First Gentile

[giantsdodie]

He was a Jew. I dont see the scriptures saying that he was rejected when he went to worship. In fact if you check the books of Acts Stephen went to a synagogue of the Cyreneans and the Libertines. These were African Jews who stoned Stephen to death.

There were always men of color even before Christianity. Jesus was a man of color. So were most of the disciples. When the children of Israel came out of slavery they cam out a mixed multitude. And that has nothing to do with color. It has more to do with cultural background.

I dont see the scripture saying he was rejected at all. That passage he was reading had to do with JESUS. There were already people of color worshipping as Jews and there had been for hundreds of years. The Hebrews themselves were people of color.

[anointedteacher]

AT, it is possible that he could have been a Jew, but the fact that he was rejected when he arrived in Jerusalem tells me that the Jews didn't see him as brother because he considered a "dirty Gentile." His skin color was part of the rejection but it mostly because he wasn't a Jew.

The scripture did not say he was rejected in Jerusalem. He was returning from worshipping in Jerusalem and was sitting in his chariot trying to figure out the scripture, Isaiah 53:7 & 8.

Act 8:26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.
Act 8:27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
Act 8:28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
Act 8:29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
Act 8:30 And Philip ran thither to [him], and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
Act 8:32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
Act 8:33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.
Act 8:34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
Act 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
Act 8:39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

This reference is from the Dakes Bible ;D from Acts 8:27 i 1 col pg 132 NT. Most of Dakes Ref. are good although he was a racist... He don't want to admit for himself the Queen of Sheba was from Ethiopia and she had a child from Solomon. This is a good reference and it explain why the eunuch was not looked on as a Gentile.

"Proof he was a worshipper of the God of Israel, perhaps getting his knowledge by tradiction from the queen of Sheba (I King 10). It has been held by the Abyssinians that this queen of Sheba, called Balkis by some and Maqueda by others, not only taught Solomon's religion, but also establinuts in her realmon her return home; that she had a son by Solomon named Menilek who succeeded her in the kingdom: that her people have preserved the Jewish religion from that time until now."

Simon Zelotes the Canaanite, one of Jesus' Disciple. an Apostle, that is listed with the twelve, Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13, and Simeon that was called Niger (Black) in Act 13:1, who was among the prophets and teachers.


AT

[ybrown]

giantsdodie said:

He was a Jew. I dont see the scriptures saying that he was rejected when he went to worship. In fact if you check the books of Acts Stephen went to a synagogue of the Cyreneans and the Libertines. These were African Jews who stoned Stephen to death.

There were always men of color even before Christianity. Jesus was a man of color. So were most of the disciples. When the children of Israel came out of slavery they cam out a mixed multitude. And that has nothing to do with color. It has more to do with cultural background.

I dont see the scripture saying he was rejected at all. That passage he was reading had to do with JESUS. There were already people of color worshipping as Jews and there had been for hundreds of years. The Hebrews themselves were people of color.

Giants and AT, both of you may have a point that he may not have been rejected at the Temple in Jerusalem. This is a possibility because he may not have gone to the Temple in the first place; however, if he had, and he was literally an eunuch (eunuch could also designate his status in the royal court), he most certainly would not have been allowed to worship at the Temple because Deuteronomy 23:1 tells us that such persons were not allowed to worship at the Temple.

Additionally, if he was literally a eunuch, he was not a full Jewish proselyte, but rather a God-fearing Gentile who devoted himself to the study of the OT scriptures and to the Jewish way of life. Eunuchs were castrated men and this certainly would have ruled out circumcision for him, which was the law for all Jewish men in order to call themselves as such.

The bible says he was returning from worship. So how does scripture reconcile itself since he wouldn’t have been allowed in the Temple? It’s easy. Instead of him returning from Temple, he was most likely returning from worship at an old covenant feast in Jerusalem, instead.

I do believe the man was a Gentile for these reasons, and not a Jew, and both scripture and history tend to support this assertion/conclusion.

Either way we look at it, whether he was the first of African descent or the first Gentile to be saved, we don’t even know the man’s name. Why? But one thing is for certain: we know that he was an eunuch. Why is that so important for us to know? Why is this repulsive status/label so important to God? Why not just refer to him as the Ethiopian? Why the over emphases on eunuch?

I believe that God being who He is, He is telling us that it doesn’t matter who you are, how or where you are born, what color you are, or what your family history or background is, the Gospel is for everyone. And the Father certainly proved that when he divinely sent Phillip to this God-loving man at just the right moment to bring him unto salvation.

For these reasons I maintain that he was not a Jew.

[giantsdodie]

In the book of Acts you already had people who were africans attending synagogue.

The book of Acts depicts an synagogue of the libertines and the cyreneans. These are ancient terms for Africa or Africans.

Many of the Hebrews were people of color with brown skin as were some of the disciples.

