Favorites ?

All items you've starred. Filter by source database or search by title. Use the star (☆) button on any detail page to add items here.

...more

Ok, getting back to answering Mark. Several of his paragraphs subsequent to the ones I have already addressed are expansions on the same issues. So I’m going to comment only on the ones that are left

Hi everyone, Curious as to whom to believe – egalitarians or complementarists – I begun a research four years ago. I found that despite all the fancy rhetoric and emotional appeals, modern complemen

Mark, I missed your Bible references on your post. Sorry. I have been copying and pasting sections for comment and for some reason I must have been interrupted and didn’t finish reading that one post

I just got an email from Mark B. I will put material from my email to him in quotation marks, and Mark’s thoughts and reflections in normal font. Sorry again for the length. Hi Craig,   Sorry thi

Mark, Thanks for your quick response. You said: > It is important to note that the atonement is the ‘canceling’ of our debt. That is, Jesus took our sin and the punishment for our sin onto his shou

Mark, > Cheryl, i agree 100% with the following… > > “I believe that one must first be able to exegete the passage first and show in the context the meaning that you put on the word or sentence or ve

Cheryl, There are a number of problems with the complementarian interpretation of [Gen 1](logos4:///Bible/Ge 1)-3 that you and the others have pointed out. In the comments and observations that foll

Mark, > Not true! Moses wrote this and God used him to record what God wanted recorded. It in no ways makes it deceptive. I’m sure you will realise this once you get a chance to do some research on i

Mark, you said: > Thankyou for your comments. A few points… you are correct that the verb to be in verse 1 is a present participle- I missed that and I’m glad you corrected me. However this does not

Mark, You said: > You can’t say that the woman’s seed (in the context) is victorious over the serpents-so whether you translate it crush, strike, bruise etc you must do the same for both. Yes, I a

Cheryl, “So why is it that God did not take the complete payment of Jesus at the cross and put it to your account at the time that Jesus died? Was His payment not full and complete at that time?” Le

Mark, You said: > People can only recieve eternal life by being reconciled in Christ. That is precisely why ‘life’ can only be ‘given’ to God’s elect, because only God’s elect have their sins ‘aton

I don’t think that one could call the complimentarian view of the Trinity “unorthodox”. The doctrine of the Trinity was something the early Church had to wrestle through and they opposed the Arians so

Kay, I tried posting my comments on Mike’s site a second time, and if I read the message that popped up, I think it went through but will be posted later. And I think your are correct in your assessm

Don #43, Sorry for taking so long in getting back to you.  I have had a full plate here for days 🙂 You said: > Jon 3:4  Jonah began to go into the city, going a day’s journey. And he called out, “Y

Sorry to dump the truck on everyone, but I thought some of you may be interested that I received an email from Mark (from Sola Panel) today. Elaine specifically asked if I could post it here. Sorry fo

Michael, Martin, Paula – go ahead and continue to discuss the issues as I work on my responses. I may not be as fast as you folks are 🙂 Michael: Regarding your first post (#1).  You said:  “Cher

Okay, I’m back. There must be a limit to how long these posts and comments can be because my post kept disappearing. Oh well, to carry on… Michael you said “I am sleepless so I have been surfing the

Here are two excerpts from my book which deal with the question of the subjection of the Son to the Father and how it relates to the assumed subjection of the woman to the man. (I didn’t feel like re-

Mark, I apologize for the terseness of my previous comment. It was addressed more to Cheryl, Dave, Lin, and Kay who know me better than you do, and who understand where I am coming from. For on both C

Mark, I am continually amazed at how you refuse to engage the challenge and yet you come back as if you can find another source of accusation against me now charging me with being “selective” in the

Mark, > Have you now changed your view from saying they couldn’t speak His name to now they could, but the full revelation of what that meant didn’t come until [Exodus 3](logos4:///Bible/Ex 3)? If so

bgk #54, > The carageenan in my ice cream comes from seaweed, but I don’t know if it has seeds.  Very cute!  And a mighty fine sense of h

Cheryl, First I will respond to some of your comments regarding the nature of the atonement and after that I will move on to your last two lots of exegetical points. “You keep saying that only a spe

Mark, > I appreciate your comments regarding [Gen 3:15](logos4:///Bible/Ge 3.15). Let me just say one final thing in case you missed it. I do agree with you that looking bcak at this verse in our pos

