Some Become - A Protestant Theology of Spiritual Eunuchism (Potential Book) Seeking criticisms, ideas for topics, improvements, or concerns.

Status
Not open for further replies.

davejonescue

Puritan Board Senior
I'm thinking about trying to slowly write a book about Spiritual Eunuchism. This is what I have so far. There is no logical order to these points, just a couple random thoughts off the top. Please feel free to add more possible points, correct me on points, etc.

Title: "Some Become" A Protestant Theology on Spiritual Eunuchism.

1. Being a Eunuch is not the same as being temporarily single. ---Becoming a Eunuch, whether by birth or by castration, was an irreversible trait or act in the time of Jesus. Spiritual Eunuchism, not Sacred Singleness, is the "free will choice" to forgo sex and marriage for the sake of the Kingdom. While a desire to become a Spiritual Eunuch may always be persistent, always keep in mind that spiritual eunuchism, as well as marriage, are freewill choices, and while one is obligated after the choice of marriage to remain in that state until the death of their partner, one is not required to remain a spiritual eunuch, even after a personal dedication, and is free to marry at any given time during their pilgrimage as long as it lines up with Gods ideal for marriage.

2. Are we a Peter or Paul?
Marriage and Spiritual Eunichism provide opportunities to serve the Lord in different ways. For example, Peter was married and took on what we would contemporarily call the role of a "full-time" minister. He was funded by the church and performed his ministry functions as a calling/vocation. This most likely allowed him to focus on family, and possibly raise children while at the same time contributing a large percentage of his time to ministry. Being that the popular Protestant consensus is that our job is also our ministry, whatever that employment may be, even those who are not formerly in ministry, would still be divided along these lines.
Paul, on the other hand, was what is contemporarily known as a "tentmaker." Instead of splitting his focus trilaterally (work, ministry, family) he was able to also only divide his focus two ways (work/ministry.) The absence of a family is most likely what allowed him to not charge for the Gospel, and to provide his own means and not burden the church, while also spending an equal share of effort in ministry. To applaud Paul for his contributions without factoring in his lifestyle is to be short-sighted.

3. Spiritual Eunichism is factually no more a danger to increase minor victimization than the general public in areas of minor concentration.
----- For instance, in the Catholic Church, which mandates celibacy for its Priests, the rate of abuse within its priestly body is about 4%. The rate of molestation within the American public school system is about 6%. There is no mandated celibacy in public schools, yet it has a higher rate of molestation. While both of these are high, too high, the point is molesting children doesn't stem from denying oneself sexual gratification, it comes from a desire to molest children.

4. A brief History of Christian Eunuchism.

5. The entire NT is written about a Spiritual Eunuch in his humanity (Jesus.) And a majority of the NT books were written by a Spiritual Eunuch.

6. Jesus puts emphasis on embracing Spiritual Eunichism is you feel called or desire to do it, and can do it (in purity.)
" The one who can accept this should accept it.” (Matt. 19:12)
Notice he doesn't say "the one who can accept this may accept this," but instead, he says "should."

7. Spiritual Eunuchism is not Esoteric Asceticism.
--The goal of Spiritual Eunuchism should never be to feel like the simple abstinence of sexual or marital gratification somehow elevates one spiritually or draws them closer to God. Instead, it has to do with prioritizing different aspects of life. One may be devoted to family, which is an act of worship, and another may be devoted to prayer, study, or service, which is also an act of worship. The level of relationship or love doesn't change by our abstinence. Every Christian receives an equal recompense under the headship of Christ.

8. Satan may try to convince you to be a Spiritual Eunuch, but he won't empower you to do so.
---- Satan's only goal in convincing someone they "have" to be a spiritual eunuch, would be to keep them in bondage to sexual impurity. Remember, Spiritual Eunuchism is not Sacred Singleness, it is a purposefully, dedicated, perpetual state of abstinence. Spiritual Eunuchism is "always a choice."
(unless one is trying to comply with unscriptural sexual temptations or potential adultery by divorce and remarriage.) Either way, one is free to marry God's way. Either by forgoing those temptations and attractions, or being reconciled back to your previous spouse.

9. Spiritual Eunuchism means never being sexually gratified again.....forever.
----Sexual intercourse ends with this life. By committing to becoming a Spiritual Eunuch, you are making sexual gratification no longer an option. (within the confines of Spiritual Eunuchism. One is always free to forgo the practice and marry; you do not sin.)

