An online journal, the World-science.net has reported a bizarre trend of body mutilations being inflicted by some people upon themselves, in order to make the Kingdom of Heaven as instructed in the Gospel of Mathew.

Quoting medical researchers at the St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Centre in Phoenix, Arizona, in the United States, world-science.net reported overall 23 cases of people who have cut off their p.enises or hands or removed their eyes, because they felt they had caused them some sins. Three of these lot who self-severed their joysticks believed their action would make them live a sinless life and as transformed eunuchs, make them live in line with the injunction in Mathew 19:12. Four others also cut off their t.esticles, believing same sentiments.

The Biblical verse reads as follows:
“For there are some e.unuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb; and there are some eu.nuchs, which were made e.unuchs of men; and there be e.unuchs, which have made themselves e.unuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it let him receive it.”

Worldscience.net reported that these incidents of self-mutilation and p.enis cutting happen on average of one every three years, ‘’judging by published medical reports—but that makes it no less disturbing each time for hospital staff faced with the situation.’’

One of such rare p.enis cutting happened last month when a 62-year-old man whom physicians dubbed Mr. P to protect his privacy, showed up at the emergency room of St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, Arizona, complaining of a case of “Matthew 19:12.” Asked to clarify, he just kept repeating the same thing: Matthew 19:12.

The nurse on duty searched the Internet for Matthew 19:12. What she read was worrisome, worldscience.net reported.

“As it quickly became clear, Mr. P had made this hospital visit unaccompanied by his p.enis. That, he explained, he had flushed down the toilet three days ago after severing it with a pocketknife. His t.esticles were also absent—removed four years earlier at Mr. P’s request by a doctor in Mexico.

“Although his speech and thoughts appeared muddled, Mr. P did state that he had “done this because his p.enis had caused him to sin and as an e.unuch he could be closer to God as described in Matthew 19:12,” three researchers affiliated with St. Joseph’s wrote in a report describing the incident. Mr. P also claimed to have pondered the decision for months before acting.

“Mr. P. received urgent medical treatment at St. Joseph’s, including a skin graft onto the stump. He was then confined to a local psychiatric hospital by court order, leaving little but questions behind.

“The three investigators proceeded to search an online medical literature database, PubMed, for other cases of this nature. They discovered that the Bible—indeed, the Gospel of Matthew specifically— has left a trail of self- mutilations inspired largely by four of its verses.

The bloody toll listed in case reports dating back to 1967—PubMed doesn’t go back much further—included three partially or fully amputated p.enises; four pairs of castrated t.esticles; three amputated hands and 11 severely damaged eyeballs. Saws, circular saws, screwdrivers and pencils were among the tools used for the horrifying procedures, although several patients put out their eyes with their fingers alone.

“Our literature review revealed 16 patients in addition to [Mr. P] who had injured themselves in connection with specific religious text,” the researchers wrote.

Their review of the cases is published in the May 29 online issue of the research journal Psychosomatics, worldscience .net reported.

‘’All but one of the patients were diagnosed with psychiatric disorders or psychotic disorders or had substance abuse issues, they wrote; Mr. P., for example, “had a long history of severe bipolar illness marked by hyper-religious delusions.”

“And every case was connected with at least one of four verses in Matthew’s Gospel: 19:12, 18:8, 5:29 and 5:30.

“The three latter verses are more cryptic than the first, referenced by Mr. P. What they have in common is that they appear to suggest that if a hand, foot or right eye are somehow offensive, cutting them off is the way to go, because at least, that much less of the body will end up in Hell.

“Several biblical verses reference self-mutilation as metaphoric acts of sacrifice or contrition,” wrote the researchers, who included psychiatrist Jason P. Caplan of St. Joseph’s and the Creighton University School of Medicine in Omaha, Nebraska. “Some individuals may interpret these passages literally and act on them, causing significant injury and even inadvertent death.”