“Here we see clearly that Jacob is chosen unconditionally before they were born. Paul is very precise to include that it is not ‘because of works’. So your hypothesis that God chose the Israelites (Ja

NN, Thanks for joining in the discussion so that we can work on clarification on this issue and a sense of unity in our love for the Lord Jesus and each other. > A few points are necessary to clari

Diane Sellner from CARM has apparently decided to do Matt’s work and reply to my article so I gladly put her comments for all to see and so I can soundly answer them. Diane is answering my articles th

Hi Michael, No your teacher analogy isn’t correct. I didn’t even think it try to pull it apart because it is meaningless to me. I would rather put my effort into the inspired Hebrew. English does not

Oh Mark, I just love it when you comps write like this! I know you are a smart guy, you just have swallowed a bit too much of the comps’ cool aid (isn’t this American saying an interesting way of putt

Diane Sellner posted “En Hakkore’s” “refutation” of me on CARM and here is my answer: > Originally Posted by Diane S (Quoting “En Hakkore”) > “Firstly, you baited with the name Bergen for three pos

John, I am thankful that you are still here.  It must mean that you are willing to try to hear us out.  Coming into a blog atmosphere where the majority believe in women’s freedom to serve without re

Hi Mark, > Thank you for clarifying your question. Now i can see what it is you are asking. Well, I am glad that you are roundabout admitting that you were the one that was not understanding, but wi

Craig, You said: > Is it > “usurp the authority of an accepted/authorized teacher before you yourself have been authorized” > as Kristen has put forward or to “dominate” as I think you believe.

Good day Kerryn (that’s Canadian for gidday!) Great questions. You said: > The verses you use to make your point regarding Adam being a ‘man’ use the word anthropos, ([Romans 5:12,19](logos4:/

Mark, Honestly, I didn’t know whether to laugh or to cry over your reply…that wasn’t the only point of agreement we had. Here are our quotes side by side: ————- Mark – “Yes the Edomites were ‘ha

Mark you said: > Now Cheryl claimed that no such ‘additional grammar’ in [Eph 2](logos4:///Bible/Eph 2) shows that Paul means a past condition. However in verse 2 is a very clear grammatical feature-

Hi Cheryl, Thankyou for your comments. A few points… you are correct that the verb to be in verse 1 is a present participle- I missed that and I’m glad you corrected me. However this does not change

Cindy K, Good questioning attitude!  You said: > Ortlund seems to be saying that Eve set out with the willful intent to twist what God had said, as if she needed no encouragement from the serpent.

Craig, Whats the evidence that women struggle more with that or at least did in Paul’s time? Why can it not just be what it says…simply a qualification that applies to women or wives? This is the h

Michael, Thanks a bunch for posting some of your questions, because it helps me to understand your mindset and I am hoping I can help you understand my mindset too even if it is only a little. You sa

Lin, #149: > Notice the strawman argument we see being used everywhere about egals: Technically, it’s the “slippery slope” fallacy: A causes B causes C causes D… It proposes causes and effect where

Now concerning Mark’s answers about Eve not being banished from the garden. Mark, you said: > 1. First of all, we need to remember that this verse is within the corpus of punishment and curse. Ther

Ok, finally getting back to this: NN said: “Let us apply the reasoning which you just outlined to a parallel passage of scripture, we’ll pick 1st Peter: [1 Pet 2:13](logos4:///Bible/1Pe 2.13) ~

Oops. I missed the anti-spam word and copied the code from the other page. Grudem’s Open Letter to Egalitarians has been well answered many times. In fact, that webpage used to contain the responses

Paula, I am going back to the comments from #10 as I took a break for a few days to deal with other matters. I am glad that you agree with me that the passage is literal. I asked you “what was Adam

gengwall, You said: > God: Eve, there are some unfortunate consequences that are going to affect you personally because of the situation. You will have an increase in sorrow and in pregnancy and ra

Mark, you said: > I’m a bit concerned about your 7 points. None of your references mention at all that the Jews did not fear God. You are bringing that into the text. I am actually quite shocked tha

On a previous thread, I referred to an audio download from Walter Martin that I had listened to that day: <http://www.spiritwatch.org/cultrise79.ram> I’m amazed at how much of what he said stuck wi

Here is what I posted in the last thread, including a link to the essay by Payne about the nature of the word “oude,” which is what engendered this discussion: \*\*\* Cheryl, I’m sure you will agr

