All posts by gaikokumaniakku

I don’t want to post a tedious argument about Greek on Dalrock’s blog

Update: White, a commenter here, offers an interesting PDF regarding the controversy.  It seems to be from the Lutheran Church:

Here you go.


A Summary
The Greek term authentein occurs only one time in the New Testament at 1 Timothy
2:12, where Paul writes: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a
man; she must be silent” (NIV; the English Standard Version has “exercise authority
over”). Given this single occurrence in the New Testament itself, scholars have had to
look elsewhere for clues as to its probable meaning in this passage. Until recent years
they have been hampered by the relatively few occurrences of the word discovered in
ancient Greek literature, including writings contemporaneous with the New Testament.
However, thanks to the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae project founded in 1972 by the
University of California, Irvine, and a data bank of ancient papyri at Duke University,
researchers now have access to the collected and digitized texts of over 3300 authors and
11,000 works stretching from the 8 th century BC to 1453 AD.
During the past 20 years a number of major studies of authentein have been conducted
making use of the vastly expanded database available. L. E. Wilshire who isolated 314
references to the term and its cognates published the first of these studies in 1988.
Scholars have now been able to refine their conclusions and to limit significantly the
probable range of meaning for this New Testament hapax legomenon (occurring once). In
this response to a request from the Atlantic District of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod regarding the meaning of authentein, the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations has summarized this current research and the conclusions drawn from it,
focusing on the most thorough and comprehensive of them. The Commission has limited
itself to the more narrow task of describing the lexical aspects (relating to word meaning
and vocabulary) of the research, rather than to an exegetical analysis of 1 Timothy 2:12
Debate surrounding the meaning of authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12 has focused on whether
the term is to be viewed as a general or positive concept, with no pejorative connotation,
or whether it has a negative or pejorative meaning (such as “domineer”). The research of
those who have examined in detail all the evidence now available to us shows that the
predominant meaning of authentein in the Greek-speaking world during the time of Jesus
and Paul was the non-pejorative or positive meaning “to exercise authority over.”2
Atlantic District Request
The Assignment.
In a letter dated June 8, 1994, the President of the Atlantic District of The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod forwarded a resolution from the Atlantic District
Convention (June 3-4, 1994) requesting that the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations address concerns related to the “terms and definitions” of the following “as
they explicate how women function as the church”: Priesthood of Believers, Order of
Creation, and the Greek word “authentein” as used in 1 Timothy 2:12. At the
Commission‟s September 1994 meeting, its Executive Committee forwarded this request
to Standing Committee II “as it continues its work on the document „Service of Women
in Congregational Offices.‟” While it did not become possible for the Commission to
incorporate a treatment of these topics in its 1994 report on The Service of Women in
Congregational and Synodical Offices (adopted in November 1994), these subjects
remained on the agenda of the Commission for inclusion in other studies related to the
role of women in the church (e.g., the study on Biblical Revelation and Inclusive
Language [1998] and the “Comprehensive Study of the Scriptural Relationship of Man
and Woman” requested by the 1995 convention).
In reviewing the Atlantic District‟s assignment, and in light of significant
advances in the lexical study of the Greek word authentein (1 Timothy 2:12) in recent
years, the Commission is now better able to respond to this portion of the District‟s
request by providing a summary of the current research on this word. It is not the3
Commission‟s intention in what follows to present a detailed exegesis of 1 Timothy
2:12ff., or to address contemporary applications of this text in the church‟s life and work.
A review of the considerable literature on this word quickly reveals, however, that a
determination of its definition (it occurs only once in the New Testament at 1 Tim. 2:12)
is a matter of no small importance. In his comprehensive and landmark study in 1995, H.
Scott Baldwin has made the observation that “the various definitions proposed result in
surprisingly different interpretations of the verse” (1 Tim. 2:12). 1
David K. Huttar, professor of Bible and Greek at Nyack College in Nyack, New
York, has recently written a highly technical article on the occurrence of authentein in a
9 th century A.D. manuscript of Aeschylus‟s [d. 456 B.C.] Eumenides. He begins the
article by noting that “numerous articles have been written on this word, trying to
establish whether it may have a general sense of holding authority over or whether its
predominating sense is that of a certain kind of authority (illegitimate, violent, abusive,
etc.).” 2 During the past two decades at least 15 studies examining in some detail the
lexical data 3 have appeared, mainly among evangelical scholars holding opposing
positions on the role of women in the church (commonly referred to as a debate of
complementarians vs egalitarians). 4
In 1979 Catherine Kroeger, a classics student at the University of Minnesota,
Andreas J. Köstenberger, Thomas R. Schreiner, and H. Scott Baldwin, eds., Women in the Church: A
Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1995), 66.
David K. Huttar, “AUTHENTEIN in the Aeschylus Scholium,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 44 (December 2001): 615-25, esp. 615.
There are, of course, countless discussions in various commentaries, books, and articles, but the reference
here is to lexical studies as such.
A comprehensive review of this debate and the various questions at issue is presented by Wayne Grudem
in his recently published 850-page book Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth (Sisters, Oregon:
Multnomah Publishers, 2004).4
published an article in which she argued that authenteō is an erotic term best translated
“to engage in fertility practices,” the implication being that in 1 Timothy 2 Paul is
countering specific heretical aberrations in ancient Ephesus and hence not laying down a
principle applicable for all time. 5 Kroeger‟s article prompted a series of responses that
challenged the methodology and substance of her study, leading one scholar to conclude
that her proposal was “more curious than substantive.” 6 In 1992 Kroeger and her husband
Richard argued for a different meaning, suggesting that Paul used authenteō to mean
“proclaim oneself author of a man” in response to “a Gnostic notion of Eve as creator of
Adam.” 7
The appearance of a 1988 study by L. E. Wilshire based on a University of
California database of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae significantly advanced the lexical
study of the term authenteō. 8 Wilshire examined every known occurrence of authenteō
and its cognates (about 314 references) and concluded the following:
Sometime during the spread of koine, the word auvqente,w
went beyond the Attic meaning connecting it with murder
and suicide and into the broader concept of criminal
behavior. It also began to take on the additional meanings
of “to exercise authority/power/rights” which became
firmly established in the Greek Patristic writers to mean
“exercise authority.” 9
C. C. Kroeger, “Ancient Heresies and a Strange Greek Verb,” Reformed Journal 29 (1979):12-15.
Carroll D. Osburn, “
(1 Timothy 2:12),” The Restoration Quarterly 25 (1982):1-12. Also
responding to the Kroeger proposal were: G. W. Knight, “
in Reference to Women in 1
Timothy 2:12,” New Testament Studies 30 (1984): 143-57 [the most comprehensive lexical study to this
point]; A. J. Panning, “
A Word Study,” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 78 (1981): 185-91.
Richard and Catherine Kroeger in I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:12 in Light of Ancient
Evidence (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 103. See note 13 below for responses to this latest proposal of the
The Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG), a research center at the University of California, Irvine founded
in 1972, has collected and digitized most literary texts written in Greek from Homer (8 B.C.) to fall of
Byzantium in A.D. 1453. It currently contains over 3,300 authors and 11,000 works, approximately 89
million words (this information is taken from See note 18 in Baldwin‟s
study [Köstenberger, Schreiner, and Baldwin, 72-73] for information on two CD-ROMs available with the
