Search — Theology Explorer

Galatians 3:28 Romans 8 creation order complementarianism image of God

Two relationships: humans to creation (equal) vs. humans to each other (different roles)

Mike provides the framework for understanding how image and role differences coexist.

1 Corinthians 11:15 Romans 12:17 1 Thessalonians 5:15 1 Corinthians 11:15 Alan Padgett anti

Greek word analysis: anti in verse 15 means equivalence, not replacement

Mike examines the Greek preposition debate in verse 15.

Plutarch Roman funeral customs Roman head covering practices

Textual evidence: Plutarch on Roman head covering customs

Mike moves to literary evidence about cultural practices.

1 Corinthians 11:4-5 1 Corinthians 11:13 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 Roman religious practices prayer and prophecy context

Religious context: Romans covered heads during worship, prayer, prophecy, and sacrifice

Mike identifies the most significant and most neglected cultural background.

Richard Oster Corinth as Roman colony Roman religious customs

Richard Oster's key insight: Corinth was a Roman colony with Roman religious head covering practices

Mike presents Oster's two main points.

Plutarch Elaine Fantham Roman vs. Greek worship

Plutarch and Elaine Fantham confirm: Romans covered heads when worshiping gods

Mike adds textual confirmation of religious covering practices.

Romans 1:26-27 Galatians 4:8 Romans 2:14 Tom Schreiner physis Romans 1:26-27

Paul uses physis nine times consistently: never means 'custom'

Mike examines all of Paul's uses of physis.

1 Corinthians 11:7 Genesis 1:26-27 image of God 1 Corinthians 11:7 Genesis 1:26-27

Question 10: How is woman the glory of man and man the glory of God?

Mike addresses the meaning of 'glory' (doxa) in this passage.

Mike Winger idea 2022-12-04

The disjunctive particle 'e' reinforces rather than refutes what precedes it, shown from Romans 3:28-29

Mike demonstrates how the Greek particle functions using Romans 3:28-29 as an example.

Romans 3:28-29 e/eta (disjunctive particle) Romans 3:28-29 rhetorical reinforcement

Genesis 2 1 Corinthians 15:22 Romans 5:14-19 ezer Genesis 2 1 Corinthians 15:22

Adam bears primary responsibility for sin — 1 Corinthians 15:22 and Romans 5:14-19

Mike argues Adam's greater representational role and accountability shows his greater authority.

Romans 13:1 Romans 13:1 governmental authority Jezebel

Queens had authority over men, and Romans 13:1 commands submission to them

Mike uses queens as another example against strict patriarchalism.

Romans 16:1 Phoebe diakonos Romans 16:1

Women can be deacons — Phoebe in Romans 16:1 as evidence

Mike argues for women deacons with Phoebe as the primary example.

Romans 14 Romans 14 non-elder teaching test Christian liberty

Wednesday/off-service teaching: if a non-elder man could do it, probably a woman could too

Mike offers a practical test for non-Sunday teaching slots.

Romans 14 Romans 14 church flexibility Christian grace

Need grace and flexibility between churches — no single policy all churches must follow

Mike emphasizes ecclesial flexibility on these hard cases.

Romans 12 Deborah Junia Priscilla

Women having influence is not a problem — influence is not the same as eldership

Mike distinguishes between influence and elder authority.

egalitarian harm church reputation good intentions

Warning: egalitarians are doing great harm to the church despite good intentions

Mike gives a direct warning about egalitarian influence.

Mike Winger idea 2023-11-22

View 3: Women saved spiritually by literally having children

Mike evaluates and rejects the view that bearing children contributes to women's spiritual salvation.

1 Corinthians 7 1 Timothy 2:15 Romans 3:28 1 Corinthians 7 justification by faith 1 Timothy 2:15

Mike Winger idea 2023-11-22

Stanley Porter's objection: future tense 'shall be saved' doesn't work with Eve

Mike addresses Porter's argument that the future tense of sozo contradicts Eve as the subject.

Romans 5:9 1 Timothy 4:16 2 Timothy 4:18 Stanley Porter Jared August future tense objection

Mike Winger idea 2018-01-10

Closing: Content plans, Romans series, and contextual reading appeal

Wrapping up the livestream and future direction

Romans series Romans series Contextual reading Proof-texting refutation

Mike Winger idea 2018-02-21

1 Corinthians 8:8 and Romans 14:14: food does not define one's standing before God; nothing is inherently unclean for the Christian.

Mike shifts from the hypothetical framework to his actual position: there is no food-law prohibition on blood for Christians.

1 Corinthians 8:8 Romans 14:14 Christian freedom 1 Corinthians 8:8 Romans 14:14

Mike Winger idea 2018-02-21

Mike plans a future series on 'Jesus in the Old Testament' after completing his Romans series, and the next week's livestream will respond to Ricky Gervais's atheism arguments.

Closing announcements about upcoming content.

Romans atheism Ricky Gervais Jesus in the Old Testament

Mike Winger idea 2018-02-07

Q&A: Distinction between a 'weak brother' (Romans 14) and a 'lukewarm brother' — the weak brother thinks something sinful that isn't; the lukewarm brother's love for God is waning.

Viewer question from TruthWatch about terminology from a previous video on being on fire for the Lord.

Romans 14 Revelation 3 lukewarm Romans 14 Revelation 3 weak brother

Mike Winger idea 2018-02-07

Q&A: Video games where the player's character summons demons are probably something a reasonable Christian would feel convicted about — Romans 14 principle: whatever is not of faith is sin.

Viewer question from DecideScroll about demonic video game content.

