Okay Major, thanks for the clarification.
I have always had trouble with the the idea of men being classed as 'virgins' in a physical sense.....we lack certain physical attributes.
So, I always understand 'male virgin' in a non physical sense......simply......... 'innocence'. Is this not what the Scriptures say?
Thanks to our being washed clean with the blood of the lamb, are we not now innocent of all wrong doing?
However, Rev 14:4 does use the word 'virgin in connection with men. Okay, so looking at some of what Thayer's dictionary says of the word,
:
"2) a man who has abstained from all uncleanness and whoredom attendant on idolatry, and so has kept his chastity"
If that is more or less what the original recipients of John's writing would have understood, then so ought we.
I'm asking as it were, why, if sexual intercourse /desire was the sole criteria would they not simply have been called eunuchs?
Mat 19:12 For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it."
What might be understood by 'eunuch'?
1c) one naturally incapacitated
1c1) for marriage
1c2) begetting children
1d) one who voluntarily abstains from marriage
It seems that a narrow reading of Rev 14 would really mean eunuchs, but speaking in terms of virginity seems most likely to embrace a much wider....a sort of global purity that can only be obtained through the blood of Christ.
So, we might say that a Eunuch's righteousness comes by works, whereas a male virgin's righteousness is by the grace of God.
And that, you and I have thanks to the shed blood of Christ.
Well that is as I see it.
I am always blessed by your in depth thought and knowledge and this is another one of those times.
The conversation over the word "Virgin" and whether it is symbolic or literal reminds me of the original introduction of the 144K in chapter 7. Some say they are literal and some same symbolic. If they are not literal I have to wonder why God went to so much trouble to specifically tell us that there will be 12K from each tribe and then even tells us the names of each tribe. That seems like a lot of information just to be symbolic.
Same with the word "virgin". If it is to be eunuch's then why not just use that word. It was well know then, probably more then that now. So then why specifically use the word virgin unless for a reason. I for one believe that the word virgin of the AV (Greek parthenoi) is the correct literal translation: however the connotation can be misleading. There is no intent to advocate celibacy over against marriage (Heb. 13:4), but only to emphasize their chastity in life as virgins are.
As for spiritual adultery, in the Old. Test. idolatry was used in conjuction with spiritual fornication. The 144K will also have kept themselves from the worship of the Beast during the Tribulation. For that reason the comment of..............
"These are they which were not defiled with women, for they are virgins" is probably referring to chastity in both the literal and spiritual sense.
Now we must ask why would that be so important? IMO, these men will be running for their lives everyday depending on others for food and water and such. God knowing how hard it is going to be for them decided that they did not need the added responsibility and worry over a wife while running for their lives as they preach the gospel. But that is just me.
Last edited: