Search — Theology Explorer

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Further, you said “a woman “ means women in general but why does Paul shift from the plural in the prior verses to the singular if he intends the plural for both? Can you find another place in Scripture wh...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Further, you said “a woman “ means women in general but why does Paul shift from the plural in the prior verses to the singular if he intends the plural for

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Again, you are missing the argument—a woman from 11-12 could be generic or specific and which it is depends on the context. It is because of the article in v14 that we know 11-12 refers to a specific woman. ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Again, you are missing the argument—a woman from 11-12 could be generic or specific and which it is depends on the context. It is because of the article in v

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi I agree with your comment that the anaphoric reference is semantic and in this case could refer to either Eve in v13 or ‘a woman’ in v11-12 depending on the context. In this case, Paul is tying the specific...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi I agree with your comment that the anaphoric reference is semantic and in this case could refer to either Eve in v13 or ‘a woman’ in v11-12 depending on the

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge How do you know it didn’t exist for the first 1900 years? I go back to the apostles and I believe that women were leaders in the apostolic churches because of the Biblical text. That said, there were churches far longer t...

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge How do you know it didn’t exist for the first 1900 years? I go back to the apostles and I believe that women were leaders in the apostolic churches because of the Biblical

@cjhormes @rightresponsem Doesn’t Trump support female pastors? Also, heresy isn’t just disagreeing on debatable matters but on the primary things that unify all Christians like the nature of God, the gospel, the physical resurrection, the deity of ...

@cjhormes @rightresponsem Doesn’t Trump support female pastors? Also, heresy isn’t just disagreeing on debatable matters but on the primary things that unify all Christians like the nature of God, th

@rightresponsem What about Christians who support female pastors? Would you allo

@rightresponsem What about Christians who support female pastors? Would you allow them to be sworn in to office?

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-22

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge Are you suggesting I haven’t read my Bible or that

@evaanderberg @dalepartridge Are you suggesting I haven’t read my Bible or that I hate Jesus? Neither are true.

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-22

@dalepartridge I agree with you. And so women who are leaders and teachers and p

@dalepartridge I agree with you. And so women who are leaders and teachers and pastors shouldn’t be relegated to just children or women but be able to minister to the entire body! You made a great arg

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-21

@dianahenryart If she was sinless, then why did she need a saviour? “And my spir

@dianahenryart If she was sinless, then why did she need a saviour? “And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior” (Lk 1:47). If they were chaste, then how did they have other children? We’ve been re

Lk 1:47 question

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-20

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Umm… how are they to love their husband if they d

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Umm… how are they to love their husband if they don’t have a husband? Genuinely curious…

Scripture Commentary tweet 2025-02-20

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Where are you getting that Paul was a widower? W

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Where are you getting that Paul was a widower? What do you mean “God literally makes more men”? Does He not also make more women? 🤔 Paul’s comments about remaining sin

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 If 1Co 7:2 means that all should be married, then why wasn’t Paul married and why did he desire that they be like him, single? It would seem that if you are fornicating it would be better to marry than sin—this is the p...

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 If 1Co 7:2 means that all should be married, then why wasn’t Paul married and why did he desire that they be like him, single? It would seem that if you are fornicating

1Co 7:2 commentary

1Co 14:35 1Co 7:1 question

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 So you think that 1Co 14:35 instructs women to marry so that they can get their questions answered? So no other woman can answer their questions? Of course, Paul is quoting from the letter the Corinthians wrote (1Co 7...

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 So you think that 1Co 14:35 instructs women to marry so that they can get their questions answered? So no other woman can answer their questions? Of course, Paul is qu

1Co 7:32-35 2Ti 2:4 general

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 As for 2Ti 2:4, Paul’s admonition that a soldier

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 As for 2Ti 2:4, Paul’s admonition that a soldier remain completely focused and unentangled with the affairs of this life is precisely the argument he makes for remaining

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Because you missed Paul’s purpose Im the letter which was for Timothy to “instruct certain people not to teach strange doctrines” (1Ti 1:3). Here you have a certain person, ‘the woman’ (1Ti 2:14), whom Paul wants to s...

