Thesis: Jesus said gays could be born from the womb

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2011 4:40 AM GMT
    Interesting and scholarly article on a puzzling verse in Matthew:

    1 Matthew 19:12. "For there are some eunuchs who are born so from their mother's womb, and some eunuchs who are eunuchized by men, and some eunuchs who eunuchize themselves for the sake of the kingdom of the heavens. Let him who is able to receive it, receive it."

    http://www.well.com/user/aquarius/thesis.htmOne day I read in the Bible that Jesus said there were eunuchs who were born so from their mother's womb.1 To my knowledge, a eunuch was a man who had been castrated, so how could he be born that way? As a translator by profession, I was aware that ideas are sometimes distorted in translation, and that this was particularly a problem in the Bible. In this case, the context was about men's obligation to marry, and these and other kinds of eunuchs were said to be exempt. As a proud gay man and, at that time, a Christian, I was intrigued by this. Since I firmly believed (and still do) that I was born gay and that, on this basis, it would be a bad idea for me to marry a woman, it occurred to me that a so-called born eunuch might mean a gay man like myself.2

    The common denominator in gay men and castrated men, which could be the basis for categorizing both groups under the term eunuch, is that neither one is suitable for marriage. This indeed was the point of the gospel verse. But in order to prove beyond a doubt that born eunuchs were gay men, I had to prove that, like gay men:

    (1) born eunuchs could have complete genitals,
    (2) they had no lust for women, and
    (3) they had lust for men.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2011 5:05 AM GMT
    That is very interesting. Have you read Elaine Pagels?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2011 1:03 PM GMT
    No, I'm just trying to suggest some online resources for http://www.bibleinschools.net/icon_lol.gif
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 15, 2011 5:26 PM GMT
    Why not first research the etymology of the word "eunuch" to determine if the word ever carried a broader or different meaning than we know today? If the word was ever used in general terms to describe those who abstain from sex with women (gays, celibate men, and/or those who were indeed castrated), then he doesn't need to prove 1-3... or has that already been done?

    The word "apocalypse" comes to mind with this kind of thing. The word was originally used to convey a revelation, a lifting of the veil, so to speak. Now most people associate it with the final battle between good and evil.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2011 9:17 PM GMT
    tongun18 saidWhy not first research the etymology of the word "eunuch" to determine if the word ever carried a broader or different meaning than we know today? If the word was ever used in general terms to describe those who abstain from sex with women (gays, celibate men, and/or those who were indeed castrated), then he doesn't need to prove 1-3... or has that already been done.


    That is exactly what he's doing on his page, if you read it in full. He documents the incidents where the word eunuch was used in the ancient world and concludes that our use of the word is different from theirs.
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 15, 2011 9:29 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 said
    tongun18 saidWhy not first research the etymology of the word "eunuch" to determine if the word ever carried a broader or different meaning than we know today? If the word was ever used in general terms to describe those who abstain from sex with women (gays, celibate men, and/or those who were indeed castrated), then he doesn't need to prove 1-3... or has that already been done.


    That is exactly what he's doing on his page, if you read it in full. He documents the incidents where the word eunuch was used in the ancient world and concludes that our use of the word is different from theirs.


    Oh. I'm dumb. Sorry Q, obviously I didn't click on the link. icon_redface.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2011 3:13 AM GMT
    Maybe this is slightly off topic but, this topic brings up the subject, so I'll go there. I think there's a text in the bible to use for or against just about anything anyone wants make right or make wrong, You can use the bible to justify killing, to justify slavery, stone a woman for adultery, stone a homosexual.

    Don't eat smooth fish, but you can eat scaled fish, don't eat the pig, but eat the cow, God hates the homosexual, but Jesus apparently healed the Roman Centurians boy servant lover.

    Do as God says or go to hell and burn, unless of course your one of only 144,000 saved. The jew is cursed forever because he denied and had Jesus Crucified, but the jew has any number of texts he'll quote saying Jesus didn't come yet and that they are the chosen and all of Palestine belongs to them. How does the clear thinking individual choose what to believe from all that's in the "good book" ??
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2011 3:32 AM GMT
    realifedad said How does the clear thinking individual choose what to believe from all that's in the "good book" ??


    Which good book in which language?icon_lol.gif
    To promote "academic" study of the Bible in the public school is actually a great thing...when religion is out of the picture. Study it for comparative erotic literature, for linguistic conundrums, for metaphysical debate, for the interplay between history and archaeology, as the basis for numerous opera libretti--anything. Is it going to happen? Not a chance.
    (I did all of that in college)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2011 8:05 PM GMT
    This is old, but nevertheless a valid and strong case for the fact that some people are born gay in the Bible. One of the uses of the word obviously isn't referring to someone who lacks genitals since it already mentions those who are "made" eunuchs.