Romans 14:23 Christian liberty Romans 14:23 video games

Mike Winger idea 2017-12-27

Tip 6: Go higher — set goals rooted in godly, selfless ambition rather than worldly self-interest

Sixth of seven tips. Mike calls believers to transcend secular motivations for self-improvement.

Romans 12:1 Philippians 2:3 Romans 12:1 Philippians 2:3 living sacrifice

Mike Winger idea 2018-01-24

Romans 11:6 teaches that grace and works are mutually exclusive — mixing them destroys the concept of grace.

Mike reinforces the biblical incompatibility of grace-plus-works with a second Pauline reference.

Romans 11:6 sola gratia Mormon soteriology Romans 11:6

Romans 3:28 Romans 4 justification by faith Abraham Romans 3:28

Protestant counter using Romans 3:28 and Romans 4 — Abraham justified by faith, not works

Presenting the Protestant response to James 2:24

James 2:21 Abraham Isaac faith vs. works

Catholic counter using James 2:21 — Abraham justified by works when he offered Isaac

Continuing the back-and-forth debate structure

James 2:14-26 hermeneutics contextual interpretation James 2:14-26

Proper methodology: verse-by-verse contextual study of the passage being debated rather than countering with other passages

Mike's positive hermeneutical proposal

James 2 hermeneutics James 2 sola fide

James 2 is about how salvation is demonstrated, not how salvation is accomplished — massive hermeneutical distinction

Central interpretive thesis of Mike's reading of James 2

Romans James 2 Galatians Romans James 2 biblical harmony

Harmonization: James perfectly harmonizes with Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians when properly interpreted

Showing that the Protestant reading creates biblical coherence

Romans 11:6 sola gratia Romans 11:6 Catholicism

Challenge to Catholics: Romans 11:6 — grace and works are diametrically opposed; if works, grace is no longer grace

Posing a challenge to the Catholic faith-plus-works view from Romans

Romans 4:4-5 justification by faith sola fide grace

Romans 4:4-5 — wages vs. gift; faith counted as righteousness to the one who does not work but believes

Additional Pauline argument against Catholic soteriology

Romans 2 apologetics Romans 2

Reference to Mike's video on Romans 2 — 'most misused passage in the book'

Pointing to a related video on another commonly misused passage

Romans 4:16 justification by faith Abraham saving faith

Q&A: Romans 4:16 — is it about saving faith? Is Abraham a prototype for saving faith?

Viewer asks Mike's view on Romans 4:16

Romans 4 Galatians justification by faith Abraham Romans 4

Abraham as the paradigmatic prototype of saving faith in Romans 4 and Galatians — changes how you read both books

Elaboration on Abraham's role as prototype

Mike Winger idea 2018-08-29

Jesus dividing spoils: the co-heir theology of the New Testament

Ra claims Jesus never divided spoils with peers as Isaiah 53 requires

Isaiah 53 - dividing spoils Romans 8:17 Isaiah 53 - dividing spoils Co-heirs with Christ Romans 8:17

Mike Winger idea 2018-08-29

Psalm 22 describes crucifixion hundreds of years before it was invented

Continuing analysis of Psalm 22 as a crucifixion prophecy

Psalm 22 Messianic prophecy Psalm 22 Crucifixion prophecy

Mike Winger idea 2018-04-25

Luke 21:20-24 — Jerusalem surrounded by armies: partial fulfillment in AD 70, not the abomination of desolation

Key difference between Mark and Luke: Luke gives a different 'sign' — armies surrounding Jerusalem, which Mike connects to AD 70, not the final abomination.

Luke 21:20-24 Romans 11 fullness of Gentiles Matthew 3:15 Luke 21:20-24 armies surrounding Jerusalem AD 70 partial fulfillment

Mike Winger idea 2018-08-22

Christians are not under the Mosaic law — Sabbath observance is a liberty, not a requirement for salvation

Mike's rebuttal to Kim's Sabbath-as-salvation teaching.

Romans 14:5 Colossians 2:16-17 Sabbath law vs. grace Romans 14:5

Mike Winger idea 2018-09-05

God can speak through creation, but creation communicates general attributes (glory, power) not specific instruction — the written word provides far greater specificity.

Viewer question about whether God speaks through nature/creation outside the Bible.

Psalm 19 Romans 1 general revelation Scripture special revelation

Romans 11:36 epistemology presuppositional apologetics Van Til

Sye explains presuppositionalism: start with the presupposition that God exists and his Word is true; all reasoning depends on God; the 'circle' is virtuous, not vicious

Sye's core explanation of the presup method, tracing it to Van Til and Bahnson

Romans 1 accountability general revelation Romans 1

What does the unbeliever know? Sye argues Romans 1 teaches everyone has sufficient knowledge of the true God for their condemnation — not just 'a god' but the God

Winger's first probing question; Sye's answer

Romans 1 sin general revelation Romans 1

Winger argues Romans 1 teaches that people have been given sufficient information but may not currently believe it, because sin causes suppression and exchange of truth

Winger's counter-reading of Romans 1

Romans 1 1 Kings 18 Romans 1 knowledge of God suppression of truth

Both men discuss the aftermath of 1 Kings 18 — the people and prophets respond differently; suppression-to-profession vs. unbelief-to-belief

Continued exegesis and debate over 1 Kings 18

Romans 1 atheism self-deception Romans 1

Sye clarifies: atheists are not necessarily liars — they are truth suppressors, which is a psychological phenomenon, not simple conscious deception

Sye corrects a common presuppositionalist mistake