10. Spiritual Eunuchism is not "just not having sex."
--- It is not just not having sex. It is not having sex, not watching p0rn, not masturbating, not getting married, not having children. It is even putting to death the mental fornication of obscene imaginations. Furthermore, it is not only not seeking romantically intimate relationships, but not engaging in them when the possibility presents itself. It is not fitting in both in the married group or the singles (hoping to marry) group. It can be a potentially lonely life. One clouded in ignorance in the world, and in the church.

11. The 4 main areas to overcome on the path to Spiritual Eunuchism:
1. The heart. A heart that desires this road, but is willing to admit if it is too difficult.
2. The flesh. First act: Stop physically fornicating. No sex.
3. The eyes. Next act. Stop visually fornicating. No p0rn.
4. The mind. Last act. Stop mentally fornicating. No imaginative sexual gratification past rejecting temptation.

12. Perfection is often times progressive.
---Our inherent sexual drives are one of the most ingrained, God-ordained attributes. As is an infant learning to walk, so too is our ability to resist our nature. Dependence to independence won't happen by the will of self, but by subjecting ourselves to the will of God and embracing brokenness that leads to praying for conviction, that leads to genuine repentance and self-control.

13. The main component of Spiritual Eunuchsim is Self-Control, not the absence of temptation.
----Paul said the gift is self-control (in relation to sexual temptation.) Do not expect to reach a state of not being tempted, but instead, a state of having control over your body and not succumbing to sin.

14. Prospective Calling: While the normal consensus of adult intimacy in the Bible is that of a heterosexual marriage, the sovereign call to perpetual singleness (even though it is a compatibilistic choice of the will) will take on a different form or intended remedy to sexual temptation. The man or woman who seeks to marry, will seek to remain pure in the hopes of ending a cycle of temporal suffering through marriage, i.e. the ultimate remedy for the temptation to fornicate is marriage. The spiritual eunuch will look to self-control as the prize of overcoming temporal suffering, not to a future of gratification; as in the above case where abstinent purity is the blessed precursor to biblical sexual expression, but instead will consider untainted celibacy as the prize, and overcoming temporal suffering as the precursor to the enemy giving up and becoming personally mature in that regard. (James 4:7) So, while spiritual eunuchism is (largely) a choice, if one sees the prize of abstinent purity as freedom from matrimony, instead of obedience until matrimony, it may be a good indicator that one is gifted with spiritual eunuchism. This is within the framework of progressive sanctification, i.e. that if a person is empowered by the Holy Spirit, that all inclinations towards holy aspects of worship stem from that source, and will be gifted to the person so that he can ultimately pursue them purely.

15. How Spiritual Eunuchism may affect ministry opportunities. (Negatively & Positively)
Survey up a select number Churches and inquire if their lead Pastors are single (and if they have never been married.)

16. Explain the consequential implications of spiritual eunuchism for those who involuntarily must succumb to this lifestyle (even if temporarily) in biblical obedience, i.e. unmortified sexual deviancy, divorced (while the spouse is still living, and for any other reason except abandonment because of conversion.) -- still fleshing this out.

17. The idea of the Church (as spouse) and Christians (as offspring) in replacement for the time, money, and effort spent on supporting a traditional family. This is in the framework of acknowledging we are the bride of Christ, yet, we look to the Church with the same affection we would a bride (and give our life for it.)

18. The implications of the creation imperative of procreation and the NT exception to forgo physical multiplicity for full-time devotion. How the Bible paints a familial narrative, and stepping outside that narrative should not be spent on self-pleasure, success, or garnishing wealth (for the purpose of hedonism,) but should be spent on devotion, evangelism, service, and study with the ultimate goal of glorifying God by our gift, not squandering it becoming copies of secular singles who merely don't have sex.

19. The possible biblio-psychological effects of celibacy (both voluntary and involuntary,) and loneliness. The theological remedy.

