I'm starting to detract a little from Christianity after reading this

[Scann]

This is the verse from Matthew(Can't remember which chapter)
"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."
I actually came to Christianity because of the verse in Leviticus(or was it Deuteronomy?) that forbade castration as I see it as a very evil act(both self inflicted or onto others). However there is the verse where Jesus said that you should cut off your arm if it offends you as "it is better to drop into Heaven with only part of your body rather than hell full bodied" and also another apostle saying that those who think circumcision is important should emasculate themselves(even as a joke). I see no strong condemnation of the act of castration in the New Testament. Sure,you can say that some rules in Leviticus still apply but why no condemnation of this act in the New Testament?
There is also no clear warning from committing this act in regards to the "which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake". Isn't that like being "on the fence" instead of saying "No,don't do that because God doesn't want you to hurt yourself?"
Can someone give me some advice on how to deal with this feeling of doubt in my head now?

 

[dzheremi]

The influential early Christian theologian Origen (c. 184-253) learned not to take such verses too literally, after being anathematized by the Church in his own time (and more famously posthumously) in part for his alleged self-castration.

The way that such verses have traditionally been read is metaphorically, as those "who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake" are those who put to death within themselves the carnal passions (i.e., not by external physical self-mutilation, but by internal self-control).

 

[dqhall]

This is the verse from Matthew(Can't remember which chapter)
"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."
I actually came to Christianity because of the verse in Leviticus(or was it Deuteronomy?) that forbade castration as I see it as a very evil act. However there is the verse where Jesus said that you should cut off your arm if it offends you as "it is better to drop into Heaven with only part of your body rather than hell full bodied" and also another apostle saying that those who think circumcision is important should emasculate themselves(even as a joke). I see no strong condemnation of the act of castration in the New Testamnt. Sure,you can say that some rules in Leviticus still apply but why no condemnation of this act in the New Testament?
There is also no clear warning from committing this act in regards to the "which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake". Isn't that like being "on the fence" instead of saying "No,don't do that because God doesn't want you to hurt yourself?"

Paul did not marry and produce children without castrating himself. He was spiritually a eunuch without losing his testicles.

Origen was a Christian writer and Bible translator who produced numerous pages of Bible commentary. He castrated himself. His writings were quoted by later writers. Origen compared Jonah being in the stomach of a whale for three days to Christ being in a tomb for three days. Eusebius wrote about Origen in his, “Ecclesiastical History.” Origen died 59 years before Christianity was legalized.

It is better to learn self control. Self control did not come easy for some. Many men had vasectomies as they did not want more children. This is less brutal than castration.

 

[Scann]

Thanks for answering, guys. To make something clear, I don't have an intention to mutilate myself. Just voicing my doubts on the subject.

 

[Amittai]

Jesus would only approve "making themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of heaven's sake" in the sense of not entering into marriage for procreation.

The having children to inherit from you was the uppermost factor.

Jesus talked in the vocabulary of the time and we have to not read anything overly literal or cut down into it.

Reading out of and not into Scripture in a true fashion means accepting meanings alongside the words. Words allude, and when several spectrums of allusions intersect, we can have meaning.

It's vital to remember that unlike the way most Protestants misuse Scripture, Jesus' words have context. Chs 18, 19 are about the hard heartedness of the Pharisees and the disciples. It wasn't considered dignified for the rabbi on whom their own self-image depended, to be mobbed by little ones.

The first half of ch 19 is about divorce. His own less usual life of celibacy won't be lost on listeners. Didn't He say that to those who seek His will, spiritual mothers and brothers and children will be added? He's challenging his listeners to get things in better and deeper proportion. He is always oblique.

These are not get-outs. These are constant standards throughout His words and much else in OT & NT (and world literature on most subjects at most times).

