I've never thought of this but I heard somone state that they wanted as many Jews and non Jews cut so because during Nazi Germany, anyone without foreskin was sent to the camps. Would not have been the case if everyone else was circumcised.
Have you heard things like this? Know anyone who thinks this?
2007-10-01 11:25:16 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
To respond to one of you guys, it was a Jewish doctor. I found it hard to believe that they would think this way. Trust me it was not some kind of nut.
2007-10-01 11:44:50 · update #1
no, we don't care. and people did not get sent to nazi camps just because they were circumsized. they got sent for being jewish, or for being descended from jews. if they sent people to the camps merely on the basis of their circumcision, a very huge chunk of the european population would have disappeared, since circumcision is common among non-jews.
2007-10-01 11:34:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
It's simply a sign of our Covenant (Testament) with God. Christians have a "New" covenent and no need for circumcision.
However, Denmark did save most of its Jewish population by wearing the big yellow Star of David indicating all of them were Jews, including the Queen. It really didn't take much effort to stop the Nazi machine, but the world stood by watching with indifference to the plight of their neighbors.
.
2007-10-01 12:02:03 · answer #2 · answered by Hatikvah 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Circumsision had an advantage but with it also disadvantage.
Not all Jews were necesssarily Cicumsized . And many of non Jewish population were circumsized as per medical practice even in USA.
Hence because a person is circumsized does not mean he is Jewish.
2007-10-01 11:43:23 · answer #3 · answered by goring 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no requirement in Jewish Law or desire among Jews to have gentiles circumcised. For Jews it is a religious obligation. For gentiles, a personal choice.
2007-10-01 11:34:08 · answer #4 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
It is probably not an issue any more but I did hear of it happening after WWII because circumcision was occaisonally used to identify Jews in Europe.
2007-10-01 20:23:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
They don't care. I don't think any mohels are trying to expand their business into the gentile market.
I've never heard of any Jews wanting to have gentiles as a form of camouflage. It sounds like some paranoid anti-semite spreading silly lies.
2007-10-01 11:32:47 · answer #6 · answered by Azure Z 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No, in our Torah it says that this is a sign of the covenant between God and the Jews.
2007-10-01 11:39:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
It sounds like to me simply the opinion of one individual.
theologically Judaism is indifferent to non-Jewish circumcision.
2007-10-02 00:16:18 · answer #8 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The New Testament says neither Jews nor Gentiles need circumcision. It profits nothing.
2007-10-01 11:32:44 · answer #9 · answered by CJ 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Non-Jew answering here.
One would think they wouldn't care. I care though, foreskin is unattractive. It's also much cleaner without foreskin. All men should be circumcized, and all men (and women) should shave their armpits, too. A monkey in a head lock up above and a shar pei down below.... I'll definitely pass!
2007-10-01 11:36:22 · answer #10 · answered by Dolores G. Llamas 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