20. Include incarcerated converts who will never be released as potential recipients of this gift by sovereign decree.

21. While self-control is an indicator of the gift, self-control is also a universal gift of spiritual maturity.

22. Also include "sovereign celibacy" under the deviant sexual attractions of pedophilia, bestiality, and necromancy, etc. Christs redeeming power is available to all those who would embrace it. We need to forgo the popular cycle of hush depravities, and not exclude those who would remain celibate from fellowship. The minute we exclude others simply because we are less depraved in a certain area, we have lost sight that we are all irredeemably depraved as a race; and, we have minimized the ability of God to forgive through Jesus, and the love of God through Christ for the most wicked among us. With this being said, it will and should be up to local elders and shepherds how such a person interacts with the congregation, per their directive to guard the sheep.

23. Develop the idea of "sovereign celibacy" or, that circumstantial celibacy where the initial desire is that of sexual gratification, but the possibility of that desire is void due to depraved desires, consequences of sin, or situational impossibility like physical/mental disorders, sexual addictions, abusive traits, or imprisonment.

24. Include appropriate passages regarding this topic. Especially including commentary from trusted sources.

25. Possibly include devotional material dealing specifically with this issue.

26. Deal with the issue of SSA illegitimate marriages, that divorce is impossible where there is no permissible union, and simply stepping away from that situation holds no relational imperative to be reconciled before initiating Christian celibacy or heterosexual marriage. Only in aspects where there will be legal hindrance should a person legally divorce from an illegitimate marriage, so that the circumstance will be severed, and the state of purity can commence whether in celibacy or straight marriage.

27. Regardless of the most depraved prior sexual deviancies, coming to a place of sexual purity, through the forgiveness of Christ, by progressive sanctification, is the "being in the will of God" for your present sexual state. Reconciliation of our transgression will never be the result of sin (i.e. overcoming sexual impurity by being illegitimately divorced (and saved) and remarrying a different spouse,) it will only come by the narrow path of biblical obedience, whether that is marital reconciliation, abstinence until marriage, or celibacy until glorification. While all sins may be forgiven, even multiple marital adultery, they are not the biblical ideal for saintliness. One of the surest ways to seek the individual will of God, is to walk in obedience. When we step away from that obedience, God will still accomplish his decretive purpose for our election, but will do so by way of our chastisement instead of our blessing. The love of God for his children is irrevocable; with that being said, we best show our love for God by obedience.

28. Make known the newness of life, and not to identify with our temptation over our newness in Christ.

29. SSA is not a pass to deem or impose perpetual celibacy on oneself in the spirit of holding on to an old nature of disinterest or self-perceived unattraction to the opposite sex. While, giving oneself “space” to the process of mortifying the old man should be acceptable, dedicating one’s life to becoming a non-sexually active Christian, while one still yearns for sexual gratification, is only imposing a life of turmoil, conflict, and possibly perpetual failure. Never limit the choices to gay or single. This is refusing to do it Gods way. There has to be a pure motive in both singleness and marriage; regardless of how we struggle. Wanting a route to quell sexual urges is a pure motive for marriage; but not wanting to conform to Gods design for marriage is not a pure reason for seeking perpetual celibacy. Yes, there should be room to work out to whether a current state of temptation would be detrimental to a Godly marriage, for, it is better to fail alone then to bring another down with you. But again, this concern would stem from a pure motive of seeking to conform but presently unable, as opposed to potentially able, but obstinately refusing as a residue of the old man.

30. The popularity in Protestantism to look at perpetual singleness as the result of relational, sexual, or emotional disability.

31. The popularity in Protestantism to think that the power that enables celibacy, stems from lack of attractions, desires, or temptations; instead of the gifted grace to have self-control over them.
 
Last edited:
I think someone that has enough romantic interest in the opposite sex that it represents a source of temptation for them should get married, not fight nature to become a "spiritual eunuch."
Nor do I think this is something folks should be seeking to "dedicate themselves" to. The gift of singleness is discerned, not strived for.
 
I think someone that has enough romantic interest in the opposite sex that it represents a source of temptation for them should get married, not fight nature to become a "spiritual eunuch."
Nor do I think this is something folks should be seeking to "dedicate themselves" to. The gift of singleness is discerned, not strived for.
Thank you for your response. I tend to disagree. I think 1 Cor. 7 could actually be taken as a "promotional video" so to speak of all the "bonuses" of living a single life. Also, some of the Puritans take the same view in thinking that serious consideration should be sought whether this "gift" is applicable to oneself, not only for the benefit of the person, in the realm of undivided devotion; but for the benefit of the church. Richard Greenham is one such person. Nor can we ignore that spiritual eunuchism (thus named to differentiate it from physical incapability) is an ongoing "choice" that must be a dedication. 1 Cor. 7:37-38 In life, even in the church, numerous situations will arise, where "one thing can lead to another" and one who is deciding to dedicate themselves to this course will not only have to be defensive, but preemptive in stopping potential romantic relationships before they arise.

