#i2 Which is correct - the original #Jahwist #Genesis 15, in which God's Covenant with Abraham does NOT involve ANY mention of #circumcision? Or the later, unauthorized revision by the priestly class, desperate to give circumcision the appearance of a divine command? Answer:https://twitter.com/thegoodgodabove/status/1187211446893121537 …
-
-
...promises "reproductive success and a lavish land grant". God's command is NOT to circumcise, but to sacrifice animals - by cutting them. This is the version of the Covenant story that was set forth in Genesis until after the end of the Babylonian captivity. At this time...
-
...priests sought to consolidate their own political, social & religious authority. Prior to this time, circumcision was practiced, but not as a religious mandate. The priests revised the Covenant story in Genesis to change that (moving it from Chapter 15 to Chapter 17).
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