full database from TLG and a Duke Data Bank of Documentary Papyri).
L.E. Wilshire, “The TLG Computer and Further Reference to
in I Timothy 2:12,” New
Testament Studies 34 (1988):131.
In a subsequent article Wilshire attempted to “clarify” his earlier work, proposing that
authenteō probably meant “instigating violence.” 10 However, in an extensive and
scholarly study surpassing earlier studies in scope, Albert Wolters of Redeemer
University College, Ontario, Canada, has shown that the work of Wilshire and some
others 11 is methodologically and lexicographically flawed. This is principally because
these studies have failed to distinguish carefully not only between the verb authenteō and
the noun authentēs, but more seriously between two meanings of authentēs having two
distinct semantic fields, 12 only one of which can be established to have a direct
relationship to authenteō. 13
We may look with appreciation at the scholarly contributions that have been made
during the past 20 years to the study of the Greek word authenteō. These studies show
conclusively, among other things, that the term was not nearly as rare in ancient usage as
previously thought, though conclusions must further be drawn, of course, regarding
Paul‟s use of it in 1 Timothy 2. Making use of a vastly expanded database, New
L.E. Wilshire, “1 Timothy 2:12 Revisited: A Reply to Paul W. Barnett and Timothy J. Harris,”
Evangelical Quarterly 65 (1993): 53. See Paul W. Barnett, “Wives and Women‟s Ministry (1 Timothy
2:11-15),” Evangelical Quarterly 61 (1989): 225-38; Timothy J. Harris, “Why did Paul Mention Eve‟s
Deception? A Critique of P. W. Barnett‟s Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2,” Evangelical Quarterly 62 (1990):
335-52; Paul W. Barnett, “Authentein once More: A Response to L.E. Wilshire,” Evangelical Quarterly 66
(1994): 159-62.
See, for example, A. C. Perriman, “What Eve Did, What Women Shouldn‟t Do: The Meaning of
auvqente,w in 1 Timothy 2:2,” Tyndale Bulletin 44 (1993): 129-42.
The term “semantic field” or “semantic domain” refers to a way of classifying the meaning of words
according to families of meaning (e.g., words for various plants, words related to each particular human
emotion, virtue, kind of behaviors, etc.). The two volume United Bible Societies‟ Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains by Johannes Louw and Eugene Nida (New York: United
Bible Societies, 1989) classes the senses of various words in this way. See Introduction, Volume 1, vi-xx.
See also Peter Cotterell & Max Turner, Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1989), 154-55; 167-68, and Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to
Lexical Semantics Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), 101-200.
Albert Wolters, “A Semantic Study of authentēs and Its Derivatives,” Journal of Greco-Roman
Christianity and Judaism 1 (2000), 145-75. See Grudem, 317. Specifically responding to the Kroegers‟
study, which has now been shown to be seriously deficient, are: Al Wolters, “Review: I Suffer Not a
Woman,” Calvin Theological Journal 28 (1993): 208-13; Robert W. Yarbrough, “I Suffer Not a Woman: A6
Testament scholars have now been able to refine their conclusions and to limit
significantly the probable range of meaning for this New Testament hapax. As Scott
Baldwin notes in the final paragraph of his important work, “We have come a long way
in our understanding of the meaning of auvqente,w [authenteō] as it is used by speakers
of koine Greek.” 14
Summary of Baldwin’s Study.
In what follows, the Commission has summarized the significant findings of H.
Scott Baldwin in his chapter titled “A Difficult Word: auvqente,w in 1 Timothy 2:12” in
the Köstenberger, Schreiner and Baldwin book previously mentioned (see note 2) and
then also has included a brief summary of the conclusions reached by Al Wolters in his
recent comprehensive study. 15 The Baldwin chapter is readily accessible and it is
methodologically and lexically thorough. It includes an appendix listing the original
Greek texts and English translations of every known occurrence of the verb auvqente,w
[authenteō] for those who wish to examine the evidence themselves. Commendable as
well is this study‟s cautiously modest approach to the evidence, with the repeated
reminder given to the reader that an examination of occurrences of the word
contemporaneous with the New Testament limits the range of possible meanings (and
appreciably so) but does not itself establish with absolute certainty the exact nuance of
Paul‟s use in 1 Timothy 2:12.
Review Essay,” Presbyterion 18 (1992):25-33; and Steven M. Baugh, “The Apostle Paul among the
Amazons,” Westminister Theological Journal 56 (1994):153-71.
Köstenberger, Schreiner, and Baldwin, 80.
See note 13 above. Dr. Wolters has kindly provided a copy of his 30-page article to the CTCR staff.7
Employing two CD-ROMs containing documentary papyri (as well as ostraca—
small pieces of pottery with written items on them) and the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae,
Baldwin has isolated about 110 occurrences of the word authenteō. Removing citations
where church fathers quote 1 Timothy 2:12 and another 10 occurrences in an undatable
work, Baldwin bases his study on 82 references spanning a period of fourteen centuries
(see his “Chronological Distribution Table,” 78).
Baldwin begins his study by noting limitations attached to an investigation of the
meaning based merely on New Testament and ancient Greek lexicons. Their listings of
sources where authenteō can be found are very few in comparison to current data
available, and there is no precise consensus among them on the meaning of the word. 16
With respect to word studies in general, Baldwin stresses the necessity of analyzing the
context of each use of a word, 17 a principle given new importance as a result of modern
linguistic study. Lexical studies, it should be remembered, do not prescribe what a word
must mean nor do they proscribe what it cannot mean in a given context. Rather, they
describe contemporaneous uses of words. Moreover, no lexical study “is a 100 percent
guarantee that a word has a specific meaning in a given passage.” But when a semantic
range is established, the burden of proof lies with those who argue for a meaning not
normal or well attested. Finally, on the basis of lexical data available and through a
See Baldwin‟s Table 3.1 “auvqente,w in Modern Lexicographers” on pages 66-67.
Baldwin warns against the hazards of determining the meaning of words based simply on etymology:
“…the principle is evident, once again, that it is language use, not etymology, which determines meaning
of words” (78).
process of trial and error one must seek to determine the possible meaning of a word in
its specific context. 18
Results of Analysis of the Data.
Limiting his analysis to the verb authenteō, 19 Baldwin concludes that “the one
unifying concept is that of authority” and he presents the following summary table:
1. To rule, to reign sovereignly
2. To control, to dominate 20
a. to compel, to influence someone/thing
b. middle voice: to be in effect, to have legal standing
c. hyperbolically: to domineer/play the tyrant
d. to grant authorization
3. To act independently
a. to assume authority over
b. to exercise one‟s own jurisdiction
c. to flout the authority of
4. To be primarily responsible for or to instigate something
5. To commit murder (10 th Century AD Scholia on Aeschylus 21 )
Baldwin discusses in some detail the data from which each of these meanings is
derived, making the final observation that “there appears among these data only limited
historical development of the meaning of authenteō across fourteen centuries”
[represented by the database]. 22
Baldwin‟s Conclusions.
Baldwin concludes his study by providing the following summary with respect to
the meaning of auvqente,w in 1 Timothy 2:12:
1. The root meaning involves the concept of authority.
Baldwin, 66, 69-71.
The study is limited to the verb for three reasons: 1) “numerous examples in Greek [occur] where the
verbal form does not correspond to all the meanings of the noun”; 2) “this methodology (separating verb
and noun) is the same methodology employed by all recent lexicographers”; and 3) “we have precedent to
separate verb and noun forms—particularly in the case of auvqente,w from the ancient lexicographer
Hesychius” (72-73).
Baldwin cautions the reader not to take “dominate” here in the sense of “domineer.” See note 19, page
73, of his essay.
See note 25.
Baldwin, 78.
2. The context of 1 Timothy 2 appears to make meaning 1,
“to rule, to reign sovereignly,” impermissible. 23
3. Meanings 2 or 2a, “to control, to dominate” or “to
compel, to influence someone,” are entirely possible. 24
4. Meaning 2c, “to play the tyrant,” could only correspond
to Chrysostom‟s unique usage if the context could be
shown to intend the same clear use of hyperbole, and
the context does not seem to do that. 25
5. Noting that auvqente,w is transitive, a translation of
“assume authority over” (i.e., meaning 3a) could be
