imageinvisible
To give us the option to be circumcised, which if you read the bible denotes one (specifiacaly in OT times) one who has established a covanent with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the "I Am", the first and the las,t the one true God. Circumcision is a sign of the covanant (which God established) between God and Abraham. If you will read the Bible, all your questions concerning the Bible, will be explained.
That would be the covenant wherein God said that Abraham's descendants
would always be in Genesis 17:8n
And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
Funny thing though
if you read your bible this covenant had already been given to
Abram in Genesis 15:18-21.
Gen 15:18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
Gen 15:19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
Gen 15:20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
Gen 15:21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
So the circumcision seems to be an ad hoc addition from Abraham in order to be able to satisfy some strange desire to fondle and then mutilate the male genitalia IMHO
OR
The Bible itself is in error for unknown reasons. Perhaps {
} Moses did not write the first 5 books?
Now before you wish to excuse this in the same way as Genesis by stating that it is a revision added to flesh{ de-flesh?} out a previous chapter, please note that one covenant was made to Abram the next to Abraham and that the one made to Abraham was made at the same time as his name change from Abram to Abraham.
Thus we have a problem of explaining why both covenants describe the same gift of land.