Search — Theology Explorer

@kudu_biltong @rightresponsem The authority is not in the messenger but the mess

@kudu_biltong @rightresponsem The authority is not in the messenger but the message.

@PrinceAsbel @dalepartridge Biblical subjection is intended to be a willful plac

@PrinceAsbel @dalepartridge Biblical subjection is intended to be a willful placing of oneself underneath of each other to work for what is best for them and lift them up. It has nothing to do with au

@MikeFloyd126871 @rightresponsem If it is weak and pathetic to follow women, why

@MikeFloyd126871 @rightresponsem If it is weak and pathetic to follow women, why was Barak put in the hall of faith in Hebrews 11 for following the Word of God spoken through Deborah?

@Unique95185 @rightresponsem Leading is not about taking authority over people,

@Unique95185 @rightresponsem Leading is not about taking authority over people, but is about doing the things Christians should do as an example to those around you for them to emulate. You've got le

@jatkins19911778 @BMcfonzie @rightresponsem I literally have no idea where you a

@jatkins19911778 @BMcfonzie @rightresponsem I literally have no idea where you are getting this from. Where does the NT "indict" women *preachers*? Preaching isn't even something spoken of in church g

@kudu_biltong @rightresponsem What's the problem with women teaching truth? What

@kudu_biltong @rightresponsem What's the problem with women teaching truth? What's more important⎯the truth or whose mouth it comes from?

@PrinceAsbel @dalepartridge I quoted from the scriptures. Submit doesn’t mean unquestioningly obey or that the one being submitted to is an authority over the one submitting. It means laying down your interests to do what is best for others. Jesus di...

@PrinceAsbel @dalepartridge I quoted from the scriptures. Submit doesn’t mean unquestioningly obey or that the one being submitted to is an authority over the one submitting. It means laying down your

@rightresponsem Women teaching truth and leading are not in the same ballpark as

@rightresponsem Women teaching truth and leading are not in the same ballpark as Andrew Tate

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad But then why without v34-36 would Paul even say v37? In 37, Paul reasserts his apostolic authority: “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to yo...

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad But then why without v34-36 would Paul even say v37? In 37, Paul reasserts his apostolic authority: “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or spiritual, let

Eph. 5:21 Phil 2:3-8 general

@dalepartridge - Husbands to wives (Eph. 5:21, Phil 2:3-8) There…fixed 😊

@aynirealtor @PrayTheRosary12 What about a set of beads or repetitious prayers w

@aynirealtor @PrayTheRosary12 What about a set of beads or repetitious prayers with 10-to-1 prayers to Mary is powerful? God is powerful. But He doesn’t force people into the church.

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad Philip Payne argues for this idea but I don’t believe it is faithful to the early manuscript evidence. I believe Paul was quoting the Corinthians and so intentionally put v34-35 in, though some scribes later...

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad Philip Payne argues for this idea but I don’t believe it is faithful to the early manuscript evidence. I believe Paul was quoting the Corinthians and so inte

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad What are you talking about? When did

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad What are you talking about? When did ai say Paul is a heretic? I’ve read Ge 3…very carefully in fact. https://t.co/xZJor8k9F5

1Co 14:34-35 1Co 14:36 1Co 7:1 question

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad You are mistaken on 1Co 14:34-35. Paul is responding to things the Corinthians wrote in their letter (see 1Co 7:1) and in this case refuting it: What? came the word of God out from you [men]? or came it unto...

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad You are mistaken on 1Co 14:34-35. Paul is responding to things the Corinthians wrote in their letter (see 1Co 7:1) and in this case refuting it: What? came t

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad It is nowhere in scripture. But we do

@BronWen727104 @RenewedReformed @sola_chad It is nowhere in scripture. But we do find laws in the Jewish oral traditions in the Talmud. https://t.co/CBNFSu2B8z

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad Paul wrote Timothy to deal with specific people teaching strange doctrines. Paul’s instruction was never to stop someone from teaching truth to anyone. And certainly he isn’t making up a new sin of a woman t...

@RenewedReformed @BronWen727104 @sola_chad Paul wrote Timothy to deal with specific people teaching strange doctrines. Paul’s instruction was never to stop someone from teaching truth to anyone. And c

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-26

@riecker “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, n

@riecker “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (Ac 20:29) ⎯ the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians Elders, ~AD 57.