appropriate, while 3 or 3b, which are intransitive,
would not. If a negative meaning were intended,
meaning 3c, “to flout the authority of,” could be
6. It is difficult to imagine how meaning 2d, “to grant
authorization,” or meaning 4, “to instigate,” would
make sense in 1 Timothy.
7. Meaning 5 appears to be impermissible on
chronological grounds. 26
8. Further syntactical/contextual studies of 1 Timothy are
required to decide with certainty among the meanings
2, 2a, 3a, and 3c.
We may note here that following Baldwin‟s study in the aforementioned volume,
Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, a study of Greek syntax by
Andreas Köstenberger sheds more light on the meaning of authentein as it is used in 1
Timothy 2:12. Köstenberger concludes the following based on an analysis of New
Testament, as well as extrabiblical, examples of syntactical constructions similar to 1
Timothy 2:12:
Since, therefore, the term dida,skein is used absolutely in
the New Testament for an activity that is viewed positively
in and of itself, and since ouvde, coordinates terms that are
In 13 instances the word reflects unhindered authority to act based on inherent or divine right (73).
This meaning “reflects authority from the standpoint of actually having control or ability to dominate an
object” (73).
The only reference intended to convey the negative meaning “tyrannize” or domineer is the c. A.D. 390
Chrysostom quote (75).
While Baldwin thinks that tenth century scholium in the Aeschylus text means murder, Huttar, in the
previously cited article, has called into question this meaning even in this citation—which occurs nine
hundred years removed from the New Testament and even if substantiated hardly provides credible
evidence for this meaning. Huttar has found one other occurrence of the word in a manuscript of the 13 th
century (Huttar, 625; see footnote 3).
either both viewed positively or negatively, auvqente,w
should be seen as denoting an activity that is viewed
positively in and of itself as well. 27
That is to say, according to Köstenberger authentein viewed within its grammatical
context in 1 Timothy 2:12 should not be understood as having a pejorative or negative
connotation (such as, for example, the translation “domineer” would have), but a positive
The Contribution of Albert Wolters.
In 2000 Dr. Al Wolters of Redeemer University College, Ontario, Canada
published his “A Semantic Study of auqe,nthj [authentēs] and Its Derivatives.” 28 On the
basis of a near-exhaustive examination of every occurrence of the noun authentēs and its
derivatives in classical and Hellenistic Greek, Wolters has concluded that this noun
appears to have had three distinct senses in ancient Greek: “murderer,” “master,” and
“doer.” For New Testament scholars, he states, “the issue is whether auvqente,w in 1
Tim. 2.12 is based on the meaning „master‟, thus yielding the traditional rendering „have
authority over‟ (possibly with the pejorative connotation of „domineering‟), or whether it
is semantically indebted to one or both of the other two senses of auqe,nthj.” 29
Wolters first of all summarizes his findings regarding the three meanings of
authentēs. The meaning “murderer,” while found 24 times in classical Greek literature of
the fifth and fourth centuries BC (almost all in Attic writers), became relatively rare,
occurring only 16 times in 7 centuries from its last occurrence in the early fourth century
Köstenberger, Schreiner and Baldwin, 91. Köstenberger also argues on syntactical grounds that
“teaching” and exercising authority” in 1 Tim. 2:12 may well be “perceived jointly,” though they do not
“blend to the extent that they become one concept in which the two constituent elements are no longer
distinguishable” (91).
See note 13 above. The references in the next six footnotes are to this study by Wolters.
Wolters, 146.11
BC to AD 312. However, authentēs “in the meaning „master‟ has a very different
history.” Wolters has identified 30 examples of this meaning in extant Greek literature
from the turn of the era to 312 AD (none of the uses having a pejorative sense), and
observes that this became “the dominant sense of the word.” The third meaning
mentioned above, “doer,” is extremely rare, and is unattested in the first three centuries
after Christ. On the basis of his examination of the data, therefore, Wolters concludes that
the meaning “master” eclipsed the meaning “murderer” and became the “ordinary
meaning” of authentēs in Hellenistic Greek—the meaning “murderer” being no longer
understood “by the great majority of Greek-speakers.” 30
Wolters then examines three derivatives of the noun authentēs, including
authenteō. 31 Looking at eight occurrences of authenteō before 312 AD, Wolters
concludes that all of these examples derive their meaning from authentēs, “master,” and
“have to do with the exercise of authority or sovereignty, almost always in a non-
pejorative sense.” 32 Wolters‟ overall conclusion is that “there was a great semantic divide
in ancient Greek between auvqen,thj „murderer‟ and all other members of the auvqen,thj
family. They belonged to separate semantic domains.” 33
With respect to the implications of his study for the interpretation of 1 Timothy
2:12, Wolters states, in summary:
First, the verb auvqente,w [authenteō] should not be interpreted in light of
auvqen,thj [authentēs]„murderer (but)… in the light of the meaning
which that word had in the living Greek of the day, namely, „master‟.
Secondly, there seems to be no basis for the claim that auvqente,w
[authenteō] in 1 Tim. 2.12 has a pejorative connotation, as in „usurp
authority‟ or „domineer‟. Although it is possible to identify isolated cases
This paragraph is a summary of Wolters‟ conclusions on pages 147-49.
The other two words are: auvqentiko,j (including adverbial auvqentikw/j), with its well-attested meaning
“authoritative,” and auvqenti,a, almost always referring to authority or sovereignty. Wolters, 153ff.; 161ff.
Ibid., 160.
Ibid., 170.
of a pejorative use for both auvqente,w [authenteō] and
auvqenti,a [authentia; „authority‟] these are not found before the fourth
century AD. Overwhelmingly, the authority to which auvqen,thj
[authentēs] ‟master‟ and all its derivatives refer is a positive or neutral
concept. 34
Concluding Observations.
It is important to repeat the point made at the beginning of this response,
namely, that it is not the Commission‟s intention in this response to engage various
exegetical questions that arise in the interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:12. Nor is it the
Commission‟s purpose here to draw conclusions regarding the application of this verse in
the contemporary church. For a discussion of what the New Testament says in general
about the service of women in the church the Commission recommends the continued
study of its 1985 report The Service of Women: Scriptural Principles and Ecclesial
In commenting briefly on the term authentein and the rendering of the
Revised Standard Version (“having authority”), the Commission on Theology and
Church Relations in its 1968 report on Woman Suffrage in the Church expressed the view
that “it would seem that such a translation does not fully reflect the significance of this
particular term.” The Commission stated that “this term really means „usurping authority,
domineering, lording it over‟ someone,” meaning that women “are not to undertake such
things as give evidence of their exercising authority over men in their own right, as
persons created to be subject to men.” 35 This conclusion was based on the evidence
available to the Commission at that time, which was limited largely to the data presented
in the standard lexicons.
Ibid., 170-71.13
In its 1985 report on Women in the Church the Commission understood
authentein in the general sense of “have authority,” noting that “there is no explicit
Scriptural background for interpreting its meaning” and that “it is open to varying
definitions, some of them quite incongruent with Paul‟s actual concern.” 36 When this
report was being prepared, the Commission was aware of some of the studies of
authenteō that had begun to appear, most notably those prepared by Armin J. Panning in
1981 and George Knight in 1984. Though Knight‟s study was based on a limited
database, he concluded in that study: “The R.S.V., N.A.B., N.I.V. and The Translator’s
Testament have caught the essence of the meaning of auvqente,w [authenteō] and present
probably the most satisfactory rendering with their phrase „to have authority‟.” 37 Though
they have expanded and refined Knight‟s analysis, the lexical studies conducted since
1985, in the Commission‟s view, have strongly confirmed Knight‟s basic conclusion. The
studies have confirmed that the term ought to be translated “exercise authority over.” In
the Commission‟s view the English Standard Version accurately translates 1 Timothy
2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she
is to remain quiet.”
Adopted April 16, 2005
Woman Suffrage in the Church, A Report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, 1968,
Women in the Church, 35.
Knight, 155.

