Circumcision (and Philistines)
mc2499 at mclink.it
Thu Feb 4 10:31:45 EST 1999
>Now you are using the very sources which you described as late (2nd
>century BC) and unreliable to argue for their own unreliability!
Whether we are dealing with Philistines in the fourth century BCE or
twelfth century BCE, the difference is drawn. The Philistines are called
"uncircumcised" in the biblical texts, indicating that they are from a
different cultural background. Is this not correct despite the dating of
Could people stop simply hitting reply to all, but go the step further and
replace the "To" address with the "CC" address, so as to reduce the
duplicates that fly around? I get two posts for every time someone responds
to something I post. That is unnecessary and really confuses the hell out
of my clean up sessions! Thanks.
>Herodotus tells us that the Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine were
>circumcised. Evidence from Egypt suggests that males there were also
>circumcised. Yet the Philistines are specifically indicated a number of
>times on the OT/HB as simply the "uncircumcised" (eg 1Sam14:6 and
>Jdg15:18), though such an epithet is never used against Canaanites. Note
>also Jer9:25-26 which calls Egypt, Judah, Edom, Moab and Ammon as
>"circumcised only in the foreskin". This should be further evidence of the
>Philistines coming from a different cultural heritage.
More information about the b-hebrew