C
CWBetts
Guest
It never ceases to amaze me that people look at Wikipedia as a reliable source
- Status
J
JuneBug72
Guest
eunuch
One entry found.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eunuch
Main Entry: eu·nuch
Pronunciation: \ˈyü-nək, -nik\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English eunuk, from Latin eunuchus, from Greek eunouchos, from eunē bed + echein to have, have charge of — more at scheme
Date: 15th century
1 : a castrated man placed in charge of a harem or employed as a chamberlain in a palace
2 : a man or boy deprived of the testes or external genitals
3 : one that lacks virility or power
— eu·nuch·ism -nə-ˌki-zəm, -ni-\ noun
dictionary.reference.com/browse/eunuch
eu⋅nuch /ˈyunək/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [yoo-nuhk] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun a castrated man, esp. one formerly employed by Oriental rulers as a harem guard or palace official.
Origin:
1350–1400; ME eunuk < L eunūchus < Gk eunoûchos eunuch, chamberlain, equiv. to eune-, s. of eun bed, place of sleeping + -ochos keeping (akin to échein to hold
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
Cite This Source
eu·nuch (yōō’nək) Pronunciation Key
n.
A castrated man employed as a harem attendant or as a functionary in certain Asian courts.
A man or boy whose testes are nonfunctioning or have been removed.
Informal An ineffectual, powerless, or unmasculine man.
[Middle English eunuk, from Latin eunūchus, from Greek eunoukhos : eunē, bed + -okhos, keeping (from ekhein, to keep; see segh- in Indo-European roots).]
eu’nuch·ism n.
Word History: The word eunuch does not derive, as one might think, from the operation that produced a eunuch but rather from one of his functions. Eunuch goes back to the Greek word eunoukhos, “a castrated person employed to take charge of the women of a harem and act as chamberlain.” The Greek word is derived from eunē, “bed,” and ekhein, “to keep.” A eunuch, of course, was ideally suited to guard the bedchamber of women.
A
AngelAshley
Guest
No, I’m saying that there is no grounds to deny certain rights to homosexuals. These rights have already been defined - under marriage law and in society as we see it today.
Good example of when one needs a VERY good reason to withold rights from certain people. When not doing so would cause a real and probably danger to others, then you have just cause to do so. Allowing homosexuals the same rights under marriage does not cause a real and probable danger to others.
Marriage has been around for a VERY long time and has had a huge variety of inclusive rights and restrictions on who can marry. I can’t speak for all of them in the limited space of this thread, even if I did know everything about all of them.
The legal one. When you include more than two parties in a contract that’s designed for two people, things get complicated.
I don’t know who -origionally- had the idea, as I said, there have been many definitions throughout history.
Yes pretty much, due to what I think was a complex hormonal imbalance in the womb, I was born with the body of a male but the “brain-wireing” of a female. Since one cannot change how their brain is wired, my only realistic option to bring my mind more closely inline with my body was to undergo surgery.
Nobody. I figured it out for myself for the most part. Two years of visiting a specialist gender clinic in London and living twoand a half years in the role of a female before I had surgery confirmed it.
I was given toys usually given to boys and not girls. I was made to wear boys clothes and not girls. I was expected to have male social circles in school. I was made to do physical education with boys and do sports normally associated with males as well as having to change with them (ewwwwww). It was socially unnaceptable for me to wear pink, to have female mannerisms, to like things like chick-flicks and romance, the list goes on.
For the first 21 years of my life, I was physically male. My mind has always been that of a female, since birth. Therefore I had been “wrong” up until the age of 21, which was when I fist started taking hormones and undergoing treatment to change my body. I had the surgery in May last year, which was the final step. I am still not 100% “right”, as someone said earlier my DNA is not female, but that doesn’t matter to me in the slightest, since the law, society, my family friends and co-workers all accept me as a female now.