end quote.

[Oddly, I can normally embed PDF files, but that one gets rejected by WordPress…]

Here is the post for people who don’t want to argue about how to translate New Testament Greek on Dalrock’s blog.

Post your comments.  Here’s the original relevant verse:

2   1321 [e]
12   didaskein
12   διδάσκειν
12   to teach
12   V-PNA
1161 [e]
1135 [e]
a woman
3756 [e]
2010 [e]
ἐπιτρέπω  ,
I do permit
3761 [e]
831 [e]
to use authority over
435 [e]
ἀνδρός  ,
a man
235 [e]
1510 [e]
to be
1722 [e]
2271 [e]
ἡσυχίᾳ  ;

Back story –

In Brief, there is a guy, Derek Ramsey, who claims to have sola scriptura Christian theological arguments. But when you ask this guy to actually articulate his argument, he claims it’s too long-winded to post.

Derek Ramsey says:
June 21, 2017 at 4:02 pm

The grammar of 1 Tim 2:12 is highly ambiguous. Scholarly material on this is readily available. Shoot down, as you will, the following alternative to the KJV, NIV, and CBMW interpretations.

The proper interpretation rests on the rendering of authentein, a word only used once in the NT (!!). In the hundreds of known uses, it implies aggressiveness and abuse. It does not refer to the normal use of authority (exousía). A better rendering would be to abuse authority in a dominating way.

