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
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.
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
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.