Search — Theology Explorer

1 Cor 14:34 1 Tim 2:11 1 Tim 3:15 general

@ymmotrojam 1 Cor 14:34⎯doesn't say sin 1 Tim 2:11⎯doesn't say sin 1 Tim 3:15⎯Paul is referring to the qualifications for elders (shouldn't be drunkards, greedy for financial gain, must hold to the faith with a clear conscience, etc)⎯it also doesn't ...

@ymmotrojam 1 Cor 14:34⎯doesn't say sin 1 Tim 2:11⎯doesn't say sin 1 Tim 3:15⎯Paul is referring to the qualifications for elders (shouldn't be drunkards, greedy for financial gain, must hold to the fa

@ymmotrojam “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.” (Acts 20:7, NASB 2020) >> This is descriptive ...

@ymmotrojam “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.” (Ac

Acts 20:7 general

@ymmotrojam Can you point out where Paul states that a woman speaking in a specific type of gathering is called a SIN? (this detail is important⎯it should be very clear that this is a SIN). Additionally, does Paul specify that the sinfulness of an ...

@ymmotrojam Can you point out where Paul states that a woman speaking in a specific type of gathering is called a SIN? (this detail is important⎯it should be very clear that this is a SIN). Addition

@ymmotrojam It's the number of people all speaking at the same time in foreign t

@ymmotrojam It's the number of people all speaking at the same time in foreign tongues that Paul is concerned about. You don't see that?

@ymmotrojam Read what I said again then look at the context and tell me that doe

@ymmotrojam Read what I said again then look at the context and tell me that doesn't make sense. Paul is not establishing what it means to have an official vs unofficial gathering.

@ymmotrojam Again, you are making up this whole idea of formal/informal, and it only causes confusion, especially when you tie it to sin. Further, Paul's instruction was actually NOT to cover one's head. That includes women. Except if a woman is m...

@ymmotrojam Again, you are making up this whole idea of formal/informal, and it only causes confusion, especially when you tie it to sin. Further, Paul's instruction was actually NOT to cover one's h

@ymmotrojam Paul's point here is constructing a sort of worst case scenario, that is⎯if the entire church gathers and a large group all speaks in foreign tongues, there will be no way anyone could understand anything. It's one thing if 5 people are ...

@ymmotrojam Paul's point here is constructing a sort of worst case scenario, that is⎯if the entire church gathers and a large group all speaks in foreign tongues, there will be no way anyone could und

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 You have to conclude this because otherwise you have

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 You have to conclude this because otherwise you have Paul contradicting himself. I do not have this problem. I think the burden of proof is on the one restricting.

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 You are explicitly commanded to not forbid speaking in tongues. And if you do not forbid this, then speaking in an intelligent language (which is far better according to Paul) should not be forbidden either. But you are f...

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 You are explicitly commanded to not forbid speaking in tongues. And if you do not forbid this, then speaking in an intelligent language (which is far better according to Pa

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 That is correct. If this is from Paul, then those wh

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 That is correct. If this is from Paul, then those who claim it is not calling for complete silence are wrong. But here's the caveat⎯it contradicts Paul's own statements in

@WhosMe08310138 @desert_drew3 @smashbaals For sure but there are good reasons to

@WhosMe08310138 @desert_drew3 @smashbaals For sure but there are good reasons to believe it’s not Paul because of elements in the language and he identified himself in all the others because people ch

@t_mo_land @jdenehar Eph 5:21 says "and subject yourselves to one another in the bfear of Christ." This includes husbands subjecting themselves to their wives and pastors to their congregants. The Biblical call is mutual subjection, so whatever the...

@t_mo_land @jdenehar Eph 5:21 says "and subject yourselves to one another in the bfear of Christ." This includes husbands subjecting themselves to their wives and pastors to their congregants. The B

Eph 5:21 commentary

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam The requirement isn't must be male. First, the comment about "one wife husband" is the only place in the Greek might indicate male, but it says husband. If Paul wasn't married and advocated for singleness, then this is no...