The Ephesians were dealing with the cult of Artemis which taught that woman was the originator of man. These women were trying to assert their dominance over men by teaching that man comes from woman. Verse 12 instructs the woman not to teach that she dominates a man due to the superiority of her gender. Now the applicability of verse 13 is obvious:…

Derek Ramsey says:
June 21, 2017 at 4:02 pm

The grammar of 1 Tim 2:12 is highly ambiguous. Scholarly material on this is readily available.

If it is readily available then you should look it up and post citations.

If you think grammar is ambiguous then you should walk us through the Greek and explain why you think the grammar is ambiguous.

June 21, 2017 at 10:34 pm

@info – “The only reason it was not exousia is that the husband is not the state. He doesn’t have the power to execute his wife the same way the state can execute criminals. That’s why.”

Three minutes with Strong’s is enough to show that this statement is absurd.

If you understand how to use Strong’s then you should post the details of your argument. We can look up references in books too.

June 22, 2017 at 10:51 pm

@gaikokumaniakku – “If you understand how to use Strong’s then you should post the details of your argument.”

I am generally hesitant to post links in the comments of someone else’s blog without their permission. Citing my arguments could result in many links that take up a lot of space. I’d prefer Dalrock to approve that. I’ll cite by Strong’s by the codes used, and you can just look it up yourself. I use biblehub or blueletterbible. The Greek interlinear translation is also useful.

Grading flame comments on the Seven Deadly Sins

“Oh, suck my dick, you fuckin Xer. One in ten million of you motherfuckers have even done a day’s work in your lives.”

The opening is a sex-themed insult. The “one in ten million” is a ridiculous anti-intellectual generalization. The vague lambasting of laziness is probably projection.

One of my entertainments is to go through comments on the Burning Platform and see how many of the Deadly Sins could reasonably be ascribed to the commenter.

Sexual insult – lust, wrath, and pride
Intellectual laziness- sloth
vague accusation of nonproductive status – pride, envy, and implicit sloth

Unfortunately the comment didn’t address money and food, or else he would have had a chance to score all seven with avarice and gluttony.

All in all, he gets a raw score of five, but only wrath, pride, sloth, and envy are strongly represented, so he gets marked down to four out of seven deadly sins.

Waist Deep in the Just World Hypothesis, and the Baby Boomer says to work harder

I have noticed dozens of Baby Boomers bragging on the Internet about how hard they worked and how much money they have and how much they are enjoying their luxurious retirements.

There is a small element of truth to justify some of that boasting, but for the most part it is destructive and stupid and I will explain why.
Continue reading Waist Deep in the Just World Hypothesis, and the Baby Boomer says to work harder

A Japanese neologism lately making the rounds is one borrowed (as most such are) from English: “self-neglect.” A Japanese-language equivalent translates into “masochistic depression.”

This is the happiest time in the history of the world, and Japan is among the happiest of countries.

That should be true. It’s not, obviously. Why?

Globally, prosperity is wider spread and poverty less abysmal than ever before. Technology enables not only the mighty few but the run-of-the-mill masses — you, me, anyone — to perform miracles and wonders beside which biblical miracles and “Arabian Nights” fantasies pale. Everything we want is the merest click away. Socially, we’re freer than ever before — to live as we please, marry or not as we please, engage in whatever sexual practices turn us on, online or off, physical or virtual, without society batting an eye in disapproval or even surprise.

Our happiness is bounded only by our misery. Which turns out to be boundless.

Earlier this month the BBC summarized a number of studies showing a global decline in sexual activity. The countries specifically cited are the U.S., Britain, Australia and Japan. Various causes are suggested: too much internet use sapping interest in real-life socializing, too much internet porn sapping interest in real-life sex, too much work sapping sexual energy (mocking technology’s early promise of liberation from overwork) and so on. Objections are raised to each of these hypothetical causes, but a qualified consensus is emerging, the report says, to the effect that sexual lethargy “may be due to increasing levels of unhappiness. Western societies in particular have seen a mental health epidemic in the past few decades, focused primarily around depression and anxiety disorders.”

Also this month, The Japan Times published a report under a headline that bluntly inquires, “Why are Japanese teens so glum?” The research cited is by the London-based Varkey Foundation. It finds among Japanese aged 15-21 “the lowest level of net happiness of all 20 countries polled,” with “more Japanese young people (saying) they were unhappy (17 percent) than any other country apart from South Korea (also 17 percent).”

Here, too, reasons are partial and hypothetical, as no doubt they must be. Halfhearted family support is one. Japanese parents, apparently, are more distracted than Chinese, Indian, Nigerian and Indonesian parents, whose children seem markedly happier. Another perceived factor is a sense among young people that Japan is past its prime, while emerging economies, less prosperous for now but heading upward while Japan declines, instill in children a faith, enviable to the less optimistic Japanese, that “the world is not becoming a worse place.”

The weekly Spa! is a persistent chronicler of what might be called prosperous poverty, or maybe Dickensian prosperity. A Japanese neologism lately making the rounds is one borrowed (as most such are) from English: “self-neglect.” A Japanese-language equivalent translates into “masochistic depression.” Spa!’s source on one exemplar is, significantly, a cleaning expert whose specialty is the decreasingly uncommon “garbage house.” You reach a point where you just don’t care anymore, or where filth seems a perversely fitting backdrop to a life gone hopelessly wrong. It happens all too easily.

Yoshitaka Ishimi, the expert in question, tells of entering one such house and finding tacked on the wall a postcard written by a little girl, the late occupant’s daughter. Under a picture she’d drawn of a taxi, she wrote, “Papa, how are you?” She thought her father still worked as a taxi driver. She had no idea how far he’d fallen out of any semblance of orderly life. He’d been dead about two weeks when his body was found by a social worker and Ishimi was called in. It was not suicide, just a slow, apathetic wasting away. Among the garbage was a mountain of instant-noodle containers. It seems to have been all he ate. The kitchen alone was clean. All he’d done there, apparently, was boil water. “Dying alone” is a growing concern, associated mostly with the elderly, but Ishimi’s firm handles 500-odd cases of it a year, and he says 40 percent of the deceased are in their 40s.

“Self neglect” is not clinical depression, which is both worse and better — worse to the point of being clinical whereas self-neglect is not; better because clinical depression sufferers receive sympathy and care as patients, while self-neglectors are too easily dismissed as malingerers. It’s a busy world. Allowances are made (up to a point) for the certifiably sick, but who has time for the merely unhappy?

