Search results

This ^^^ nailed it!

If Paul hadn't written verse 15b, your conclusion would be correct. Because he did, it isn't.

When offered in worship, silence is beautiful. When imposed in ignorance, it is ugly.

Ignoring the cultural context of Scripture is as bad as assuming its message before reading it. Context is not a matter of "opinion".

In the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:24), he owed ten thousand talents. It's a metaphor for sin, and would have been impossible in real life.

Yawn. I disagree with your interpretation. You are arrogant to think that yours is the only valid interpretation. Then again, despite your reasonably good knowledge of Scripture, you bleed arrogance, as though all that learning has merely inflated your ego instead of transforming your heart.

Irrelevant. Metaphors need not be physically possible to be valid. As your statement is "telling" of your arrogance.

Sadly though, ignorance does.

There's more going on with this passage than most modern readers understand. The gulf of cultural (and scientific) change has obfuscated Paul's original meaning, and veiled the scandal that he addressed in this chapter. In short, this is a non-issue today.

Please just answer the question with "Yes", or "No".

To paraphrase Matt Walsh, what is a lady? :LOL:

Well... there's nothing like jumping with both feet into the quagmire. You have your interpretation, and you think it is sound. Other who read the same text interpret it differently, and they think their interpretation is sound. You accuse those who have a different interpretation of "cherry...

I don't subscribe to either, particularly, but I see more sense in the preterist view than the futurist view. The former has some awkward metaphorical interpretations which may or may not be sound, while the latter is sullied with failed prophecies and wild speculations.

You hint loudly at your interpretation. ;) Fair enough. There is plenty of substance in the text to determine the timing intended by the authors, and no need to manipulate the text to provoke a particular conclusion. :)

Let's borrow some truth from biology to get a handle on these concepts. Milk is NOT inferior food. It is densely packed with nutrients and is perfectly designed to facilitate the growth and development of the infant. Don't think 'skim milk'; rather, think breast milk that a mother secretes for...

Where is the evidence of this alleged manipulation? It appears that you are allowing an interpretation of the text to colour your perception of the facts.

While I think the judge was correct, it’s not a definition that helps the discussion along.

I didn’t feel like typing Novum Testamentum Grecae on my phone.

A little information is a dangerous thing. Instead of getting your information from one source, do your homework properly. There are nearly 6,000 Greek manuscripts. The NTG is updated based on new discoveries, not ‘theories’ of the scholars who produce it.

Glen, is English your first language?