Thief
Rogue Theologian
would that be?.......the entire body
sheilding our souls?
that we know not what each other think and feel
the body is opague
God can see right through it
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Genesis 17: Guarding the Covenant.
- Thread starter John D. Brey
- Start date
sheilding our souls?
that we know not what each other think and feel
the body is opague
God can see right through it
John D. Brey
Well-Known Member
Amen. With one proviso. The text of Genesis chapter 17 zero's in on a particular body: one with an organ making the one possessing it think they're "male." The chapter is opposed not to the "foreskin," which is translated from the Hebrew word ערלה (orlah), but "male" flesh. In Genesis chapter 17, male flesh is called "uncircumcision" ערלה (orlah).
Which is to say the Hebrew word errantly interpreted and translated "foreskin" doesn't mean "foreskin." It means "uncircumcision." And "uncircumcision" means a human body considered "male." In the Hebrew of Genesis chapter 17, the text distinguishes between circumcision itself, versus the sign of circumcision.
In their guardianship of the text, the Hebrew sages conflate circumcision (returning the human body to its original state), with the "sign" or symbol of returning the human body to its original state, so that the symbolism of emasculation (cutting, bleeding, the penis), i.e., transforming a male into neither male, nor female, Jew nor Gentile, slave, nor master (Galatians 3:28), is distorted in a manner that implies that once the symbolic-emasculation takes place (brit milah), the actual circumcision has been effected.
To be "perfect" is to possess a body that's no longer gendered. And part and parcel of that perfection is that ha-adam was immortal until Genesis 2:21 when his labia were sewn shut to form the first male flesh. Prior to that Death had no rulership over ha-adam. Being "perfect" is a biblical trope for being immortal, not subject to death: non-gendered. And it's not the female body that's the "uncircumcision" ערלה (orlah). It's the male body that must be treated as what it is: a transgression of God's original design.
Unfortunately for Judaism, when the "foreskin" is removed, the person ritually undergoing circumcision is still a slave to the angel of death. Removing the foreskin ritually, or symbolically, isn't circumcision itself (emasculation), but merely a ritual that doesn't cut all the way through to the bone of the truth. If it did, Abraham would still be with us today since he wouldn't be subject any longer to the angel of death. He would indeed be "perfect," immortal, non-gendered.
John
Last edited:
Thief
Rogue Theologian
well....if you are formed as a man......
but don't perform as one
that would be?.....perfect
John D. Brey
Well-Known Member
Judaism symbolizes that through cutting and bleeding the flesh symbolic of masculinity: brit milah. Roman Christianity went further by forbidding the priesthood from engaging in dual-gendered sex. The celibacy of the priesthood is Roman Catholicism showing Judaism what brit milah signifies.
John
Thief
Rogue Theologian
and in between.....the Jews and the Roman Catholics
stands a Carpenter with a New Covenant
it seems He wanted to make a correction on the old one
do you think the new one has been .....well guarded