Jesus said nothing about people transitioning and gender, but IIRC early and medieval Christian scholars condemned bodily modifications because the body was God’s creation and property and it ought to be kept intact for resurrection.
Matthew was written about 80 CE. Nero was emperor until 68. Nero rather famously took a eunuch as a “wife”, Sporus, which most in the Roman empire and likely the author of Matthew would have been aware of.
I would like to know how, at least in some Christian variations, that you can’t have tats or piercings when the text I remember covering the subject was more like, “don’t burn your corpse, you’re gonna need it when the time comes.” If I had tats or whatever, I’d still have an intact body to be resurrected. 🤷♂️
Jesus said nothing about people transitioning and gender, but IIRC early and medieval Christian scholars condemned bodily modifications because the body was God’s creation and property and it ought to be kept intact for resurrection.
Matthew 19:12
I mean… That’s a start. But what about the ones that can’t seem to accept it?
I don’t know enough about transgender people in ancient times to argue about the definition of “eununch”. Thanks for your contribution, though.
Matthew was written about 80 CE. Nero was emperor until 68. Nero rather famously took a eunuch as a “wife”, Sporus, which most in the Roman empire and likely the author of Matthew would have been aware of.
Always has been.
Yeah, that’s basically all of major religions. Their rationale was resurrection and the rapture.
I would like to know how, at least in some Christian variations, that you can’t have tats or piercings when the text I remember covering the subject was more like, “don’t burn your corpse, you’re gonna need it when the time comes.” If I had tats or whatever, I’d still have an intact body to be resurrected. 🤷♂️
My guess is that someone was jealous of his fellow’s tats and it all snowballed from there