Search results

There you go with the unwarranted assumptions again.

I see them having been fulfilled in the first century. ;)

The five who were not welcomed in didn't "depart from the faith"; rather, they didn't have genuine faith in the first place.

"Why does God love you" is a question that warrants an answer with and overt or implied "because" in it, giving the causal explanation for the reality at hand. Scripture does indeed say, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart." However, it definitely does not say that God loves me...

If you think that's pertinent to the discussion, then it's your responsibility to share it. Nobody else can read your mind. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by "love is a two way bond".

Unfortunately, it does not "imply" that at all. You may have been thinking that, but were not successful in communicating it. ;)

That was a scholarly but unsuccessful attempt at a sidestep. Three examples, please.

Ah… so a straightforward, biblically sound response is “rude”. I see.

You chose the thread title.

In some cases I do. ;)

I challenge you to find three uses of ‘this generation’ in Scripture that clearly don’t refer to people alive at that time.

When you understand the cultural context, the meaning of the passage changes significantly. Without that context, and especially if you are reading the passage in isolation, it is easy to conclude that Paul was teaching distinct roles for men and women.

To the thread title: No. "Should" implies that there is a debt, an obligation owed. It implies that we "deserve" salvation when in truth the only thing we deserve is death for our sins. There is no obligation on Jesus to do anything for us; He died for us because He loves us... period.

The judgment upon Israel for all their murder and idolatry fell upon that generation. That judgment came at the hand of the Romans around 70 AD, fulfilling the prophecies that Jesus had spoken. It doesn't mean that generation was directly guilty, but that by doing the same things (killing John...

But you just quoted Paul as saying, "I do not permit a woman to teach... but to be in silence." Which is it? Silence, or teaching? Do you see how your interpretation is self-refuting?

I agree. However, if Paul is saying that because there was prevalent teaching among the pagans that Eve was formed first and was not deceived, and he is refuting that claim rather than explaining why "women can't teach", then it is a context-specific statement. Consider how many women would...

There is no need to twist Scripture to understand as I do. There is, however, a need to understand the context and to interpret the passage within that context rather than treating the text like it stands on its own. If you honestly think that Paul (and, by extension, God Himself) is saying...

The research needed is outside of Scripture, which does not explain the culture of Ephesus in detail.

Culture is indeed important. In the Greek/Roman context, women had a much higher social status than in many pagan cultures.

It's not that I don't "see" the implication, but having done my homework (extensively) on this subject, I "know" that is not what Paul is saying.