Paula

For general information, modus ponens is defined in this article:

The argument form has two premises. The first premise is the “if–then” or conditional claim, namely that P implies Q. The second premise is that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim, is true. From these two premises it can be logically concluded that Q, the consequent of the conditional claim, must be true as well. In Artificial Intelligence, modus ponens is often called forward chaining.
An example of an argument that fits the form modus ponens:
If today is Tuesday, then I will go to work.
Today is Tuesday.
Therefore, I will go to work.

This argument is valid, but this has no bearing on whether any of the statements in the argument are true; the validity of modus ponens means that the conclusion must be true if all the premises are true. An argument can be valid but nonetheless unsound if one or more premises are false; if an argument is valid and all the premises are true, then the argument is sound. A propositional argument using modus ponens is said to be deductive.

As you can all see, “Chris” presumes the correctness of both premises, yet we know that the first [P1] is one of the points being debated, meaning “Chris” has made the foundational premise out of an assertion and not an undisputed fact. That is, an attempt is being made to make the conclusion one of the premises. Such fallacious tactics are common.

And [P2] is hardly an obvious implication of P1. In fact, it is a tautology to impose that implication on the OT when that is part of the point under debate. Again, logically fallacious. Likewise, P3 presumes the reason for Paul to refer to the OT instead of citing any kind of proof.

Overall, as is obvious here, the male supremacist cannot cite anything more than presumed implications from dubious premises to justify their conceit in the flesh. I’m also observing the attempt here at using big, scary college words to try and intimidate the humble readers here. This same approach is commonly used by atheists/evolutionists who then return to their supporters to report their great victory and gloat over their superior intellect.

In stark contrast, a true Christian does not seek preeminence, does not crave rule over others, and does not aggressively pressure others to conform to their will. Jesus laid aside power and position to serve His bride; any believer who does not stoop that low is unworthy to go around teaching anyone.