-
-
Odgovor korisnicima @Transhuman_i2 @realChaim_Rubin i sljedećem broju korisnika:
The original description of the Covenant (Genesis 15 in the Jahwist text) had no reference to
#circumcision. That story was revised only after the Babylonian Captivity (& moved to Genesis 17) by priests who thereafter pretended the circumcision reference had always been there.0 proslijeđenih tweetova 7 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cooney21 @Transhuman_i2 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Then, 100s of years after the Baylonian Captivity, the rules of the Covenant were changed again to require the entire foreskin to be removed. Until then, only the small part of the foreskin that always overhangs the glans was deemed necessary to remove.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 6 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cooney21 @Transhuman_i2 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Each of us can (& does) believe what he or she would like. But there simply is no historical or other support for the idea that infant
#circumcision always has been an immutable requirement for Jewish identity, & so no basis for the idea it couldn't be changed yet again.#i20 proslijeđenih tweetova 5 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cooney21 @Transhuman_i2 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
. The Torah has been increasingly validated by historical research &material findings &never once invalidated Any contrary statement is unsupported speculation All academic work is loaded with suppositions &qualifiers Bottom line is universal Jewish practice on the ground
1 proslijeđeni tweet 6 korisnika označava da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @realChaim_Rubin @TeddysMom8 i sljedećem broju korisnika:
What have we here? More Penis trolls, obsessed with the foreskin division? Has only been helpful - never hurtful - gives identity and community - no harm, no foul. Kindly butt out.
2 proslijeđena tweeta 3 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @bellewriter @realChaim_Rubin i sljedećem broju korisnika:
We oppose child
#circumcision b/c destroying another person's healthy body part is inherently wrong (for more on why: http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/06/to-mohel-who-cut-me.html …). It's circumcisers who've picked the body part to become obsessed with attacking. Of course it's harmful: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/10/26/secrecy-questioned-about-babys-death-after-circumcision.html …#i20 proslijeđenih tweetova 3 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cooney21 @bellewriter i sljedećem broju korisnika:
. Circumcision is a unique obligation for Jews We have been quite successful with the practice Empirical findings of benefits of circumcision come from Jewish populations If you want to dispute circumcision with of the world that would be fine But nobody will notice you
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 2 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @realChaim_Rubin @bellewriter i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Unique? So was stoning blasphemers to death. Successful? Jewish deaths from circumcisions occur with regularity. Jewish populations don't show circumcision "benefits" differently than other circumcising groups. No wonder most of the world, including many Jews, is already with us.
5 replies 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 2 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa -
Odgovor korisnicima @cooney21 @realChaim_Rubin i sljedećem broju korisnika:
Jewish deaths from circumcision occur regularly What utter rubbish.
1 reply 0 proslijeđenih tweetova 1 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa
Sadly, it does happen, and far too often.pic.twitter.com/rbLMhPRuYT
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.