Hi Michael, You ask a great question about the creation of animals. First of all in answer to your question, the issue is not about animals ONLY being created after Adam. The Hebrew is specific in th

“H”, Your point is well taken. If we continue to lift scriptures from their context, then we are left with following a new “law” to the letter – are men lifting their hands in prayer as Paul “require

I’m sorry it has taken me longer, than I originally intended, to make a response to Mark’s latest comments ( #228) of my critique of the ESS teaching. But as you well know, Cheryl, the responsibilitie

Dear Fellows, I would like to state that more than half of these paradoxes you are struggling with could have readily been prevented by reading my website <http://gfwilkinprofwomen.webs.com/>, and

I’m glad the focus will be on [1 Tim. 2](logos4:///Bible/1Ti 2), because Dr. Nyland’s notes for this book are available for free at [This Link](http://www.godswordtowomen.org/studies/resources/Source/

Peter, you wrote about [John 17:12](logos4:///Bible/Jn 17.12) In this verse, looking at the words of the text, Judas is among the “them” group. Of the members of this group, Judas is the one that was

Hi Peter, You wrote: I am not sure if I hit a nerve with you, but the conversation is becoming slightly less than irenic, and I think it is best to leave it before it becomes personal. Thanks for the

Mark, You asked regarding Ryan’s comments: > In what way is the husband the source of his wife? What does that mean from the context? Then in what way does that parallel the Church and Christ? The

#230 Craig, You said: > One of the staff at my church said egals use a “different hermeneutic”. I have often heard comps say it is a “liberal hermeneutic”. I don’t really understand what they mean,

HI, Cheryl, I’ve been reading your blog for a while, and I want to say that I enjoy it a lot. I agree with what you say on a lot of things concerning Adam and Eve’s relationship and the fall. Howeve

Mark, You mention my lack of Greek exegesis on [Eph 4:11](logos4:///Bible/Eph 4.11). Well let me enlighten you so that we can be on the same page. The grammar of [Eph 4:11](logos4:///Bible/Eph 4.11)

Mark you wrote: “I’m interested to hear how you believe you have answered Grudem’s challenge. Can you explain how [James 4:4-10](logos4:///Bible/Jas 4.4-10) is reciprocal submission with no authority?

Mark, You said: > I am glad you attempted to address all of my post, I give you credit for that. It seems that since I last logged on, comments have risen so I won’t have time to answer them all- b

A possible interpretation of I Tim 2:15 is that in the first half “she” does refer to Eve, and in the second half “they” refers to all women. My understanding is that people of the OT era were saved b

Mark, You said: > Now about being a child of God. I have agreed with you that we are children of God once we believe. However like I said [Romans 8](logos4:///Bible/Ro 8) and [Eph 1](logos4:///Bibl

Mark you quoted me and then said: > “[Ephesians 2:8, 9](logos4:///Bible/Eph 2.8,9) is not talking about faith as a gift because the term is singular and faith is said to be the thing that the gift (s

Don, You said: > I used to think there was ONE RIGHT WAY to interpret each verse in the Bible, but more and more I see there are “clouds” of various ways to understand various verses and a believer

Mark, I would like to add some comments to your exegesis of [John 6:26-30](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.26-30) because you missed some things. > [John 6:25–26](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.25-26) (NASB) > 25 Whe

gengwall, I am very pleased that you are allowing yourself to be open about Eve not having sinned in rebellion after the fall. > Either [Gen 3:16](logos4:///Bible/Ge 3.16) is exclusively about Adam

continuing on… [Joh 6:26](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.26) Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. [Joh

Hi all, Hope you all had a great Christmas and New Year! Cheryl i have a response for that ‘question 1’ from way back so im just gunna post it hear…feel free to move it or whatever. Please know that

Michael: Regarding your post #2 on the length of days. You said “The seventh day has not ended. Is Hebrews in error when it suggests the seven day was not 24 hours?†I understand and I think most

Don, I have heard the interpretation before about the Gnostic teaching that woman authored the man. Although I do believe that it is possible that Paul could have somehow been referring to this teac

Mark, For [John 6:35-44](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.35-44), the view I hold regards who the “all that” refers to. Many calvinists identify the “all that” in verses 37 and 39 as “those whom, in his great l

Pinklight, I think people often keep and defend traditions that agree with their personal desires, like in this case, for male power and privilege in a world that is shifting from male-dominance to f

