Search — Theology Explorer

@JohnHar63885981 @DickSaban1 Paul starts out "Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task" not "males that aspire" but "whoever" which is the word τις You cannot take a statement about monogamy and then apply "must be male" as Paul says "...

@JohnHar63885981 @DickSaban1 Paul starts out "Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task" not "males that aspire" but "whoever" which is the word τις You cannot take a statement about mon

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I posted it because you keep referring to it so we might as well allow people to decide for themselves. Whether its beautiful or accurate exegesis, you will have to decide for yourself. I respond to his exeges...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I posted it because you keep referring to it so we might as well allow people to decide for themselves. Whether its beautiful or accurate exegesis, you will hav

1 Cor 14:34-36 debate

@PubliusJosephus @DickSaban1 If the requirement "one wife husband" is the same for both elders and deacons and females can be deacons, then on that basis there is no restriction females cannot be elders. Leadership leads to Christ and His Word; it i...

@PubliusJosephus @DickSaban1 If the requirement "one wife husband" is the same for both elders and deacons and females can be deacons, then on that basis there is no restriction females cannot be elde

1 Tim 3:1-13 Titus 1:5-9 general

1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9 ⎯ Character qualifications for leadership; Paul doesn'

1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9 ⎯ Character qualifications for leadership; Paul doesn't forbid the single, the childless or women https://t.co/SMUaKrLevt

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Here’s my exegesis of 1 Cor 14:34-36 http

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Here’s my exegesis of 1 Cor 14:34-36 https://t.co/WHlrSQvbxX

1 Cor 14:34-36 general

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I’ve already gone through 1 Tim 3 but her

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I’ve already gone through 1 Tim 3 but here’s a summary. https://t.co/PxqmZAHG7J

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Fallacy #1: appeal to authority https://t

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Fallacy #1: appeal to authority https://t.co/Er42JjzD1M Fallacy #2: argumentum ad populum https://t.co/U4th8NmokL Fallacy #3: ad hominem https://t.co/mlOGSE5Q6

@JohnHar63885981 @trentonpastor I don’t believe it is a contradiction to the int

@JohnHar63885981 @trentonpastor I don’t believe it is a contradiction to the intent of what Paul meant in these passages. https://t.co/EBzpnqIOus

After explaining 1 Tim 3 many times and whether it restricts the role to males o

After explaining 1 Tim 3 many times and whether it restricts the role to males only, I have summarized the points succinctly in the following. https://t.co/EBzpnqIOus

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Jesus washed Judas' feet at the last supper...Paul called himself "a bondservant of Christ." We are all servants. The context has to be used to determine whether the person is a leader or not. It is leaders t...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Jesus washed Judas' feet at the last supper...Paul called himself "a bondservant of Christ." We are all servants. The context has to be used to determine wheth

commentary

@BarberraBarker @choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe someone can call them and ask why they haven’t updated based on the canceled order from July 14. Maybe they aren’t required to remove restrictions but just aren’t required to i...

@BarberraBarker @choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe someone can call them and ask why they haven’t updated based on the canceled order from July 14. Maybe they aren’t required to

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I’m agreeing with scripture but disagreei

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I’m agreeing with scripture but disagreeing with interpretation. I am not questioning God’s revelation but the men who claim to be the sole determiners of the m

@nsraban Interesting because I believe 1 Cor 14:34-35 is a quote from the letter

@nsraban Interesting because I believe 1 Cor 14:34-35 is a quote from the letter from the Corinthians and Paul is refuting it. Paul is advocating for women to have equal rights to speak.

1 Cor 14:34-35 general

@nsraban Actually, it seems 1 Cor 14:34-35 says all women are to keep silent because their speaking is shameful. Those who are married can ask their husbands at home. It totally goes against Paul’s instructions that all can prophesy and all can lea...

@nsraban Actually, it seems 1 Cor 14:34-35 says all women are to keep silent because their speaking is shameful. Those who are married can ask their husbands at home. It totally goes against Paul’s

1 Cor 14:34-35 general

@msmithpg @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Yes, you are quite right, I

@msmithpg @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Yes, you are quite right, I’m afraid. Sigh…

Num 30:13 Gen 3:16 debate

@nsraban @CovenantReform2 @smashbaals Yes, Nice find. But Num 30:13 isn’t a law silencing women in the assembly but confirming whether her vow which she speaks is in force and binding. Kind of different. Gen 3:16 is a prophecy to the woman about w...

@nsraban @CovenantReform2 @smashbaals Yes, Nice find. But Num 30:13 isn’t a law silencing women in the assembly but confirming whether her vow which she speaks is in force and binding. Kind of diffe

@godlywomanhood Haven’t you noticed all the men who teach error too? It’s not j

@godlywomanhood Haven’t you noticed all the men who teach error too? It’s not just one gender. Take another look. https://t.co/WHlrSQvbxX

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek “One wife husband” is written in the male form and the default would be to follow the male form but it doesn’t require “must be male” or “must not be female” just like elders are not required to be married and h...

