10-08-2003, 09:48 PM
Eunuch or Believer? Both?
Shlama Akhay:
While doing a quick reading of the wonderful recollection ???Semi split Words???, I stopped in the n. 6, ???Matthew 19:12 / Acts 8:27??? and, as the issue touches me personally, I would like to say something about it (God, these guys gonna hate me!). Sorry, but for the sake of accuracy in our Forum I must.
There???re some fundamental (not fundamentalists) rules in exegesis to have always in mind. Among them:
1) The MEDIATE AND IMMEDIATE CONTEXT is to be regarded. No verse must be picked up and isolated from its context.
2) A ???short-circuit??? between texts must be avoided, otherwise a ???hazard??? could happen.
Acts 8:27 refers to the [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font]of great authority... a staff member of the Ethiopian Queen (eunuchs were regularly). The other text quoted is Deut 23:1, concerning the prohibition for such persons ???to enter in the assembly of the Lord???. I suppose that, as same as women or gentiles, these eunuchs couldn???t go into CERTAIN parts of the Temple (you know there were ???concentric boundaries??? for different kind of people, from the external atrium to the ???Qodesh haqqodashim???). But see this amazing text of Is 3:4 (a parallelism of not excluded foreigner/eunuch) and particularly v.5: ???Even unto them will I give IN MINE HOUSE AND WITHIN MY WALLS A PLACE and a name better than of sons and of daughters...???
Nevertheless, in Acts 8:27 I would admit that ???Believer??? is OK.
Now, let???s get into the main thing.
In the text of Mt 19:12 the IMMEDIATE CONTEXT is:
A) Mt 19:3-8 Pharisees came with the ???tempting??? question about DIVORCE. Jesus proclaims his teaching about the ???original??? God???s project about marriage.
B) Mt 19:10 Disciples??? reaction about this ???hard??? doctrine: ???it is not good to marry???.
C) Mt 19:11 Jesus??? statement: This is a ???gift??? not given to all (to understand this Word about loyalty in love and/or ???not to marry??? choice)
D) Mt 19: 12 Jesus??? (discussed) Words about [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font]: ???Believer??? doesn???t fit here (at least in the two first cases):
- Nobody becomes a believer ???from the womb???
- Nobody becomes a believer ???from men???
(Faith is a Gift of God, not ???transmitted by flesh and blood???; ???eunuchs??? instead could born with this deficiency and they could be made so by castration in order to be ???faithful??? servants, especially related to Qeens :-)).
- In the third case... Keep reading to the end!
Regarding the CONTEXT (marriage-divorce-not marry), these ???Eunuchs for the Kingdom...??? seem to be:
a) Those who chose not to marry AGAIN, when their wives abandoned them.
b) Those who (in very early times) freely chose NOT TO MARRY, remaining in Chastity, as Maran Eshoa Himself, or Paul (see 1Cor 7:8), Yukhanan (virgin, according Tradition) and others, in order to devote themselves entirely ???to the Kingdom of God??? (Cf. 1Cor 7:32), being a living anounce of the eschatological stage of this Kingdom (???people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven??? Mt 22:30). And that???s a ???Gift???, [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)] Byhyd Fwby= [/font]of God!
Origenes (s. III) understood this literally and castrated himself physically (Oops! That would be too easy, man!). He???s not considered a saint because of that stupid action, in spite of his highly mystical writings and life of true virtue.
Therefore I don???t see a mistranslation here, but thanks to the cleverness of Akhi Steve, what I see instead is A BREATHTAKING, DEEP PLAY ON WORDS! Believe me, Akhay, I know about this life???s option and I can humbly tell you this:
TO BE A[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)] 0nmyhm [/font] (EUNUCH) FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD,
ONE HAS TO BE A CONVINCED [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font] (BELIEVER) IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD!
Thanks a lot, Akhay Paul, Steve and Chris! You give me more ???fuel for my Spiritual Engine???!
