The Castrati Kingdom?
Dan Barker wrote:
“What personal sacrifice for ‘the kingdom of heaven’ was Jesus talking about when he told his disciples, ‘He that is able to receive it, let him receive it’?…Castrate yourself. -No wonder we don’t hear sermons from the entire New Testament-how many preachers actually take this ghastly advice seriously?! Although some have prudently tried to interpret this as celibacy rather than castration, the early church father Origen read it literally and took a knife to himself. There were entire monastic orders, and church choirs in need of sopranos known as ‘castrati’ based on this teaching of Jesus. Literal or not, the face value of this verse is physical mutilation:
‘But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 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 from the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.’ (Matthew 19:11-12) The Scholar’s Version has: ‘There are castrated men who castrated themselves because of Heaven’s imperial rule. If you are able to accept this (advice), do so.’
Tragically, every year there are reported cases of Christian followers mutilating themselves because ‘the bible tells me so.'”1
By now it should be quite obvious that typically in order to refute the fallacious claims of Mr. Baker and other activists the only thing one has to do is simply read the text. Read for context, for content and without prejudice. The comment “No wonder we don’t hear sermons from the entire New Testament” does not prove that we, 2.5 billion Christians, do not hear sermons from the entire New Testament. It may prove that Dan Barker’s preaching style was partial or topical and it may be indicative of the churches that he has attended but many of us 2.5 billion, including yours truly, attend churches where the entire Bible, every book, chapter, verse and word are read, taught and dissected. But “how many preachers actually take this ghastly advice seriously?!” plenty, as we shall see.
Let us again take this claim by claim. Mr. Baker claims that Jesus commanded the personal sacrifice of castration which, note carefully, in a physical sense is a surgical or chemical procedure whereby the male tesets or female ovaries are made to cease from functioning-or “physical mutilation.” Dan Barker makes some reasonable statements regarding monasticism, I have dealt with this topic in two essays regarding Roman Catholicism: The Celibate Priesthood – God’s Will and Human Nature and Eternally a Virgin? (with regards to a dogma about Mary).
Now let us consider the text and the claim that “the face value of this verse is physical mutilation.” Recall our reference to simply reading the text for context, content and without prejudice. Dan Barker claims that the text refers to “physical mutilation.” But the text likens what Jesus is asking of his adult followers to “some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb.” Does Dan Barker expect us to believe that, somehow, the doctors of 2,000 years ago would perform castration upon a baby that was still in the womb? It perhaps should be pointed out that Dan Barker does “think abortion is a blessing” (hear his debate with John Rankin and my mention of it in my essay Atheism is Holier Than Theism). But in utero surgery is certainly not envisaged here. Indeed, the text is referring to what may be termed “impotency” since one can be born that way, or “celibacy” since that is what an adult would do.
Perhaps some have quite literally castrated themselves, although Dan Barker claims that “every year there are reported cases” he can offer only one example from the past 2,000 years. Yet, the text is clear.
Moreover, there is the reference to the reverentially entitled “Scholar’s Version.” Please note something that Dan Barker did not bother mentioning: “The Scholar’s Version” is the work of “The Jesus Seminar.” The oxymoronically named group may be entertaining, bombastic and even interesting but are also a group that has been discredited in every possible facet of scholarship (see here for an example). The University of South Florida’s Rabbi Jacob Neusner stated that the Jesus Seminar is “either the greatest scholarly hoax since the Piltdown Man or the utter bankruptcy of New Testament studies.”2
Thus, even if the text reads “There are castrated men who castrated themselves because of Heaven’s imperial rule. If you are able to accept this (advice), do so,” the point is: what is the text actually stating and how was it understood? We do not have one single example of any apostle, disciple or anyone in the New Testament physically mutilating their genitalia. This is either because they did not understand their own history, culture, language, etc. or because only now with the alleged erudite elucidation of Dan Barker and the Jesus Seminar can we see that they should have mutilated themselves.
Moreover, the greater context is sexual relations and marriage, verses 9-10 (just prior to Dan Barker’s quotation):
“‘And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.’ His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with [his] wife, it is not good to marry.”
Thus, we learn that the issue of being a eunuch was directly related to the discussion of sexual morality.
Furthermore and lastly, the word “eunouchous” is Strong’s number 2135 as refers to:
“1) a bed keeper, bed guard, superintendent of the bedchamber, chamberlaina) in the palace of oriental monarchs who support numerous wives the superintendent of the women’s apartment or harem, an office held by eunuchsb) an emasculated man, a eunuch1) eunuchs in oriental courts held by other offices of greater, held by the Ethiopian eunuch mentioned in Ac. 8:27-39.c) one naturally incapacitated1) for marriage2) begetting children
d) one who voluntarily abstains from marriage”
So, “how many preachers actually take this ghastly advice seriously?!” plenty, by living celibate and or sexually pure lives of devotion to God.
Of further interest may be, Christopher Hitchens – On the Mutilation of Children’s Genitalia.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.