In an underhanded effort to kill the precocious and popular upstart, David, King Saul promised his daughter’s hand in marriage if David would collect one hundred foreskins from their enemies, the Philistines. The narrator of 1 Sam 18:20-27 tells that David foiled Saul’s murderous plan by killing said number of Philistines and bringing their foreskins back to Saul. Yuck. Cut to wedding bells. I wonder if he could have achieved the same result with a little smooth-talking?
Maybe he could have gotten the Philistines to undergo elective surgery like his ancestors Simeon and Levi did when they convinced the Shechemites to get circumcised. (Never mind that S and L then killed the temporarily disabled Shechemites.)
It appears that circumcision helps protect a man from getting AIDS. According to Johns Hopkins research physician, Dr. Ronald Gray, the HIV virus has a special fondness for the foreskin. Taking that penis part off, then, would seem to improve a fellow’s chance of remaining HIV-free. How it affects women is another story, though (phps having no effect HIV-wise but possibly increasing her chances of infection). A recent article in the New York Times, citing Gray’s research, notes how people in every age point to circumcision as the cure for that period’s illness du jour.
The basis of male circumcision in religious practice is long and storied. Its biblical beginning wanders back into a misty history with the ancient Israelites and their first, binding pact with YHWH-God. It’s a distinguishing mark, then, for Jews; and it became a source of debate and consternation among the Jesus-followers who wrestled with the question of just how Jewish a person needed to be in order to follow this Christ, the Jewish Jesus. A pact made first with Abraham, some hundreds of years later, Muslims adopted the practice since they identify Abraham as their “father,” too.