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Fwx0b[/font]
Ab. Valentin
Shlama Akhay:
While doing a quick reading of the wonderful recollection ???Semi split Words???, I stopped in the n. 6, ???Matthew 19:12 / Acts 8:27??? and, as the issue touches me personally, I would like to say something about it (God, these guys gonna hate me!). Sorry, but for the sake of accuracy in our Forum I must.
There???re some fundamental (not fundamentalists) rules in exegesis to have always in mind. Among them:
1) The MEDIATE AND IMMEDIATE CONTEXT is to be regarded. No verse must be picked up and isolated from its context.
2) A ???short-circuit??? between texts must be avoided, otherwise a ???hazard??? could happen.
Acts 8:27 refers to the [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font]of great authority... a staff member of the Ethiopian Queen (eunuchs were regularly). The other text quoted is Deut 23:1, concerning the prohibition for such persons ???to enter in the assembly of the Lord???. I suppose that, as same as women or gentiles, these eunuchs couldn???t go into CERTAIN parts of the Temple (you know there were ???concentric boundaries??? for different kind of people, from the external atrium to the ???Qodesh haqqodashim???). But see this amazing text of Is 3:4 (a parallelism of not excluded foreigner/eunuch) and particularly v.5: ???Even unto them will I give IN MINE HOUSE AND WITHIN MY WALLS A PLACE and a name better than of sons and of daughters...???
Nevertheless, in Acts 8:27 I would admit that ???Believer??? is OK.
Now, let???s get into the main thing.
In the text of Mt 19:12 the IMMEDIATE CONTEXT is:
A) Mt 19:3-8 Pharisees came with the ???tempting??? question about DIVORCE. Jesus proclaims his teaching about the ???original??? God???s project about marriage.
B) Mt 19:10 Disciples??? reaction about this ???hard??? doctrine: ???it is not good to marry???.
C) Mt 19:11 Jesus??? statement: This is a ???gift??? not given to all (to understand this Word about loyalty in love and/or ???not to marry??? choice)
D) Mt 19: 12 Jesus??? (discussed) Words about [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font]: ???Believer??? doesn???t fit here (at least in the two first cases):
- Nobody becomes a believer ???from the womb???
- Nobody becomes a believer ???from men???
(Faith is a Gift of God, not ???transmitted by flesh and blood???; ???eunuchs??? instead could born with this deficiency and they could be made so by castration in order to be ???faithful??? servants, especially related to Qeens :-)).
- In the third case... Keep reading to the end!
Regarding the CONTEXT (marriage-divorce-not marry), these ???Eunuchs for the Kingdom...??? seem to be:
a) Those who chose not to marry AGAIN, when their wives abandoned them.
b) Those who (in very early times) freely chose NOT TO MARRY, remaining in Chastity, as Maran Eshoa Himself, or Paul (see 1Cor 7:8), Yukhanan (virgin, according Tradition) and others, in order to devote themselves entirely ???to the Kingdom of God??? (Cf. 1Cor 7:32), being a living anounce of the eschatological stage of this Kingdom (???people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven??? Mt 22:30). And that???s a ???Gift???, [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)] Byhyd Fwby= [/font]of God!
Origenes (s. III) understood this literally and castrated himself physically (Oops! That would be too easy, man!). He???s not considered a saint because of that stupid action, in spite of his highly mystical writings and life of true virtue.
Therefore I don???t see a mistranslation here, but thanks to the cleverness of Akhi Steve, what I see instead is A BREATHTAKING, DEEP PLAY ON WORDS! Believe me, Akhay, I know about this life???s option and I can humbly tell you this:
TO BE A[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)] 0nmyhm [/font] (EUNUCH) FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD,
ONE HAS TO BE A CONVINCED [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nmyhm [/font] (BELIEVER) IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD!
Thanks a lot, Akhay Paul, Steve and Chris! You give me more ???fuel for my Spiritual Engine???!
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Fwx0b[/font]
Ab. Valentin