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek “One wife husband” is written in the male form and the default would be to follow the male form but it doesn’t require “must be male” or “must not be female” jus

1 Tim 3:2 1 Tim 5:9 Tit 1:6 debate

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Both forms are used so I summarized as “faithful to one’s spouse”. 1 Tim 3:2,12; Tit 1:6 is the husband form and 1 Tim 5:9 the wife form. The “he’s” are following the default but the male pronoun isn’t there. ...

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Both forms are used so I summarized as “faithful to one’s spouse”. 1 Tim 3:2,12; Tit 1:6 is the husband form and 1 Tim 5:9 the wife form. The “he’s” are follow

@Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Bonnie has canceled the order to dete

@Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Bonnie has canceled the order to determine vax status. Doesn’t that mean they cannot require you to disclose your status and therefore no longer discriminat

@outcatching @TomBuck The apostles were selected before the church began and they are unique as there are only 12 and they must have been with Jesus. Paul is certainly unique in that his claim to being with Jesus was after His resurrection. Most el...

@outcatching @TomBuck The apostles were selected before the church began and they are unique as there are only 12 and they must have been with Jesus. Paul is certainly unique in that his claim to bei

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck No doubt you are correct there are disparities all over. But the woman is the very flesh and bone of the man and equal to him. This is not about envy or death. I have no idea how you get this characterization ...

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck No doubt you are correct there are disparities all over. But the woman is the very flesh and bone of the man and equal to him. This is not about envy or death.

@outcatching @TomBuck Firstly, all believers are priests already. You are right to think that leadership requires mature examples, but 1 Tim 3:2 says literally “one wife husband” which doesn’t mean married (Paul isn’t married) but faithful if marrie...

@outcatching @TomBuck Firstly, all believers are priests already. You are right to think that leadership requires mature examples, but 1 Tim 3:2 says literally “one wife husband” which doesn’t mean m

1 Tim 3:2 debate

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck I agreed with you about the law. You shou

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck I agreed with you about the law. You should not let your mind blow so quickly…it can become messy.

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck What, you can’t read Gen 3:16 either? Why don’t you answer my questions then? Why didn’t God tell Adam he should rule the woman? Why were his words to Eve future not present? I don’t advocate for women forcin...

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck What, you can’t read Gen 3:16 either? Why don’t you answer my questions then? Why didn’t God tell Adam he should rule the woman? Why were his words to Eve futu

Gen 3:16 debate

@ChristChurchTe1 @uncledando @TomBuck Notice it’s the same as masters ruling sla

@ChristChurchTe1 @uncledando @TomBuck Notice it’s the same as masters ruling slaves. Notice it’s future tense. If God wanted the man to to rule and it wasn’t a prophecy of what will happen why doesn

@BogdanOancea77 Again, I don't believe Paul is constrained ONLY to answer questions. He is correcting their misunderstandings and statements. I don't see "your women" in v34, but "the women" (nominative, not genitive as I think would be used for "y...

@BogdanOancea77 Again, I don't believe Paul is constrained ONLY to answer questions. He is correcting their misunderstandings and statements. I don't see "your women" in v34, but "the women" (nomina

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Paul seems to be picking out statements they make and is not answering questions most of the time. The word in 7:1 is "matters" not "questions". The quote in 7:1 is "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations wit...

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Paul seems to be picking out statements they make and is not answering questions most of the time. The word in 7:1 is "matters" not "questions". The quote in 7:1 is "It

in 7:1 general

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf The ἢ in v36 is followed by two rhetorical questions which are obviously not true. Verses 34-35 don't contain a question (Paul is often just commenting on things they wrote), but they say things that contradict other th...

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf The ἢ in v36 is followed by two rhetorical questions which are obviously not true. Verses 34-35 don't contain a question (Paul is often just commenting on things they wr

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck I’m simply looking at the text and taking it for what it is: a prophecy from God to the woman about what will happen as a consequence of the fall. If you understand head as “source” or “origin” the church origin...

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck I’m simply looking at the text and taking it for what it is: a prophecy from God to the woman about what will happen as a consequence of the fall. If you underst

@ChristChurchTe1 @uncledando @TomBuck Consequence of the fall. Not God’s origin

@ChristChurchTe1 @uncledando @TomBuck Consequence of the fall. Not God’s original design.

@TetzlaffJoshua @jhillky2 @NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt What if Paul is quoting from the letter from the Corinthians (which he did frequently in 1 Corinthians (he indicates this in 1 Cor 7:1)? What if this is not a law of God but one that contrad...

@TetzlaffJoshua @jhillky2 @NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt What if Paul is quoting from the letter from the Corinthians (which he did frequently in 1 Corinthians (he indicates this in 1 Cor 7:1)? Wha

1 Cor 7:1 debate

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Hans may have a different viewpoint, but I would think there was some disagreement. There's a quote something like this: "You put three Jews in a room you get four opinions." At any rate, Paul refers to Judiazers that ...