Seems to happen all too often
I’ve always wondered how anybody can view scripture as a reliable tool to base their morals on, since thousands of people have been trying to interpret them for thousands of years yet still we cannot decide on their meaning…“If all the Christians who have called other Christians “not really a Christian” were to vanish, there’d be no Christians left.”
S
stephendcml
Guest
Do you have like total ignorance of that passage? Do you like not try and read the Hebrew text and see what things really say, or are you like brainwashed? Do you know what a m’haym-ne is? Like it’s the word that was translated to eunuch in that passage. Why don’t you look it up.
Anyhow, this website is helpful. And thank you everyone for stating a good argument, because everyone in this forum has very good insight and point of views.
S
stephendcml
Guest
That website is this, I forgot to put it in:homosexualeunuchsandthebible.com/
M
magdelaine
Guest
This is incorrect. You really should look at historical and anthropological evidence…which points to marriage having the purpose of raising the next generation (or the biological result of sexual relations between a man and a woman). I would love to see some credible evidence to the contrary.
A
AngelAshley
Guest
Really? You’re claiming to know about every single historic definition of marriage everywhere? Wow, ok. Would like to see some credible evidence of THAT.
Besides, the point is that we know a lot more about ourselves than we used to. We understand now that there isn’t actually anything wrong with homosexuality. “Marriage” might of once been a term relating to “the purpose of raising the next generation”. It is now a lot more than that. It encompasses things that every couple should have the right to, regardless of sexuality. Whatever you call it, marriage, civil partnership, it doesn’t matter. What matters is everyone having equal rights.
Besides, the point is that we know a lot more about ourselves than we used to. We understand now that there isn’t actually anything wrong with homosexuality. “Marriage” might of once been a term relating to “the purpose of raising the next generation”. It is now a lot more than that. It encompasses things that every couple should have the right to, regardless of sexuality. Whatever you call it, marriage, civil partnership, it doesn’t matter. What matters is everyone having equal rights.
S
stephendcml
Guest
I like your view, some people fail to realize that as time goes by, we learn more about ourselves, which I believe is God’s plan. People believe that religion is so simple, and it’s not. If people just chose to accept things and not question things, we wouldn’t have Christianity and we would all think the world was flat. If you think you are questioning your faith or opposing God when you question somethings,especial in the physical world, your not. Faith is believing in this mystery of God and Jesus, unseen things. What is physical should be questioned. People have different physical appearances, part of the physical, but I believe love and faith and hope are not physical and come from God. Love cannot come from Satan, so if two men love each other, it is not evil because love is not evil. Homosexuality and heterosexuality cannot be evil if your relationship has love and has no fear, I believe it comes from God. There are twisted relationships, like being afraid of your partner because of abuse, masochism, or promiscuous open relationships that are not good. What are the real problems? Anything that is love is not from Satan. Love is from God.
S
stephendcml
Guest
You weren’t born wrong, but you were born different. Different is not wrong. All love comes from God.No, I’m saying that there is no grounds to deny certain rights to homosexuals. These rights have already been defined - under marriage law and in society as we see it today.
Good example of when one needs a VERY good reason to withold rights from certain people. When not doing so would cause a real and probably danger to others, then you have just cause to do so. Allowing homosexuals the same rights under marriage does not cause a real and probable danger to others.
Marriage has been around for a VERY long time and has had a huge variety of inclusive rights and restrictions on who can marry. I can’t speak for all of them in the limited space of this thread, even if I did know everything about all of them.
The legal one. When you include more than two parties in a contract that’s designed for two people, things get complicated.
I don’t know who -origionally- had the idea, as I said, there have been many definitions throughout history.
Yes pretty much, due to what I think was a complex hormonal imbalance in the womb, I was born with the body of a male but the “brain-wireing” of a female. Since one cannot change how their brain is wired, my only realistic option to bring my mind more closely inline with my body was to undergo surgery.
Nobody. I figured it out for myself for the most part. Two years of visiting a specialist gender clinic in London and living twoand a half years in the role of a female before I had surgery confirmed it.
