Search — Theology Explorer

@DickSaban1 The phrase “one wife husband” repeated for deacons and also in Titus 1 and in 1 Tim 5:9 as “one husband wife” is an idiom for faithful to one’s spouse if married. Paul was not married and advocated for singleness so this cannot mean must...

@DickSaban1 The phrase “one wife husband” repeated for deacons and also in Titus 1 and in 1 Tim 5:9 as “one husband wife” is an idiom for faithful to one’s spouse if married. Paul was not married and

1 Tim 5:9 general

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I don’t reject the plain meaning of scripture but interpret it in context. Thanks for your concern but we disagree on a secondary issue related to women and that’s ok. Your reference to 1 Tim 2:11-12 should be...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek I don’t reject the plain meaning of scripture but interpret it in context. Thanks for your concern but we disagree on a secondary issue related to women and tha

1 Tim 2:11-12 debate

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Hi Glenn, it would appear that Phoebe was already a Deaconness at Cenchreae. Paul appears to be commending her to the church at Rome and describing her as a woman of means who has been a benefactor to many, as ...

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Hi Glenn, it would appear that Phoebe was already a Deaconness at Cenchreae. Paul appears to be commending her to the church at Rome and describing her as a wom

commentary

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Just as the apostle Paul commended the Bereans for not just taking him at his word because he was an apostle but for searching the scriptures to see if what he said was consistent with God’s prior revelation, so...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Just as the apostle Paul commended the Bereans for not just taking him at his word because he was an apostle but for searching the scriptures to see if what he s

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Yes, we are all servants, but not all hold the office of deacon. Same word, whether it’s the office or just service depends on the context. Scripture nowhere contradicts itself. I completely agree. Paul writ...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Yes, we are all servants, but not all hold the office of deacon. Same word, whether it’s the office or just service depends on the context. Scripture nowhere c

@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

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Hi Glen. Paul wasn't a permanent pastor in a congregation. But he is most certainly an overseer. Overseers often oversee multiple congregations, helping with issues and assisting other pastors. It's the same...

@GlennDavies @outcatching @danitreweek Hi Glen. Paul wasn't a permanent pastor in a congregation. But he is most certainly an overseer. Overseers often oversee multiple congregations, helping with

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Jesus says to eat His flesh and drink His blood and no one starts cannibalizing him. Jesus is a gate, a door, etc. I’m literally interpreting Paul’s idiom. It’s not hidden so you cannot see it, but your patri...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Jesus says to eat His flesh and drink His blood and no one starts cannibalizing him. Jesus is a gate, a door, etc. I’m literally interpreting Paul’s idiom. It

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Maybe you can teach me then. What does “

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Maybe you can teach me then. What does “husband of one wife” mean for deacons since the same Paul calls Phoebe a deaconness in Rom 16:1? Did Paul forget that d

Rom 16:1 question

@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

@theojunkiedan You’re looking at a poor schmuck. Right @pauldirks ? 😉

@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…

@Robert_S_Morley @FearlessExpress @autocorrect2_0 Here’s a thread I created on 1 Tim 2:11-15 showing that this passage is dealing with a specific woman and her husband. The woman is deceived so Paul doesn’t name her but it’s a personal letter to Tim...

@Robert_S_Morley @FearlessExpress @autocorrect2_0 Here’s a thread I created on 1 Tim 2:11-15 showing that this passage is dealing with a specific woman and her husband. The woman is deceived so Paul

1 Tim 2:11-15 debate

@godlywomanhood @Karpouzisporo But in context and the specific grammar, Paul is

@godlywomanhood @Karpouzisporo But in context and the specific grammar, Paul is dealing with a specific situation in this personal letter to Timothy. https://t.co/lwAJ5mgNRm

@choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe let them know the emerg

@choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe let them know the emergency is over?

@choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe they didn’t get the mem

@choyMM @Freedom_1961_ @Conservative_BC @pauldirks Maybe they didn’t get the memo?

@samuel_costner @thescottbarber To which Paul responds “What? came the word of G

@samuel_costner @thescottbarber To which Paul responds “What? came the word of God out from you [men]? or came it unto you [men] only?”

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek “[Paul] writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Sc...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek “[Paul] writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant an

2 Peter 3:16 general

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Can Paul who appoints elders not meet the

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Can Paul who appoints elders not meet the same standard? He is single and doesn't have children.

@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

@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 @GlennDavies @danitreweek Again, the apostles are chosen before the church is instituted. Just because men were chosen first doesn’t mean women cannot follow as apostles (though different than the foundational apostles). Just like chur...

