Now, I'm no expert on the Bible. But, uh, where did Jesus say castration was the way to go? Seriously. Could some of you just be taking what he said out of context? And if he gave the 'thumbs up' to castration- why hasn't more people castrated themselves over the last 2000 years? I've gone to church. I don't hear anything about castration. I've heard Bible scholars speak nary a word about castration. If Jesus wanted you to be castrated, wouldn't people be talking abou it? I know about the circumcision, but CASTRATION?! The Alien Leader of Heaven's Gate wanted his followers to be castrated, but JESUS?! I don't get it. Thought the Catholic Church had its choir boys castrated, but there was something about the Pope having to be fully intact. Double standards or what?

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am Now, I'm no expert on the Bible.

No one is. There's too many versions and it's been translated too many times. Anyone who claims to be automatically tosses credibility out the window.

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am But, uh, where did Jesus say castration was the way to go? Seriously. Could some of you just be taking what he said out of context?

Matthew 19:12, and in the verse right after that, HE puts his hands on the little children. Pervert. Try that today.

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am And if he gave the 'thumbs up' to castration- why hasn't more people castrated themselves over the last 2000 years?

Got me. Why don't more people eat spinach or jump off the Golden Gate Bridge? Don't know. To each his own. Must have been one of those things in the Bible that just never caught on. Maybe if it had been printed back with those OLD Testament Laws, it would have gone over better.

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am I've gone to church. I don't hear anything about castration. I've heard Bible scholars speak nary a word about castration. If Jesus wanted you to be castrated, wouldn't people be talking abou

t it?

Castration and eunuchs are scattered throughout the Bible. When I was about 10, our class was reading Daniel aloud and the word "eunuch" was all over the place. I innocently asked what it was, and the teacher (our minister) turned every shade of red you can imagine. This led to a long discussion in his office about eunuchs, which led into circumcision. Two topics from the Bible that no one really wants to explain to a little boy. They tend to want to dodge the issue.

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am I know about the circumcision, but CASTRATION?! The Alien Leader of Heaven's Gate wanted his followers to be castrated, but JESUS?! I don't get it.

Marshall Epplewhite was a prime example of what can happen when a religious leader gets too much of a following. One of the main reasons that I no longer go to any church is just that - it's a small 'cult' of like minded, and usually narrow minded people, blindly following after the teachings and interpretations of someone they have installed as a leader. They usually aren't smart enough to question him either, and when he's wrong, no one seems to notice.

XXX (imported) wrote: Sun Dec 01, 2002 9:56 am Thought the Catholic Church had its choir boys castrated, but there was something about the Pope having to be fully intact.

The Catholic Church was big on the issue of castrated choir boys, castrati as they were known, and it all began with the blessing of the Pope and a verse in the Bible that said for women to keep quiet in the church. Eventually, another Pope put an official end to the practice.

Double standards or what?

That pretty much sums up the whole religious issue in a neat little nutshell, yes. Double standards. Why bother?

XXX,

You’ve asked a very important question, and one that is repeatedly asked by new visitors to the Archive. Rather than carefully composing a new version of my response, I’ve simply rewritten the answer I gave to a very similar question about 7 or 8 months ago. [Maybe we need another FAQ for castration and eunuchs in history and, especially, in the Bible???]

Jesus

_________________

Trying to decode an English translation of the Bible is extremely complex. The original was, of course, written in different languages - Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek - and the earliest surviving copies are from LONG after the various books were written. They were hand copied by scribes who made minor errors with each re-copying. Recent archaeological discoveries have found earlier manuscripts and pieces of manuscripts of some of the books and the differences clearly indicate that scribal errors were not rare.

Whether the New Testament takes full priority of place for Christians can be disputed. Certainly many Fundamentalist groups much prefer the Old Testament in their beliefs (except for the divinity of Jesus). The Gospels and other books of the New Testament are ambiguous (in other words, they disagree) as to whether or not Christians should follow the Old Testament laws. Paul argued forcibly that they should NOT follow them, Matthew, less forcibly, that they should.

In the Old Testament, there are many references to castration and to eunuchs. Deuteronomy 23:1 is but one. Certainly the faith which developed into Judaism favored anything which led to procreation of more members of the faith, but there were some interesting inclusions in the sacred text which indicates much broader acceptance of castration and eunuchs than most modern believers would want to accept. Castration was common enough in the ancient Middle East that nearly everyone would have had experience with eunuchs (and certainly with castrated animals). In addition to the dozens of references to eunuchs and eunuch officials, at least two of the prophets collected in the Old Testament were eunuchs: Daniel and Nehemiah.

Authorship of the book of Daniel is disputed. It was probably written long after the supposed date, but whoever wrote it, included a eunuch as the purported author. Daniel held a court office which contemporary readers would have clearly known to be reserved for a eunuch. Within the book of Daniel, the three individuals who have become the standard exemplars of the virtue of total faith in God, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, were most certainly eunuchs. There is no doubt by any theologian I have consulted but what all three were castrated as small boys.

Within the New Testament, Matthew 19:12 is the most commonly cited passage regarding eunuchs, but it needs to be placed into its larger context. Readers need first to place it next to Matthew 5:27-30.

Also, we need to set some historical context for the New Testament. The order of the books as now printed has nothing to do with the order in which they were written. All of Paul's epistles were certainly written before any of the Gospels. 1 Thessalonians is most likely the first writing regarding the historic Jesus and his teachings to have survived in some form to the present. It was probably written about 20 years after the death of Jesus. Mark, the earliest of the Gospels, dates from about 20 years later.

