Mandating church traditions as biblical commands is wrong; Proverbs 22:28 and Matthew 18:18 do not support it

Q8 from John Doe: A church mandates women wear dresses and men be clean-shaven using Proverbs 22:28 and Matthew 18:18 — is it biblical to mandate adherence to tradition?

Kalam leads to God with biblical attributes via conceptual analysis

Continuation of the Kalam answer, explaining the conceptual analysis step.

Psalm 82 gods (elohim) most likely refers to earthly rulers ironically addressed as divine beings, not literal supernatural deities.

Question 10 from RaHR17 about who the gods in Psalm 82 are; engages Michael Heiser's divine council worldview.

Timeless beings don't have beginnings or endings — these are temporal concepts. God, existing timelessly, doesn't need a cause. This also rules out pagan deities and the Mormon concept of God.

Who made God — continued; ruling out non-eternal deities

Objection: this only gets you to generic theism, not the Christian God. Response: each attribute (spaceless, timeless, etc.) was justified, not ad hoc; the Kalam is meant to be followed by evidence for the resurrection to identify the God.

Objection — doesn't prove the Christian God

Mike introduces a study on flat earth Bible verses. His goal is not to argue about the shape of the earth but to show that the Bible does NOT teach flat earth. Ground rules: not about conspiracies, geocentrism, or the firmament — only about whether specific verses teach a flat earth.

Introduction — flat earth Bible study

The "footstool" verses (Isaiah 66:1) are metaphorical — God is sovereign. If "earth is my footstool" is literal, then "heaven is my throne" must be literal too (but no flat-earther takes it that way). Isaiah 40:12 says God measured waters in "the hollow of his hand" — also obviously metaphorical. 1 Kings 8:27: even the highest heavens cannot contain God.

Footstool verses — metaphor for sovereignty

Q: Could Christians have made up martyrdom claims? Unreasonable for Peter, James, and John — first-century evidence of their martyrdom is strong. Some later apostle martyrdom stories may have been embellished, but the core eyewitnesses clearly suffered for their resurrection claims. Martyrdom proves sincerity, not necessarily truth — but combined with ruling out hallucination, the case is strong.

Q&A — historicity of apostolic martyrdom

Mike on women in ministry: he's complementarian — the highest leadership/preaching/governing role is reserved for men God has called. But he struggles with how to apply this to the wide variety of modern ministry situations. Women can teach; the question is in what contexts. He encourages women to study Scripture carefully and let it guide their choices.

Women in ministry — complementarian but cautious on application

Does God answer unbelievers' prayers? Mike sees no biblical rule preventing it. Jesus healed people who were apparently unrepentant (John 5:14 — "sin no more lest something worse happen" implies the healed man was still in sin). God may answer unbelievers' prayers to show them he's real — but he's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for those who keep living in rebellion.

God answering unbelievers' prayers

Context: Mark 8-10 reveals the messianic mystery — Jesus has TWO comings (suffering first, glory later), but the disciples only expect one glorious military conquest. Their argument about who's greatest stems from thinking they're about to rule in an earthly kingdom. They're wrong about both timing and values.

Context — the messianic mystery in Mark

Leviticus 20:10 objection: if adultery = death, how can it be grounds for divorce (the person would be dead)? Four responses: (1) The death penalty wasn't practiced after 30 AD under Roman rule — John 18:31: "it is not lawful for us to put anyone to death." (2) The Mishnah has rules for divorced adulteresses (can't marry their lover) — proving they weren't killed. (3) Adultery was hard to prove (requires 2+ witnesses). (4) Jesus uses porneia (broader than adultery) to include lesser sexual offenses.

Adultery death penalty objection — four rebuttals

Mark Series pt 39: Mark 10:35-45. James and John ask for positions of authority in Jesus's kingdom. Jesus teaches that greatness in his kingdom = servanthood, the opposite of worldly leadership. This passage addresses pastoral abuse at its root: the false expectation that Christian leadership means authority rather than service.

Introduction — Mark 10:35-45 and pastoral abuse

Mark 10:42-45 — Jesus's leadership model: "You know that those recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them... but it is not this way among you." The greatest must be servant; the first must be slave of all. Pastoral abuse happens when leaders adopt CEO mentality — protecting their vision, reputation, and authority instead of serving. Signs: demanding allegiance to the leader rather than to Christ, silencing criticism, creating distance/hierarchy, using authority for personal benefit.

