Recent content by Dino246

You know what I was thinking by what I wrote, not by what you think I wrote.

There is another recent thread on this subject. I encourage you to take your question there rather than confusing this thread with an unrelated topic.

Not in “real life” but in dreams, yes.

The KJV was translated long before Sharp discovered the rule, and the ESV follows it in many places. While the two-person view is easy to get in English, it is an interpretation of a flawed translation. The verses clearly present Jesus as God.

That’s a pleasant sanitized distortion of Scripture. It doesn’t account for the fact that Jesus cast unclean spirits out of people. Unclean spirits are entities distinct from humans. They are real and have power and influence, but cannot stand against Jesus.

I won’t ask if this “girl” was you. ;)

There’s a massive difference: one is God’s will and the other is only His foresight.

While it is about husband and wife, it is not saying that the husband shall have authority over the wife. Rather, it says that, as a consequence of sin, "he shall rule over you". That's the unpleasant outcome for her, and for almost every woman since.

You completely misread my post. You're welcome to exit the conversation, but know that you do on your own error. Further, I am not erasing or explaining away everything God has said on the matter; my position takes into account everything He has said and doesn't conveniently ignore certain...

It's not at all a false premise, it's the meaning of authentein that makes sense of the passage in its context. The wording of many English translations makes this the apparent reason. However, when you study the cultural context in which Timothy was leading, you see the flaw in that reasoning...

Statements of certain consequence, not commands. The statements made to Adam tell us that.

Welcome to CC. Kindly read my explanation for 1 Timothy 2 in post 655 (previous page).

"Vamoose"? Do you seriously think you have the authority to tell me to leave? Go laugh at yourself in the mirror. I have stated my case. You're welcome to disagree, but grow up first.

Your position is inherently self-contradictory. If women are to remain silent in the churches (14:34), they can't pray or prophesy (11:5, sing, or speak in tongues. "Silent" leaves no room for exceptions. Consider that 14:34-35 are actually a quotation to which Paul responds. There are two...

Context informs Scripture. Every competent Hermeneutics teacher will tell you that. Your flippant remark tells me that you aren't interested in discussion, but in perpetuating the errors you believe; I'd like to be proven wrong on that.