Recent content by Dino246

I'm sorry you're incapable of handling any challenge to your interpretation of Scripture.

Wow... self righteous much? I have already explained why I think your conclusions are wrong. You have not addressed any of my arguments, but instead have dismissed them all with a condemnatory wave of the hand. I get that you may not have the chops to discuss this matter further, but you...

It's sad that you attribute anything with which you don't agree to Satan. This is a discussion board, not a condemnation board. If you don't agree with someone else's viewpoint, you're welcome to say so, but once you cross the line, you become the accuser. How about you start by explaining why...

You keep repeating the same blather, but you clearly haven't done your homework.

No, it was his statement that he did not allow a woman (singular) to teach or "authentein" a man. The context tells us that it was a matter of protecting the flock from false teaching, not prohibiting competent, trained women from any role.

Telling you that I'm not playing your games is not being arrogant; it's walking away.

Does that mean every man is the head of every woman? No. It can only logically mean within a marriage. So many Christians misread this passage because they don't understand the context, and don't bother actually studying. The statements God makes to the serpent, the woman, and the man are...

I'm not interested in your silly fallacious games.

You're welcome to your conclusions, but I would encourage you to tone down your arrogance. My conclusion is based on Scripture just as much as yours is.

I too have a problem believing God would write, "women keep silent in the churches..." when three chapters earlier, He specifically permitted them to speak in the churches (11:13-16). 1 Cor 14:35 cannot apply to all women, because many are not married and therefore could not ask their husbands...

I don't have to prove anything. I have a rational conclusion that follows the available evidence. You reject it based on the absence of particular evidence.

Yes, but it's the same sin, according to Leviticus 18:8: "“‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father." Both Reuben and Ham dishonoured their father by sleeping with his wife; that one was the younger man's mother is secondary to my point. Ham slept...

Very credible, considering that Reuben did the same thing with Jacob's wives. See Genesis 35:22 and 49:4.

Yes, the overwhelmingly common interpretation is that Nephilim were the result of such unions, not in existence before such unions. Perhaps you missed the "If"?

You're welcome to argue as you see fit, but first you must explain Genesis 6:1-4. Please, don't waste your time or mine with the "descendants of Seth" fallacy. When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of...