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam The requirement isn't must be male. First, the comment about "one wife husband" is the only place in the Greek might indicate male, but it says husband. If Paul wasn't mar

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam Paul was quoting from the Corinthians which likely st

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam Paul was quoting from the Corinthians which likely started from "As in all the churches of the saints, women are to keep silent..." https://t.co/7Y7QxeM1ER

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam Yes, Paul makes his argument from the order of creation. No, there is no mention of authority. First doesn't make superior⎯if so, the animals would rule over the man. The first born is just first, not the best. So what'...

@ich1ban123456 @ymmotrojam Yes, Paul makes his argument from the order of creation. No, there is no mention of authority. First doesn't make superior⎯if so, the animals would rule over the man. The

1 Cor 14:34-35 1 Cor 7:1 1 Cor 7:25 commentary

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 In 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to the letter from the Corinthians in 1 Cor 7:1 that he is responding to. After that point, there are a number of their questions in 1 Cor 7:25; 8:1; 10:23-24; 12:1. Similarly, Paul is quotin...

@ymmotrojam @ich1ban123456 In 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to the letter from the Corinthians in 1 Cor 7:1 that he is responding to. After that point, there are a number of their questions in 1 Cor 7:2

@patrioticzeal @smashbaals Did you see this? What reason can you think of as to

@patrioticzeal @smashbaals Did you see this? What reason can you think of as to why Paul would not identify himself? https://t.co/xfUlOZ6LN0

@Yessiiiiir @MikeWingerii Paul says to Timothy in 1 Tim 1:3-4, “Just as I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, to remain on at Ephesus so that you would instruct certain people not to teach strange doctrines, nor to pay attention to myths and e...

@Yessiiiiir @MikeWingerii Paul says to Timothy in 1 Tim 1:3-4, “Just as I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, to remain on at Ephesus so that you would instruct certain people not to teach stra

1 Tim 1:3-4 general

@No_Sugar_m8 @smashbaals Why would you say that Jewish believers held contempt for Paul? Paul was accepted by the leaders and members of the Jerusalem church. There were letters circulating supposedly from him but which were forgeries, so he has re...

@No_Sugar_m8 @smashbaals Why would you say that Jewish believers held contempt for Paul? Paul was accepted by the leaders and members of the Jerusalem church. There were letters circulating supposed

2 Thess 2:1-2 debate

@smashbaals Paul has authored many letters and made plain he is the author even

@smashbaals Paul has authored many letters and made plain he is the author even writing in his own hand sometimes to prove it. Hebrews is a stellar work; why would Paul not identify himself. What fa

@3HillsMinor Are we talking again then? I’m not effeminate. I’m very much male. And I’m not twisting scripture just because you don’t agree with or like my exegesis. Paul is dealing with false teachers of any gender as false teaching does not bel...

@3HillsMinor Are we talking again then? I’m not effeminate. I’m very much male. And I’m not twisting scripture just because you don’t agree with or like my exegesis. Paul is dealing with false tea

@3HillsMinor You appear to have a problem with reading in context. You cannot i

@3HillsMinor You appear to have a problem with reading in context. You cannot ignore Eph 5:21: “and subject yourselves to one another in the fear of Christ.” Whatever Paul says later cannot contradi

Eph 5:21 debate

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning That’s what I’m contending. I’m contending this is not referring to all women because Paul explicitly uses the singular and specifies it is a specific woman because of the anaphoric reference to...

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning That’s what I’m contending. I’m contending this is not referring to all women because Paul explicitly uses the singular and specifies it is a sp

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Paul is most certainly an overseer! Seriously, on what basis can you substantiate your claim? He is probably the quintessential model of one⎯taking care over multiple churches, writing letters,...

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Paul is most certainly an overseer! Seriously, on what basis can you substantiate your claim? He is probably the quintessential model of one⎯ta

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Yes. Paul is both an apo

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Yes. Paul is both an apostle and an overseer. Is he a husband? Is he even disqualified? If not, are you sure you are understanding what Paul

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Even Mike Winger admits that women can be deacons and yet the term “one wife husband” is also a requirement of deacons. Was Paul married? No. And he advocated for singleness—since it removes d...

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning Even Mike Winger admits that women can be deacons and yet the term “one wife husband” is also a requirement of deacons. Was Paul married? No.

@3HillsMinor @c_w_henderson @Kdubtru I am simply taking what Paul wrote seriousl

@3HillsMinor @c_w_henderson @Kdubtru I am simply taking what Paul wrote seriously and unwinding the complexities he himself put in the text. https://t.co/YjFKhdD3bw

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning You are misinterpreting 1 Tim 2:12. You assume it's as clear as mud, but its just mud in the eye of the complementarians and Patriachists! Read chapter 1⎯how Paul refers to the purpose of stopp...

@3HillsMinor @Rattle_Resists @Kdubtru @michael_ronning You are misinterpreting 1 Tim 2:12. You assume it's as clear as mud, but its just mud in the eye of the complementarians and Patriachists! Read

1 Tim 2:12 debate

@TeamPapuForever @graceforprize Paul was both an apostle and overseer but not a husband. So this requirement cannot mean “must be married” but rather “if married, must be faithful.” The emphasis is on the “one.” For the same reason it doesn’t requ...

@TeamPapuForever @graceforprize Paul was both an apostle and overseer but not a husband. So this requirement cannot mean “must be married” but rather “if married, must be faithful.” The emphasis is

@graceforprize @sympatheticNPC What we see is: >> all people (vv1-7) >> all males (v8) >> all females (vv9-10) >> a woman (v11) >> a woman (wife), a man (husband) (v12) >> Ada...

@graceforprize @sympatheticNPC What we see is: >> all people (vv1-7) >> all males (v8) >> all females (vv9-10) >> a woman (v11) >> a woman (wife

@graceforprize @sympatheticNPC The doctrine that came out of this was set out by the Apostles⎯James, Paul, Peter, but it was also agreed to by the WHOLE church. James was the leader in this judgment but in verse 22 it was the whole church which inclu...

@graceforprize @sympatheticNPC The doctrine that came out of this was set out by the Apostles⎯James, Paul, Peter, but it was also agreed to by the WHOLE church. James was the leader in this judgment b

@c_w_henderson @Kdubtru Correct. It’s clearly referring to a particular deceive

@c_w_henderson @Kdubtru Correct. It’s clearly referring to a particular deceived woman teaching false doctrine at the church at Ephesus who Paul didn’t want to name. https://t.co/rBGS8Fof6Y

@thatlandinotho False teachers and deception is not limited to one biological se

@thatlandinotho False teachers and deception is not limited to one biological sex. That verse in 1 Tim 2:12 has to do with a specific deceived woman teaching false doctrine in the church at Ephesus w

1 Tim 2:12 general

@PauleyMo67 BTW, you are actually quoting what was said at the tomb when Mary Magdeline discovered that Jesus was missing. This is not what she said when telling the disciples the good news! “They asked her, ‘Woman, why are you crying?’ She sai...

@PauleyMo67 BTW, you are actually quoting what was said **at the tomb** when Mary Magdeline discovered that Jesus was missing. This is not what she said when telling the disciples the good news! “Th

@PauleyMo67 That’s quite a mischaracterization of what the women said. Luke 24:5-7, 9: “In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, ‘Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he...

@PauleyMo67 That’s quite a mischaracterization of what the women said. Luke 24:5-7, 9: “In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, ‘Why do you look

Luke 24:5-7 debate

@ich1ban123456 @TemAleSaEliTa @Kdubtru That passage—read in context and taking Paul’s grammar seriously—is referring to a deceived woman at the church of Ephesus who was teaching false doctrine. Paul only names blasphemers who know the truth but don...

@ich1ban123456 @TemAleSaEliTa @Kdubtru That passage—read in context and taking Paul’s grammar seriously—is referring to a deceived woman at the church of Ephesus who was teaching false doctrine. Paul

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-11-22

@AlistenDoris It’s great you are obeying what you read in the Bible. This passage is not Paul telling godly, qualified and gifted women that they should not teach true doctrine to groups which include men. The grammar, context and references do not...

@AlistenDoris It’s great you are obeying what you read in the Bible. This passage is not Paul telling godly, qualified and gifted women that they should not teach true doctrine to groups which includ

@ronhenzel @ZacharyGarris While you are working hard on that question, you'll also want to consider that "the woman’s" transgression that happened because she was deceived was a past action, but the continuing results of the transgression are a prese...

