A post as a result of Jill’s comment to the blog about circumcision.
I didn’t know that that circumcision was rare among evangelicals outside of North America. I had also never heard of an operation done on baby girls to remove the clitoral hood. My understanding is that when newspapers use the term ‘female circumcision’ the operation to which they are actually referring is a clitorectimy. I don’t really know much about the beliefs and customs of female mutilating peoples so I won’t say anything more about it.
About evangelicals though I’m well versed.
One of the foundational beliefs of evangelicals is that everyone should read the Bible and by implication if everyone should be reading it then everyone should be interpreting it. This makes for a wide variety of opinions on every subject including circumcision. At one time (and thanks to your information I should add) in one place, all or most of the Mosaic laws were interpreted by a great bulk of evangelicals in terms of health. It sort of made sense. We know the dangers of eating pig and shellfish for instance and the Jewish cancer thing made it seem circumcision was in the health category also. The problem is that while we can read God’s words we can not read God’s mind.
My own opinion is that all of the laws were one way or another meant to civilize the Gods people. All the laws about sex were civilizing because you can’t have civilization without getting control of your sexuality. In this I am like other evangelicals. I read the Bible. I stir in other things that I already know or think I know and come up with something that makes sense to me. We don’t really know what God had in mind.
Speaking of mind, If you read Jill’s comment she said she changed her mind. Changing one’s mind is a good sign. It means that you are still learning humble enough to admit that you could be wrong.