Unhappiness works in mysterious ways. You never know who it’ll strike, or why, or what form it will take. Spa! tells of a nurse in her 40s — a successful professional woman with a solid work record and friends and family who cared about her. They didn’t know her, though, and didn’t know they didn’t know her. One day she failed to show up at work. Her hospital called her sister. The sister went to her flat, and found the dead body among what turned out to be 7 tons of garbage. Imagine the shock. The sisters were close, and had met regularly, though not at the nurse’s apartment. What happened to her? No one seems to know.

School bullying figures as a cause of unhappiness in the Varkey Foundation report, and office bullying in Spa!’s. It’s a hypercompetitive jungle out there and everyone’s on edge, natural sympathy overwhelmed by pressure to triumph over others and get ahead. Spa! in addition invokes middle-age disillusion, a feeling of being “betrayed by life” among people who, by age 40, have seen to many of their youthful hopes wither. It’s what life does to you. Even the successful succumb, as how can they not when they get home to find, or be reminded, that “all they are to their kids is a walking ATM.”

Somehow the way we’re living, with all its promise of happiness, is making us miserable. Is there anything we can do about it? Spa! has a suggestion, presumably ironic (though maybe not): go homeless. In Osaka’s Airin district, where day laborers congregate and live in flophouses or on the street, a man in his 60s says, “Die alone in a room? No thanks!”

Give him homelessness. What he saves on rent he spends on liquor and, thus fortified, “I can sleep quite comfortably outside.” Maybe we all could. Hopefully, it won’t come to that.

Battles Without Howls And Lupinity

Jin-Roh, the Wolf Brigade
is essentially an art movie.

It is similar to Fukasaku’s work, such as Battles Without Honor Or Humanity.

It’s a damn good movie. But it’s not a date movie. In all probability, your girlfriend will not enjoy watching this with you. This is a damn shame, because I know a few women who like art movies and who want to learn about anime, but this is NOT the movie to spark their interest.

This is a dark and violent and sad movie. It draws on the Brothers Grimm and their treatment of Little Red Riding Hood. It is unfortunately very insightful regarding the nature of modern society. This is unfortunate, because society sucks, and this movie shows us a little slice of that hell.

I was going to write an argument for the existence of God, but then … damn

I had recently allowed myself to get annoyed by some stupid, undereducated oafs arguing for atheism on YouTube.

So I thought I would get an eye-catching visual to head up my refutation of their arguments.

And now I’ve got the eye-catching visual, and suddenly I realize that stupid people argue on YouTube because snappy visuals distract most viewers from the weakness of the arguments.

What I needed was not a snappy visual, but the eloquence to keep a reader’s attention WITHOUT resorting to snappy visuals.

The reader is thus presented with an animated GIF of Anna Chicherova. Whether the GIF motivates the reader to argue for or against God is left as an exercise for the reader.

Prostitutes, Gun Molls, and Gamblers of the Old West

Top 10 Wild Women Of The West



The Wild West of the late 1800s and the turn of the next century was a land with loose laws, big egos, and, of course, adventure. It attracted fiery individuals, with spirits as wild as the terrain, who left colorful pages in history. It was a place where rebellious women roamed free and pushed all the envelopes ever made for the fairer sex. These 10 women reveled in the freedom of the frontier and led lives in a way that still has us talking about them today.


10Calamity Jane

Photo credit: C.E. Finn
Born: Martha Jane Cannary
Lived: May 1, 1852–August 1, 1903
Areas: Wyoming, Utah, Arizona
Calamity Jane is perhaps the most famous of the wild women of the West and for good reason. She pretty much did it all when it comes to the things that brought these women notoriety. She skillfully shot a gun, told tall tales, dabbled in prostitution, committed hefty crimes, and drank—a lot.
Besides her reputation as a drunken outlaw, Calamity Jane was known for her generous heart. She and her siblings were orphaned when Jane was 14, and she took it upon herself to care for them.
This responsibility helped to shape her into a true enigma.[1] While one of her earliest-known careers was as a dance hall girl, she also became famous for wearing men’s clothing and riding alongside the roughest cowboys on whatever work or action she could find.
Jane ended up with a plethora of careers, including a short stint as a storyteller in Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show. However, none of these careers lasted long due to Jane’s unfortunate chronic alcoholism.
Like many of the notable characters from the Wild West, Jane was unashamed about telling a fib. She is known for being a sidekick of Wild Bill Hickok and bragged about their friendship until the day she died. However, many who knew them both said that Jane was, in fact, obsessed with Bill rather than having a true partnership or friendship with him.
Although she was buried next to him, his friends said at the time that the location of the burial was a joke on Hickok. He was rumored to have said that he had “absolutely no use” for Jane.

9Big Nose Kate

Photo via Wikimedia
Born: Maria Katalin Horony
Lived: November 7, 1850–November 2, 1940
Areas: Arizona, Texas
Known primarily for being the longtime companion of Doc Holliday, Big Nose Kate was an indomitable woman to be reckoned with.
Kate’s family emigrated from Hungary to Iowa when she was 10 years old. Tragically, the roughness of the frontier left Kate and her siblings orphaned only three years later. In true outlaw fashion, she ran away from her foster home at age 15 and became a stowaway on a riverboat headed for St. Louis.
She proceeded to dabble in various careers and move around until meeting Doc Holliday in Texas in 1877. History, in fact, would not be the same without Kate, as she was the one who introduced Doc Holliday to Wyatt Earp.[2] Kate and Doc moved to Tombstone, Arizona, with Wyatt and his brothers in 1880, and the rest is history.
Her legacy continues to this day. A Tombstone saloon named in her honor is still one of the best cowboy bars in the entire area.


