How does Paul’s teaching about creation relate to his vision of the new creation in Christ? This study explores how Paul’s repeated appeal to Genesis ultimately finds its fulfilment in Christ, the last Adam, and the new humanity God is creating through the gospel.
Why does Paul repeatedly appeal to Adam and Genesis 2 when explaining the gathered church? This study explores why these appeals belong to Paul’s theology of creation and provide the foundation for his understanding of relationships within the people of God.
Are modern discussions of 1 Timothy 2 asking the same question that Paul himself is asking? This study explores whether Paul’s argument is organised around a different theological framework—one grounded in creation, the gathered church, and the gospel.
Should Genesis be interpreted primarily through later theological debates, or should it first be read within its own literary context and alongside the canon’s unfolding interpretation? This study explores why Genesis itself should provide the primary framework for understanding its own message.
Should the primary explanation of Paul’s argument be sought in reconstructed historical circumstances, or in Paul’s own theological explanations? This study argues that historical reconstruction should illuminate Paul’s letters, but never replace Paul’s own explanatory framework.
These two passages are usually studied independently. This study examines their shared vocabulary, theological foundations, and rhetorical structure, asking whether together they reveal a unified Pauline theology of the gathered assembly.
This article offers a constructive alternative to prevailing patterns of reasoning, developing a thicker theological account grounded in Scripture, relational ontology, and Paul’s creational logic. It completes the technical investigation begun in the previous two essays.
This article traces how particular habits of reasoning developed within Christian theology and biblical interpretation. It examines the historical and conceptual shifts that made certain conclusions appear obvious while rendering alternatives implausible.
This article revisits the questions raised in the earlier public series at a fully technical level. It examines patterns of reasoning, hermeneutical assumptions, and ontological commitments that shape how Scripture is read and theology is constructed.
This article offers a full exegetical and conceptual treatment of the argument developed in the preceding essays, examining the biblical text, theological logic, and ontological assumptions in detail. It is written for readers who want to see how the conclusions are grounded in Scripture.