Filter results by source database — Scripture Commentary, Theology, Mike Winger, or Pulpit. Click a tab to narrow to one database.

...more
All (14) Mike Winger (14)
Mike Winger idea 2022-03-07

Groothuis's syllogism: if women's subordination is permanent, comprehensive, and ontologically grounded, then women are inferior persons; women are not inferior; therefore subordination is unjustified.

Mistake #4: Analyzing Groothuis's syllogism

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis Discovering Biblical Equality syllogism
Mike Winger idea 2022-03-07

Mike agrees women are not inferior persons but argues that submissive roles and inferior personhood are not the same thing — children submit to parents, employees to bosses.

Mistake #4: Rebutting Groothuis's syllogism

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis submission vs. inferiority personhood
Mike Winger idea 2022-04-13

Tom Schreiner's refutation: co-worker/labor terms are too vague to indicate leadership

Mike reads a lengthy quote from Tom Schreiner (Two Views, pp. 280-281).

Romans 16:3 Philippians 4:3 Tom Schreiner Two Views on Women in Ministry Mary
Mike Winger idea 2019-01-23

The pro-life syllogism — abortion is wrong because it intentionally kills an innocent human being

Mike's core logical argument against abortion, credited to Scott Klusendorf

abortion Scott Klusendorf pro-life syllogism
Mike Winger idea 2019-01-23

Mother's life exception — ectopic pregnancy and similar cases are not 'abortion' by definition; they are pro-life decisions

Q&A — question about whether abortion is acceptable when the mother's life is at stake

pro-life bioethics mother's life exception
Mike Winger idea 2019-01-30

1 John 3:4 — "sin is lawlessness" — Hebrew Roots argument: lawlessness = breaking Torah, therefore sin = breaking Torah, therefore obeying Torah is mandatory

Mike walks through the Hebrew Roots syllogism built on 1 John 3:4 in step-by-step form.

1 John 3:4 Law of Moses Torah Equivocation fallacy
Mike Winger idea 2019-05-01

The slogan formalized as a syllogism — and why it fails at premise 4

Mike reconstructs the argument in syllogistic form, attributed to critics of Sagan's argument ("argumentum Sagani").

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence Carl Sagan Miracles
Mike Winger idea 2019-06-05

Responding to syllogism: judgment for sin requires being under the law

Q&A: Timmy Pine presents a logical argument

logical fallacy grace under the law
Mike Winger idea 2019-05-30

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 — the Calvinist logical argument for limited atonement from this text

Winger presents the viewer's question and the Calvinist logical argument drawn from 2 Corinthians 5:14-15.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 limited atonement 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 all have died
Mike Winger idea 2020-11-06

Genesis 1-11 allegorical interpretation does not necessarily violate John 5:44-47 or deny salvation

Responding to a question from Cat Chat about whether allegorical reading of Genesis 1-11 equals rejection of Christ per John 5

John 5:44-47 Genesis 1-11 salvation John 5:44-47 Genesis 1-11
Mike Winger idea 2020-02-12

Guest Braxton Hunter (president of Trinity Seminary, PhD) introduces the Kalam cosmological argument and explains its ultimate payoff: reasoning toward what the cause of the universe must be like.

Introduction to the Kalam — what it gets you

Kalam cosmological argument Braxton Hunter Kalam cosmological argument
Mike Winger idea 2020-02-12

The Kalam cosmological argument stated formally: Premise 1 — whatever begins to exist must have a cause; Premise 2 — the universe began to exist; Conclusion — the universe has a cause.

Formal presentation of the Kalam syllogism

syllogism William Lane Craig William Lane Craig
Mike Winger idea 2020-02-12

The Kalam conclusion (the universe has a cause) doesn't mention God explicitly, but the conceptual analysis that always follows leads to theistic conclusions about the nature of that cause.

Relationship between the formal argument and conceptual analysis

Kalam cosmological argument Kalam cosmological argument conceptual analysis
Mike Winger idea 2020-09-21

The Free Thinking Argument formal syllogism: (1) no libertarian freedom → no rational inference; (2) humans DO rationally infer; (3) therefore humans have libertarian freedom. Stratton calls it deductive and potentially debate-ending.

Presentation of the core Free Thinking Argument

libertarian free will free thinking argument