8Poker Alice

Photo credit:
Born: Alice Ivers
Lived: February 17, 1851–February 27, 1930
Areas: Colorado, South Dakota
Perhaps even more than today, the Wild West was a place where women were given permission to experiment with careers not normally seen as fit for women. Alice Ivers embraced a career as a poker player, a profession still largely dominated by men.
Alice was born in England to conservative parents in 1851. Her father had the wanderlust bug of the age and relocated the family to Colorado. Alice seems to have caught the ailment herself as she fled her family at a young age to marry her first husband, Frank Duffield. This bold act would change the course of Alice’s life forever as Frank was a poker enthusiast, to say the least.
Preferring to accompany her husband out at night, she sat at the tables behind him while he played. When he died in a mining accident a few years into the marriage, Alice took up gambling[3] herself. This led to another interesting Wild West crossover: She made big bucks playing at a bar in Colorado owned by Bob Ford, the man who killed Jesse James.
Alice was known to use her skills to finance a lavish lifestyle and made a show of heading to New York City with large earnings to stock up on the couture fashions of the day. She was also exceptionally shrewd as a professional gambler. It is widely believed that she married her last husband rather than pay off a large gaming debt she owed him.
Humorously, it is reported that Alice refused to play on Sundays despite her nontraditional ways. However, she was still arrested several times for running girls, bootlegging, and public drunkenness.

7Belle Starr

Photo credit:
Born: Myra Maybelle Shirley
Lived: February 5, 1848 – February 3, 1889
Areas: Missouri, Texas
Belle Starr was destined to live a life rubbing shoulders with notable outlaws. She was childhood friends with both the James brothers and the Younger brothers (of the Younger Gang), all native to Missouri. All the families eventually ended up in Texas, where their bonds were strengthened.
In time, Belle married a Cherokee man named Sam Starr who was addicted to a life of crime and could not tolerate traditional employment. During their marriage, Belle became skilled as an organizer for local cowboy gangs, providing refuge for fugitives, bootleggers, and thieves. She was well-known for her class, always riding sidesaddle and in her best black velvet. Belle loved the outlaw life and only quit after Sam was gunned down.
She lived the rest of her life attempting to have less notoriety. Her cause of death, two days before her 41st birthday, remains a mystery with several colorful theories.
At the time, it was reported that Belle was ambushed[4] on her way home from a neighbor’s house late at night. Some believe that she had come from a dance and was killed by a rebuffed attendee with whom she had refused to dance. Still others believe that it was her own son who committed the murder in a fit of adolescent rage.

6Sally Scull

Photo credit:
Born: Sarah Jane Newman
Lived: c. 1817–Unknown Date of Death
Areas: Texas
Sally Scull loved to shoot, loved to intimidate those around her, and loved to marry. She perhaps attracted so many suitors because she intrigued everyone she met. She played poker, was a good shot, and could ride a horse. Sally could also lasso as well as any man and better than many. She combined this with a strong taste for men and must have been a striking and unforgettable woman to encounter.
Sally learned to be brave, bold, and fierce as a young girl growing up in Comanche territory. One famous story recalls her mother chopping off the toes[5] of a local Native American who was trying to break into their home. By the time the family moved to Texas a few years later, Sally had learned to be a quick draw and a skilled horsewoman.
Sally became famous for her skills as what we now call a cowgirl. But her legacy has perhaps survived because of her five husbands and her involvement in the deaths of two of them. In one instance, Sally reportedly fired in shock at her current husband after he poured ice water over her head to wake her one morning.
In another case, her husband and the horse on which he was riding met their deaths when a strong river current overcame them. Rather than expressing any grief, Sally famously said that she wished her husband’s belt buckle had been saved so she could retrieve the $40 it was worth.
Given her abilities and knowledge of the area, Sally was the perfect person to help the Confederacy during the Civil War. She seems to have stayed busy and profited from transporting cotton during those years.
Following the war, her trail runs cold. It is not even known when or how she died. Had she been born a decade later, she could have built a career as an outlaw or frontierswoman. Nonetheless, she still left quite a legacy.


5Laura Bullion

Lived: October 1876–December 2, 1961
Areas: Texas, Tennessee, Missouri
The apple didn’t fall far from the tree with this wild woman. Laura Bullion came from a family who lived on the edge. Her father was a bank robber who was friends with Wild Bunch gang member Ben Kilpatrick (aka “The Tall Texan”), and her uncle was a train robber. Needless to say, her family life was less than stable and she left home at age 15 to make her own way.
As with many infamous female outlaws of this age, Laura started her career of crime as a prostitute. Sadly, she began very early and retired around age 17 when she transferred to robberies with Butch Cassidy’s Wild Bunch. She was likely welcomed into the group because of her father’s connections, and she did, in fact, become romantically involved with Kilpatrick for a time.
Laura is known to have participated in many heists[6] with the Wild Bunch. She is believed to have been involved with many more because she often dressed in men’s clothing and may have gone unrecognized. As with many other outlaws, Laura retreated into a life of traditional employment and a low-profile existence after she was released from prison.
Perhaps most notably, prior to her death, Laura was one of only three people believed to know the true identity of Etta Place, a secret that she happily took to her grave.

4Etta Place

Lived: 1878–Unknown Date of Death
Areas: Utah, Argentina, California
No list of female Wild West outlaws would be complete without at least a mention of Etta Place, the mysterious companion to Harry Longabaugh (aka “the Sundance Kid“). The two were so devoted to each other that she was the only person to flee the country with him and Butch Cassidy and the only woman to stay with a member of the Wild Bunch as long as she did. At the same time, few people from recent history can claim such notoriety and mystery.
Despite Etta being one of the only women to have penetrated the inner circle of the gang and stay with them long-term, little is known about her life before or after her relationship with Longabaugh. It is widely believed that she met the Sundance Kid while working as a prostitute, possibly in Utah, and that the two eventually became devoted companions. When Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid escaped to South America in 1901, Etta was at their side.[7]
There are at least half a dozen theories about Etta after she parted ways with Longabaugh, most of them involving Etta living as a prostitute or outlaw. It is known that she lived in San Francisco in 1907, at least for a little while, but the trail runs cold after that. Estimations about her date of death range from 1922 to 1966. Now that’s one wild woman with a talent for mystique!

