Search results

It looks like you’re ignoring the context. It is a statement of certain consequence resulting from the woman’s choice, just as verses 17-19 show the certain consequences of the man’s choice. The woman will desire her husband’s affection but he will rule her harshly. Your attitude is a perfect...

Hogwash and codswollop.

Gen 2:18 helper: ezer kenegdo, also used of God Himself. Nope, no equivocation whatsoever. It amazes me that you are so blinded by your commitment to sexism that you dismiss the evidence that refutes it.

I certainly don’t need a mistranslation to know it was Jesus.

Yes… later. You’re employing a fallacy of anachronism.

Your argument is based on a fallacy. You need to establish first that the KJV is a perfect translation of perfect manuscripts before using it as the standard against which other translations are measured.

After all, it makes perfect sense that a pagan king would acknowledge a foreign god. No. The KJV might be theologically accurate here but it’s contextually incorrect. It is extremely unlikely that the original Hebrew has ‘the son of God’.

Your words, exactly. Stop assuming. Go with what Jesus actually said and stop inventing doctrine from His actions. Jesus didn’t say that women should not be disciples. Jesus didn’t say women could not lead, or preach, or teach men. Jesus didn’t say women shouldn’t lead local fellowships of...

The problem with the English word “begotten” is that it is not a correct translation for “monogenes”. “Species-unique”, though awkward, fits better. “One-of-a-kind” is a colloquial rendition.

Excommunication is appropriate in very limited circumstances. Disagreement over the involvement of females in church is not among them.

I have no such obligation, and will happily ignore your crowing.

Jesus taught them, but said nowhere that the absence of female apostles means anything at all. It is foolish to make doctrine from narrative. Perhaps you didn’t know that the Hebrew words translated ‘helper’ are used elsewhere for God Himself. Is God merely a helper, a subordinate underling...

Paul’s words to Timothy allude to a local cultural issue. His reference to Genesis fits this context perfectly and actually affirm women rather than restricting them, as so many misogynistic male Christians think.

The KJV was created with several manuscripts in hand, so you are refuting your own position.

I’ll wait for the long answer; the short answer is ridiculous.

Repeating the same claim does not validate it. Your quote from Waite is circular reasoning.

Tell SeoulSearch you found her owl friends incognito at the sushi bar...

According to what standard? Against what do you measure the TR to draw this conclusion?? Of course, you don't have an answer, because there isn't an answer. You're just making up hogwash and framing it in lofty words.

Unadulterated bullhockey! You really drank the Kool-Aid on this one, Gary.

We don’t avoid sin by the power of the law, but by the inner conviction of the Spirit. Perhaps you don’t have the Spirit; that would explain perfectly why you don’t understand what you’re being told. People with the Holy Spirit within them don’t need the external law to constrain them.