Which post exactly? I just re-read our conversations. I see that you don't believe there is a causal connection between the verses. But I do not see your explanation of what the passage means. Can you tell me your exegesis of the passage in the Biblical context? The biblical context means using Adam and Eve in your exegesis, just as Paul did. Hence, the "for", which you really cannot avoid.
It doesn't make sense....to you. Does it have to make sense for you to accept it?
943.
That is not what I said. What I did say is, "There is no causal connection between prior creation and authority". Adam's creation prior to Eve's does not necessarily confer authority over her, and it certainly does not confer authority of all males over all females or preclude female authority over males. The two concepts are unrelated. I related them on the basis of the cultural situation, where Paul is not making a theological argument for female submission, but rather, upending a false teaching about Adam and Eve.
Answered above.
In a word, yes.
You cannot pastor a church because you are divorced. God put you in that situation for your own good.
What false argument was Paul referring to? And who was making this false argument?
Are you saying that if you don't understand something in the Bible, then you don't accept it?
Not a false argument but a false teaching, part of the mystery religions, that Eve was formed before Adam, and was free of any wrongdoing with regard to the forbidden fruit.
It's an admonition, not a command... and it does make sense to me.
I have been very patient with you but I will put you on my ignore list now and will stop engaging with you as it is obvious that you're getting provoked to the point of sinning.
What's your source for this "Eve created before Adam" heresy being prominent among 1st century Jews Paul was writing to?
How do you know that?
Fine, I will word it another way:
Absolutely, Christ is the head of the body. The "senior pastor" technically isn't even a biblical office. So I don't have an opinion about that. Elders (the teachers and leaders of the church), however, are always described as male; they are referred to as "man", "he", "him" and "husband". If you can find a verse in the Bible that even hints at the idea of a woman elder, please tell me so that I can repent. I just simply don't see any evidence at all for the possibility of a female elder ever existing in the entire Bible...and certainly not an affirmation of the idea. If you or anyone can find this evidence, then we would have a reason to entertain the thought. People who argue for women eldership are fighting against a very obvious Biblical affirmation: Men and women are not the same. If we were the same, we wouldn't be having conversations like this. But Satan wants us to be jealous of (or abuse) the uniqueness of the other sex. God wants us all to follow His wonderful, complementary design and trust that He knows what he is doing. But if you chose to dig into the subject, paying attention to the obvious, natural conclusions the Bible expresses, you will see so much wisdom and beauty in God's design of male and female.
I said nothing about it being a prominent heresy among first-century Jews to whom Paul was writing. Where did you get all that?
Commands come with punishments for violation. There is no specific punishment for not counting trials as joy.
That's a leading question; I don't accept that James' statement is a command. As for the gist of your question, you are missing the point. As I said before, there is a difference between not understanding, and nonsense. I don't understand Mandarin or tensor calculus (never having studied either) but I don't believe either is nonsense. You want me to accept nonsense. It ain't gonna happen.
Her post is not employing equivocation; rather, she is using sarcasm to demonstrate the folly of the post to which she responded.
My mistake. I forgot that Timothy was pastoring at Ephesus.
Do you know what the "imperative tense" means in a Greek phrase like this? When a Biblical writer uses the imperative tense this way, it indicates that this is required of us, entailing necessity, and expectation to fulfill.
Just look at what happened to Stephen in Acts 7. Verse 54 says they gnashed on him with their teeth. The high and holy ones accuse others of sin because they cannot tolerate the truth.
