Every so often I see a comment that is egregiously bad. But this time it isn’t just one comment, it is same one twice, both here and at Sigma Frame: I’ve seen some bad takes over the years, but this one is among the very worst. Let’s start by getting …

I’m not sure how long it will take until I resume my series, but in the meantime, I wanted to include a relevant comment that was posted after I published yesterday’s post, “Genesis 3:16 Revisited.” First, Jack has not responded to any of Pseudonymous Commenter Firefly’s arguments. He’s simply dodged …

Well, one of our old topical standbys is being discussed again. So we’re going to take a brief break from our series to discuss it. A Bit of History Back in 2020, Jack @ Sigma Frame discovered the ESV’s version of Genesis 3:16, which at the time read as follows: …

NOTE: This post is divided into three sections of increasing complexity to suit all reader’s tastes. Stop reading when you’ve had enough. The Short Explanation Over at Patriactionary, the author of “Eve’s Curse” thinks that Matt Cochran’s Twitter thread is a real banger (and, probably, his blog post too). Cochran explains that the …

See this index. One of those common things you often see in the fundamentalist Christian manosphere is the general belief that the Bible must be easy to explain: that the simplest interpretation is the correct one. Most of the time the person making this claim believes that their own arguments …

This is part of a series on patriarchy, headship, and submission. See this index. In “The Tennant Authority Structure“, Lexet and Jack discuss the position of Dominic Bnonn Tennant and his commentors with respect to Genesis 3:16. This is a topic that I mentioned in a citation only a few days …