The earliest Christians were certain that the Resurrection would arrive within their own lifetimes. Paul (and his contemporaries) taught that it was immoral to bring new life into the world. Chastity was strongly emphasized. (Read any of the epistles clearly attributed to Paul, and not the pseudepigrapha, written much later by others and attributed to Paul, such as Ephesians or Titus.) One of the early Christian group, the Valensians, carried this emphasis on chastity to the extent of, not only castrating themselves, but castrating any male who fell into their control. They even went so far as to kidnap and castrate small boys from nearby villages, all in the name of Jesus.

Revelation, written a little after 70 A.D. and about midway in age of the New Testament books, clearly has this emphasis on chastity: And I looked, and lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand; having his Father's name written in their foreheads.... These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. (Revelation 14: 1&4)

Matthew, based on Mark, oral traditions about Jesus, and probably some other written material which has not survived, like Paul, expects the Resurrection to happen soon. Production of new Christians was NOT valued. You need to read much more than chapter 19:12 to see the general tone of Matthew's interpretation of the message of Jesus.

Most moderns are aware of Origen, an early Christian theologian and philospher, who castrated himself to maintain his chastity. Most are unaware that he was one of many who did so.

For centuries, Christians castrated themselves for their faith. The Byzantine Christians often castrated their children so that they could properly serve God. Patriarchs were frequently eunuchs. A number of Eastern Orthodox saints had been castrated by their parents when they were small children. St. Ignatius was unusual in that he was not castrated until he was fourteen.

The Skoptsy, a Christian group that flourished in Russia and Romania in the 18th and 19th centuries (and which may still exist, the evidence is mixed) took this passage from Revelation to indicate the clear need for castration of anyone who truly wished to enter Heaven. They extended their belief to an interpretation of Genesis that Adam and Eve were punished by the addition of genitals when they were forced from the Garden of Eden. They believed that God did not have a penis or testicles and that castration returned men to God’s image.

Only after it became clear that the Resurrection would be postponed, was the emphasis on chastity relaxed. Christians today who focus on "family values" do so without regard to what the actual texts of the faith clearly state. Go back and read them yourselves.

Hell, you can take ANYTHING out of the Bible and twist it into something else.

So- Jesus really didn't say anything about CASTRATION. Just as I thought.

I'm not sure Jesus was being literal when he mentioned that 'plucking out the eye' business. I doubt Christ would approve of you chopping off your nuts because you found it offensive to be a man and not a woman. You got to draw a line somewhere.

But, um, Paolo, that jumping off bridges thing is one thing. If Jesus said to do it, more people would do it.

Hmm.

We must make a distinction, here, however. Jesus H. might not have said much, but Jesus A. usually does. Just a bit of clarification there.

Christians Vs. Lemmings ... go figure ...

I rest my case,

Amen.

:tongueout

The clearest statement, attributed to Jesus himself, is that found in Matthew 19:12, For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Theology, being the rat's nest of conflict that it is, gives multiple interpretations of this passage. Many contemporary theologians want the passage to refer to celibacy after divorce. Others want it to be interpreted very literally to state that castration is a good Christian action (or, at least, was perceived as such in earlier times).

Those closest in time and place to the actual historic Jesus tended to interpret it literally much more often than do contemporary theologians. Many even thought that Jesus, himself, was a eunuch - whether born so, in the image of God, or made so after birth. Tertullian, one of the most important early Christian theologians not only stated clearly that Jesus was a eunuch, but that St. Matthew was also. The Valensians, one of the earliest Christian communities in the area just to the east of Jerusalem not only believed that Jesus was a eunuch, but that ALL true Christians must be castrated if they are to enter Heaven. Contemporary documents on the Valensians are limited, but the group appears to have been exterminated by the Romans because of their custom of kidnapping and castrating small boys from the surrounding region in order to save their souls.

Origen was only one (and the most famous) of many early Christians who castrated himself or was castrated for his faith. Reading in history and theology will turn up many more examples of eunuch saints and theologians who are rarely cited today as their interpretations of Jesus's words have fallen out of favor.

See my review of Kuefler's book The Manly Eunuch on the Nonfiction Board for further information on the later abandonment of this early Christian belief in the western part of the Roman Empire. Kuefler, in a very careful review of the evidence, sees it as largely an attempt to convert Romans to the new faith as well as to counter the major competitor to early Christianity, faith in the Mother of the Gods and her castrated priests. Castration in the name of Christ continued to be frequently practiced in the east for several more centuries before being gradually abandoned. It was still practiced as late as the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453, when Moslem observers described it with horror - that parents would castrate their own sons for the sake of their salvation. There are a number of other relevant articles on the Nonfiction Board as well.

And, thank you Paolo for your kind words,

---Jesus Angel Azevado

About Christians and the body see:

Peter Brown. "The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Rununciation in Early Christianity." New York: Columbia University Press, 1988.

A recent account of the English Bible is Benson Bobrick's "Wide as the Waters: The Story of the English Bible and the Revolution It Inspired."



Jesus' post above indicates an important part of Christian history. Having once been the pastor to a bunch of beautiful young women, I understand the desire to cut off the offending organs and the power of temptation.

What i see is CHRIST is very sympathetic of the eunuch .And may i say JESUS you explained it very well.

from Matthew most probably is not an authentic statement of the historical Jesus but a position assumed by the later church as it developed its particular polemics.

It is intriguing that Jesus is not connected with a wife. It would have been most unusual in his time for a man not to be married.

Does this imply Jesus has links with ascetic communities such as the Essesnes? Did he have a wife who died?