Personal life and Jesus

The Most Important Person

Only One Son

The futurist interpretation requires a rebuilt temple in Israel, a seven-year covenant halted at midpoint, and a specific person who demands worship — all still future events. Winger holds this view while acknowledging it is an in-house Christian discussion and not a salvation issue.

Winger's own futurist position and how it integrates the Daniel/Paul/Revelation data

When the high priest asks if Jesus is "the Christ, the Son of the Blessed," Jesus responds "I am" and quotes two Old Testament passages: Daniel 7:13-14 (the Son of Man receiving all dominion) and Psalm 110:1 (sitting at the right hand of God). Both are deity-laden claims — riding the clouds is a divine prerogative in the OT (Psalm 68:4; Deut. 33:26), and the Son of Man receives eternal worship from all nations.

The high Christology embedded in Jesus's self-disclosure at his trial

Isaiah's four Servant Songs (Isa 42, 49, 50, 53) form a unified prophetic arc pointing to Jesus. Isaiah 50:6 — "I gave my back to those who strike me, my cheeks to those who pluck out the beard; I did not cover my face from humiliation and spitting" — is fulfilled in the mocking scene at Jesus's trial, showing the OT and NT are deeply integrated, not incidentally connected.

Isaiah's Servant Songs as OT prophecy fulfilled in Jesus's suffering

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

Deuteronomy 21:22-23 required that anyone executed by hanging be buried the same day so as not to defile the land. According to Dr. Craig Evans, the Sanhedrin was specifically tasked with ensuring proper burial of executed persons in Jerusalem to maintain ritual purity — meaning even the enemies of Jesus had religious motivation to bury him promptly.

Jewish law and Sanhedrin practice as evidence for burial; Deut. 21:22-23 and the purity argument

Philo's "Against Flaccus" (§83) records a Roman governor in Egypt allowing crucified persons to be taken down and given to relatives for burial during a festival — showing there were documented exceptions to any general policy of leaving bodies on crosses, and that burial was sometimes permitted on special occasions across the Roman world.

Philo's "Flaccus" as evidence of Roman burial exceptions for crucified persons

A note left on Winger's car in response to his "Former Embryo on Board" bumper sticker argued that abortion is justified when a parent can't provide love, financial support, or a non-abusive home. Winger uses this as a case study in pro-choice reasoning, arguing its logic is genocidal because it ties human value to external conditions rather than inherent worth.

The bumper sticker note as a test case for examining pro-choice reasoning

Winger shares from his own childhood: an absent/indifferent father, an abusive stepfather, and poverty — all three conditions the note-writer listed as grounds for abortion. His life was redeemed and transformed through Christ. He argues the pro-choice logic, applied to him, would have called for his death, yet God demonstrated that suffering circumstances do not determine a life's value or potential.

Personal testimony used to refute the claim that bad circumstances justify abortion

The note-writer describes death as a tragedy but then proposes death as the solution to potential suffering. This self-contradiction reveals the deeper issue: pro-choice reasoning treats the baby as "not yet in the world" because they haven't crossed the threshold of the womb — a distinction without moral significance, since the baby exists and has biological life inside the womb.

Internal contradiction in the note: death as both tragedy and solution; the "not yet in the world" fallacy

Winger explains the reason for his extensive long-COVID delay in completing the Women in Ministry series: the number of complex texts and exegetical issues in 1 Timothy 2 is genuinely large, and he refuses to produce a rushed or shallow treatment of a topic that will have real impact on people's lives and churches. This reflects his broader ministry philosophy of thoroughness over speed.

Long-COVID illness and the delay in completing Women in Ministry series; commitment to thoroughness

Hebrews 1:1-2 opens with a declaration of continuity: the same God who spoke through the prophets in many times and ways now speaks through his Son. This compacted theology establishes Jesus as the culmination and continuation of God's revelation — not a replacement or contradiction of it.

Hebrews 1:1-2: the continuity of divine revelation from OT prophets to the Son

The Transfiguration (Matt. 17 / Mark 9 / Luke 9) visually enacts Hebrews 1:1-2: Moses and Elijah appear representing the Law and the Prophets, but God's voice from heaven says "This is my Son — hear him." The old revelation is present and honored, but the new word is through Jesus. This is "Hebrews 1 in living illustration."

The Transfiguration as a visual fulfillment of Hebrews 1:1-2's funnel from prophecy to Son

If the Old Testament is not reliably true, then Jesus — who consistently affirmed, quoted, and grounded his teaching in the OT — cannot be trusted either. Hebrews 1 frames the same God speaking through both prophets and Son; you cannot "unhitch" from the OT without also unhitching from the Jesus who is the culmination of it.

Why abandoning OT trustworthiness undermines confidence in Jesus himself

The literary alliteration of Hebrews 1:1 in Greek (poly-meros, poly-tropos, patrasin, prophetais — all P-sounds) signals this is high-level, carefully crafted Greek prose. God speaking "in many times and many ways" through the prophets contrasts with the singular, final word through the Son — a deliberate narrowing funnel from diverse OT revelation to the one person of Jesus.

