Considering not circumcising. No judgments please.

[JustSomeChickVee]

Originally Posted by qsefthuko The circ God directed as you pointed out was only nipping a bit off the tip. It left the majority intact. In Genesis God says he looked at his creation and said it was good. This included man in his entirety. So it included his foreskin. He never directed for the entire foreskin to be removed. It did and still does serve a purpose. Maybe that helps. I believe in the whole bible. So for us this includes where it says man need no longer be circed. This makes it an easy decision for us.

This. OP, you are correct about the original circ not removing the entire, or even most of the foreskin. They also got the babies drunk. As far as pain, it is as painful as described, at least the way it is done today (I can link you to a few videos if you would like.) Anesthesia isn't effective according to this study: http://cpj.sagepub.com/content/25/8/412.abstract

You could also consider a Brit Shalom. It is a non-cutting naming ceremony.

[hilaryisinked]

Originally Posted by ~*~Sunflower~*~ (((HUGS))) The bible states in the new testament that circumcision was no longer necessary or relevant. I am sure that it must be a hard decision for you, based on your religious community. We did not circumcise our son (now an adult) & we never were unhappy with the decision, nor is he. I hope that you will pray to God for peace regarding this decision.

Originally Posted by qsefthuko The circ God directed as you pointed out was only nipping a bit off the tip. It left the majority intact. In Genesis God says he looked at his creation and said it was good. This included man in his entirety. So it included his foreskin. He never directed for the entire foreskin to be removed. It did and still does serve a purpose. Maybe that helps. I believe in the whole bible. So for us this includes where it says man need no longer be circed. This makes it an easy decision for us.

These. Hugs. Pray on it and I know you will get an answer you are at peace with.

Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

[MyLovely]

Okay, so I'm an atheist, but was raised Christian, almost converted to Judaism and have studied religion in extensive detail...

In all my readings and all the things I was taught, God was supposed to be jealous and righteous, but loving. You have a very valid reason to be second guessing this. Remember, like you said, most boys are very healthy newborns who had an entirely different procedure done than what's done today. Your baby will already have to undergo surgeries, and if he were circumcised, it would be much more extreme than in the old times. I may not be religious, but if I were, I would feel that this would be a totally justifiable excuse to skip it.

Not to mention, this isn't something as "big" spiritually as, say, baptism. It's a mitzvah, no more or less important than keeping kosher or not shaving a beard. It's not even a mitzvah that falls on your son himself, so he will be no different spiritually than a circumcised boy. The mitzvah falls on the parents, and as I said, I think you have a really good reason. I can't imagine a god who would punish parents for preventing pain, especially when it's just one of 613 mitzvahs...nobody can do them all perfectly

[marliah]

Actually the new testament goes into detail about how circumsiion was a shadow of something to come (the circumsiion of the heart) as the sacrifices of lambs and bulls was pointing to the sacrifice of Christ and wa are no longer required to perform animal sacrifices. The new testament seems to speak against circumsiion, see Galatians 5. I would be happy to talk to you more about his, I have studied it pretty heavily. Feel free to pm me

And we do not ignore the old testament either, what God hated then, He hates now, I don't believe we are to throw out the old testament, but I think the Levitical ordinances have been done away with (the animal sacrifices, circumsicion, the physical temple (as we, Gods people, are now the temple) the Levitical priesthood (Christ is our mediator now) ect.) the law was given as our schoolmaster to point us to Christ as we see we cannot keep it perfectly.

Would love to talk to you more if you desire.

Blessings in Yeshua our Savior!

[~Cricket~]

I think you maybe have to discern between what is a cultural tradition and a Biblical principle. Obviously, circumcision is a part of your tradition, and as such, it's hard to break with that, especially if family and friends are "expecting" it. It's always really tough to pull away from something that all of your family and friends are doing, and you will probably feel like they might be judging you for it.

But, as for Biblical principles, I think you might have a hard time finding support in the Bible, as a Messianic Jew, for circumcision. Read what Paul has to say about those who believed that circumcision was necessary for Christians. He was pretty firm about it NOT being necessary, and that if you feel you need to keep the ceremonial law to please God, then you are missing out on the free gift of grace in Christ. (Phillipians 3, Galatians 5, etc.)

Please don't think I'm trying to judge you on this - I really think that circumcision is a personal choice, and I don't get too worked up about it one way or the other. I just thought it might be helpful for you to clarify for yourself the difference between a tradition (which is hard to break, but not "wrong") and a Biblical principle (which shouldn't be broken.)

I agree with the other posters - talk to your DH, pray, think, and try to come to a decision that you can both be at peace with. All the best!

[wonton]

I am wondering as a Messianic Jew would there be a traditional circumcision ceremony?

There is a non-cutting ceremony that more Jewish people are practicing, it's called Brit Shalom.

If he were female no circumcision (not even a symbolic prick) would be legally allowed regardless of the reasons.

[raisingcropsandbabies]

My DH was set on having our first son circ'd and while I dreaded the thought (I was not for it), DH is the head of our house and I was going to submit to his decision.