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Hans may have a different viewpoint, but I would think there was some disagreement. There's a quote something like this: "You put three Jews in a room you get four opini

@reformedrandy @thatssocheeky @lagracelaverite Take another look. Here's a cons

@reformedrandy @thatssocheeky @lagracelaverite Take another look. Here's a consistent Biblically faithful egalitarian interpretation of 1 Cor 14:34-35. Paul is quoting from the Corinthian letter and

1 Cor 14:34-35 general

@drbrudd It appears from what I've read of your views that you believe that 1 Co

@drbrudd It appears from what I've read of your views that you believe that 1 Cor 14:34-35 was not in the original text. I disagree and believe that the text makes much more sense if Paul is quoting

1 Cor 14:34-35 debate

@Hansronsdorf @BogdanOancea77 The problem with this view is that vv34-35 are in every manuscript. They also fit well before verse 36 which uses the disjunctive “what?” And asks rhetorical questions to show that those who wrote the things in vv34-35 ...

@Hansronsdorf @BogdanOancea77 The problem with this view is that vv34-35 are in every manuscript. They also fit well before verse 36 which uses the disjunctive “what?” And asks rhetorical questions t

@nicole_keir @William_E_Wolfe The problem with this view is that vv34-35 are in every manuscript. They also fit well before verse 36 which uses the disjunctive “what?” And asks rhetorical questions to show that those who wrote the things in vv34-35 ...

@nicole_keir @William_E_Wolfe The problem with this view is that vv34-35 are in every manuscript. They also fit well before verse 36 which uses the disjunctive “what?” And asks rhetorical questions t

@Wbtesq @William_E_Wolfe Just because some misuse, take texts out of context and

@Wbtesq @William_E_Wolfe Just because some misuse, take texts out of context and misinterpret the Bible, it doesn’t follow that it is useless. In that case pretty much everything would be useless. T

A free Bible study tool has been made available through the work of Bob Crow, Je

A free Bible study tool has been made available through the work of Bob Crow, Jeevan Nair and Grace Ministries. It provides a clear translation and non dogmatic notes that help any reader to think th

@William_E_Wolfe This all seems to hinge on what this law is and where it comes

@William_E_Wolfe This all seems to hinge on what this law is and where it comes from. There is no such law in scripture that prohibits women from speaking (or judging) in the assembly. https://t.co/W

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-08-03

@DanBerkholder Maybe he had in mind protesting a drag queen event by reading the

@DanBerkholder Maybe he had in mind protesting a drag queen event by reading the book of Galatians over a loud speaker? I can get behind this. https://t.co/vPoGvHQPJe

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-08-02

@Schweinzig @HwsEleutheroi I realize we disagree…but even most complementarians

@Schweinzig @HwsEleutheroi I realize we disagree…but even most complementarians wont say that women are not able to lead. Most think it’s just what God requires (which I would contend with). There a

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-07-31

@richjmatt26 @MikeWingerii Debating a position is different from insisting or forcing your rights. I can debate the truthfulness of the egalitarian position but I don’t believe we should force that equal right on our churches. It should come by con...

@richjmatt26 @MikeWingerii Debating a position is different from insisting or forcing your rights. I can debate the truthfulness of the egalitarian position but I don’t believe we should force that e

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-07-31

@bebookled @canonpress Please explain why we should listen to you, a woman? (ps

@bebookled @canonpress Please explain why we should listen to you, a woman? (ps: I’m egalitarian myself…I just wonder how you can justify your critique and commentary against other women who give com

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-07-27

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii No, that’s not quite right. It says wom

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii No, that’s not quite right. It says women cannot speak as its shameful, base, lewd. That would include all women. But the other comment is that the married o

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-07-27

@n5iln @KristanHawkins Except Paul was refuting that statement from the Corinthi

@n5iln @KristanHawkins Except Paul was refuting that statement from the Corinthians’ letter to him. https://t.co/WHlrSQvbxX

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii That some quotes aren’t introduced means that it is possible. Therefore, we need to read in context to determine whether or not this is a quote. Paul says to eagerly desire to prophesy, not that everyone will...

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii That some quotes aren’t introduced means that it is possible. Therefore, we need to read in context to determine whether or not this is a quote. Paul says to

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii What stands is Paul’s statements in the beginning of chapter 14 up to verses 34-35 and Paul’s questions in verse 36 that contradict verses 34 & 35. My sources were the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Test...

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii What stands is Paul’s statements in the beginning of chapter 14 up to verses 34-35 and Paul’s questions in verse 36 that contradict verses 34 & 35. My sour

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii Ah, thanks. I learned a new term today. “A fortiori = with greater reason or more convincing force.” You are right—I’m not saying Paul is using “nomos” for rabbinical traditions but that he is quoting from t...

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii Ah, thanks. I learned a new term today. “A fortiori = with greater reason or more convincing force.” You are right—I’m not saying Paul is using “nomos” for r