Comment on Anon hates reddit
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 days agoSource on the Ethiopian church?
Matthew 19:4-5
He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
Estiar@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Acts 8:27-28 NRSV [27] So [Phillip] got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship [28] and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah.
Here’s a story about a eunuch returning home from Jerusalem. Eunuchs back then were seen as ‘between’ male and female. They were able to go between the men’s Chambers in the women’s Chambers freely, and so they were very useful in courts. Not all Eunuchs were in the courts though.
According to church tradition this very Eunuch founded the Ethiopian Church. And so it is very possible for non-binary people to be followers of Christ.
Of course we can’t fall into the pitfall of applying modern sexuality and gender theory on ancient cultures, as they have a very different set of social institutions.
Some theologians of years past have suggested that the passage which is alluded to in Genesis might have a different meaning.
Genesis 2:23 NRSV [23] Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.”
This taken in conjunction with the passage that you quoted, can be interpreted very differently. Woman was taken out of man, meaning that Man was once both male and female at the same time, and yet perfect as all of God’s creation was.
Jesus never explicitly condemns Eunuchs or other groups of gender non-conforming people. I would not take this passage to exclude everything else from the life giving blood shed for us on the cross
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 day ago
Eunuchs were men, though. They were castrated so were seen as less of a threat. I do not think we can compare eunuchs to non-binary/gender-non-conforming people of today.
Estiar@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I don’t think that’s the case
Matthew 19:12 NRSV [12] For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”
Jesus mentions two types of eunuchs here. Those who are made, and those who are born as eunuchs. The latter, those who are born as eunuchs are what we today call intersex people.
Intersex people have ambiguous sex characteristics and are born that way. Intersex people make up around 1.7% of the population, around the same amount as people who have red hair. They are pretty distinct. Sometimes they can have male genitalia and female sex hormones, while still others can have ambiguous genitalia. Others still have male chromosomes when being phenotypically female.
Not every one of these was included in the term Eunuch, as they aren’t always visible traits. But many of these traits were visible so they were seen as distinct from men. Oftentimes they’re born that way.
(An aside while it’s on my mind, Jesus tells us that marriage is overrated in this passage. I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn’t seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage. And this passage says that marriage isn’t for everyone)
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 22 hours ago
I always interpreted this as referring to asexual people, not intersex people
True