Nope. My explanation makes much more sense based upon the plain meaning of the text. Heiser travels to the outer limits of reality in order to come up with an interpretation and therein lies the difference. Moreover, you have neglected to explain how Paul could be wrong in his belief (sperm is contained in hair) when he was inspired to write what he wrote by the Holy Spirit (who is never wrong).
No, there is no such verse in the Bible. I was replying to the person who posted #8 in the replies to your thread. The linked podcast makes the absurd (in my opinion) claim that Paul believed that sperm was contained in the hair which is supposedly why men are not to cover their heads while women cover theirs.
You welcome to remain in your own personal beliefs. As we know there is no one golden rule but a number of golden rules to hermetical interpretation and Dr. Heiser's publicizing of discussions made by other Christian scholars is no less invalid for a Christian to accept.
Your appeal to scholarship is a logical fallacy. Just because a scholar says so doesn't make it true. Scholars are quite fallible and have even been known to disagree with one another. Instead of heeding them; read the plain meaning of the passage. You interpretation is invalid because the Holy Spirit is never wrong. According to you, Heiser and the bunch of scholars, we are supposed to believe that Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Spirit believed that women should cover their heads and men should uncover their heads because of "sperm contained in hair." Since we know today that that is not scientifically true, that could not have possibly been Paul's reasoning for head coverings. So either the Holy Spirit was wrong, or the Spirit lied to Paul. Take your pick.
Just because a scholar says so in prestigious widely accepted academic Christian journals, actually makes it a topic for public discussion/debate. Will you go out on a limb and proclaim any Christian who accepts Heiser's presentation of this discussion within Christianity as someone who isn't saved? Otherwise you may have to acknowledge that it has some merit.
You have ignored and have failed to explain how Paul was wrong in his thinking that sperm is stored in the hair. Since Paul was inspired by the Holy how could he not have been wrong? Your reply is nonsense to me unless you have a credible explanation. So your answer is??
Here's my direct answer to your question. Dr Heiser cites a 100% hermetical rational explanation about why people believed that hair was involved with the human reproductive system thousands of years ago. Nowadays we understand this "fluid" they observed ejecting from the male penis is scientifically labelled as sperm. Their (including Paul's limit of explaining things) lacked this knowledge, he like the rest of his generation didn't have access to this information as we do now Daniel 12:4. This is not brain surgery or rocket science. It's a 100% hermetic explanation. Basically thousands of years ago in historical preserved written documents which we can read and understand, they (including Paul) believed sperm was stored in the hair!!!
So Paul wasn't confronting and dealing with the ancient Greco Roman world's understanding of physiology? To exaggerate this comment of mine, where can you show he was familiar with Newtonian science and Einstein's theory or relativity?
This is like talking to a brick wall. Do you not realize that you have failed to answer my question repeatedly?? Do you not acknowledge that the Holy Spirit (who cannot be wrong) inspired Paul to write what he wrote, including the reasons he did so? For Paul to believe that sperm was in the hair, the Holy Spirit had to be in agreement that sperm is in the hair. Since the Spirit is truth, it is impossible for your and Heiser's explanation to be the least bit plausible. For your claim to be true, the Spirit would have inspired Paul to write what he wrote for the reason you supply. Since sperm is not in the hair, the Spirit could not have possible caused Paul to write what he wrote for the reason that you and the supposed scholars supply. Comprende?Here's my direct answer to your question. Dr Heiser cites a 100% hermetical rational explanation about why people believed that hair was involved with the human reproductive system thousands of years ago. Nowadays we understand this "fluid" they observed ejecting from the male penis is scientifically labelled as sperm. Their (including Paul's limit of explaining things) lacked this knowledge, he like the rest of his generation didn't have access to this information as we do now Daniel 12:4. This is not brain surgery or rocket science. It's a 100% hermetic explanation. Basically thousands of years ago in historical preserved written documents which we can read and understand, they (including Paul) believed sperm was stored in the hair!!!
Now answer my previous question that you did not include in this reply to my previous comment. Do you believe any Christian who believes Dr. Heiser's analysis as a Christian has lost his salvation?
If you want to be familiar with this Christian argument and discuss it's conclusions, you'll find it here:
No, I've just pointed out that 1. Dr. Heiser isn't breaking golden rules of hermetical analysis and 2. Paul did not have access to the knowledge we have today so his scripture on this topic needs to be understood in its' historical context.
