69 million page views

To Maqsood: Circumcision, pork and Greek History don't mix

Reader comment on item: Salman Rushdie and British Backbone
in response to reader comment: This reply is much better

Submitted by Plato (India), Aug 10, 2007 at 05:56

Hello Maqsood, here is my reply:

>….I did not want to hurt you but my point is we should have a focused discussion. topic by topic so that we can reach some conclusion…<<

I agree that the discussion should be focused. You give interesting links and articles you consider relevant to the topic, but which turned to be irrelevant. As I pointed out in a previous post, you gave a lot of statistics about hypertension and crime in the US. Your point was to show me the bad consequences of eating pork. But when you fail to give similar statistics for comparison with other countries which have a taboo on eating pork the statistics are irrelevant to the discussion.

>>… But what i demand from you is that once you see that reference about some typical issue/topic, you should confess of being convinced for at least that topic or issue and closed for future discussion….<<

Merely seeing a reference about an issue, pork eating in this particular instance, will not convince me about your viewpoint being correct. We can close the porcine matter if you wish as you seem unable or unwilling to give me statistics about hypertension or poor sexual morals in non-pork eating countries to conclude the discussion.

>>>…We can discuss God too (also logically ) in some parallel discussion as i have already asked you few questions about your believes about God/god in yesterdays message….<<<

I have already answered the question of god/gods in (To Maqsood: Like oil and water, Islam and logic don't mix).

>>…I m not discussing with you as per blind belief. Rather i am giving you statistical data from reliable resources and research results from recognised universities and same i expect from you….<<

The statistics may be from reliable sources. But what is important is they should be relevant to the discussion. You gave a lot statistics about hypertension and sexual crimes. But you failed to link it up with how they are pertinent to eating pork. One very simple thing which you could have done to make the statistics you quoted relevant would be to quote statistics for hypertension and sex crimes in the Muslim countries.

>>M:U again misused my words intentionally or unintentionally but i dont want to go in this discussion because it is endless in this way…<<

This is what your wrote: ‘I am not afraid of anyone but we should follow one regime at one time so that we can reach some conclusion.'

Since you use the words ‘not afraid of anyone', I assumed you are talking of some physical threat. There was no intention to misuse your words. I hope you can see that. Also I hope you can tell us why people who are considered critical of Islam and the Prophet are killed ( Abu Afak, Asma Bint Marwan…..Farag Foda, Theo van Gogh, the murderous attack on Taslima Nasrin yesterday).

>>>i suggested: By putting scientific facts those are as per Quranic signs i only want to make you people understand better, and from my point of view these should be the starting point for onward discussion.( Logic to faith)<<

Maqsood as the Koran is from the Creator Himself if even one fact is shown to be false the whole edifice of your scripture collapses. You have added another 38 to my list. Let us take one from my list and another two from yours and see how the Koran stands up.

086.006-07 YUSUFALI: He is created from a drop emitted- Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:

Where does sperm come from Maqsood? To put sperm back into our testes will require some interesting mental contortions after this ayat of the all-knowing Allah. Allah has given us testes which hang below both the backbone and the ribs.

Here is one miracle of the Koran you have mentioned.


I expect you are referring to the following verses of the Koran:

041.009 YUSUFALI: Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in two Days? And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.

041.010 He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in four Days, in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).

041.011 Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."

041.012 So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge


I refer you to Richard Carrier's article Cosmology and the Koran on his website for a detailed refutation of this claim: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/

But let me summarise it for you:

  1. The Greeks and Persians already had the idea that the universe began as a sort of gas.
  2. The universe did not begin as a gas according to present theories. Smoke is made of ash, predominantly carbon. The universe began in an explosion of energy and elementary particles which became plasma, not smoke. You will have to change the meaning of smoke in Arabic to fit science.
  3. Considering 41:9 and 41;10 there is a time order. The earth being created in 41:9 and after the earth's creation placing mountains and sustenance for its dwellers as mountains and plants could not have been made before the earth was created.
  4. Naturally 4:11 is next in the time order. This ayat is saying that the earth already existed at the same time as the universe exists as smoke. This clearly contradicts the claim that the universe originated from smoke as the verse indicates that the "gaseous state" co-exists with the fully-formed earth.
  5. 41:12 says that creation was completed in the last two days and it is during this period that the sky is adorned with stars. But it is the stars that produce the heavy elements required for bodies like the earth. But the Koran says stars appear in the heavens after the earth.

Read the full article for a detailed refutation of Koranic science. Richard Carrier has refrained from commenting on the very unscientific conversation between Allah and the inanimate earth and sky. What did the earth and sky speak with??


Asexual reproduction is the formation of new individuals from the cell(s) of a single parent. It is very common in plants; less so in animals. (http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/A/AsexualReproduction.html)

Asexual reproduction is a form of reproduction which does not involve meiosis, ploidy reduction, or fertilization. Asexual reproduction only takes one parent. (wikipedia)

>>…M: I will answer these questions (i.e. did Allah make a mistake or was he a bad designer), but does it mean that otherwise you agree on Alcohlism, Circumcision and pork forbidden….<<

I never denied that alcoholism is bad as against there being no harm in having a few drinks once in a while. Circumcision is unnecessary as I showed you from the expert you have quoted yourself. The expert shoots down almost all the reasons for circumcision. Read them again.