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 Because you missed Paul’s purpose Im the letter which was for Timothy to “instruct *certain people* not to teach strange doctrines” (1Ti 1:3). Here you have a certain pe

1Ti 1:3 1Ti 2:14 general

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Paul is not being stylistic—we simply need to go back to his clear statement in 1Ti 1:3 that he is instructing Timothy to stop “certain people” to stop teaching strange doctrines—and here you have a certain ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Paul is not being stylistic—we simply need to go back to his clear statement in 1Ti 1:3 that he is instructing Timothy to stop “certain people” to stop teach

1Ti 1:3 commentary

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Except if Paul wanted to refer to a specific woman from Ephesus Im vv11-12 how else might he do it? In making a contrast between the plural to the singular, Paul is moving from general to narrow which the de...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi Except if Paul wanted to refer to a specific woman from Ephesus Im vv11-12 how else might he do it? In making a contrast between the plural to the singular,

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi The first use of woman is NOT definite. Where are you getting that from? Paul is first referring to women plural and then shifts to the singular in v11-12 which is the first singular anarthrous reference. ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir @HwsEleutheroi The first use of woman is *NOT* definite. Where are you getting that from? Paul is first referring to women plural and then shifts to the singular in v11-12

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 I have an agenda? And you are just neutral? lol.

@covapologetics @MissionaryJC3 I have an agenda? And you are just neutral? lol. The only place Paul says for a woman to marry is if she is a widow and young or in the case of either gender can’t cont

@WonderingBashir @ronhenzel Well let’s see—how would you like it if you were tol

@WonderingBashir @ronhenzel Well let’s see—how would you like it if you were told to be silent for your whole life and you had a gift and calling to teach or pastor?

@ronhenzel @carol66944 @BibleU777 Well now, the only place authority (exousaizo)

@ronhenzel @carol66944 @BibleU777 Well now, the only place authority (exousaizo) is mentioned and it’s *mutual*? Did you miss that? Where is the husband said to authentein anyone let alone his wife?

@ronhenzel @Pastor_Gabe You commented and I thought I’d comment—which I’m comple

@ronhenzel @Pastor_Gabe You commented and I thought I’d comment—which I’m completely free to do. Now I feel you are deliberately wasting my time…again, curious.

@ronhenzel @Pastor_Gabe You are completely free to do whatever you wish, Ron.

@ronhenzel @Pastor_Gabe I agree about the bots. But I’m not sure how you assess

@ronhenzel @Pastor_Gabe I agree about the bots. But I’m not sure how you assess a ‘deliberate waste of time’ since it’s up to you what to respond to/read and there is a mute button for this purpose.

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir Oh hi, Ron! Why didn't Paul just say women (plural)? Rather, he says "a woman...a woman...she...the woman...she"⎯the reference is specific, aligned with the purpose of the letter to stop the teaching of strange doctrines ...

@ronhenzel @WonderingBashir Oh hi, Ron! Why didn't Paul just say women (plural)? Rather, he says "a woman...a woman...she...the woman...she"⎯the reference is specific, aligned with the purpose of the

@Ryan_Adair_A Yes, I agree this is referring to the seed of the woman, or the messiah. The advantage to the interpretation I shared with you is that it aligns with the purpose of the letter⎯to stop teaching of strange doctrines, and makes sense of w...

@Ryan_Adair_A Yes, I agree this is referring to the seed of the woman, or the messiah. The advantage to the interpretation I shared with you is that it aligns with the purpose of the letter⎯to stop t

@JRowley11 @MissionaryJC3 First, there was no ‘church’ yet though there was syna

@JRowley11 @MissionaryJC3 First, there was no ‘church’ yet though there was synagogue and yes Jesus went to synagogue.

@wandering_prot @jathanasius1 Disgusting? Let me guess—your church is the only t

@wandering_prot @jathanasius1 Disgusting? Let me guess—your church is the only true church, right?

@Ryan_Adair_A What if Eve was representative of a specific deceived wife teachin

@Ryan_Adair_A What if Eve was representative of a specific deceived wife teaching heresy in Ephesus whose undeceived husband is silent and doing nothing—just like in Gen 3 in Eden?

@Ryan_Adair_A That’s close, except it cannot be Eve as Paul’s grammar has “will

@Ryan_Adair_A That’s close, except it cannot be Eve as Paul’s grammar has “will be saved” in the present tense at the time of writing and Eve can’t do anything to be saved in the future as she is dead

@KebRayGonzalez Yet Paul seems to desire singleness to be the norm and marriage

@KebRayGonzalez Yet Paul seems to desire singleness to be the norm and marriage the exception. “Yet I wish that *all men* were even as I myself am. However, each has his own gift from God, one in thi

1Co 7:7 debate

@that_foot_is_me That’s a good passage to keep in mind regarding those that twis

@that_foot_is_me That’s a good passage to keep in mind regarding those that twist Paul’s words.

@RobChristisKing @AsherJacob23060 @smashbaals You can't be cut off unless you are already attached to the vine, so their tribes cannot be cut off unless they were already included. Is that what you believe, that the Jews and Gentiles were already in ...