That is illogical. A person could say a similar statement this way: All the children had ice cream except for little Marcie as Marcie only likes cake. Marcie is one of the children, but is she a part

Mark, You said to pinklight: > Here lies the problem with your view. You are looking at it from a readers perspective. We do know alot of other details from verses other that verse 23. However how

It is interesting that Diane Sellner keeps repeating that “En” has refuted me regarding Dr. Buth’s work on the Hebrew grammar that proves that [Genesis 2](logos4:///Bible/Ge 2) has the animals and the

#44 CLC, You said: > 2. Second, my NIV translation makes it seem like only women fell into sin: “14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.” We all

I agree with Bushnell on this issue. LESSON 16. GOD’S WARNING TO EVE 122. The N. T. teaches us that “He that committeth sin is of the devil. . . Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin. . . .

Craig, I have some further thoughts about the connection of a sexual *authenein* with Eve. What if there is truth to the ancient understanding of Church Fathers that the “desire” of [Genesis 3:16](lo

**I notice a commen theme in those who opposes our viewpoint. They say ONLY married people can “Reflect” Christ in the Home and Chruch ( a brick building made with human hands). ALL believers can Refl

John, In your comment #97, you copy and paste from a scholar that you say gives an excellent exposition.  This scholar says: > Paul with this explanatory injection states the reason why these women

Pinklight (102), “‘They also break the first of the 10 commandments: Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Compism is men’s shrine to themselves, and they bow down to the god of husband authority

Mark, You said: > If you look closely at the Hebrew in [Genesis 3](logos4:///Bible/Ge 3), there is nothing in the grammar to suggest that Eve’s motive’s were good and Adam’s bad. Actually I just p

Cheryl, Yes i did feel you were harsh or frustrated and i understand that, but i still do not believe that i am throwing a low ball or presenting logical fallicies. Very briefly i will respond in a h

> I linked to that article onto Matt’s site and then figured out how to copy the article with the graphics so that those on Matt’s site can be blessed by it too without having to go off of his discuss

Mark, “C’mon mate, let’s be realisitic” is not a valid argument…especially when I am realistic! Kay responded on my behalf with regards to you first point. Thanks Kay, Mark did miss the point. I shou

Mark, You said: > I appreciate your attempt to defend the doctrine of original sin. I agree wholeheartedly here with you. I take this as a kind word from you and it feels really good to have someo

Mark, You said: > “[Joh 6:37](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.37) All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” > > And then you said “Jesus says that “all” (no

Here is my response to Mark’s second point. **I think the ‘lay down power’ here is pretty tendentious. Almost any complementarian would say something like all this, but would say that what is going

Mark, You said: > I understand that you believe in a sin nature from Adam and Greg does not, but the logical conclusion of what you are saying leads to the same path. You say we have the ability as

Peter, you are a LONG way from home! You wrote: IF you are right about John the Baptist’s status as an unbeliever, then you have a strong case. I appreciate you saying this. If each point I made is va

Tarun, Again, welcome and thanks for posting. > You said: I was not trying to imply that the Husband “is” the Saviour/Lord and God of his wife.That is a role that only Christ can fulfill. However ev

Peter, Your case as presented is that in [John 6](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6) the term “coming” is a physical coming that means a physical following Jesus so that those people whom Jesus is talking about in

I absolutely do not agree with the meaning that Ortlund ascribes to the Genesis account here, but I think that there is some Scriptural basis to argue against the points you brought up.  I will play d

This does not really go here but it is about Eve and the teaching out there about her. A friend sent me this today. It is a quote from Mark Driscoll about Eve.(CBMW disagrees with Driscoll as he allow

Mark, One more thing – “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before

Cheryl, will you please delete my first post and replace it with this one? Thanks. Mike, you said,” The [1 Corinthians 14](logos4:///Bible/1Co 14) passage has to do with the corporate worship setting

Mark, I believe the surrender required by mutual submission is so radical in its demands that it causes “wife/obedience to husband/authority” to pale by comparison. The beauty can be seen in Jesus ex

“Words have set meanings and always will. Do you use a dictionary?” I certainly do use a dictionary, as you suggest Douglass, but it is important to use the right dictionary. A dictionary of English

It has been a long day for me, but I am going to try to answer as much as I can before I head for bed. Mark, You said: > I have no problem saying that God was in control of what Adam said and knew