Greek alliteration in Hebrews 1:1; the "many-to-one" funnel structure of divine revelation

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

The maximal data argument for the resurrection has two steps: (1) establish that the gospel and Acts accounts represent genuine eyewitness testimony, then (2) evaluate what best explains the content of those claims. The apostles voluntarily suffered imprisonment, persecution, and death for their testimony — making the conspiracy/lying hypothesis highly implausible (William Paley, 1794).

The maximal data argument: apostolic suffering establishes sincerity; conspiracy hypothesis fails

Miller experienced the hostility firsthand: prank calls from PhD colleagues, a Marxist professor placing a "delusional" note in his file, and having his dissertation sabotaged for having "too much of a faith perspective." It is now routinely understood in PhD programs that Christians hide their faith until they receive their degree — a level of suppression that atheists and Marxists never face.

Personal testimony of anti-Christian hostility in secular PhD programs; Christians hide faith to survive

Women in Ministry - Prof Craig Keener

Paul's letters stand at the centre of the dispute over women's role in church ministry, with each side of the dispute championing texts from the Apostle. How do we understand the text in 1 Corinthians 14 where Paul instructs women to be silent, or the 1 Timothy 2 passage where women are forbidden to teach or exercise authority over men? Are these texts addressing a specific cultural situation or should they be treated as universal prohibitions? Craig Keener delved deeply into the world of Paul and wrestled with these thorny texts in his book [*Paul, Women and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul*](/library/25) (Hendrikson, 1992). In a public lecture at Laidlaw's Henderson campus in September 2019, Professor Keener looked at the arguments for both sides of the question: 'are women allowed to be in ministry?', and the approaches various theologians and church traditions have taken throughout the centuries. He gave insights into the culture at the time Paul wrote his letters, and of the way false teachers were targeting women. He notes the importance of considering the original situation of Paul's letters, and that Paul does affirm women's ministry which helps us to see that Paul himself did not prohibit women from teaching the Bible always.

Peppiatt's Quotation-Refutation Theory on 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

[Lucy Peppiatt](logosres:LLS:9781498201476;ref=bible.1Co14.34-35) (now [Peppiatt Crawley](logosres:LLS:9781498201476;ref=bible.1Co14.34-35)) argues vv. 34-35 are not Paul's words but the Corinthians'

Participatory Worship in 1 Corinthians 14:26 — The Structural Gap Brett Overlooked

Pastor Brett correctly identified the status-seeking motive behind the Corinthians' misuse of gifts but did not address the text's own positive vision: broad participatory worship where multiple membe

"The Others" (hoi alloi) Judging Prophecy — Discernment Belongs to the Whole Body

In **1 Cor 14:29,** Paul says "let two or three prophets speak, and let the others (*hoi alloi*) weigh what is said." A key interpretive question is whether "the others" refers to a small group of pro

Commentary: Eve Quotes God in the Plural — God Spoke to Both

Ardavanis claims Eve "added" the phrase "or touch it" to God's command, implying she garbled what Adam relayed to her. But the Hebrew text reveals something he doesn't address. ### The Singular-to-pl

Commentary: Adam's Responsibility — Knowledge and Omission, Not Leadership Rank

Ardavanis says: > "God holds Adam responsible... this is Adam's failure to lead. His sin was that he passively followed his wife's leadership." He also says: "We read in **Ro 5:12** that sin entered

Commentary: "The Voice of Your Wife" — Eve Never Spoke to Adam

God tells Adam: "Because you listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree..." (**Ge 3:17**). But in the **Ge 3** narrative, Eve never speaks to Adam. She speaks to the serpent (3:1

Commentary: Following a Woman Is Not the Problem — The Bible Commends It Repeatedly

Ardavanis says Adam "passively followed his wife's leadership," framing the act of following a woman as itself the failure. She did go first, and yes, he followed without objecting. But Ardavanis miss

Commentary: "Desire" in Genesis 3:16 — She Will Want Him Despite His Betrayal

Ardavanis says that Eve's "desire" for her husband (**Ge 3:16**) is not romantic desire, and he prefers the parallel in **Ge 4:7** where sin "desires" to master Cain. But there are two problems with t

Commentary: "Counter-Cultural" Is Not a Truth Test — And His View Is Also Cultural

Ardavanis suggests that his complementarian view is counter-cultural, implying that its friction with modern culture validates it. But culture is not how we measure truth. A view being unpopular does

Faulty Summary of Human History — Kings, Priests, Prophets, Authors

At 11:56, he tries to summarize human history by saying that there were all male kings with one exception, all male priests, all male ongoing prophetic offices, all male authors of scripture and so fo

Children's Minister vs. Pastor — The Self-Contradiction

At 13:52, he claims that a pastor is an elder and an elder is a pastor, and says this is why they do not call a children's minister a "children's pastor" — because a pastor is an elder. Words really