Jesus himself had africans in his lineage.

Only saying lets not make it a color thing when in reality it was more a culture thing.

[krazeeboi]

Ybrown brings up good points about the eunuch's physical condition though. It's a bit hard to circumcise a eunuch. Haven't ever tried it before, but I can imagine.

[nina]

He could have been a "Righteous Gentile" in which case circumcision is not mandatory unless the person wants to become a convert.

[anointedteacher]

ybrown, KB and nina,

I have questions:

1) Was Jeremiah, Daniel, Apostle Paul and Jesus eunuchs?
2) Did any of them had sexual organs removed, as in (Deu 23:1)?
3) Was they allowed to worship in the temple?

I need to see the scripture that say Eunuchs is not allowed in the temple to worship and that they had their sexual organ completely or partially removed.

Matthew 19:12," :For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

1Cr 7:6 But I speak this by permission, [and] not of commandment.
1Cr 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
1Cr 7:8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
1Cr 7:9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Apostle Paul a Eunuch by birth or self made for the kingdom of God?

Something to think about.......

AT

[Nikkol]

Here's one:

Leviticus 21:16-24
16 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 17 Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. 18 For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, 19 Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, 20 Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; 21 No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. 22 He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. 23 Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them. 24 And Moses told it unto Aaron, and to his sons, and unto all the children of Israel.

[krazeeboi]

I'm not necessarily espousing a particular POV here. Both sides bring up great points.

AT, thanks for adding a splash of color to the discussion.

[nina]

The original question was:
"Who was the first Gentile to be saved and how/why did it happen?"
The answer was given as the Ethipian eunuch as mentioned in Acts.

Then, we took a turn and Krazee mentioned the quasi- incompatibility of being a eunuch and being circumcised (paraphrasing...)
I mentioned, and it's true, that for a Righteous Gentile circumcision is not needed, unless he also wants to become convert.
So, it was merely a possibility which would have avoided the issue of circumcision (re trying to decide if this man was a Gentile, a Righteous Gentile or a Jew).

I know that there is more to consider, and we might approach these things from different angles. However, among the ones you mentioned to consider:

1) Was Jeremiah, Daniel, Apostle Paul and Jesus eunuchs?
Not that we know of... There is a difference between choosing celibacy and sexual purity and being physically castrated.

2) Did any of them had sexual organs removed, as in (Deu 23:1)?
Not that we know of, but they were all circumcised male Jews.

3) Was they allowed to worship in the temple?
Yes, if and when there was a temple standing and they were able to go to Jerusalem...

"I need to see the scripture that say Eunuchs is not allowed in the temple to worship and that they had their sexual organ completely or partially removed."

Well, for the second part, I don't think that scripture goes so far into the details of castration techniques

As for Eunuchs and Gentiles being allowed or not in the temple to worship, there might more things to consider when it comes to this Ethiopian eunuch and others.

How do we decide if he was a Gentile or a Jew? He did things that obedient Jews did:

- He came to Jerusalem to worship

- Also, the scripture says "Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet."
That's called "Haftara".

What is Haftara?

"Jews read Torah out loud each week in synagogue in an effort to become more learned about their Jewish heritage.

There were many periods in Jewish history when the powers ruling over the Jews sought to destroy Jewish religion and culture by banning Torah reading. To circumvent these efforts, Jews would read portions from the unbanned Book of Prophets in place of the Torah.
The Jews would choose a section each week from the Book of Prophets that was similar in some way to the Torah portion that was supposed to be read that particular week.
Haftara refers to the Book of Prophets reading that follows the Torah reading on Sabbaths and holidays."

So, he was certainly behaving as an observant Jew.

For scriptures related to eunuchs and what they were allowed to do or not:

Commandment 106 : "Not to castrate the male of any species; neither a man, nor a domestic or wild beast, nor a fowl (Lev. 22:24) ."

Commandment 389: "That a person with a physical blemish shall not enter the Sanctuary further than the altar (Lev. 21:23) (negative)."

Leviticus 22:3 "Say unto them, Whosoever he be of all your seed among your generations, that goeth unto the holy things, which the children of Israel hallow unto the LORD, having his uncleanness upon him, that soul shall be cut off from my presence: I am the LORD. "

Then again, there is this word from the book of Isaiah:

"Isaiah Chapter 56

3 Neither let the alien, that hath joined himself to HaShem, speak, saying: 'The HaShem will surely separate me from His people'; neither let the eunuch say: 'Behold, I am a dry tree.'

4 For thus saith HaShem concerning the eunuchs that keep My sabbaths, and choose the things that please Me, and hold fast by My covenant:

5 Even unto them will I give in My house and within My walls a monument and a memorial better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting memorial, that shall not be cut off.

6 Also the aliens, that join themselves to HaShem, to minister unto Him, and to love the name of HaShem, to be His servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from profaning it, and holdeth fast by My covenant:

7 Even them will I bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable upon Mine altar; for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.

