| sexual]], and [[Psychological issues of male circumcision| psychological]] harm to a child. They wish to protect a son from such harm and so have adopted a peaceful, non-cutting naming ceremony usually called [[Brit Shalom]] instead of the traditional [[Brit Milah]]. [[Jenny Goodman |Goodman]] (1999) has called for an end to ritual cutting.<ref name="goodman1999">{{REFjournal

|init=J |author-link=Jenny Goodman

|volume=83 Suppl 1 |issue=1

Jewish Professor [[Leonard Glick]] (2005) observes observed that Genesis contains two covenants between God and Abraham. The first is in Genesis 15:18-21. It does not mention circumcision. The second covenant in Genesis 17 is a later addition by Judean priests.<ref name="glick2005">{{REFbook

|first=LeonardB. |init=LB

|url= |work= |editor= |edition=First |volume=1st

|locationpublisher= {{UNI|publisher=Oxford University |Oxon}} Press

}}</ref> Child circumcision did not become firmly established in [[Israel ]] until after [[Gilgal]] in 1604 {{#tip-text:BCE|Before Common Era, an alternative to BC}}, more than two centuries after the death of Abraham. According to Glick, the priests gained control after the Babylonian captivity, which ended in 538 {{#tip-text:BCE|Before Common Era, an alternative to BC}} and at that time the changes were made to Genesis Chapter Seventeen. Glick suggests that the choice to require [[circumcision ]] of infant boys may have been because the boys cannot put up resistance.<ref name="glick2005"/> It is clear that the alleged covenant that required circumcision of male infants on the eighth day was a later fabrication by [[circumcised ]] Judean priests and did not come from God.

Modern psychology offers an explanation for such behavior by the [[circumcised ]] priests. Male [[circumcision ]] is a highly traumatic surgical amputation that affects its victims for life.<ref>{{REFjournal

|volume=83 Suppl 1 |issue=1

}}</ref> [[Bessel van der Kolk|Van der Kolk ]] (1989) has shown that traumatized persons are compelled to repeat their [[trauma ]] on themselves or others.<ref name="vanderkolk1989">{{REFjournal |last=van der Kolk |first=Bessel |author-link= |etal=no |title=VanderKolkBA 1989}}</ref> The compulsion of [[circumcised]] men to repeat the [[Psychiatrist Discusses the Lasting Trauma of Circumcision| trauma: re-enactment, revictimization, and masochism of circumcision]] is seen in the huge numbers of men with [[adamant father syndrome]]. It appears that the circumcised priests ascribed their compulsion to an edict of God. |trans-title= |language= |journal=Psychiatr Clin North Am |locationDoes the Abrahamic covenant apply to Christians? = |date=1989-06 |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=389-411No, the Abrahamic covenant does ''NOT'' apply to Christians. Christians come under the New Covenant.<ref>{{REFweb |url=httphttps://www.cirpbiblegateway.orgcom/library/psych/vanderkolkpassage/?search=Acts+15%3A1-30&version=NASB |title=Acts of the Apostles 15:1-30. |last= |quotefirst= |pubmedIDinit=2664732 |pubmedCIDpublisher=Bible Gateway |DOIdate= |accessdate=20202023-0310-0322}}</ref> The compulsion of circumcised men to repeat the [[Psychiatrist Discusses the Lasting Trauma of Circumcision| trauma of circumcision]] is seen in See the huge numbers of men with [[adamant father syndromeCouncil at Jerusalem]]. It appears that the circumcised priests ascribed their compulsion to an edict of Godfor more information.

* [[Leonard B. GlickPain]]* [[Trauma]]

 * {{REFjournal |last=Chessler |first=Abbie J. |author-link= |title=Justifying the Unjustifable: Rite v. Wrong |journal=Buffalo Law Review |date=ChesslerAJ 1997 |volume=45 |issue= |pages=555 ''et seq'' |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/chessler/ |accessdate=2020-04-08}}