Bible C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

As due weight is an NPOV concern, it behooves the user adding an undue tag to discuss the issues on the talk page so that we can find a way forward, rather than leaving the tag up permanently as a badge of shame. JohnChrysostom, since you own many commentaries, perhaps you can add other interpretations of the story so that the LGBT interpretation would not form so large a part of the section. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]