“Psychiatrists should be aware of the content of these four verses to aid in timely diagnosis and intervention if they were to arise in discussion with a patient,” they added. “It is interesting to note that no cases cite the Gospel of Mark despite very similar content (i.e., Mark 9:43, which reads ‘And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched’).”

“Individuals who rationalize their actions through biblical verses appear to have a series of features that make them a unique cohort with specific challenges regarding prognosis and treatment,” Caplan and colleagues wrote.

Many of them have no regrets about their actions; deliberately destroy the body part to prevent its reattachment; resist efforts to successfully reattach it when that is possible; and are uncooperative with other aspects of treatment, they added.

A 37-year-old man was quoted in the 1967 report saying: “Even if I do get certified [insane] and in the eyes of the world I am mad it is far better for me to have cleansed myself.”

“Ideas of reference (specifically, that the Bible directly refers to them) is a repeated theme in this group, underscoring a common thread of psychotic disorders,” Caplan and colleagues wrote.

“Guilt over sexual acts or desires is another recurrent theme… Recent homosexual experiences occurred in three of the cases of g.enital self- mutilation.” Four of the 17 self-mutilators were females; they had poked out their eyes or, in one case, amputated a hand.

Many patients had self-amputated after failed attempts to persuade doctors to do the deed, the researchers wrote, indicating a need for doctors presented with such requests to refer cases to a psychiatrist immediately.

Caplan disclosed in the paper that he is affiliated with Aliso Viejo, Calif.-based Avanir Pharmaceuticals. The report did not recommend any specific drug treatments, however. As for how Mr. P is doing currently, Caplan said he doesn’t know. “Once they leave the acute care hospital, we get no further update,” he wrote in an email.

The contentious worrisome verses in the Gospel of Mathew

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

Matthew 18:8

Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

Matthew 5:30

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5:29

But if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

http://pmnewsnigeria.com/2012/06/14/8-cut-off-p.enises-testicles-for-kingdom-of-god/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PmNewsNigeria+%28PM+News+Nigeria%29



EDIT: Unfortunately the link couldnt pass the filter so Ive had to edit it.
Just take out the . (dot) in "p.enises" in the link.

Fr0sbel: I bet all the Nairaland 'Miscreants' will soon rush to comment on this nonsense article !!

jayriginal:

How is it nonsense if its reporting facts ?

Fr0sbel:

On a more serious note, the chaps are nutts need help

jayriginal:
They do need help.

frosbel:

Yep, but I sense some ulterior motive for this article , ridicule the Bible again.

Problem is , the intention of this news piece will only appeal to those who do not understand the true, deep and underlying meaning of the quoted biblical verses !

frosbel:

Yep, but I sense some ulterior motive for this article , ridicule the Bible again.

Problem is , the intention of this news piece will only appeal to those who do not understand the true, deep and underlying meaning of the quoted biblical verses !

Goldieluks: "Cut Off" simply means 'to avoid, to control,to sieze" it doesn't mean one should
physically mutilate oneself.

Ptolomeus: When I read posts by some fans, who say that all is sin ... I think the best solution for them.
God supposedly gave them a body that they despise, then not a bad idea that they changed the work of God.
"For Rent knife"

jayriginal:

Goldieluks, how is your definition compatible with the verse, considering that the listener is urged to cast the offending parts away ?
Its not just cut off, but cut off and cast away. How do you cast away what is still attached to you ?


Matthew 18:8

Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

Matthew 5:30

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off and cast it from thee for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Matthew 5:29

But if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Goldieluks:



Kindly quote the number of people, who actually did cut their hands off in the bible?? The Bible is deep and it is only
those with a spiritual insight that can fully understand the profoundness of the Bible.

jayriginal:

I cant. Can you quote the number of people in the bible that swallowed eba ?

