this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
226 points (81.4% liked)

Greentext

6636 readers
1188 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Source 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’?

Gender did exist in biblical times

[–] Estiar@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

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 points 5 hours 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.