Pastoral abuse — CEO vs servant leadership

The unridden colt symbolizes Jesus' transcendent, non-derivative authority — unlike kings who rode conquered rulers' mounts to claim their power, Jesus' authority is wholly his own.

Analysis of "a colt on which no one has ever sat" (Mark 11:2)

Solomon's inauguration on a donkey (1 Kings 1) and Genesis 49:10-11 provide additional donkey-messiah connections that Zechariah 9:9 likely draws from.

Additional OT background on donkey symbolism

The chief priests, scribes, and elders = a delegation from the Sanhedrin (Jewish supreme court, ~70 members). This is a significant escalation — Jesus is now on their turf in Jerusalem, confronting the highest authority in Israel.

Identifying the Sanhedrin delegation in Mark 11:27-28

Objections answered: (1) Jesus's "turn the other cheek" refutes personal vengeance, not governmental justice; (2) David's pardon is a divine exception, not a rule; (3) John 8 (woman in adultery) was a mob, not a court — and the passage is textually questionable.

Responding to objections against the death penalty

The Hebrew preposition "min" (for/because of) in "pierced FOR our transgressions" — anti-PSA advocates claim it means "because of" (we sinned against him) not "for" (substitutionary). But min is used 7,000+ times with huge variety, and most translations render it "for."

Debate over the Hebrew preposition min in Isaiah 53:5

The greatest commandment — love God with ALL your heart, soul, mind, strength — is what everyone gets wrong about morality. Love of GOD comes first, love of neighbor second. Not all sins are equal; violating this foremost command is the most serious.

Mark 12:28-34 verse-by-verse study on the greatest commandment

Winger walks through 1 Timothy 3 elder qualifications, acknowledging real-life churches (especially small ones) struggle to find people who meet all criteria. Lists: blameless, husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, hospitable, able to teach, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy, gentle, not quarrelsome, rules his own house well, not a novice.

Q&A: How literally should we follow the qualifications for pastors/elders in 1 Timothy and Titus?

About the “Golden Rule”: Is the Golden Rule objective or subjective? For example, I tease my friend and he teases me back because we think it's funny, but I won't do it to others because they don't think it's funny.

Q&A question: About the “Golden Rule”

How is Satan the World’s Ruler?: Can you explain how Satan became the ruler of this world?

Q&A question: How is Satan the World’s Ruler?

Winger affirms husband-wife roles are equal in value but different in role, calling this 'irrefutably taught' in the NT. He rejects the word 'rule' as misleading in modern English but affirms husbands have a higher position of authority.

Q&A question asking why submission is taught as God-ordained in the NT if the husband's rule was a curse of the fall.

Reaching Difficult Students for Christ: I'm a high school teacher at a school that’s heavily influenced by culture and broken homes. The students lack respect, and hate following rules. How can I reach these students that appear far from God?

Q&A question: Reaching Difficult Students for Christ

Winger clarifies his 1 Peter 3 teaching on Abigail: she is an example of not submitting in a life-threatening situation, but he does NOT limit exceptions to only life-threatening cases. He refuses to draw precise lines because 'life is so messy' — drawing them too tightly either encourages rebellion or traps abuse victims.

Q challenging why Winger interpreted Abigail's story through a 'life-threatening situations' lens as the only valid exception for wives not submitting.

Winger says NO — do not follow your husband to a cult. The Bible never gives husbands spiritual authority to dictate their wife's worship. Wives have a relationship with God independent of their husbands. He also rejects the 'husband as priest of his house' teaching as unbiblical. Uses 1 Peter 3:1-6 extensively.

Q&A: Husband joined a cult teaching women go to hell for wearing makeup/trousers. Should wife submit and follow him there?

If God Doesn’t Change, Why do His Rules?: From a non-Christian friend: If God doesn’t change over time, how come He commands Jews not to eat certain foods in the Old Testament, but deems them OK in the New Testament?

Q&A question: If God Doesn’t Change, Why do His Rules?

Can I Trust that my Faith is Sincere?: I sincerely believe Jesus is my Savior, but if my sincerity can’t be trusted (just like the rich young ruler’s), how can I truly 100% know that I actually do have a saving faith in Jesus Christ?

Q&A question: Can I Trust that my Faith is Sincere?