Also understand the entire basis of the "gift" is not absence of temptation or desire, but self-control (over ones body.) Trying to mitigate it to someone who supposedly has no interest in the opposite sex is void, in so being, there is no need to have self-control over something that is absent.

Furthermore, I would push back regarding the thought that it is not to be strived for. Jesus mentions to those who "can accept it, should accept it." This brings the denominator past the realm of mere immediate physical ability, into the scarceness of those who can even mentally accept it. There first has to be a desire of this gift, before the gift is received. And we know that the Bible clearly states that to those who love God, he will give us the desires of our heart. Paul, in 1 Cor. 9:27, talks about the process of training and disciplining his body to bring it into subjection to Christ. Again, if there were no striving, there would be no need to bring anything into subjection.

Lastly, the difference between a person being determined or striving in such a calling, and taking a vow, is that in biblical perpetual singleness, marriage is allowed at any time. There is no penalty, disqualification, or annulling of promises any further then the distinct duties (or lack thereof) related to each vocation. If one marries, they do not sin.
 
Last edited:
Dave, you don't draw enough attention to the fact that a number of your 39 points are not uniquely applicable to singleness. They are equally to be expected of marriage - 11, 12, and 13 for instance.

Also, marriage is intended as a protection against fornication. Singleness is not. Those who need protection against fornication should marry. That said, again, uncontrolled lust has no more place in marriage than in singleness, and anyone who thinks of marriage as a solution to their untamed sexual desires is headed for disaster.
 
Dave, you don't draw enough attention to the fact that a number of your 39 points are not uniquely applicable to singleness. They are equally to be expected of marriage - 11, 12, and 13 for instance.

Also, marriage is intended as a protection against fornication. Singleness is not. Those who need protection against fornication should marry. That said, again, uncontrolled lust has no more place in marriage than in singleness, and anyone who thinks of marriage as a solution to their untamed sexual desires is headed for disaster.
Thank you for the comment. My goal was never to only create points uniquely regarding singleness, only that they do have its place within it.

Also, somewhere along the line Paul makes a distinction of "having self-control" 1 Cor. 7:8-9, the requirement for pure perpetual singleness, and in the same breath that married couples should not refrain from coming together due to "a lack of self control" 1 Cor. 7:5. How this is played out in overcoming temptations, I dunno? The only thing that is clear is that in both cases, temptation is present, but the determinate of the "gift" is the response to it. Control, or lack there of.
 
Last edited:
Hello Dave,
First, thank you for your post. I’ve discussed this topic with several friends, and only received blank stares, smirks, or challenges to my seriousness. So, for anyone who is truly seeking God’s will on this matter, a book or lengthy article would be incredibly helpful. Just your summary points are worthy of study. I encourage you to continue and thanks again.
 
Hello Dave,
First, thank you for your post. I’ve discussed this topic with several friends, and only received blank stares, smirks, or challenges to my seriousness. So, for anyone who is truly seeking God’s will on this matter, a book or lengthy article would be incredibly helpful. Just your summary points are worthy of study. I encourage you to continue and thanks again.
Thank you for your response. One of the parts I want to get to the root to, is why this topic is so ignored? I know in Protestantism, there is probably an ingrained response against vows of celibacy regarding clergy; and rightfully so. But there is a whole gulf between what Paul and Jesus describe as spiritual eunuchism; that is, being describe as celibacy "focused, but not obligatory;" and vowed celibacy, where such a vocation becomes a precondition of service. This is also why I think there has to be a distinction made between "Sacred Singleness" or, what has been come to be known as "a season of singleness," and those who like 1 Cor. 7:7, live like Paul did for the remainder of their lives. It again, does surprise me, that of the limited things Jesus talked directly about, Matt. 19:12, that something he did is almost completely ignored. I get that relatively "few" are gifted in such a way, its just like nothing is there for them, if they feel they are; and they are met with the same responses you mention, as if the thought had no biblical basis. Thank you for the encouragement. This book is no rush, and I still want to come up with at least double the possible points. Even the responses I have received have added to that list.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the comment. My goal was never to only create points uniquely regarding singleness, only that they do have its place within it.

