Search results

I've read a few of your posts. Frankly, you come across as a self-righteous, arrogant know-it-all. The statement above does much to reinforce that assessment. You might find your ideas are received better when you don't assume you know more than anyone else. I've been a Christian for many...

In general I agree with you, but I disagree with your bolded sentence. The Law is not "operational" for Christians today; it is a historical reality that has relevance in understanding the new covenant in Christ, but we are not "under" the Law the way ancient Israelites were. :)

This is still somewhat obtuse. Non-believers don't have any spiritual covering (in the protective sense), and believers are covered by Jesus Christ. Further, non-believers likely wouldn't care to understand it. Aside from my earlier comments about husbands and fathers, I don't see anything more...

Your response can be summed up in one word, but I won't put it in print here. I suggest you go and look up the word, "coherent" before responding again. I have read both Genesis and Paul's letters many times, and I consider the traditional interpretation incoherent. Disagree if you like, but at...

You're proposing that women are "rightly" under their husband's rule. Genesis 3 doesn't support that. Rather, it says "but he will rule over you" in the context of consequences for sin. Why would God (Who is good) put women under the rule of now-sinful husbands?

Wrong. My argument is on the basis of coherence. Since there is no "law" in the Law requiring women to be silent, and Paul knew the Law better than we do, it doesn't make sense that he would appeal to such a statement. Further, he knew well enough that not every woman was married, and that not...

I don't "remove" them because I don't agree; I consider them spurious because they are incoherent.

It's not entirely clear what you're saying because your quotations were messed up. Generally though, you haven't made an argument just by saying, "Paul definately (sic) wrote those words." Firstly, the word is "definitely"; the root word is "finite" as in "limited". Secondly, without evidence...

This is the kind of snowflake behaviour that makes this board so interesting. The guy doesn't like one post, so he puts me on Ignore. Oh well, now I can refute his folly without his interference.

Methinks you didn't read my post carefully. Ditto the above comment. Ditto the above comment, and you're engaging in circular reasoning. I can only go by what you wrote. If what you wrote doesn't represent what you believe, that's on you, not on me. ;)

Psst: A quotation from Jesus doesn't prove your point about Paul. ;)

Um... I appreciate your enthusiasm, but it needs a bit of focus. Faith, by itself, is meaningless unless you have the right object of your faith. The 'word of faith' folks dove headfirst into error by forgetting that we need to start with what God says, and not with what we want. We will not...

I disagree strongly with your assessment and your reasons. In short, your argument is circular. Nothing in the Law says that women are to be silent, so either Paul didn't write those words (he probably was responding to a quoted question) or he didn't know the Law. The second is completely...

Kindly don't assume the absence of my full dissertation on the subject means that I am needing or seeking instruction. ;)

I understand what you're saying. I make the distinction on the wording used. :)

I suspect the idea of "covering" comes from legitimate response to people operating without any accountability, reasonable interpretation of certain OT passages, and some misinterpretation of certain NT passages. Under the OT Law, children, and older unmarried daughters, were under the care and...

God said specifically to the serpent, "Cursed are you..." (v, 14) and to Adam, "Cursed is the ground...". He did not say either to the man or to the woman that they were cursed. Though they are related, negative consequences are not actually curses. I can tell my daughter the consequences of...

... that God will answer what? If we ask Him a question or make a request, then it makes sense to expect an answer. Your statement does not have a question or request as a preamble.

God cursed the ground and the serpent. He did not curse the man and the woman; rather, He told them the consequences of their action. There are many different translations of this passage in English. In light of this, it doesn't make sense to assign doctrinal basis to a single translation...

I said the first people were garden dwellers, which the Bible says they were. The only evidence you have is distantly circumstantial. No, I did not. I can rationally charge you with making an unsubstantiated assertion, for that is what you did. Streeeeetch. Similarity of garment materials is...