Jesus Knew His Eunuchs

[VioletLake]

Matthew 19:12

12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it.

http://www.rc.net/wcc/readings/matt19v1.htm

[VioletLake]

1. The hypothesis is that Jesus himself was a eunuch.

And priests are symbolic eunuchs.

[Angry Dragon]

3. Then how do you explain that priests were allowed to marry

until it started to effect the church's back account...........

[VioletLake]

5. I don't know if any of that is true,

but why could a symbolic eunuch not be married? There is a world of difference between pretending to be castrated and actually being castrated.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

2. Origen cut his own balls off, at least according to Eusebius.

(Please note that Eusebius was a notorious bullshitter.)

Some of the things that Jesus said make him look like a bit of a religious extremist. "Put out your eye, cut off you hand, chop of your balls." Nobody really takes these verses too seriously, and after all, who can blame them? Other than telling us a little bit about the time and place in which they were written, what are they good for? There is a reason why some verses are talking about more than others, and that's because verses just don't have any merit.

[VioletLake]

8. That's my favorite Jesus quote!

"Put out your eye, cut off your hand, chop off your balls."

In addition to telling me a little bit about the time and place in which it was written, it tells me everything I want to know about you.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

15. Those are all in the Bible:

If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.

Matthew 18: 8

And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

Matthew 18: 9

For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Matthew 19: 12

I'm not making these up; they are in the Bible. The notion that one should bodily maim himself to maintain ritual purity or spiritual cleanliness is insane, and the fact that Matthew here says that Jesus spoke these words don't make them any less crazy. I don't think any modern people argue that this is something that should be done, because it's dangerously fanatical. So, all we are left with are these words as a cultural or historical artifact - that, yes, there were people who actually believed these things, and likely actually practiced them.

[VioletLake]

17. Your first two examples are not to be taken literally.

Unless you want to show me some examples of ritual self foot-cutting and eye-gouging. LOL

The eunuch issue is not metaphor or allegory. But I agree that the idea of chopping one's balls off for the "kingdom of heaven" is insane.

All of this doesn't negate the possibility that Jesus was a eunuch.

[tama]

11. Tertullian

"early Christian theologian Tertullian wrote that Jesus was a eunuch, there is no corroboration in any other early source. (The Skoptsy did, however, believe it to be true.) Tertullian also wrote that he knew, personally, the author[citation needed] of the Gospel of Matthew, and that he was a eunuch. Again, this is not attested elsewhere, nor is the account of Origen's self-castration."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eunuch

Eusebius was later than Tertullian, perhaps he refers to Tertullian, but this story is from Tertullian, and perhaps from the author of GoM, who was a eunuch...

[ChadwickHenryWard]

16. Well, it's not exactly weighty evidence.

It's within the realm of possibility, but it's hardly a sure thing. Matthew seems to be pretty pro-eunuch, and I doubt that if Jesus was one, that he would fail to mention that. The only two possibilities in that regard are that Matthew did call Jesus a eunuch, and that the passage was later excised by somebody who didn't like the idea of Jesus having a maimed or imperfect body; otherwise, it's possible that the original author of Matthew did not mentions eunuchs at all, and their presence represents a later interpolation.

[humblebum]

4. Another hypothesis is that "For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth"

indicated that there are males being BORN who are not attracted to women. And eunuchs are highly regarded
in other portions of scripture.

[ButterflyBlood]

6. Yep, like the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts

Actually heard a sermon about that a couple months ago. The verse in the OP was also mentioned, to which the pastor then commented "Oh and I don't have a clue what that last bit means".

[Thats my opinion]

12. This story was remembered

because Eunuchs were not allowed in the temple--where this Black eunuch wanted to go. What he found out that as a follower of Jesus there was no discrimination, and he was welcome. The Christian message was and is that all distinctions of class and race and gender have come to an end.

[ButterflyBlood]

13. Yep that was the point of that sermon

Which also included a lot of info about the status of eunuchs in the Roman Empire and at the time. Yes talking about eunuchs like that sounds pretty odd today, but it was logical at the context of the times. There was also a bit about how being a eunuch then was like a man "working in a fancy hair salon today" with the analogy being obvious.

[onager]

14. The Xian message was and is the same as most other religions.

"We're the Chosen People, and you're not."

The Christian message was and is that all distinctions of class and race and gender have come to an end.

Uh...are you sure about that "gender" part?

1 Corinthians 14:34–35 - Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

1 Timothy 2:11-12: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.

1 Tim. 2:12–15: Now I permit a woman neither to teach nor exercise authority over a man, but let her be in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Eve...

I know...that's Paul. But it is right there in the Buy-bull, along with all the good stuff about slaves and selling your daughter, so you're pretty much stuck with it.

The race part I can address directly, having lived in the Middle East for 6 years. Not too far from Alleged Jesus' old stomping grounds.

It probably makes you feel like a Good Xian Liberal to put words in the mouth of Jebus about race. But race is simply not an issue there, the way it is in the U.S. e.g., Egyptians come in a huge, beautiful rainbow of colors, from nearly coal black to very light.