Also, somewhere along the line Paul makes a distinction of "having self-control" 1 Cor. 7:8-9, the requirement for pure perpetual singleness, and in the same breath that married couples should not refrain from coming together due to "a lack of self control" 1 Cor. 7:5. How this is played out in overcoming temptations, I dunno? The only thing that is clear is that in both cases, temptation is present, but the determinate of the "gift" is the response to it. Control, or lack there of.
Personally, I think there is some overlap between what Paul refers to as the gift of singleness and what our perverted age calls "asexual" or "demisexual". Throughout history, one finds people who, through no apparent abnormality, just have little or no visible interest in marriage or sex. We have recently read the Little House books and Mr. Edwards strikes me as one such character.

Whether it's the result of some natural dispositional trait or some special working of the Holy Spirit, certain people have or arrive at a marked disinterest in marriage or an overriding interest in some other pursuit such that the state of singleness is a non-issue for them. It's not necessarily a matter of self-control - it's more a lack of need for it because the temptations and drives are not there or substantially muted such that they don't pose the pressing problem that they would for most people.

BTW, I do NOT believe celibacy is a sound recommendation for dealing with SSA. Mortify that sin then determine whether marriage or celibacy is the wiser option. Telling someone to remain celibate while not mortifying a homosexual identity is tantamount to sweeping the house clean so the demons can invite their buddies over for round 2.
 
Personally, I think there is some overlap between what Paul refers to as the gift of singleness and what our perverted age calls "asexual" or "demisexual". Throughout history, one finds people who, through no apparent abnormality, just have little or no visible interest in marriage or sex. We have recently read the Little House books and Mr. Edwards strikes me as one such character.

Whether it's the result of some natural dispositional trait or some special working of the Holy Spirit, certain people have or arrive at a marked disinterest in marriage or an overriding interest in some other pursuit such that the state of singleness is a non-issue for them. It's not necessarily a matter of self-control - it's more a lack of need for it because the temptations and drives are not there or substantially muted such that they don't pose the pressing problem that they would for most people.

BTW, I do NOT believe celibacy is a sound recommendation for dealing with SSA. Mortify that sin then determine whether marriage or celibacy is the wiser option. Telling someone to remain celibate while not mortifying a homosexual identity is tantamount to sweeping the house clean so the demons can invite their buddies over for round 2.
I see where you are coming from, but then I look at the text, and Paul is not making room for the disinterested or mentally or emotionally disengaged. Instead, he is promoting a "counter-matrimonial" life style, and shows this by explaining the benefits of perpetual singleness 1 Cor. 7:32-35. Also, we have to look at this within the confines of Christian community. An unbeliever, though they may be disinterested in marriage, will simply fornicate, or, if they have trouble finding a route to that, they will turn to self-gratification. Even Jesus, in his 3 forms of Eunuchs, doesnt give an option for sexually disinterested; but 1. born, 2. forced, 3. chose. And the last being for a reason, not simply as an extension of a "disinterested" nature. So while what you say maybe and is probably true in some cases, I have to follow the text. Consider if you will the momentous "prizes" of perpetual celibacy and sacred singleness. i.e. Undivided, Undistracted, Total Devotion to the Lord. To minimize these opportunities as nothing less than tremendously attractive is to do a disservice to the text.

The gift of celibacy for a Christian, and I have to emphasize this, is not the result of a lack of interest, or lack of innate desire for the opposite sex; it is the ability (or grace given) to control those desires. If there were no temptations, there would be no need for self-control. I really don't know where this idea comes from but it seems popular. This is also a topic I can put on the list, that is #30. The popularity in Protestantism to look at perpetual singleness as the result of relational, sexual, or emotional disability.