Ac 20:29 general

@PrayTheRosary12 If by ‘Catholic’ you mean following Christ and His teachings, a

@PrayTheRosary12 If by ‘Catholic’ you mean following Christ and His teachings, absolutely. But if you mean praying to saints, treating Mary as a mediatrix, or worshipping the Eucharist, that’s another

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-25

@TomBuck He’s making the point that these things are not primary. If your weaker

@TomBuck He’s making the point that these things are not primary. If your weaker brother is offended by you not wearing a mask, is it really the end of the world and worth leaving a church? The pastor

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-25

@KennyBurchard All that proves is that you have fallible humans who are not read

@KennyBurchard All that proves is that you have fallible humans who are not reading the text carefully enough. It says nothing about whether the text is sufficient for every good work or not, or wheth

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-25

@WWUTTcom You’d be surprised how many pastors don’t know what this passage means

@WWUTTcom You’d be surprised how many pastors don’t know what this passage means. I used it when interviewing pastors and was quite shocked at the results.

commentary

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir For example, Dr. Daniel Wallace, while I deeply respect him for his expertise, is a Calvinist and a cessationist and I disagree with his theological stance in these areas because I think he is wrong. And why do other Gree...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir For example, Dr. Daniel Wallace, while I deeply respect him for his expertise, is a Calvinist and a cessationist and I disagree with his theological stance in these areas b

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir First, you have a definite “the men” occurring prior to “a man”—are you saying that this is also the anaphoric use? Second, if Paul can speak of all people (including the unsaved) and then clearly shift to the men of the ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir First, you have a definite “the men” occurring prior to “a man”—are you saying that this is also the anaphoric use? Second, if Paul can speak of all people (including the

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir But then the appeal to style is due to their interpr

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir But then the appeal to style is due to their interpretive assumptions which I disagree with because of the contextual clues. You can be an expert in Greek and still be wro

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir I have no problem listening but understand that context is key. Scripture is not understandable only to experts! And those who know Greek and English syntax can be wrong if they don’t pay attention to context. It happens f...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir I have no problem listening but understand that context is key. Scripture is not understandable only to experts! And those who know Greek and English syntax can be wrong if

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi No, it’s not a pernicious fallacy. You said “there’s absolutely no remotely legitimate way” when there is a legitimate way since you have “she will be saved” all the way back to “a woman” in 2:12⎯ it seems...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi No, it’s not a pernicious fallacy. You said “there’s absolutely no remotely legitimate way” when there *is* a legitimate way since you have “she will be save

in 2:12 general

Did you know that Eagles are Egalitarians? https://t.co/4PndvXfqN6

@ManassehRJones I didn’t know that Eagles were Egalitarians!

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi It's an even bigger pity that you cannot seem to recognize that the translators are interpreting the singular as plural and literally changing the inspired grammar of scripture! These translations⎯like you (...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi It's an even bigger pity that you cannot seem to recognize that the translators are interpreting the singular as plural and literally changing the inspired g

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi It's not the only straightforward way to read the text because your interpretation doesn't make sense of all the details⎯both semantically and contextually. Yes, and thanks for admitting that you are not aw...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi It's not the only straightforward way to read the text because your interpretation doesn't make sense of all the details⎯both semantically and contextually.

in 2:14 commentary

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You are lying by saying that "Paul never so much as hints at" since he states "certain people teaching strange doctrines" in 1Ti 1:3. That's at least a hint. And this is not a translation issue⎯it's an inte...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You are lying by saying that "Paul never so much as hints at" since he states "certain people teaching strange doctrines" in 1Ti 1:3. That's at least a hint.