 

[Mark Quayle]

This is the verse from Matthew(Can't remember which chapter)
"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."
I actually came to Christianity because of the verse in Leviticus(or was it Deuteronomy?) that forbade castration as I see it as a very evil act(both self inflicted or onto others). However there is the verse where Jesus said that you should cut off your arm if it offends you as "it is better to drop into Heaven with only part of your body rather than hell full bodied" and also another apostle saying that those who think circumcision is important should emasculate themselves(even as a joke). I see no strong condemnation of the act of castration in the New Testament. Sure,you can say that some rules in Leviticus still apply but why no condemnation of this act in the New Testament?
There is also no clear warning from committing this act in regards to the "which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake". Isn't that like being "on the fence" instead of saying "No,don't do that because God doesn't want you to hurt yourself?"
Can someone give me some advice on how to deal with this feeling of doubt in my head now?

The Old Testament has many proscriptions and requirements with which the New Testament doesn't directly deal --I find it curious you should focus on this one to the exclusion of others.

Anyhow, you seem to me to be confusing several different things: being a eunuch for Christ's sake as Paul mentions is not a medical procedure, but a heart and self-control matter. Likewise, the reference to cutting off an offending member of the body is of the same figurative sense. He is saying it is that serious a thing, that yes it would actually be better, but he is obviously (or so it seems to me) talking in terms of self-control and self-discipline and life-direction/ focus. I don't think he would think it virtuous to cut one's arm or leg off, for example, making a person subsequently dependent on others for life-quality, encumbering them because of one's lack of self-discipline. So why would actual emasculation make one more virtuous? How is the removal of one temptation going to make a person more Godly than learning self-control does?

Further, I have often come to realize that in what seems to me to be an addiction, if that "necessity" was removed, and I was no longer tempted in that area, I would come up with another area in which to be tempted and addicted; hence, I concluded, in the "old man", the sin nature, I am not addicted to anything, except to pleasure.

 

[xaris]

This is the verse from Matthew(Can't remember which chapter)
"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."
I actually came to Christianity because of the verse in Leviticus(or was it Deuteronomy?) that forbade castration as I see it as a very evil act(both self inflicted or onto others). However there is the verse where Jesus said that you should cut off your arm if it offends you as "it is better to drop into Heaven with only part of your body rather than hell full bodied" and also another apostle saying that those who think circumcision is important should emasculate themselves(even as a joke). I see no strong condemnation of the act of castration in the New Testament. Sure,you can say that some rules in Leviticus still apply but why no condemnation of this act in the New Testament?
There is also no clear warning from committing this act in regards to the "which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake". Isn't that like being "on the fence" instead of saying "No,don't do that because God doesn't want you to hurt yourself?"
Can someone give me some advice on how to deal with this feeling of doubt in my head now?

God is out to change our heart (and He does through the new birth), rather than change our body parts.

 

[SubjectObject]

When one can find the only real pleasure in this world is within studying God's Word, getting to know Him intimately through His Word that is how to overcome sinful pleasures

 

[Sketcher]

The New Testament doesn't teach castration. Origen has been brought up already. No one should do what he did.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

This is the verse from Matthew(Can't remember which chapter)
"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."
I actually came to Christianity because of the verse in Leviticus(or was it Deuteronomy?) that forbade castration as I see it as a very evil act(both self inflicted or onto others). However there is the verse where Jesus said that you should cut off your arm if it offends you as "it is better to drop into Heaven with only part of your body rather than hell full bodied" and also another apostle saying that those who think circumcision is important should emasculate themselves(even as a joke). I see no strong condemnation of the act of castration in the New Testament. Sure,you can say that some rules in Leviticus still apply but why no condemnation of this act in the New Testament?
There is also no clear warning from committing this act in regards to the "which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake". Isn't that like being "on the fence" instead of saying "No,don't do that because God doesn't want you to hurt yourself?"
Can someone give me some advice on how to deal with this feeling of doubt in my head now?

Neither of these verses are talking about castration. If you read the New Testament, Jesus uses what is known as parables, or symbolism. When he talks about plucking out your eyes, he does not mean that we should actually pull out our eyes, it is figurative language, to show the seriousness of dealing with sin. That we should take serious measures to deal with sin. When he is talking about eunuchs, he is meaning some people give up on the worldly passions to follow Jesus, alone. That rather than get distracted in marriage they serve Him only. Jesus in no way wants anyone to be mutilated.