To answer your question about SSA, this is what I was thinking so far.
29. SSA is not a pass to deem or impose perpetual celibacy on oneself in the spirit of holding on to an old nature of disinterest or self-perceived unattraction to the opposite sex. While, giving oneself “space” to the process of mortifying the old man should be acceptable, dedicating one’s life to becoming a non-sexually active Christian, while one still yearns for sexual gratification, is only imposing a life of turmoil, conflict, and possibly perpetual failure. Never limit the choices to gay or single. This is refusing to do it Gods way. There has to be a pure motive in both singleness and marriage; regardless of how we struggle. Wanting a route to quell sexual urges is a pure motive for marriage; but not wanting to conform to Gods design for marriage is not a pure reason for seeking perpetual celibacy. Yes, there should be room to work out to whether a current state of temptation would be detrimental to a Godly marriage, for, it is better to fail alone then to bring another down with you. But again, this concern would stem from a pure motive of seeking to conform but presently unable, as opposed to potentially able, but obstinately refusing as a residue of the old man.
 
Last edited:
I think we may be expressing similar things in different words. And yes, I think I agree with you about SSA as you laid it out in point 29.
 
I think we may be expressing similar things in different words. And yes, I think I agree with you about SSA as you laid it out in point 29.
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I dont think we are. You seem to be painting life-long celibacy as a passive protocol, simply stemming from disinterest (or an abnormal trait.) I am not. Nor do I think Paul is either. Consider if you will the momentous "prizes" of perpetual celibacy and sacred singleness. i.e. Undivided, Undistracted, Total Devotion to the Lord. 1 Cor. 7:32-35. It is the eternal state of our glorification in Heaven, and the current state of the Angels. To minimize these opportunities as nothing less than tremendously attractive is to do a disservice to the text. The text paints it as a blessed proposition, not left-overs or a sub-vocation until the "infinite bliss" of marriage.
 
Last edited:
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I dont think we are. You seem to be painting life-long celibacy as a passive protocol, simply stemming from disinterest (or an abnormal trait.) I am not. Nor do I think Paul is either. Consider if you will the momentous "prizes" of perpetual celibacy and sacred singleness. i.e. Undivided, Undistracted, Total Devotion to the Lord. 1 Cor. 7:32-35. It is the eternal state of our glorification in Heaven, and the current state of the Angels. To minimize these opportunities as nothing less than tremendously attractive is to do a disservice to the text. The text paints it as a blessed proposition, not left-overs or a sub-vocation until the "infinite bliss" of marriage.
I don't think that's what I'm saying, but I'm not going to argue the point further. If you insist on seeing disagreement between us where I am trying to be charitable, by all means, have at it.
 
As someone who considered this (choosing to become a Protestant spiritual eunuch) seriously for several years during my university studies, but have since married, I will offer a few thoughts:
5. The entire NT is written about a Spiritual Eunuch in his humanity (Jesus.)
I do not disagree.
6. Jesus puts emphasis on embracing Spiritual Eunichism is you feel called or desire to do it, and can do it (in purity.)
" The one who can accept this should accept it.” (Matt. 19:12)
Notice he doesn't say "the one who can accept this may accept this," but instead, he says "should."
Is this faithful to the text? The text is most likely referring to physical eunuchs: "eunuchs who from the womb of their mother were born so"; "eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"; and "eunuchs who made eunuchs of themselves." It would seem that Christ is saying, if you want to become a spiritual eunuch, not having the perfect Spirit as Christ did, then you should castrate yourself to remove, to a large degree, sexual desire and temptation (removal of the testes does chemically alter ones physiological being). Separating spiritual from physical is dangerous - is becoming a spiritual eunuch really wise if not also becoming one physically?

Choosing a lifetime of celibacy seems to be taking Paul's teaching in I Corinthians 7 that "it is better to marry than to burn" a step further and proclaiming that it is better not to burn at all. But the latter is simply not true as Scripture testifies throughout that sexual passion within the bounds of marriage is good and natural. Furthermore, men using I Corinthians 7 to promote celibacy also seems to go beyond the text as Paul only applies his counsel to consider remaining single to widows (v.8), widowers (v.27), and unmarried daughters (vv.8, 36-40). This should be taken in context with what Paul writes elsewhere regarding widows: "I will therefore that the younger women marry, and bear children, and govern the house, and give none occasion to the adversary to speak evil." (I Timothy 5.14) whereas the older women (over 60 and presumably without a burning to remarry) should remain single to serve God (vv.5, 9-11).

So I do not believe that Christ's teaching in Matthew 19 and Paul's in I Corinthians 7 are addressing the same exact issue. Note that, despite dealing with the same topic (marriage), Paul does not refer to Christ's teaching in any way. Christ seems to be addressing those physically made eunuchs (at birth, by station, or by choice) whereas Paul seems to be addressing those left single through providential circumstances (by death or divorce of a spouse, or by the decision of a father).
 
