Andrew R. Rillera, “Polemicizing with Preputial Precision: What We Can Learn about Paul’s Opponents in Galatians and Philippians by Understanding the Differences between Two Types of Physical Circumcision,” Journal of the Jesus Movement in its Jewish Setting no. 10 (2023), 130.
From a Greco-Roman perspective, therefore, periah [circumcision] is equivalent to a permanently aroused state (ψωλός) because their “dog” (glans) can never be “leashed.” Therefore, I take it to mean that “dogs” in Phil 3:2 is more than a simple pejorative (i.e., Paul is saying more than “these folks are unclean animals”). It is Paul using sexually vulgar language purposefully and ironically. The best way, then, to translate the vulgarity in Paul’s expression would be to render κύων into an equivalent modern slang with an explanatory gloss: “Beware of the upright cocks.” (And scholars thought Paul’s use of σκύβαλον in v. 8 was vulgar!)
This use of “dog” would again further explain Paul’s polemic in 3:19. From the (Philonic) perspective of these opponents, undergoing periah has a noble purpose: to control one’s passions and desires by maiming the organ that serves the most enslaving desire of all: sexual lust. But, because of what this physically does to the penis by permanently exposing the glans, Paul can use the notion of ψωλός to ironically shame them.
The Amateur Exegete 
“BEHOLD AND TREMBLE! I AM THE UNCAUSED CAUSE, THE PRIMUM MOVENS, THE ALMIGHTY. MY RIGHT HAND SEEDED THE COSMOS WITH COUNTLESS STARS, MY LEFT HAND STIRRED THEM INTO VAST GALAXIES. WITH A THOUGHT I SET THE SIDERIAL CLOCK TICKING. MY VOICE SHAPES PLANETS, MY BREATH GIVES LIFE, MY GAZE ENCOMPASSES ALL, MY STRIDE SPANS LIGHT YEARS. EPOCHS ARE BUT MOMENTS TO ME. I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN, AND I AM, AND I WILL ALWAYS BE.
“NOW, LET’S DISCUSS SOME VERY SPECIFIC RULES I HAVE ABOUT FORESKINS, MENSTRUATION, AND SHELLFISH.”
-Lex Lata
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yahweh is *very* interested in penises. You could even say obsessed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very interesting quote from Rillera, thanks for sharing.
The comment from Lex Lata is actually a logical outworking of the existence of God. Your hairs are numbered. Why wouldn’t “God” also care about things you don’t care about, or are at best careless about?
“…and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.”
LikeLike
God is welcome to care about whatever he desires. But given his track record with everything else in the world, his concern with how one’s genitals looks seems odd.
LikeLike
I hear your response, heavy on the amateur and light on the exegete. You don’t want to be calling something you don’t understand “odd” and then just walk away
When you say “everything else in the world” make sure you start with “spared not his own son” – now that’s “odd”
LikeLike
Killing your own kid is not the flex you might think it is.
LikeLike
LOL – You don’t have firsthand experience do you?
LikeLike