@outcatching @GlennDavies @danitreweek Again, the apostles are chosen before the church is instituted. Just because men were chosen first doesn’t mean women cannot follow as apostles (though differen

@Conservative_BC @pauldirks Was the announcement on July 14 a secret? https://t

@Conservative_BC @pauldirks Was the announcement on July 14 a secret? https://t.co/iemTTTTAdh https://t.co/fZc4lVbai4

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck What teachings of Paul, Peter, Moses and J

@uncledando @ChristChurchTe1 @TomBuck What teachings of Paul, Peter, Moses and Jesus do I reject? I claim to reject none. I hold Sarah and Ruth in contempt? On what basis? A HUSBAND who divorces h

@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

1 Cor 7:7-8 1 Corinthians 9:5 debate

@outcatching @TomBuck 1 Corinthians 9:5 (NASB 2020): Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? This is the only reference we have on this but it suggests the ot...

@outcatching @TomBuck 1 Corinthians 9:5 (NASB 2020): Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? This is the onl

@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

@RobertZ60423932 @NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt Plain English? But it’s Greek. Further, it cannot mean “must be married” (Paul himself wasn’t married), and this doesn’t say “must not be a woman”. Given no male pronouns are used in this passage a...

@RobertZ60423932 @NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt Plain English? But it’s Greek. Further, it cannot mean “must be married” (Paul himself wasn’t married), and this doesn’t say “must not be a woman”.

@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

in 14:36 1 Cor 1:13 question

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Oh! We also have the ἢ used in an interrogative i

@BogdanOancea77 @Hansronsdorf Oh! We also have the ἢ used in an interrogative in 1 Cor 1:13 after "Was Paul crucified for you?" So Paul uses the ἢ in a very similar way earlier in the same letter gi

@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

@ekkiet @ChrisHohnholz Ugh...I just spent 20 minutes answering this and the response disappeared! Ok, one more time...going to copy it elsewhere just in case! Ok, you are missing some things here which prove that "the woman" in v14 cannot refer to ...

@ekkiet @ChrisHohnholz Ugh...I just spent 20 minutes answering this and the response disappeared! Ok, one more time...going to copy it elsewhere just in case! Ok, you are missing some things here wh

@AJG797 @TomBuck I understand the importance of Paul's reference to this prototypical couple in this personal letter to Timothy as he writes of a situation which is known to both himself and Timothy. Men are deceived all the time. But why was Adam ...

@AJG797 @TomBuck I understand the importance of Paul's reference to this prototypical couple in this personal letter to Timothy as he writes of a situation which is known to both himself and Timothy.

@ekkiet @ChrisHohnholz That’s correct. The idea being that she is deceived and so Paul is preserving her dignity until Timothy has a chance to deal with her. It’s a personal letter from Paul to Timothy so Timothy would know. This interpretation ma...

@ekkiet @ChrisHohnholz That’s correct. The idea being that she is deceived and so Paul is preserving her dignity until Timothy has a chance to deal with her. It’s a personal letter from Paul to Timo

commentary

@anahnemoo @William_E_Wolfe This is divisive!! Since when is allowing women to preach true doctrine or lead based on God’s gifting a gospel issue?! In some ways it is because of Gal 3:28 and you can be certain women were saved just like men in the ...

@anahnemoo @William_E_Wolfe This is divisive!! Since when is allowing women to preach true doctrine or lead based on God’s gifting a gospel issue?! In some ways it is because of Gal 3:28 and you can

Gal 3:28 debate

@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

@NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt There's a specific woman that Paul is referring

@NiceNeanderthal @Red_Beard_1Sgt There's a specific woman that Paul is referring to. I go through the details in the following thread. https://t.co/LPisirHz38

@RealBrysonGray People are missing what Paul is doing in 1 Cor 14... https://t.c

@RealBrysonGray People are missing what Paul is doing in 1 Cor 14... https://t.co/0UJxaSEb7U

@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

@ChrisHohnholz Except 1 Tim 2:11 says "a woman" not "women" and verse 15 says "she (singular) will be saved through the (definite) childbearing (noun) if they (the wife and husband that Paul was referring to)". One would expect verse 14 to say "but ...

@ChrisHohnholz Except 1 Tim 2:11 says "a woman" not "women" and verse 15 says "she (singular) will be saved through the (definite) childbearing (noun) if they (the wife and husband that Paul was refer

1 Tim 2:11 debate

@rightresponsem @ChrisHohnholz Paul links the order of first creation with deception. Males can clearly be deceived too, so this isn't a comment about gender differences but relates to the specific creation order of Adam and Eve. Because Adam was c...

@rightresponsem @ChrisHohnholz Paul links the order of first creation with deception. Males can clearly be deceived too, so this isn't a comment about gender differences but relates to the specific c

@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

Scripture Commentary tweet 2023-07-27

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii “You really ought to be embarrassed.” Is this really necessary? Thayer’s may have interpretively selected the wrong application here. This isn’t an “A or B” construction though some may think it is. I took ...

@OccamsBraiser @iheartJ37 @MikeWingerii “You really ought to be embarrassed.” Is this really necessary? Thayer’s may have interpretively selected the wrong application here. This isn’t an “A or B”

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