Hi Martin, Dave Hunt is a very good apologist in my opinion. We will attending his conference this summer and then I will get to meet him in person. As far as Sandy Simpson and his DVD – yes there w

Waneta, If you look closely at the Hebrew in [Genesis 3](logos4:///Bible/Ge 3), there is nothing in the grammar to suggest that Eve’s motive’s were good and Adam’s bad. In fact the ‘desire’ Eve has,

Dave, We are always going to but heads. I recommend you read the scholarly work of comps such as that book i recommended before you continue to argue for Cheryl’s exegesis. s Kostenberger has con

@207 gengwall I think I failed to congratulate you on thinking outside the box. Even if your view does not agree with mine, the fact that you are thinking for yourself and considering all the options

Mark, You said: > Again you have not dealt with any precise exegetical arguments i have raised. Please deal with them. > > I have not talked about hiding sin, only you have. Well, Mark, that appea

Peter, You wrote: The crux of our impasse is that it seems to me that you want to consider that passages that show the role of the Father – as in the case of the Lord opening Lydia’s heart, and insist

Thanks, dear folks for adding good thoughts while I was not able to be here! I have been so incredibly busy the last while that something had to give and the blog just couldn’t have my attention. I wi

Don, > As I stated, one sees the polemic in [Gen 1](logos4:///Bible/Ge 1) in contrast to the other polytheistic origins stories. I don’t know about the other polytheistic origin stories. What I was

Holly – the KJV only debate is a whole ‘nother can of worms. It boils down to quantity vs. quality. The Greek foundation of the KJV is called the “Received Text” because it was basically all we had “

Mark, To just use Pinklight as an example, yes, she has asked you why you have an issue with believing that the salvation of the woman might be conditional on her husband. I do not have a problem wi

Why have you set things up on this blog so that biblical references are automatically linked to the website of ESV, a version which (as documented at [the Better Bibles Blog](http://englishbibles.blog

God does not contradict itself and if I am seeing a contradiction in Scripture then the problem is with MY interpretation, NOT with God’s Word!!! I could see QUITE CLEARLY other examples of women exer

Paula, Thanks for your consideration. It has been a stressful week for sure! This is a great discussion. > 1a – I don’t agree that Adam’s words contradict the idea of Eve being made from a “female”

An excellent critique of those who misuse the Scriptures to justify male dominance, and to unjustly “keep women in their proper place,” denying their equal status as members of God’s household and as

I thought this was an interesting essay, but with generally weak or unconvincing arguments throughout. Much of the text is confounded by the writer’s inability to recognise and address key paradigms

Well, Cheryl, as some of my CBE friends will tell, I see my sharing of “the big picture” as a means of engaging in what Carolyn James describes, in The Gospel of Ruth: Loving God Enough To Break The R

Don, 1. In [1 Cor. 15](logos4:///Bible/1Co 15) we see several very interesting observations that will help us to understand this passage. First of all we see that each “group” of listing of people do

Hi Don, > ” The lot was an accepted way to make decisions and besides being random it might mean they voted.” While the “lot” was an accepted way to make decisions in the OT, it is not shown to be a

Going back to @Mark #41, you said: > Where your exegesis becomes troublesome is when you appeal that the ‘they’ is husband and wife, since then it inevitably means that the future salvation of the wi

Peter, You wrote: If He is still alive when they also begin to follow Him, it seems that He would be caring for them as well. I would just say that they are not the primary subjects in view in the pra

Jessica, Welcome to my blog! I always appreciate when complementarians are willing to dialog. > For me, it isn’t so much that Eve usurped Adam’s authority, but she denied the goodness of God. The s

Hi Cheryl, Thankyou for your reply. A few observations. I have to disagree that i failed to answer the original question. What i attempted to do was distinguish between the different gifts because

#22 Cindy K, > I intended to say more directly before that I don’t think that it is expressly “pagan” to believe that the “they” of [Genesis 1:27](logos4:///Bible/Ge 1.27) means that there was one pe

Hello K, Men do not carry a different sin nature than women do. We are all born in sin and all of us have inherited the sin nature. This sin nature comes from Adam through the father’s seed. Since

#18 Cindy K, You said: > Unfortunately, much of that ideology has shaped my thinking, sometimes to the point that I wish I could take a toothbrush and toothpaste to scrub out my brain. I understand

Mark, You said: > Naming her was the mans responsibility. Sigh! Where does it say that in text? There is no authority or responsibility given in the text. Or do you think that just repeating the s