Earthly Rulers vs. Spiritual Rulers?: In 1 Corinthians 2:8, is Paul referring to earthly rulers (i.e. Pharisees or Romans) or spiritual rulers as he does in Ephesians 6: 12?

Q&A question: Earthly Rulers vs. Spiritual Rulers?

Can Non-Believers Come to Church to Observe?: Are there any good rules of thumb for atheists attending a church service for the purposes of learning? Assuming they have no intention of conversion, is this considered rude or invasive?

Q&A question: Can Non-Believers Come to Church to Observe?

Rulers & Authorities; Manifold Wisdom: Can you explain Ephesians 3: 10 (ESV)? Who are the "rulers and authorities in heavenly places," and how is the "manifold wisdom of God" made known to them through the church?

Q&A question: Rulers & Authorities; Manifold Wisdom

Winger explains headship means the husband has a higher position of authority (not the only authority) — when they disagree, the deciding vote goes to the husband. But Jesus commands this be exercised with grace, love, and self-sacrifice, never 'lording it over' the wife.

Q&A question: What does a husband being the head of the wife actually mean he does? Does he boss her around or just be a good man?

The Granville Sharp’s Rule: How reliable is the Granville Sharp's rule? Is it implemented outside of New Testament writings?

Q&A question: The Granville Sharp’s Rule

Winger says a wife co-teaching an adult Sunday school Bible study IS an elder-type role and would be wrong under his complementarian view. However, co-teaching a topical class (like parenting) is NOT eldership and he'd be fine with it. He warns against creating Pharisaic rules but draws the line at verse-by-verse Bible teaching.

Bonus Q after viewer watched WIM series: Is a woman helping her husband teach a co-ed adult Sunday school class an elder-type role?

Do our Lives Affect our Eternity?: Is our ability to rule and reign with God in His new world forever (Revelation 22:5) dependent on how we serve God in our lifetime for His mission (Luke 19: 17)?

Q&A question: Do our Lives Affect our Eternity?

Disqualifications for Serving?: What disqualifies someone from non-pastoral ministry? Are the rules for pastors the same for sound techs, ushers, etc.?

Q&A question: Disqualifications for Serving?

Winger says Eph 5:22 and Col 3:18 apply regardless of whether the husband is a Christian — the qualifier is 'your husband,' not 'your Christian husband.' Submission is not 100% in every possible thing, and exceptions exist for abuse, but the exception shouldn't be used to invalidate the rule.

Q: How should a newly Christian woman apply Eph 5:22 and Col 3:18 when her husband hasn't come to Christ and isn't supportive?

Pastors Using AI?: For pastors preparing sermons: What is the proper use of AI (artificial intelligence)? What are some rules of wisdom we can apply when using AI as a helpful tool?

Q&A question: Pastors Using AI?

And When You Feel Your Discernment Run Out this Is a Wisdom Thing Maybe Someone Won't Understand It but When You When You'Re Looking at a Situation or a Person and Here's the Things You Know about Them but Then You Start Realizing There's a Lot of Things I Don't Know and that's Where Your Discernment Running Out So Just Don't Go beyond What You Actually Know and that's One Thing another Thing Is this Is Here's the Phrase I Learned for Myself Years Ago Which Is Discernment without Wisdom Is Destructive I'Ve Learned that through Experience Right Maybe I Have Discernment Maybe I'M Told Right but I Didn't Have the Wisdom on What To Do with that Discernment so My Rule Now if I Keep It Is To Wait Wait after Discernment Wait on Wisdom Okay I See that Clearly but What's the Wisdom on How I Should Handle It and I Pray and I Wait on Wisdom

The Digesta (summary of Roman law, ~500 AD appealing back to Augustus) states that "the bodies of those condemned to death should not be refused their relatives" for burial — and this was the general rule, not the exception. Ehrman presents a selective picture by quoting only sources showing executions without burial, ignoring Roman legal provisions that allowed it.

Roman law (Digesta) as evidence that burial of crucified persons was permitted and practiced

Hebrews 1:4-6 decisively refutes Jesus being an angel: (v.4) Jesus became superior to angels as a different category; (v.5) God never said to any angel "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"; (v.6) all God's angels are commanded to worship Jesus — angels do not worship other angels. Hebrews 2:5 adds that God did not subject the coming world to angels, but Jesus rules it.

Hebrews 1:4-6 and 2:5 as decisive refutation of the Jesus-is-an-angel claim