@RobChristisKing @AsherJacob23060 @smashbaals You can't be cut off unless you are already attached to the vine, so their tribes cannot be cut off unless they were already included. Is that what you be

@Crystalisives @rightresponsem Yeah, it's always a bit shocking to hear people a

@Crystalisives @rightresponsem Yeah, it's always a bit shocking to hear people actually say this. I think it would have been much better to just say "I have no idea what this passage means" than to sa

@ShamarYall @rightresponsem Except Joel is most certainly wrong on this, albeit he is consistent in his view. And yes, 1Ti 2:15 is there and yes, we have to explain it. Yet remaining single is what Paul advocates for in 1Co 7, so Joel's interpretatio...

@ShamarYall @rightresponsem Except Joel is most certainly wrong on this, albeit he is consistent in his view. And yes, 1Ti 2:15 is there and yes, we have to explain it. Yet remaining single is what Pa

1Ti 2:15 debate

@MissionaryJC3 God didn't command marriage or else Paul's advocating for singlen

@MissionaryJC3 God didn't command marriage or else Paul's advocating for singleness in 1Cor 7 is a sin.

@BronWen727104 Could be. Though in 1Ti 1 where Paul introduces the strange doctrines, he refers to myths and genealogies and fruitless discussions about the law. I’m not sure what that has to do with Artemis. 1Ti 2:9 refers to elaborate hair—likely a...

@BronWen727104 Could be. Though in 1Ti 1 where Paul introduces the strange doctrines, he refers to myths and genealogies and fruitless discussions about the law. I’m not sure what that has to do with

1Ti 2:9 commentary

@BronWen727104 I actually don’t think a reference to Artemis is needed as Paul didn’t make an explicit connection. The childbearing is a definite noun and refers to the messiah. She will be saved if they <do things> refers to the deceived wife ...

@BronWen727104 I actually don’t think a reference to Artemis is needed as Paul didn’t make an explicit connection. The childbearing is a definite noun and refers to the messiah. She will be saved if t

Joel says it is wicked to say he teaches that women must bear children or they are not saved. What he meant was that if you are a woman who desires to be single and not be a mother, with no signs of repentance, you are assuredly reprobate. Sounds p...

Joel says it is wicked to say he teaches that women must bear children or they are not saved. What he meant was that if you are a woman who desires to be single and not be a mother, with no signs of

@Valerie181225 @Balduc13679 The believers used the Old Testament as their Bible

@Valerie181225 @Balduc13679 The believers used the Old Testament as their Bible and the testimony and teachings of the apostles which were oral for several decades until they started writing them down

@pauldirks If he is able to conquer the desires of the flesh (which seems reason

@pauldirks If he is able to conquer the desires of the flesh (which seems reasonable from your comment) but doesn’t believe in Jesus, then what?

@RobChristisKing @smashbaals Fourth, this is the same pattern we see in Ro 11: “They were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear… otherwise you too will be cut off” (Ro 11:20-22). Both passages teac...

@RobChristisKing @smashbaals Fourth, this is the same pattern we see in Ro 11: “They were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear… otherwise you too w

Ro 11:20-22 debate

RT @ryanschatz: @RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Is Ro 11:20-22 referring t

RT @ryanschatz: @RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Is Ro 11:20-22 referring to nations and not individual Gentiles and Jews? The Greek g…

Ro 11:20-22 question

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals So yes, Ro 11:20-22 clearly teaches that a

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals So yes, Ro 11:20-22 clearly teaches that an individual Gentile can be cut off due to unbelief—just like individual Jews were. Continuing in faith is essential.

Ro 11:20-22 debate

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals In conclusion, Paul is not just warning ab

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals In conclusion, Paul is not just warning about Gentile nations. The Greek grammar, singular pronouns, and the direct contrast with individual Jews show he is warni

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Fourth, Paul says “if (ἐὰν, ean) you conti

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Fourth, Paul says “if (ἐὰν, ean) you continue in His kindness.” This conditional clause shows that remaining in faith is required. The phrase “otherwise you too

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals If this passage only referred to nations,

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals If this passage only referred to nations, it would imply nations are saved or lost collectively. But salvation is *always* individual in Paul’s theology: “If you

Ro 10:9 debate

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Third, Paul warns Gentiles in the same way

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Third, Paul warns Gentiles in the same way Jews were warned: Jews were “broken off” as individuals for personal unbelief (v20). Gentiles can likewise be “cut of

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Paul maintains this singular focus through

@RobChristisKing @thatdna @smashbaals Paul maintains this singular focus throughout Ro 11:20-22: “They were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but fear” (v.20)

Ro 11:20-22 debate