Mark, you said: > Also the present takes a future meaning in some contexts. > > [John 14:3](logos4:///Bible/Jn 14.3) And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with

Your exegesis from #303 “Jesus said that the crowd had “seen” him (they had been a witness and experienced or caught sight of his miracles) yet they did not believe in Him. Now we are going to find o

Mark, Is there any passage that shows that an unregenerate person cannot hear God at all? [Acts 10:1-4](logos4:///Bible/Ac 10.1-4) shows Cornelius as one who was not yet a believer in Jesus, called “

Lin, You said: This is because ‘desire’ is not a good translation and takes us into all kinds of error and problems on both sides of egal/comp. God warned Eve that she would turn to her husband an

Mark, I am not even convinced that you understand the Hebrew scholar correctly. Is he really stating that men have taken the liberty to add things to God’s word and God was fine with that? The first

Tiro3 (#89), You said: > “Patriarchalists such as the ones on CARM regularly teach that women are ONLY required to be of a submissive attitude to their own husbands, their own fathers, and their own

Mark, You write: “I obviously disagree with you that Adam is not the leader in [Gen 1](logos4:///Bible/Ge 1)-3. You talked about the ‘them’ of [Gen 1](logos4:///Bible/Ge 1) and how both genders were

Hi Cheryl. Thanks you so much for your comments. It seems like the crux of our where we disagree distills down to verse 39. In the context of the entire passage, my reading doesn’t cause any strain on

Cheryl,I just ordered the DVD and I am looking forward to hearing what you have to say about this issue.  The clip on youtube was very good and what I would like to know is how Ware handles the fact t

Mark, Concerning Question #3. I asked you where the Bible says that only elders could teach? I also asked you if single men are in sin for being pastors? You did not answer these questions. I would

Craig, I value your questions and I think that others do as well. The difference between you and some others who come here is that you appear to be genuinely interested in seeing both sides and you

Cheryl, I’m sure you will agree that our English grammar construction and ancient Koine Greek grammar construction may not always be the same. I am relying on the scholarship of Phillip Payne, author

Mark, Again you misrepresent me. You said: > Cheryl believes that although Eve’s quotation of God’s words was a direct command given to her only, since Adam had already been told what not to eat ([

Mark said: “I am still interested to know why you think ’one woman man’ is generic (and thus includes female overseers) and yet why Paul needs to single out ’gyne’ in verse 11 since in your own admi

Hi Cheryl, thanks for responding. Here are answers to your specific questions: //He is not praying for just “these alone” (the disciples) but also for those who believe (present tense) because of thei

Cheryl says in her blog post “What does [1 Timothy 2:11-15](logos4:///Bible/1Ti 2.11-15)?” under point #17: “The grammar f[rom 1](logos4:///Bible/Ro 1) Timothy 2:15 requires the identification of a si

Paula, Good point. We must take into consideration that KJV translators were laboring under a church/state mentality. Cheryl, one reason you may not have gotten a posted question about Hebrews is be

Cheryl, I’m glad I popped by too 🙂 and lets use your style of response to clarify my stance, (C)There are many things that Jesus is to the Church that the husband is not. (T) I agree. (C)Althou

Continuing on from our conversation on the other thread: https://mmoutreach.org/tg/jesus-draws-all/#comments It seems that you are engaging in circular reasoning. If we can find non-Jewish believers w

tiro3, What you do is highlight a word when you are in the regular comment mode (not html) and once the word is highlighted the little chain above will become visible. Click on that and you can add a

Peter, I see that you have not answered yet on my response to point #1. You must still be considering my challenge to think outside the box. I will answer point #2 as it is similar to point #1. We can

I rarely post but, I wanted to let everyone know that I keep up with the discussion at the carm website as well as here. It is disturbing to me as I watch the discussion at carm digress ( i would like

Hi Mark, I don’t expect everyone to be clear on the Trinity. It is a difficult subject to comprehend and explain. You said: > What i am trying to emphasise is that Jesus and the Spirit are not jus

Okay, I’m back and just going to catch up on gengwall’s comments that I didn’t address. Gengwall @210 you said: > Yes – I’m saying that maybe Paul wanted Timothy to understand vs. 11 and 12 to mean

Historical Progression of Zionism <http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/zionism/ZionistState/historical.cfm> 18th century: The German Jewish philosopher Moses Mendelssohn initiates a Jewish secularis