As someone who considered this (choosing to become a Protestant spiritual eunuch) seriously for several years during my university studies, but have since married, I will offer a few thoughts:

I do not disagree.

Is this faithful to the text? The text is most likely referring to physical eunuchs: "eunuchs who from the womb of their mother were born so"; "eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men"; and "eunuchs who made eunuchs of themselves." It would seem that Christ is saying, if you want to become a spiritual eunuch, not having the perfect Spirit as Christ did, then you should castrate yourself to remove, to a large degree, sexual desire and temptation (removal of the testes does chemically alter ones physiological being). Separating spiritual from physical is dangerous - is becoming a spiritual eunuch really wise if not also becoming one physically?

Choosing a lifetime of celibacy seems to be taking Paul's teaching in I Corinthians 7 that "it is better to marry than to burn" a step further and proclaiming that it is better not to burn at all. But the latter is simply not true as Scripture testifies throughout that sexual passion within the bounds of marriage is good and natural. Furthermore, men using I Corinthians 7 to promote celibacy also seems to go beyond the text as Paul only applies his counsel to consider remaining single to widows (v.8), widowers (v.27), and unmarried daughters (vv.8, 36-40). This should be taken in context with what Paul writes elsewhere regarding widows: "I will therefore that the younger women marry, and bear children, and govern the house, and give none occasion to the adversary to speak evil." (I Timothy 5.14) whereas the older women (over 60 and presumably without a burning to remarry) should remain single to serve God (vv.5, 9-11).

So I do not believe that Christ's teaching in Matthew 19 and Paul's in I Corinthians 7 are addressing the same exact issue. Note that, despite dealing with the same topic (marriage), Paul does not refer to Christ's teaching in any way. Christ seems to be addressing those physically made eunuchs (at birth, by station, or by choice) whereas Paul seems to be addressing those left single through providential circumstances (by death or divorce of a spouse, or by the decision of a father).
I think dealing with the Jesus text, it is clear he is not talking about self-castration, because he himself was a spiritual eunuch, and nowhere was it mentioned that he castrated himself. (Even the 1st. Council of Nicea, 325 a.d. condemns self-castration.) And why would not becoming a physical eunuch along with a spiritual pursuit be detrimental? Spiritual eunuchism is not a vow, but a determination, it is evident when these two sections are paired why self-castration is void; that is, that within the framework of spiritual eunuchism, there is always the permission to marry. 1 Cor. 7:28. The reason spiritual eunuchsim must be a determination though, is because in life, situations will arise where one will be presented the opportunity to forgo it; and because the fruit of such a life only comes with living it, not talking or reminiscing about it. Jesus and Paul dedicated their lives to this vocation, and though it would not have been a sin for either to marry, they determined 1 Cor. 7:37, to stay in this vocation. Yet, with that being said, one is still free to marry, and should never do to themselves today, what may produce an irrevocable change in a life where we could freely change tomorrow. Nowhere in scripture are people being rebuked or warned against forgoing celibacy and desiring to marry. One does not need to be "talked out of marriage." The "gift" of celibacy is an offer, and such, if one desires, to be sought and prayed for, even strived for; but it should never be made to feel obligatory, nor that one is being "less than" for not seeking it and desiring marriage over it. Paul and Jesus offer this in way that it produces affects that marriage will not allow. If these offerings are not more attractive to someone than marriage, then they should seek marriage; they do not sin. If one gets tired of it and seeks marriage, again, they do not sin.

And Pauls offer to those who would seek this "gift" are to the unmarried in general 1 Cor. 7:7-9, 1 Cor. 7:32-35. Again, Paul kind of defines what "burning" here is, and it isnt just being tempted or having sexual desires. It is having unbridled sexual desires that lead to sexual immorality, which is made clear by his distinction between 1 Cor. 7:8-9 and 1 Cor. 7:5. What is becoming evident, is it seems that many think that God is incapable to make a person able to control their desires, so that though at times they may be tempted, or though they still may find women attractive; he allows a person not to manifest those temptations into sexually immoral acts. This is what "self-control" is. If there were nothing to control, there would be no need for it. I have no idea where the thought that spiritual eunuchism must be within a framework of not being tempted nor attracted came from?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top