Rational Thought

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@TreeTherapeutic @kevinmyoung Are you God in this scenario?

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@PastorMark How fragile does your masculinity have to be to be concerned about personal pronouns in social media bios?

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@jaredbrannon @NateAlspaw Right, so 1,600 years of Christians got it wrong, including the ones who decided which writings were “Biblical.” That makes sense.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@PastorMark @Chris_Ellzey Apply that logic to preferred pronouns

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@Kdubtru How ironic… you’re appealing to a quality which you lack.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@evangelicalpleb @samiam2 @CaptainSass_ @grcastleberry *they don’t stand up to your previously held biases

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@mrEkli @FrustratedYoof @Skippyman2099 If “a woman” can be selected by God to give birth to God, then “a woman” can be selected by God to preach. Just like if “a man” were selected by God to preach. Insinuating that gender alone should not be the disqualification

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@macguy1959 @skylejoh @SethAGinger @MattWalshBlog Do you typically check birth certificates and/or genitalia of the people you meet?

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@MattWalshBlog Interesting take from someone who goes by “Matt” instead of “Matthew”

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @lukelongino @ZachWLambert Let’s unpack your “pretty clear” ignorance of your subjective bias over the context of 1 Timothy2. Does the context of the culture of Ephesus in which Timothy was doing ministry factor in here? Or do you just choose to read this out of context.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @lukelongino @ZachWLambert See, that’s your interpretation. You’ve decided this subjectively, Scott.
It’s ok to admit your “authority of scripture” is your “interpretation and selective application of scripture.”

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @ZachWLambert So, you’re choosing ignorance when it comes to your own biases - got it.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@Quis_ut_Deus_7 @BoomTown85 @LivingGodsTruth Even demons believe in God and Satan uses scripture to justify his agenda with Jesus…

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@PensiveJustin @tovtheology @kevinmyoung Unless you consider that modern conservative Christians don’t give the same weight to the term “abomination” when used in other contexts.
Therefore it’s either hypocrisy, or “abomination” doesn’t imply what CCs are trying to imply.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@Veritas1646 @Jordan_Morrow12 @apatajohn15 @LivingGodsTruth There we go. You revealed your real underlying bias. This isn’t about scripture for you. You just think it’s icky and you’re proof texting to justify your ignorant prejudice.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@LivingGodsTruth Read the last part again…. Slowly, John.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @ZachWLambert At this point, Steven, hopefully you can see the point that we all approach “the authority of scripture” with bias and selectively apply it based on that bias. Claiming anything to the contrary is either intentionally disingenuous or flat out ignorance.

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @ZachWLambert “God is not the name of the Lord.” - did you stretch before doing all those mental gymnastics, Steven?
Given the “literal context” of your statement, you were not referring to any other “God” (and if you were that would be breaking another commandment).

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @ZachWLambert “Context” being subjective. If you believe in the “authority of scripture” then it should speak for itself. (and you wouldn’t need to throw baseless attacks at others exposing your own insecurities, Scott).

[Rational Thought @RationalT]

@HeManseth @ZachWLambert You’re in denial about your worldview. What you see as “authority of scripture” is really your interpretation and negotiation with the text.