Cheryl, My apologies – I simply felt that the length & formatting of the discussion made it potentially cumbersome to put here as a comment – but per your request here is the cut and paste. [A Paga

Though we attended an Assemblies of God Church, I was fed a fairly steady diet of Ken Copeland from the time I was a young teen. Later, my mother forced a great deal of Benny Hinn on me, and I’d been

From the beginning of our discussion, we both agreed that we enjoy irenic discussion the best. If you look back to the original comments, you will see that you were the first one to “take the gloves”

Craig @103 You said: > I can see the context of false teaching in ch1 and 2 and clearly relate this to 2:11-15. Your argument from v14,15 concerning a particular woman and man seems conclusive to m

Don, The premise is that there is no universal law that is not repeated in scripture.  I am not saying that God has to repeat the law to the exact same people that he said it to the first time.  What

gengwall, > My “guarding” stuff was kind of shooting from the hip. Suffice it to say that I do not think of Adam as the guardian of Eve so much as the guardian of an environment. I think we are in sy

Thanks for all your good comments. It is an interesting thing that Neopatriarch posts on the CCC forum under the name “statisticallyodd”. That forum has decided that I need the gospel preached to me

Mark, You said: > Now about [1 Cor 12](logos4:///Bible/1Co 12)! First of all i don’t believe it is a less ‘teacher’ than [Eph 4](logos4:///Bible/Eph 4). Second the reason why Paul numbers the gifts

#91 Don, > And a natural metaphor (for me) is evening is the onset of darkness/night, which is associated with less order and morning is the onset of light/daytime, which is associated with more orde

Hello there, I am back in the saddle although I am doing ministry work at the same time as I am packing up our second load of belongings. Busy times! I appreciate that your husband is trying hard to

I find [1 Peter 5:5](logos4:///Bible/1Pe 5.5) to be compelling. Peter has spent most of his letter telling Christians in a pagan culture how to get along in that culture, including submission to the a

We have gone through this exercise before but it bears repeating to help make the *entire* passage “clear”, if for no one else, then for Mike Seaver. Instead of paraphrasing as we have done in the pas

Craig, Thanks for thinking out loud and answering your own question! Your answer is very good. I would only add an answer that is referenced in the passage but Paul saying (vs 14) And it was not Ada

Peter, you said: So, if “driving away” can be said to a physical, earthly rejection of anyone who would try to follow him – with wrong motivation, it takes on a different nuance than does the judgemen

*“Why would Moses say things differently? Well, he’s Hebrew, comes to mind. Plus, he may be trying to be more explicit on what was actually said.”* How is being more cryptic being more explicit? “Th

I am all a twitter! This is great dialog. My take on the context and Sarah’s example follows Paula’s a little, with some of truthseekers insight included. Let me lay it out. I love Cheryl’s synopsis

LOL – I feel my contribution at this point is equivalent to adding 30 seconds to “Lawrence of Arabia”. Never the less, here goes. This refers to Cheryl’s post 89 above. I agree whole heartedly with

Getting back to the issue of whether authority of husbands is a God-given mandate in [Ephesians 5](logos4:///Bible/Eph 5): Understanding the underlying cultural assumptions can be very important in

Kerryn, Boy I thought I was being thorough, but I forgot to include some of your questions that you posed earlier regarding verse 3. You asked: “further regarding v 3: what is interesting to also n

Peter, You presented the context of [John 6:37](logos4:///Bible/Jn 6.37) as the words of Jesus at the end of John. You wrote: Also, in verses 65-67, it is interesting to notice that COMING is juxtapos

Kerryn, I forgot to answer this question: > Cheryl I am not sure how watertight the use of “he†in [Gen 3:15](logos4:///Bible/Ge 3.15) is for your argument… (My Greek is better than my Hebrew!)

There are some interesting points that most people miss in [1 Tim. 3](logos4:///Bible/1Ti 3). It starts off with pistos ho logos – faithful is the Word. Paul continues with tis episkopE oregO kabos er

“Both of Isaac’s children have the same mother and indeed both are conceived at the same time, yet God in his sovereign mercy, chose Jacob and not Esau. Paul then quotes various Old Testament referenc

[Jude 14](logos4:///Bible/Jud 14) Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute judgment on all,

“. . . because they did not have an answer to her explanation of the Greek from the original Greek manuscripts, but also because they told her as a woman that she was to be quiet.” Neither of these a