3Pearl Hart

Photo via Wikimedia
Born: Pearl Taylor
Lived: 1871–Unknown Date of Death
Areas: Missouri, Arizona
The success of train robbers in the Wild West was lucrative but short-lived. Pearl Hart, besides earning a name as a female gang member, is also famous for being involved in the last of such recorded robberies.
Pearl was a true rebel. Born into a well-to-do family, she eloped at age 16 with an abusive alcoholic with whom she had an on-again, off-again relationship until 1893. Then she discovered Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Showand became infatuated with the cowboy life.
In 1898, she ended up in Phoenix running a tent brothel. When the nearby mine closed, she and a male cohort decided to rob a stagecoach for funds. She cut her hair short and dressed in men’s clothing to commit the crime.
The pair was quickly arrested and ultimately acquitted. (Pearl’s passionate plea to the jury that she needed the money to care for her elderly mother actually worked.) But she was arrested[8] and convicted a short time later for mail tampering.
Pearl had evidently learned a thing or two about using her female charms to her advantage. She used her notoriety to finagle a comfortable stay during her five years in prison. Not only was she granted a comfy mountainside suite, it came complete with an outdoor yard. She was also allowed to visit with the public and pose for photos (for which she received compensation).
Pearl was pardoned in 1902. While the reasons remain unknown, many believed that it was because she became pregnant and the authorities wanted to keep the circumstances secret. She was given a ticket to Kansas City, Missouri, and proceeded to dabble in various careers, even going full circle and working anonymously as a storyteller for Buffalo Bill’s show.

2Fannie Porter

Photo credit:
Lived: February 12, 1873–January 1, 1940
Areas: San Antonio
When it came to the famous outlaws of the Wild West, Fannie Porter rubbed shoulders with them all. However, it was not as a fellow outlaw or lover that she knew them. It was because she owned a brothel that most of them frequented over the years.
As with many of the frontier women who dabbled in prostitution, Fannie started her career at a young age—15 years old. By age 20, she had already become known for her business acumen as a high-end brothel owner, running one of the cleanest, safest, and classiest establishments in Texas.
Fannie didn’t just supply outlaws with short-term company. Many of her “girls,” as she referred to them, became lovers and companions to the most famous Wild West figures.
Until becoming the girlfriend and accomplice to Kid Curry, Della Moore worked at the brothel. She returned after the relationship ended. Lillie Davis was a companion to Will “News” Carver of the Wild Bunch and claimed to have even married him before he died.
Most famously, the mysterious Etta Place is believed by many to have met the Sundance Kid while she was working for Fanny (rather than in a brothel in Utah). However, this has not been confirmed.
As the outlaws disappeared into obscurity and the Golden Age of the Wild West came to an end, Fannie also faded from the public eye. Some say she retired rich,[9] some say she married rich, and some say she returned to England to live well. Whatever the case, many famous outlaws have her to thank for introductions of the most provocative type.

1Lottie Deno

Photo credit:
Born: Carlotta J. Thompkins
Lived: April 21, 1844–February 9, 1934
Areas: Texas, New Mexico
Born Carlotta J. Thompkins, this wild woman was so skilled at poker that she was eventually given the name “Deno,” which was a shortened version of dinero (“money”). Unlike many women who made names for themselves living on the edge of the law during this time, Carlotta was from a wealthy family and from parents who gave her ample care and affection.
She learned to play cards by spending time with her father, a successful gambler and horse breeder. After he was killed in the Civil War, Lottie began her own career at the poker table.[10]
She quickly added fugitive-companion to her resume when she fell in love with Frank Thurmond, also a professional gambler. He was accused of murder, and the two of them went on the lam, happily using poker tosupport their lifestyle.
The pair ended up in Fort Griffin, a quintessential cowboy town, and became friends with Doc Holliday. Fearful of being caught, Lottie and Frank hid their relationship until they were married years later. In Fort Griffin, Lottie’s fame grew as a poker player who was not to be challenged. She became the subject of songs, paintings, novels, and numerous short stories.
Lottie and Frank were a couple with their eyes on the big picture. They eventually married in 1880, used their savings to invest in a number of legit businesses, and settled in New Mexico. There, they became leaders in their community. Their later life found Frank as the vice president of a bank and Lottie as the cofounder of a hospital.

Just World Hypothesis, Millennial Edition: if a Millennial fails, it’s because that Millennial wickedly chose to spurn salvation

The USA used to be a Christian nation.

Back then, the belief was that everyone’s SOUL could be saved. Your body might starve to death, you might have leprosy, but Jesus was omnipotent enough to save your soul. (Jesus might choose not to save someone who wickedly chooses of his own free will to spurn salvation, of course.)

(No amount of material observation or science could refute this claim, because souls are not material.)

Time went on, the USA forsook Jesus, and instead believed in MATERIAL salvation. The faith became the Just World Hypothesis, USA Edition: Everyone has a chance to succeed, if you fail it’s your own fault.

Just-world hypothesis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The just-world hypothesis is the assumption that a person’s actions are inherently inclined to bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, to the end of all noble actions being eventually rewarded and all evil actions eventually punished. In other words, the just-world hypothesis is the tendency to attribute consequences to—or expect consequences as the result of—a universal force that restores moral balance. This belief generally implies the existence of cosmic justice, destiny, divine providence, desert, stability, or order.

This faith is still alive in 2017, as shown by the following:

The refusal to accept pain, to learn from it, and to triumph in the face of the fear that tells us to turn back in from adversity, is what stops us from achieving our maximum potential.

The problem with Mr. Sinek’s advice above is that he refuses to acknowledge that, at some level, Millennials are ENTIRELY to blame for their own predicament after all of the other factors are accounted for. And that is what makes his conclusion so wrong and foolish.

Companies cannot save Millennials. They won’t have the first clue as to how even to start.

To any young Millennial, especially a young Millennial man, reading this, here is your first, last, and most important lesson in life: once you reach the age of majority, everything bad that happens in your life is, at some level, YOUR FAULT.

Only you can fix what is wrong with you. Only you can pick yourself back up after life has beaten you down. Only you can change yourself, push yourself to become stronger and better and more resilient against pain and suffering.

It is a terribly hard journey, make no mistake. But it’s worth the pain.

So if you go through pain, and you DON’T become stronger, IT’S YOUR FAULT for refusing to learn from the pain! In this narrative, the Just World Hypothesis is TRUTH.

This is just rehashed Christianity. If Jesus doesn’t save your soul, it’s because you have free will and you CHOSE to defy Jesus. If you go to Hell you are the only one to blame!

Here is an alternate theory: sometimes pain does make people stronger, and sometimes it doesn’t. Sometimes you can do everything right and STILL get no reward. In this narrative, the Just World Hypothesis is a fallacy.