I used to stop in a little village store whose owners had 2 daughters, both olive-skinned, one with black eyes and one with startling bright blue eyes. Egyptians seem proud of the country's diversity and it often gets mentioned favorably in the media.

Neither in Saudi Arabia nor Egypt did I ever see any discrimination over skin color. I can't even remember any comments about it...other than stuff like Egyptians in Mansoura joking that their women are the most beautiful in Egypt because of their fair skin. (According to local legends, the result of visits by either Crusaders or Napoleon's soldiers.)

They do discriminate about - guess what - religion!

The Wahhabi Saudis kept a close watch on their Shi'ite neighbors during major religious festivals - "close watch" meaning "circling their villages with armored vehicles." Sunnis gossiped about the Sufis desecrating mosques with dancing and nudity. Egyptian Coptic Xians and Muslims attacked each other's churches and mosques. And just each other.

I saw two major riots while I lived in Alexandria, Egypt, one very close to my neighborhood. Both were ugly, with deaths and injuries. And both were rooted in religious disputes between the Xians and the Muslims.

[ButterflyBlood]

18. Paul's writings in those verses are usually read out of context

The letter about women being silent in church was written to a specific church where a group of women were frequently being disruptive. The word "submission" in those verses is also a loose translation from the original Greek, where the initial word meant something closer to a state of peace and serenity. And the reason he was opposed to women having leadership roles is because at the time women were mostly uneducated and tended not to have leadership experience.

[onager]

19. Context! The believers favorite weasel-word!

The letter about women being silent in church was written to a specific church where a group of women were frequently being disruptive.

That's just a guess, as even the honest Xian websites admit. Nobody knows for sure if it was written about one gaggle of rowdy women at a church in Corinth.

Plenty of modern Xians believe it applies to all women, in every church, forever. They're mostly Fundamentalists but they are most definitely Xian.

The word "submission" in those verses is also a loose translation from the original Greek, where the initial word meant something closer to a state of peace and serenity.

OK, then please provide the original Koine Greek and your learned translation of it. Otherwise I might suspect you just quickly cut and pasted that from a Lib'rul Xian website or something. Apparently there are umpteen different possible translations, depending on the reader's own religious biases - as usual.

A couple of other opinions on Paul's statement, from modern Xian religious leaders:

What’s the principle that Paul is trying to get across? The same one that he’s been working at in all of these rules: that God made the man the head of the home, giving roles to the men and women that should be followed and celebrated, and not confused.

Matthew Henry brings out this point about the man’s obligations here:

Our spirit and conduct should be suitable to our rank. The natural distinctions God has made, we should observe. Those he has placed in subjection to others should not set themselves on a level, nor affect or assume superiority. The woman was made subject to the man, and she should keep her station and be content with it. For this reason women must be silent in the churches, not set up for teachers; for this is setting up for superiority over the man.

http://www.minthegap.com/2006/09/29/should-women-keep-silent-in-church/

WOMEN'S LIMITATIONS IN WORSHIP
By Joe D. Schubert

To sum up, the New Testament passages limiting women's participation in worship lead us to the following conclusions:

1. Except to obey the specific commands to sing and to confess faith in Jesus, a woman is forbidden to speak in the formal assemblies of the whole Church (l Corinthians 14: 34).

2. In no situation is a woman to speak or act in such a way as to be in a place of authority over a man (I Tim. 2:12).

3. A woman, however, may teach (I Cor. 11: 5).

4. She may teach other women and children (Tit. 2:3,4).

5. She may teach a man in a situation where she does not have authority over him (Acts 18:26; 1 Tim. 2: 12).

6. She may teach publicly, as did Philip's four virgin daughters and the Corinthian women who prophesied (Acts 21: 9; 1 Cor. 11:5).

7.The principle of woman's subjection to man has applied since the Fall and is a part of God's eternal law (I Cor. 14:34; 1 Tim. 2: 13,14).

http://www.scripturessay.com/article.php?cat=&id=649

[ButterflyBlood]

20. Well it's safe to say no one at my church with female pastors agrees with that

So yeah take it up with them. They deserve it.

[tama]

21. I'm sorry

but the Greek ὑποτασσέσθωσαν means submission, literally 'to be placed under'. For state of peace and serenity some other word would have been used.

Paul represents the patriarchal values of his culture and time, no need to take him seriously - if you don't take Bible as literal word of God.

[VioletLake]

7. I believe that is a reference to intersexed people,

but the whole quote shows an understanding and acceptance of the exceptions to the norm that I believe included people with the gay.

[humblebum]

9. I don't see it as anything but that. Clearly Jesus refers to more than a single type

of eunuch, as is commonly portrayed. It is almost as if he is referring to a third sex, so to speak.

[tama]

10. Eunuchs

meant originally castrates who guarded harem. In NT koine the meaning seems to have shifted to "those without sexual drive", asexuals.

PS: there were also religious cults in antiquity whose priests castrated themselves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galli