I was given toys usually given to boys and not girls. I was made to wear boys clothes and not girls. I was expected to have male social circles in school. I was made to do physical education with boys and do sports normally associated with males as well as having to change with them (ewwwwww). It was socially unnaceptable for me to wear pink, to have female mannerisms, to like things like chick-flicks and romance, the list goes on.
For the first 21 years of my life, I was physically male. My mind has always been that of a female, since birth. Therefore I had been “wrong” up until the age of 21, which was when I fist started taking hormones and undergoing treatment to change my body. I had the surgery in May last year, which was the final step. I am still not 100% “right”, as someone said earlier my DNA is not female, but that doesn’t matter to me in the slightest, since the law, society, my family friends and co-workers all accept me as a female now.
Seems to happen all too often
“If all the Christians who have called other Christians “not really a Christian” were to vanish, there’d be no Christians left.”
M
magdelaine
Guest
You don’t address what I said at all. I didn’t say I know everything, but I have done enough historical and anthropological reading to know that if you will be hard pressed to find **any **evidence to the contrary. I don’t think you have done ANY research of this kind quite frankly. You are very cavalier about your “facts”, much of which is based on your own “feelings” and what your friends say and not on reality.
Which is why, I dare say, you are so willing to change the institution upon which civilization was built to the point of it being unrecognizable as an institution at all. If you knew what it was, you would leave it alone. “Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do.”
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Thank you for this piece of semi-heretical “theology.” The problem is, disordered love can be disguised as a good, non-love can be disguised as love, and lust can be disguised as love. And all can be rationalized as love, even when not much effort is made to disguise. Our primary helpful accomplice in such disguises and rationalizations is the devil; our secondary accomplice is faulty vision and faulty education.
Genuine love between any two persons of any gender is a holy thing; that does not extend necessarily to physical expression of that love as being equally holy. Depends on the context (i.e., heterosexual marriage).
D
Dee123
Guest
No one said she was born wrong. No one said she wasn’t created out of love. All humans are created because of a God who loves them. She’s the one indicating she wasn’t made “right”. What she’s done to her body indicates such…
D
Dee123
Guest
Point 1: This is a Christian forum.
Point 2: Expect religious explanations.
Point 3: If you don’t like religious explanations, perhaps you’d better not ask any more questions—or address your constitution. Weren’t Christian morals/values put into that? Do you guys plan on addressing that next?
Point4: As people keep pointing out, one cannot leave out religion. You can if you’re atheist. You can’t if you believe in a God who created you. And you can’t expect us Christians to give atheistic answers. Are you trying to force us to leave out God/relgion? We cannot become like an atheist, because we arent’. Let us express ourselves freely!!!
D
Dee123
Guest
So, according to scripture, eunuchs were either born that way, or they were castrated by men or they made themselves that way for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, and they were born eunuchs to partake in homosexual activities and … oops, I mistakenly put in something which isn’t there…
By the way, you never answered the question about who told you there were Christian gay marriages after the time of Jesus? And what did the Church Fathers have to say about this, if indeed such events took place?
And, when were they outlawed, as seems to be the case if people are fighting to have them lawful again?
D
Dee123
Guest
Elizabeth, your arguments are strong and coherent. Thank you for your valuable points.
D
Dee123
Guest
First off, an interpretation CAN be wrong. The Holy Spirit leads all to the truth. There can’t be 2 or 5 or 10 different “truths”. One for each person who has a different way of thinking? Be honest with yourself. Ask yourself if there really is ONE TRUTH or many variations…What does scripture say? If there is ONE TRUTH, do you think it’s going to be accepted by all? Of course not. But there is ONE TRUTH.
