Agnostic Atheism? Your opinions thread's landfill

[Shell B]

Threat? Oh, for pity's sake. I'm not entirely sure you can read.

[Epimethean]

μπορεί να διαβάσει καλά ...

[Darwinning]

Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

[dtango]

Category 7 Fascist

Κατηγορίας 7ης μαλάκας
Dear Epimethean could be of help here!

[Epimethean]

LOL. I never wrote that, tango but ...

[dtango]

The operation for the promotion of my theory worldwide had me today giving a lecture on the interpretation of a passage in the OT.

I decided to present the subject to my two good friends (I am in no speaking terms with the fourth member of the company) to see if they approve of my opinion of the ancient scholars of the Hebrew Academy.

Here is the passage:

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him (Moses), and sought to kill him.
Then Zipporah (Moses’ wife) took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.
So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.(Ex. 4:24-26)

The great Egyptian god Ra circumcised himself (Book of the Dead, Ch. 17).
Zipporah circumcised her son in order to prove to the God that He was the father of her son and not Moses. To prove that her son was a “son of God.”
She casts the foreskin at the feet of the God and she is addressing Him not Moses!

The scholars who were responsible for the edition of the biblical texts offered a chance to those who study the texts to inform the Jewish people what the meaning of the circumcision was so that they would stop practicing it.

No one, however, will accept the above interpretation of the passages and people will keep amputating their children, but we cannot blame it on the texts.

Let us see whether the agnostics have some opinion on this one!

[Epimethean]

http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/second/larue.html

[dtango]

http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/second/larue.html

Very good work but, as expected, he was in no position to answer “Why?”

Dr. Gerald Larue wrote:
”Nor is it possible to know for certain just why or how circumcision originally came into being.

The excuse given for the attack of the God against Moses is quite childish:

Dr. Gerald Larue wrote:
Yahweh's demonic intention to kill Moses was magically thwarted by the rite of circumcision performed on the infant son (the beginning of infant circumcision?)

As regards:

Dr. Gerald Larue wrote:
The reference to the use of a flint blade in an age when copper, bronze and iron were known and used, suggests the antiquity of the ritual and may indicate a link to the Egyptian custom of using flint tools for circumcision.

A flint blade cannot be compared to blades made of copper, bronze or iron. Flint blades can be superior even to today’s scalpels.

In order for a child to be immortal (god) his mortal parts have to be removed (Achilles). Circumcision is an act of purification. Being pure one becomes god.
Most probably you know that there was a custom of amputating fingers for purification purposes. We still do not know whether the stencils of hands with missing fingers which are painted on the walls of the caves of Northern Europe and elsewhere depict hands with fingers amputated or not. If they were amputated, then circumcision was the alternative they found to stop cutting their fingers!
See what imaginary gods force people to do?

[Shell B]

Is this thread on random?

[Epimethean]

Is it childish, Tango? He was very aware of the circum-stances, as well as the historical milieu. I think you have an issue with scholarship in general if it is not your own, and so far, I cannot say that you have provided anything overwhelmingly persuasive here. What you offer is merely your own interpretation of things which many other scholars seem in general to agree upon, and while I think that can be a sign of a breakthrough, I also know it is just as often just the sound of thin ice. Why don't you send your stuff to Boston, or Cincinnati, and see what their Egyptology departments make of it? Better yet, look into publishing it in a real, peer-reviewed journal, like ARCE or JEA?

---

By the way, your reference to Achilles is inaccurate. He was entirely mortal. Better to have used Herakles, whose mortal flesh had to be burnt off in order for him to become fully a god.