One Bible Topic we find in Genesis is the command that all males should be circumcised.
I made quite a lot of research on this topic. I was not able to connect a God who created the human the way he wanted with all the body functions and then tell his people to cut a part of, and also causing a lot of pain in the newborn. In fact an average circumcision today on a newborn takes about 10 Minutes, and takes a way the complete inner layer of the foreskin and the outer skin up "to where the circumciser decides", meaning that since there is no clear mark on the outer skin where to cut, sometimes much more skin and sometimes less skind is taken away.
After taking both layers the glanse is free, not protected anymore by foreskin, the foreskin, which God made with a high amount of Nervs to be highly sensitive is gone. Flance will dry out, get numb, in the sense of getting less sensitive with time. Additional skin will develope on the glans.
The cuttin of the inner foreskin is very painfull since a sharp metall has to be insertet between foreskin and glans, because these are attached to each other, which is normal and will loose itselfe with time, mostly in puberty (of not retractet forcibly by doctors or parents) due to the hormonal chance. Till then the attached foreskin has a job: protect the glance to injuries and bacterias. As long as nobody trys to retract it it can to the work perfectly. The opening in a baby is tight, also purposly created by the Creater like that, we should not pull it back.
So all this things did not agree with a law of circumcision as it is understood today.
Obviously it must have happend in another way. And I also found some proof. The original Hebrew words used in Genesis 17 "mowl" do NOT mean remove, cut away, cut off. It means more of "curtail" "shorten "cut short". If in Hebrew something like full removal or cutting off should have been expressed other words were used, such as in Jeremiah 4 : 4 where it is mentioned that the foreskin of our hearts should be remooved. Or when the bible talks about Gods commands that if someone does not follow he will be cut away. The word there is "wehasiru" which is rooted in "karath", (see Strongs H3772) and cuwr (strongs H5493).
What happend is that Abraham was only told to cut the "overhang" of th skin off, he curtailt or shortend it, which was a short cut, seconds, not to compare with the one which is done today. It left a big part of the foreskin and all its protective functions and also the most of the nerv cells.
Later when the child was bigger the scar was good visible. It was enough since it was only a sign of the convenant for got. We know that the Hebrews did not introduce themself to "foreigners" showint there Penis, so that all could see that they were circumcised.
The understanding of foreskin might not have been the same as it is today. It was only that part which was obviously beFORE the glans, the overhang what was curtailed.
The Circumcision by taking all the foreskin away and layin the glans bare was introduced about 140 our time. The Rabbies tried to prevent circumcised Jews to hide their scar in the flesh by stretching the foreskin so that the scar is not longer visible, but they look more like the other nations, escpecially the Greeks, in that time prefered long foreskins. So the Jews tried to appear like that again. Operations to prelong the foreskind were performed mostly by manual stretching. In that time the Greeks liked to do sport events in gymnasien naked. So one could really see of the foreskin still hat a long overhang as viewed desireble by Greeks or did not have an overhang again like the Hebrews/Jews.
TO prefent any hiding or stretching of foreskind then the complete taking off off the foreskin was introduced.
That is how for me I can understand the whole thing again. And as in many other medical explanaitions and definitions also this has changed over time. The definition for "Foreskin" and "circumcision" was obviously not the same as today.
More Information and translations to that topic are welcome