Well, ds1 was born and suffered a birth injury (miracle he lived). All our prior decisions went out the window and DH didn't want him going through any "extra" surgeries when he was going to need surgery/therapies for his arm too. While we didn't have a religious reason to circ him, it was just like, "Why put him through more pain when he just endured it and will have to endure more?" So he is intact.

We had the opposite with family expecting us TO circ and voicing it during my pregnancy, but when he was born all of those comments and expectations just faded away and were all background.

We have another 2 sons and they are intact as well (I think after seeing our first son be okay not circ'd, DH lost his will to have the others get circ'd).

I would just pray about it (asking for God to direct you and DH) and then look to DH to give his answer.

[chandni3]

Originally Posted by ~Cricket~ But, as for Biblical principles, I think you might have a hard time finding support in the Bible, as a Messianic Jew, for circumcision. Read what Paul has to say about those who believed that circumcision was necessary for Christians. He was pretty firm about it NOT being necessary, and that if you feel you need to keep the ceremonial law to please God, then you are missing out on the free gift of grace in Christ. (Phillipians 3, Galatians 5, etc.)

We don't believe in keeping the laws for salvation and believe that Paul was talking about people trying to convince the converts that they must be circumcised in order to be saved. We believe the law is the blueprint for how to live out your life after salvation (it was given after freedom from slavery in Egypt, not as a requirement to become free) and there is always grace when you fail but it doesn't mean you don't try. We also believe that circumcision was a covenant with Abraham and his descendants which applies today, however we're not Jewish by blood (and neither were the converts Paul was talking to), only by practice, so I'm taking that into consideration too. I haven't had a chance to talk to my husband about it, hopefully he has some thoughts to add (usually he doesn't though, it's great that he lets me do whatever I think is best but sometimes I'd like a little input or advice )

There is a ceremony that some Jewish people do nowadays to welcome the son without a circumcision. We actually did a naming ceremony for our daughter. But I don't really want to attract attention to the fact if we don't circumcise. I don't want to have to defend our decision, especially to others that made a different one and so would feel I was judging them. This really requires a lot of thought and study on my part. The only benefit is if we don't do it, and it was the wrong decision, our son can have it done later. Our Rabbi's adopted teen sons recently had it done. It can't be easily un-done though.

[DesertRat]

Originally Posted by chandni3 So anyway, I've been thinking a lot the last couple days about it and remembered that I had read that circumcision as done in Bible times is different than what they do today. Back then it was only a trimming of the skin at the end of the foreskin. The foreskin was pulled forward, not back, and trimmed off. This left a large amount of the foreskin still intact and it wasn't ripped away from the gland. Infact, there was so much intact that men during Roman (or Greek) times in the arena would pull their foreskin down so you couldn't tell they were circumcised. Because of this the religious leaders changed circumcision to be the removal of the whole foreskin so that people couldn't hide it. So what God ordained, and what is done today are two different things. God's way still allowed the gland to be protected so that pleasure wouldn't be lost. So, what I'm thinking is, unless I can find a trained person to perform a "Biblical" circumcision, which I probably won't be able to. I'd like to leave my boy intact. I'm still struggling if it's the right decision or not, and I might change my mind with more research, I don't even know why I"m writing all this, I just have no neutral people to talk to. All our friends circumcised their boys so I dont' want them to feel judged by me and other friends don't believe the same as us (in keeping Old Testament laws).

I was going to say this exact thing, but I'm glad to hear you already know it! I'm not Jewish, but I do believe that circumcision was commanded by God for the Jews. However, I believe that commandment was done away with with the coming of Christ. For a long time it really bothered me that God would command something so painful for babies that would also negatively affect their sexual function for their ENTIRE life! I'm really bothered by circumcision, and it didn't mesh with my understanding of God. Not to mention, with the lack of medical knowledge back then, I wondered how many babies would have died from blood loss or infection. When I learned about the difference between ancient and modern circumcision, I was so relieved and it made so much sense! While I don't circumcise my boys, ancient circumcision doesn't really bother me.

It's easy for me to say (because I'm not Jewish) but I could not/would not circumcise by today's method for "religious reasons." It's not what God commanded you to do. If you can't find someone to do a biblical circumcision, I would leave him intact.

[songbird516]

Originally Posted by qsefthuko The circ God directed as you pointed out was only nipping a bit off the tip. It left the majority intact. In Genesis God says he looked at his creation and said it was good. This included man in his entirety. So it included his foreskin. He never directed for the entire foreskin to be removed. It did and still does serve a purpose. Maybe that helps. I believe in the whole bible. So for us this includes where it says man need no longer be circed. This makes it an easy decision for us.

Yes, this. While I'm sure that there was a good reason for the command to circ (most likely to separate themselves from the other nations at the time), that was not God's original creation, and what's done now really wouldn't have worked back then, as it would have left way too much chance for infection. As a Bible reader I appreciate God's laws and follow them, but circumcision was removed as a requirement for God's favor. I don't know why it's such a big deal- there are pretty much no Jews left that follow the rest of the Mosaic Law, such as sacrificing animals for repentance or communion with God, so why stick so much to the command to circumcise? Even with the Jews, it was not the act of circumcsion that really guaranteed God's favor, but the doing of his will. Without that, they still showed themselves to not be his servants.