MyJoe:

^^^ Haba, Jayriginal! I don't think your analogy is apt. It was commanded in the Bible that people cut off their hands if it leads them to sin. She says that's metaphorical and if you say it isn't you should show her where anyone cut off their hands in the Bible... and you are asking her to show you where anyone ate Eba in the Bible! One example to explain what she is saying: Peter slashed off the ear of someone who came to arrest Jesus, yet Jesus simply re-attached the ear. Peter's hands which caused him to sin in this case were not cut off. This incident took place after Matt 5:29 and 18:18.

CHARLOE: @ frosbel,
like jayriginal said,who determines what is literal and what is metaphorical in d bible? i've come to find out dat most pple (like u) give their own literal or metaphorical meaning to passages in d scriptures to suit themselves and turn around to claim d holy spirit told them.
A good example is hell fire, is it a literal burning fire or a metaphor/figurative? Plz answer.

jayriginal:


She did say "hand' not ear or any other parts so I'm going by that.

jayriginal:
EDIT:
Just by the way, I didn't take a position on whether it was metaphorical or literal. I'm simply asking how one can determine which interpretation is correct. See below

MyJoe: My point is that an opportunity was clearly presented for Matthew 5:20 be carried out - Peter's hands caused him to sin, but this was not done. This is different from if one merely said, "Well, Jesus must have seen people committing sins, and he never asked them to mutilate themselves." In that case, your eba analogy would be close to being apt.


Same here. In fact, I buy your general tone in the thread. I just felt you shouldn't be allowed to get away with that line.

jayriginal:

I think its a good line still. If I was a pastor and I believed in amputation of offending members, that verse will not dent my conviction one bit. Thats the beauty of the bible passages. They can be interpreted to suit a wide variety of tastes.

Was it a sin for Peter to defend his master ? When Jesus asked them to pick up a sword was it cake they were going to cut with it ?
I could always find something to explain it away as a 'spirit filled' preacher. Anyone who would disagree will only make our case stronger by creating an us versus them situation (as seen within different christian denominations today).

MyJoe:
Yes, because Jesus reprimanded him by invoking the law that anyone who kills by the sword would die by the sword. You see, he asked them to get swords, yet only one of them defends him with with it, and all that one gets is a reprimand. Maybe he had other things in mind as per the sword matter...? That's just my speculation, though. I think the reprimand proves conclusively that Peter's act was deemed a sin.

jayriginal:
PS:
For the records, I do not see how the reprimand proves conclusively that Peter's action was a sin but I'm not willing to be drawn into that for now.

MyJoe:
Well, it was Jesus himself giving the reprimand and it appears Peter accepted it. Of course, he did! It was his Lord talking. But if you have any doubts about this case, perhaps because the word "sin" was not used, what about the adulterous woman? In that case, Jesus simply said, "madam, no do am again" - go and sin no more. No mutilation recommended.

You see I have this one neatly tied up?

jayriginal:


Actually you dont. Very little if anything can be neatly tied up in the bible (figuratively speaking). You have simply offered a position and supported it from the bible. Anyone else can counter you and support his/her claim from the bible and be entitled to be taken to be correct.

Dont forget, the issue here is who's 'revelation' is correct and not who is making the most sense.

MyJoe:

Of course, you are right about there being no consensus among Christians on the biblical position on most things and about the Bible being open to different interpretations on matters. But on this particular one, if a debate were orgnanised between me and the person taking the literal viewpoint, I would land so many kicks and uppercuts as I cite verse after verse that he would end up looking like Rodney King after an encounter with the LA police.

Seriously, though, most Christians try to construe the meaning of scripture text from the surrounding words or by making reference to other verses. They usually resort to "revelation" when the argument is not going well for them. It's dishonest.

Image123:
Faith in God{the One you call the Christian God} supercedes reason. Faith is not opposite of reason or without reason, it is greater than and in a more advanced plane than reason. Unfortunate that such information could melt a fuse or two in you guys anytime it's re-stated.

https://www.nairaland.com/955608/did-god-want-dana-flight/12#11116068