>The small percentage of adults who have a persistently non-retractable foreskin have a slightly increased chance of developing phimosis (see below), but this persistence is not a reason for circumcision.<

>In phimosis (foreskin contraction), the opening of the foreskin is narrowed, preventing retraction. Provided that the skin of the foreskin is normal and inability to retract it does not cause problems with intercourse or recurrent infections, no action is necessary.<

>The changes in the prepuce are known as balanitis xerotica obliterans, which can become cancerous if left untreated. Circumcision is advisable in most cases.<

>Balanoposthitis is very occasionally the first sign of diabetes. If there is no underlying cause, simple hygiene measures, mild painkillers and the avoidance of tugging the foreskin are the only necessary treatments. Most cases will recover without further intervention. Circumcision is only done for recurrent and troublesome cases.<

>If this is not possible, the paraphimosis needs to be reduced under a general anaesthetic. Circumcision is only very rarely necessary.<

>Therefore, routine circumcision cannot be recommended to prevent penile cancer.<

>Far more effective and reliable methods than circumcision exist to reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, such as the use of condoms and adoption of safer sexual practices. Thus circumcision cannot be recommended to prevent these infections.<

>A UTI is not usually a great risk to health, so it does not seem reasonable to perform a surgical procedure on 100 infants to reduce the risk of one developing UTI.<

>At the cutting edge of the AIDS battle is genetic engineering, with human trials about to start on genetically modifying a HIV patient's blood stem cells and T cells and reintroducing them into the body to better fight the disease. AIDS will soon be thing of the past like small pox.<

Do you want to bet that AIDS will be conquered by human science in the foreseeable future. I place my faith in science not Allah.

You have not shown any convincing reasons for forbidding pork. The statistics you quote does not have anything to say about pork or even fats in general.

The questions I have posed are purely logical questions based on your belief in the existence of God. If you do not wish to involve God then my refutation of your science about circumcision and pork I have already repeated at least two times. Why don't you address them. (You quote only statistics for the US on hypertension and sex crimes whthout showing figures for Muslim countries.)

>>…Allah is independent of all kind of mistakes. He created us as he liked. None of us has any power to object. Although we can anlayse now as per our limited wisdom that almost everything is as per nature by itself. As long as penile foreskin is concerned it was produced by Allah Almighty to prtect and hide the penis when proper clothing was not available in the early ages of man,s history. When time moved and man made clothes Allah ordered for circumcism as it was more favorable for new age men….<<

Maqsood you have brought in Allah here, I did not. If Allah is ‘independent' of all kinds of mistakes why do people get cancer (cells in the body doing what they are not supposed to do), why are thousands of children afflicted with a Down's syndrome, why are people born blind, deaf or paralysed, why did the tsunami take place and kill hundreds ?

Yes everything is as per nature not as per Allah's design. Cancer is as per nature not as per Allah's design. People are born with good eyes but cannot see because inside the body there is no connection to the brain. As per nature but poor design as per Allah. People are born with good spinal cords but the nerves are not connected to the legs resulting in spina bifida. They are as per nature but a case of poor design by Allah.

Having half an inch of penile skin does not protect the penis. Also it would mean that Adam, a prophet of yours was not circumcised. When did the practice start, when we started wearing tree bark around our waists?

The question I asked earlier arises again, instead of having people put children's lives in danger why did Allah not start creating people without foreskin. Some people are born without it. Allah could have given everyone the genes for foreskin-free penises when we started wearing good clothes. All things are possible for Allah. You argument for circumcision is not supported by science nor by your argument from Allah's power. Instead of commanding circumcision Allah could have commanded our genes to do the job, which would have been more efficient and safer.

>>… Tell me why do you shave or remove unwanted hair?? let it be as Allah created you….<<

Hair is made of dead cells. There is no danger of bleeding to death or getting an infection by shaving or having my hair cut. Removing them is a matter of fashion and there is no one insisting that I shave. Circumcision is a practice which all male Muslim children undergo.

>>…My reasoning is further strengthened by the following history. If it is even a practice in the classical Greek Times then before this period it would be even more logical.


In classical Greek times the exposure of the glans of the penis was considered offensive and men with short foreskin would wear the Kynodesme to prevent its accidental exposure….<<

Does the para you have pasted above mean that the Greeks liked an exposed foreskin? By classical Greek time clothing was well developed. Why did the Greeks not start circumcising? I followed the link and found kynodesme is a leather strip that was some sort of fashion. Why do you give links that have nothing to do with the matter at hand.

This link below on foreskin restoration you have given is another meaningless one. Actually it argues against circumcision. It is discussing foreskin restoration. What, dear Maqsood is the point of this link. Below the link I have copied and pasted some paras to demonstrate what I am saying.


Foreskin restoration is the process of expanding the residual skin on the penis, via surgical or non-surgical methods, to create the appearance of a natural foreskin (prepuce) covering the glans penis. Foreskin restoration techniques are most commonly undertaken by men who have been circumcised or who have sustained an injury, but are also used by uncircumcised men who desire a longer foreskin and by men who have phimosis.

Reasons for foreskin restoration

Men attempt foreskin restoration for many reasons. These may range from simply wanting their foreskin back, to restoring a natural appearance, desire for improved sensitivity of the glans or better sexual stimulation, and regaining a sense of wholeness.[1] Some men cite a desire to regain a sense of control over their sexual organs and regaining lost self esteem. Foreskin restoration may also be seen as a form of body modification for those interested.

In classical Greek times the exposure of the glans of the penis was considered offensive and men with short foreskin would wear the Kynodesme to prevent its accidental exposure.

A form of foreskin restoration, historically known as epispasm, was practiced among some Jews in Hellenistic and Roman societies.[2]

European Jews, along with men circumcised for medical reasons, sought out underground foreskin restoration

Maqsood, are you arguing for or against circumcision. I am confused.

And thank you for giving a short synopsis of Greek history. But again I have no clue to why you have given it and how it connects to the topics under discussion.

>>…Think Seriously…<<

You tell me to think seriously. What I am to think seriously about? Allah, science in the Koran or Greek history??




Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)