@ronhenzel @ZacharyGarris While you are working hard on that question, you'll also want to consider that "the woman’s" transgression that happened because she was deceived was a past action, but the c

@deluxe_pastor @DennisMSwanson1 @ZacharyGarris No, I don’t think he believes he

@deluxe_pastor @DennisMSwanson1 @ZacharyGarris No, I don’t think he believes he is more “mature” than Paul. But you might want to revisit the details of this text in its context with the specific gra

@AJRigney @LandOnYourHome @ZacharyGarris Regarding context, you have a wholehear

@AJRigney @LandOnYourHome @ZacharyGarris Regarding context, you have a wholehearted agree from me! We also cannot ignore the specific grammar Paul used. And carefully examine his back references in

@JakeRainwater 1 Tim 2:12 is one of the most misused passages in the New Testament these days. Without addressing the specific context of Paul’s letter, the grammar and his references in their context, how can one claim to understand what Paul is me...

@JakeRainwater 1 Tim 2:12 is one of the most misused passages in the New Testament these days. Without addressing the specific context of Paul’s letter, the grammar and his references in their contex

1 Tim 2:12 commentary

@ronhenzel @ZacharyGarris Hi Ron! So “She will be saved” applies to Eve? Isn’t

@ronhenzel @ZacharyGarris Hi Ron! So “She will be saved” applies to Eve? Isn’t Eve dead when Paul wrote this? How can she do anything to affect her salvation?

@scorpion_bird @ChristnNitemare That makes no sense. And that’s not what Paul i

@scorpion_bird @ChristnNitemare That makes no sense. And that’s not what Paul is teaching either. https://t.co/rBGS8Fof6Y

@ZacharyGarris @wintrwizrd That verse is not speaking generically of all women.

@ZacharyGarris @wintrwizrd That verse is not speaking generically of all women. The grammar has to make sense and Paul using the singular. https://t.co/rBGS8Fof6Y

@2b_censored @autocorrect2_0 @DezGroves You are right that Paul was not using th

@2b_censored @autocorrect2_0 @DezGroves You are right that Paul was not using the imperative in v12. But can you explain verse 15? https://t.co/rBGS8Fof6Y

@pauldirks @pj_schreiner Are you of the persuasion that these differences you see in males and females will persist into the next age where there is no marriage or giving in marriage (nor procreation)? Second: would you consider 1 Cor 6:2-3 to apply...

@pauldirks @pj_schreiner Are you of the persuasion that these differences you see in males and females will persist into the next age where there is no marriage or giving in marriage (nor procreation)

1 Cor 6:2-3 question

@DefendTheSheep It’s a pity because after studying these hard passages in more detail we find that Paul wasn’t restricting women at all. His reference to Eve’s deception is only tied to the creation order and not something in her chromosomes. His f...

@DefendTheSheep It’s a pity because after studying these hard passages in more detail we find that Paul wasn’t restricting women at all. His reference to Eve’s deception is only tied to the creation

1 Cor 14:34-35 1 Cor 7:1 debate

@gleasondj @narelleford @FrontiersIn @FrontEndocrinol But Paul was quoting from the letter the Corinthians wrote him (see 1 Cor 7:1) and in 1 Cor 14:34-35 this is a quote from that letter—he refutes them in v36: "What? came the word of God out from y...

@gleasondj @narelleford @FrontiersIn @FrontEndocrinol But Paul was quoting from the letter the Corinthians wrote him (see 1 Cor 7:1) and in 1 Cor 14:34-35 this is a quote from that letter—he refutes t

@masonmennenga What is the evidence Paul didn’t write 1 Timothy? This is a clas

@masonmennenga What is the evidence Paul didn’t write 1 Timothy? This is a classic work of the apostle Paul. Rather, people are misreading what Paul says in 1 Tim 2:11-15. https://t.co/rBGS8Fof6Y

1 Tim 2:11-15 debate

@RichAH67 @Lily_Warrior @YoungVi42770165 @pastherandie @carlaskaufel Paul, Peter

@RichAH67 @Lily_Warrior @YoungVi42770165 @pastherandie @carlaskaufel Paul, Peter, John and other writers of scripture were inpired by God in what they wrote such that the ultimate author is God who ca