8 Saith the Lord GOD who gathereth the dispersed of Israel: yet I will gather others to him, beside those of him that are gathered."

Finally, I can hardly see this man being rejected when he went to worship. If nothing else, he was a dignitary of the court of the queen of Ethiopia, he obviously traveled with an entourage, his visit regardless had an official aspect which cannot be ignored because of his position.

Also, to this day, Gentiles are allowed to attend services in synagogues, as long as their behaviour is respectful and he/she submits to the few rules which exist...

[krazeeboi]

Nina, good points. And Gentiles are indeed allowed to visit synagogues, as long as they comply with Jewish behavioral customs. I know, I went to one once. I was grateful I did, I really enjoyed the experience.

But come to think of it, if the Ethiopian eunuch WAS the first Gentile convert, then it kinda throws a monkey wrench into the pattern. Jesus gave Peter in particular the keys to the kingdom, and one thing that it represents is Peter being pivotal in "opening the doors of the Church" to the first of the major groups: Jews, Samaritans (half-Jews, half-Gentiles), and Gentiles. Having Phillip, apart from Peter, operating in this capacity isn't true to the pattern. And although it was Phillip who "led the revival" down in Samaria, Peter and John had to come down in order to lay hands on the Samaritans that they might receive a complete conversion/initiation experience by receiving the Holy Spirit. Of course, Peter preached the sermons on the Day of Pentecost and at Cornelius' house that resulted in the salvation of the first Jews and Gentiles, respectively.

[anointedteacher]

The Ethiopian Eunuch was Jewish.... Ethiopian Jews go as far back as Moses. I believe Moses second wife, was an Ethiopian Jew, not just an Ethiopian woman. He did not marry someone outside his belief. Some think it start with Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (Maqueda or Makeda), because she did brought back the worship and the Jewish religion back to her people. The Ethiopian came out of Egypt with the Children of Israel. Right today we have Ethiopian Jews, many have moved to Israel.

AT

[ybrown]

Since Luke does not identify the eunuch as either a proselyte (a Gentile convert to Judaism) or a God-fearer (a Gentile adherent to the Jewish faith/belief), we can only surmise. I still maintain that he was a Gentile, based on historical and biblical evidence, but there is also a case that he could have been a Jew. Another interesting point to observe is the fact, here he is returning from Jerusalem, and the Gospel was not taught to him there. This, along with other proof is inescapable.

KB, it doesn’t seem that the eunuch’s divine encounter was to follow any kind of pattern or newly established practice for conversions. God had his eye on this man and everything about his conversion was supernatural and unlike any other. It started off with the introduction of an angel and then we have the way Phillip was sent to that remote desert, the condition of the eunuch’s prime heart and attitude to receive the Gospel and Phillip’s subsequent carrying away and disappearance after the eunuch was saved.

Nothing about this conversion was going to follow any type of pattern.

I beleive that there is also another difference between the other new believers and the eunch. It was necessary for the apostles Peter and John to go to Samaria to lay hands on the new converts so that they would receive the Holy Spirit. In the case of the eunuch the Holy Spirit was already there because He divinely arranged his conversion.

AT, in response to your questions:

1) I believe that in Matt 19:12, the Essenes are being referred to here. The Essenes held to very strict practices such opposing animal sacrifice, not eating meat, abstaining from relations with women, etc. What would lead you to believe that Jeremiah, Daniel, the Apostle Paul and Jeus were euuchs? I don’t know if you were just asking….

2) No, unless I’m missing scripture that says otherwise.

3) We have scriptural evidence that Jeremiah, Jesus, and the Apostle Paul all preached and/or worshipped the temple.

Just some things to definitely consider....

[krazeeboi]

Interesting commentary from the NET Bible:

The term eunuch normally referred to a man who had been castrated, but this was not always the case (see Gen 39:1 LXX, where Potiphar is called a eunuch). Such castrated individuals were preferred as court officials in the East, although Judaism opposed the practice. The Mosaic law excluded eunuchs from Israel (Deut 23:1), although God certainly accepted them (Isa 56:3-5; Wis 3:14). This individual was a high official, since he was said to be in charge of all her treasury. He may or may not have been a eunuch physically. He appears to be the first fully Gentile convert to Christianity, since the Samaritans mentioned previously (Acts 8:4-25) were regarded as half-breeds.

Since this man had come to Jerusalem to worship, he may have been a proselyte to Judaism. This event is a precursor to Acts 10.

Interesting.

[stillfocused]

I was listening to John Hagee this morning what he made an interesting comment concerning
Moses's second wife the Ethopian. He made mention that there was 2 places on that contintent called Ethopia. One was in Arabia and the other Africa..and that Moses wife came from Ethopia in Arabia..and that he did not go South..I found that to be very interesting..