Talk:Ethiopian eunuch: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Leaving aside [[John J. McNeill|McMeill's]] way-fringey claim, the assessment section is hopelessly unbalanced. For one thing, the connection to present-day Ethiopian Christianity goes unmentioned. There's plenty of other theological material out there, and I'm pretty sure that most theologians don't take the passage as an endorsement of, um, alternative sexuality. [[User:Mangoe|Mangoe]] ([[User talk:Mangoe|talk]]) 13:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
Leaving aside [[John J. McNeill|McMeill's]] way-fringey claim, the assessment section is hopelessly unbalanced. For one thing, the connection to present-day Ethiopian Christianity goes unmentioned. There's plenty of other theological material out there, and I'm pretty sure that most theologians don't take the passage as an endorsement of, um, alternative sexuality. [[User:Mangoe|Mangoe]] ([[User talk:Mangoe|talk]]) 13:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
::Your section header is untrue - the rather ''short'' assessment section nonetheless also contains analysis of the significance of race and of the story's role in the narrative structure of Acts. Anyway, why don't you [[WP:BOLD|add]] the connection to present-day Ethiopian Christianity and the other theological material? (The analysis of what the eunuch was reading, for example, or any of many other things.) That would be helpful. [[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] ⋅ [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 15:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
: This is all the more slanted that the man is not gay, he's a eunuch, that is, a kind of cripple, not a sexual deviant/minority. To boot, describing him a "gentile" is an abuse since there had been Jews living along the Nile valley right down to Ethiopia (and not just Kush between Sudan and the Cataract) for a very long time... there are any number of African peoples who claim Jewishness, and the Ethiopian Falashas have been deemed Jewish enough to make tha Aliyah since the 80s. --[[User:Svartalf|Svartalf]] ([[User talk:Svartalf|talk]]) 15:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
: This is all the more slanted that the man is not gay, he's a eunuch, that is, a kind of cripple, not a sexual deviant/minority. To boot, describing him a "gentile" is an abuse since there had been Jews living along the Nile valley right down to Ethiopia (and not just Kush between Sudan and the Cataract) for a very long time... there are any number of African peoples who claim Jewishness, and the Ethiopian Falashas have been deemed Jewish enough to make tha Aliyah since the 80s. --[[User:Svartalf|Svartalf]] ([[User talk:Svartalf|talk]]) 15:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
::As the article makes clear (but could it be clearer in this regard?) some scholars note in the context of this story that "eunuch" is not used in the Bible only to refer to those who have been deliberately castrated. And we do include different opinions on his religious status, but if you have more sources, that would be cool too. [[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] ⋅ [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 15:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:27, 20 April 2011
 | Bible Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
The only analysis is queer analysis?
Leaving aside McMeill's way-fringey claim, the assessment section is hopelessly unbalanced. For one thing, the connection to present-day Ethiopian Christianity goes unmentioned. There's plenty of other theological material out there, and I'm pretty sure that most theologians don't take the passage as an endorsement of, um, alternative sexuality. Mangoe (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- Your section header is untrue - the rather short assessment section nonetheless also contains analysis of the significance of race and of the story's role in the narrative structure of Acts. Anyway, why don't you add the connection to present-day Ethiopian Christianity and the other theological material? (The analysis of what the eunuch was reading, for example, or any of many other things.) That would be helpful. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is all the more slanted that the man is not gay, he's a eunuch, that is, a kind of cripple, not a sexual deviant/minority. To boot, describing him a "gentile" is an abuse since there had been Jews living along the Nile valley right down to Ethiopia (and not just Kush between Sudan and the Cataract) for a very long time... there are any number of African peoples who claim Jewishness, and the Ethiopian Falashas have been deemed Jewish enough to make tha Aliyah since the 80s. --Svartalf (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- As the article makes clear (but could it be clearer in this regard?) some scholars note in the context of this story that "eunuch" is not used in the Bible only to refer to those who have been deliberately castrated. And we do include different opinions on his religious status, but if you have more sources, that would be cool too. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)