Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Now God had brought Daniel into favor and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs. (Dan 1:9, KJV)

The prince of the eunuchs is the guy Daniel asks for permission to eat the pulse and water instead of the king's meat. This seems to indicate that Daniel was a eunuch, because the prince of the eunuchs was the person that he asks. This is an important question because how we translate it gives credibility to how hard it would be if not impossible to be as great and for God as Daniel was.

Think about it. Guys are distracted by lots of things that wouldn't be as distracting, if distracting at all, if one was a eunuch. If Daniel was indeed a eunuch then in a sense he would have had a head start at being a man of God.

share|improve this question
    
So... what do you want us to do? Are you searching for biblical support or contrary evidence to your claims? Are you searching for denominational refutation or support to your claims? –  Anonymous Apr 5 at 20:45
    
I am looking for nothing but the truth. Was Daniel made a eunuch? –  Hand of Don Apr 5 at 20:46
2  
Better on Biblical Hermeneutics? –  DJClayworth Apr 6 at 2:54

3 Answers 3

up vote 1 down vote accepted

While the Bible does not say it, it can certainly be implied. It would be strange for him to not be. Unfortunately, since the Bible is silent about it, then that is about as close as we can get to it. But, I say definitely yes, he was a eunuch.

share|improve this answer
2  
Could you cite a source on that? What you say is not helpful, what do authoritative sources say? –  wax eagle Apr 7 at 20:11
    
Well, I suppose the only source I could list would be my bible (KJV). It does not say if he was a eunuch or not specifically. Because there is no information available, all you are going to get from people are their opinions and assumptions. –  user10712 Apr 7 at 20:46

The word eunuch and its plural, eunuchs are used 27 times in the bible. None of these entries indicate that Daniel was a eunuch.

share|improve this answer
1  
I disagree with your interpretation. The verse quoted in the OP refers to the man placed in authority over Daniel as the prince of eunuchs - there is a strong implication from this verse that Daniel is in fact a eunuch. You may say it doesn't constitute definitive proof, but you can't logically say that it doesn't indicate such a state of affairs –  bruised reed Apr 6 at 16:18
    
Wouldn't the prince of eunuchs have authority over all the household slaves, not just the other eunuchs? I don't think this fact is determinative for this question. –  SDGator Apr 6 at 23:38
    
The 27 passages listed, do not indicate that Daniel was a eunuch. this is not my interpretation. If there is a verse that states Daniel is a eunuch Ok. I don't see it in my bible. I could make the assumption that Daniel was a eunuch, but I don't. If there were other verses to support the assumption,then I may reconsider. I try to base my answers on what is actually written. –  V. Rollins Apr 7 at 17:00

Daniel wasn't eunuch based in Dan 1:4v. It says he was blameless. The state of eunuch is not perfection, rather it is blame. Kings in the early days they use to appoint eunuchs for security purpose- especially to queens. Since they are eunuchs, they more focused on their jobs and also physically stronger.

share|improve this answer

This post does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this post by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.

1  
Hi and welcome! Your answer requires support (citation) to be valid according to your site standards - refer to our help centre for further clarification. –  bruised reed Sep 9 at 8:32
1  
Eunuchs are not physically stronger. In fact, they suffer many abnormalities because of their state, and among them is decreased muscle mass. –  fredsbend Sep 14 at 15:06
    
I +1 fredsbend, maybe the answerer intending mental strength from temptation? I mean, I do not understand how they couldn't break by their temptation. –  The Freemason Sep 14 at 15:45

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.