It is a little awkward for me to admit that I never really looked at the OT scripture the eunuch was reading. I always pretty much thought it was just an OT reference to Jesus being the sacrificial lamb. "He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation he was deprived of justice. Who can speak of his descendants? For his life was taken from the earth." Acts 8:32,33. For me, Jesus is a sacrificial lamb: for the eunuch, it was much more important. For those of you that "got it" a long time ago, please be gentle with me.
1 - As one who is not a eunuch, this passage might help me understand by Philip's example how I should/could someone whose matters sexually are pretty much different than mine. The Eunuch was studying scripture, and Philip explained the scripture to the eunuch, who was then baptized. Philip disappeared, and the eunuch went on his way rejoicing.
2 - The scripture does not say the eunuch was homosexual. While it is a little bit of a stretch to conclude that, we might assume that the eunuch did not go find a nice Christian girl and start a family.
3 - The bible also points out that some eunuchs are born that way, and others are made that way by people. I can't help but see the parallel to conversations about nature and nurture in others naznet threads.
4 - The writer of Acts was Luke, a doctor. Doctors have pretty much been the one who made decisions at the time of gender assignment. Doesn't prove anything, except that it's strange that I hadn't see that part before. Luke may have had more than one reason to note the story of the eunuch's conversion.
If time sequence is accurate, Saul was next to find Jesus.
All of this may mean nothing, but a heightened awareness of individuals different than myself has contributed to my seeing things differently. Perspective? That sensitivity began several years ago when I met a believer eunuch, who admitted struggling with sexual identity in the church.