1Ti 1:3 debate

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi 1. Your statement doesn't even make sense unless you are saying that you are ignorant of my grammar and semantics. Who cares⎯it's Paul's grammar and semantics anyways. 2. Yes, the nearest anarthrous noun fo...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi 1. Your statement doesn't even make sense unless you are saying that you are ignorant of my grammar and semantics. Who cares⎯it's Paul's grammar and semantic

in 2:13 of 2:14 debate

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi This is not a popularity contest. If none of the commentaries identify the option that Eve is symbolic of a specific woman teaching false doctrine and "the woman" of v14, the subject of "but she will be save...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi This is not a popularity contest. If none of the commentaries identify the option that Eve is symbolic of a specific woman teaching false doctrine and "the w

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You did no such thing. Paul explains

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You did no such thing. Paul explains why Timothy is being left behind in Ephesus and this sets the purpose for his letter. Have you not seen my response to

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Well, I agree with that statement. Ho

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Well, I agree with that statement. How is it a “fact” that Paul’s switching from pl to sg and back is stylistic? Why do you presume your interpretation that

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Now that we are confirming we are back on earth where people study Greek and English syntax and can read in context as authors use syntax to communicate what they want, I believe that the interpretation that...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Now that we are confirming we are back on earth where people study Greek and English syntax and can read in context as authors use syntax to communicate what

commentary

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Men does not equal man, but if it did, my point would stand from another angle. Because then the definite man would necessitate the definite woman (in v11-12). Paul wants strange doctrines to not be taught ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Men does not equal man, but if it did, my point would stand from another angle. Because then the definite man would necessitate the definite woman (in v11-12

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You have the anaphoric use of “the woman” and the anaphoric use of “she”. So you have no problem with the anaphoric showing up here. But you refuse to acknowledge one specific anaphoric use as it means Pau...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You have the anaphoric use of “the woman” and the anaphoric use of “she”. So you have no problem with the anaphoric showing up here. But you refuse to ackn

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Style is not a good Biblical answer. Details matter in inspired scripture. And your response leaves us with Paul telling all women not to teach men and supports two anaphoric references but not the correct o...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Style is not a good Biblical answer. Details matter in inspired scripture. And your response leaves us with Paul telling all women not to teach men and suppo

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You are just assuming your point. But the grammar doesn’t match. In v8, it is “the” men (definite). The article comes first which means it is not anaphoric. Then in v12 it is “man” singular. We could assum...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You are just assuming your point. But the grammar doesn’t match. In v8, it is “the” men (definite). The article comes first which means it is not anaphoric.

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi A ludicrous ignorance of grammar and semantics? Seriously? Both options are possible but then you have she as anaphoric pointing back to v11-12 and not the nearest which is the woman. You are trying so hard...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi A ludicrous ignorance of grammar and semantics? Seriously? Both options are possible but then you have she as anaphoric pointing back to v11-12 and not the n

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge I'm not arguing that it was common. But as Luther n

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge I'm not arguing that it was common. But as Luther noted, the historical church has got things wrong at times⎯sometimes seriously wrong. This is one of them.

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Ron, I think this is just confusing. The best way to make everything fit together is to understand a specific woman teaching heresy and Paul linking the situation between this woman and her husband to the f...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Ron, I think this is just confusing. The best way to make everything fit together is to understand a specific woman teaching heresy and Paul linking the sit

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You failed to incorporate the context

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi You failed to incorporate the context where Paul leaves Timothy to instruct *certain* people to not teach *strange* doctrines—you flipped his purpose to stop

commentary

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi I don’t think you can just label Paul’s switching from pl to sg and then sg back to pl as stylistic—though I agree that you have to say this or your view falls apart. But that would mean Paul is not being i...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi I don’t think you can just label Paul’s switching from pl to sg and then sg back to pl as stylistic—though I agree that you have to say this or your view fal

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi And on what planet does that sound totally straightforward? Your supposedly straightforward reading has Paul conflating plural and singular twice and has Eve’s consequences ongoing after her death. That’s n...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi And on what planet does that sound totally straightforward? Your supposedly straightforward reading has Paul conflating plural and singular twice and has Ev

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi And where does the Bible ever confirm

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi And where does the Bible ever confirm that it is proper to use singular and plural together to mean the same thing in the same sentence? 🤔 What confusion.

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi IF Paul intended the singular and plu

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi IF Paul intended the singular and plural to mean the same thing (all Christian women) which you seem to be fighting for, then why would Paul change to a sing

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi v9-10 are not only plural, but they m

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi v9-10 are not only plural, but they match the plural in v8. If v11-12 mean Christian women (plural) then why would Paul change to singular? And why does P