Now, how do you go about discerning who is right? It’s easy to say you alone are right. That’s easy. It’s harder to admit someone else is right. And maybe that someone is within the Catholic Church. Or, go ahead, I challenge you to read the Church Fathers and see what they all had to say about specific Scripture passages. You’ll find they are all the same on major issues. Sacraments, especially…anyway, enough bumbling for now…
Anyway, who is the author of Truth? And does He want us to be united or set apart–in chaos? Read Ephesians…Ponder this idea for some time…
D
Dee123
Guest
Just want to respond to your response indicating you’re following the legal definition of marriage. But, that doesn’t make sense. There was a legal definition. You guys didn’t like it. You want the law changed. So, you’re actually fighting to change the law according to your beliefs. Then you can actually say you’re using the legal definition of marriage. Until then, you’re not!!!No, I’m saying that there is no grounds to deny certain rights to homosexuals. These rights have already been defined - under marriage law and in society as we see it today.
Good example of when one needs a VERY good reason to withold rights from certain people. When not doing so would cause a real and probably danger to others, then you have just cause to do so. Allowing homosexuals the same rights under marriage does not cause a real and probable danger to others.
Marriage has been around for a VERY long time and has had a huge variety of inclusive rights and restrictions on who can marry. I can’t speak for all of them in the limited space of this thread, even if I did know everything about all of them.
The legal one. When you include more than two parties in a contract that’s designed for two people, things get complicated.
I don’t know who -origionally- had the idea, as I said, there have been many definitions throughout history.
Yes pretty much, due to what I think was a complex hormonal imbalance in the womb, I was born with the body of a male but the “brain-wireing” of a female. Since one cannot change how their brain is wired, my only realistic option to bring my mind more closely inline with my body was to undergo surgery.
Nobody. I figured it out for myself for the most part. Two years of visiting a specialist gender clinic in London and living twoand a half years in the role of a female before I had surgery confirmed it.
I was given toys usually given to boys and not girls. I was made to wear boys clothes and not girls. I was expected to have male social circles in school. I was made to do physical education with boys and do sports normally associated with males as well as having to change with them (ewwwwww). It was socially unnaceptable for me to wear pink, to have female mannerisms, to like things like chick-flicks and romance, the list goes on.
For the first 21 years of my life, I was physically male. My mind has always been that of a female, since birth. Therefore I had been “wrong” up until the age of 21, which was when I fist started taking hormones and undergoing treatment to change my body. I had the surgery in May last year, which was the final step. I am still not 100% “right”, as someone said earlier my DNA is not female, but that doesn’t matter to me in the slightest, since the law, society, my family friends and co-workers all accept me as a female now.
Seems to happen all too often
“If all the Christians who have called other Christians “not really a Christian” were to vanish, there’d be no Christians left.”
D
Dee123
Guest
Actually, I read the first paragraph of this site. First off, of course the eunuchs were trusted not to sleep with the women…they couldn’t! They were physically incapable of doing that!!!
And are you simply believing the activities of eunuchs from this website?
Besides, I don’t only refer to the aforementioned passage of Matthew to determine that homosexuality is immoral. There are other scripture passages that indicate fornication is wrong. That would mean that if two unmarried people had intercourse, that is a sin. That’s what fornication is. It’s not the same as adultery. Doesn’t matter the sex of the two.
I suggest you try to find other scripture passages that address the issues of fornication. They are listed, not alone, but along with other sins which are serious, too.
And if some eunuchs were such for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, wouldn’t that perhaps indicate they took on a priestly role?
J
Jossy
Guest
You said it, I didn’t (no need to emphasis male/female parts of
the body) and for your information, I am not a priest.
Anyway, why trying to put the nail in the coffin on this gay
issue. It is a disease of the mind and God’s law was made
known to us by the prophets of old so why are we trying to make
everyone believe that gay is not a sickness and that everyone
should accept this people for who they are.
For normal people who are supporting them, I question
your belief in God our Creator.
I fear the Lord my God and I will not be arguing this point again.
S
stephendcml
Guest
What if sex isn’t just for procreation, think Songs of Songs, whenever that guy talks about getting it on with beautiful girl, I doubt he was thinking about having children. That’s in the Bible, totally not using sex for procreation, he’s using it for love.
- Status