Why did Paul mean in Galatians 3:27-28 when he says that all of the Galatians were one in Christ? Does this contradict what Paul had taught elsewhere about the role of women in the ekklēsia (church)?

Galatians 3:27-28 (NASB) For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

KJV 1 Cor: 14:34  Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.  1Co 14:35  And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.


8 Answers 8


I believe you have misunderstood the context of what Paul is talking about in Gal 3:27-28. Taking the verse in context we see Paul has just been speaking of faith and the law and the verse before draws this out in that it speaks to all that believe, that they are "sons" through faith. He does not mention "daughters" but does endorse this concept and it is "understood", by the verse you are asking about. In fact he goes further to ensure it is understood there is neither distinction nations, the Gentiles are accepted by faith, the Jew and there is no distinction by class or gender. This in context is not speaking of the "role" of men or women in church, this is addressing believers "position" in Christ by faith. As always context context context should be considered. LoveInJesus

  • Welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange! Be sure to take our site tour to learn more about us. We're a little different from other sites,
    – Tau
    Commented Jul 26, 2014 at 0:34
  • 2
    Your answer was good, but you could have embellished it more with textual reference to make your case. You might want to consider some of the suggestions on what constitutes a good answer, found here(meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/653/…).
    – Tau
    Commented Jul 26, 2014 at 0:47
  • Can you please elaborate on "position"? Thanks.
    – Ruminator
    Commented Aug 1, 2018 at 22:45

Galatians 3:27-28 (NASB) For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

St. Paul's point in this passage is that the Law, as unique to the Jews, in itself, does not offer to the Jews a 'more excellent' salvation not available to non-Jews, but in fact it is those who share the same trust and faith in God who recieve the promises made to him—not those who (it's true) were obliged to keep the Law as God's people: the purpose for their reception of the Law was, we might say, threefold: to show forth the impossibility of keeping God's Law, so that it might be demonstrated that it is something other than, even if then unseparable from as part of faith in Him, which was the salvific agent in their salvation—which the New Testament identifies as faith. God wouldn't really accept a burned animal as an exact repayment for sinning against Him: it was the act of faith and obedience which, as the channel of grace, allowed them to recieve the mercy of God and avoid His just wrath (and in fact, this included all falling short of the Law—another proof that the Law itself did not earn forgiveness as such, since breaking it itself demands mercy). And secondly, to sanctify them, (Cf. Joshua 3:5; Joel 1:13-14 etc. Mt 6:18-19) that is, make them able to recieve better rewards in the world to come. And thirdly, to show an example as God's holy nation, to the nations, especially as this foreshadows the role of the church of God as 'the light of the world,' (Mt 5:14; Acts 13:41) which according to the New Testament, is actuallyl a continuation of Israel, since it teaches Israel was always a nation of God spiritually, and that not everyone who happened to be born with Jewish DNA were actually pleasing to God—truly the 'Israel of God' (Gal 6:16; Rom 9:6).

Galatians 3:1-9 (NASB) You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU." So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (NASB) The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

The abovementioned lack of discrimination between races and sexes and such in salvation (it's ability, fruitfulness, power, reward, excellence), doesn't imply no discrimination of roles within the plan of salvation. For example, children aren't allowed to be ministers, men can't be virgin-women, obviously. Likewise, women, according to the New Law, even, are to respect the symbolic significance of man over woman, and God over man. There is also the controversial issue of the plain old differences between men and women phisiologically and psychologically, and such, God's infinite wisdom might be such that He has reasons for ordaining men to such roles as He has, and elected to have women remain silent in church. The seeming arbitrary nature of the rules is not the issue: it is, 'Did God ordain it?' In our case, this command is in Scripture, and even ties it in with an unchangable law of God which is defined for us as still in force in this sense.

  • Thank you. As a result of your answer, you drew my attention to the phrase, "just as the Law also says." This refers to Torah, raising additional questions regarding what Torah also says, including eating non-kosher foods, etc. Is keeping Torah a likely argument from Paul? How about Paul's admonition of Peter regarding keeping Torah? You might also want to visit Philip Payne's website to consider some of his posts: pbpayne.com Having said that, I don't think the question centers on whether one identifies as either an "egalitarian" or a "complementarian," but on God's will.
    – Dieter
    Commented Sep 11, 2023 at 16:01

No, one does not contradict the other:

In Christ, For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

This does not amount to sameness in thought to: Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak. Otherwise there would be neither hand nor head, and all gifts from the Spirit would be the same. For, if we were the same, why would we not have the same functions and gifts? Would there be any merit to doing more or less? What would be the purpose in the Book of Philemon if they were all the same? After becoming a Christian do women stop being able to give birth? Do Christ's men stop being driven and forged by Testosterone?

One pertains to Group AB and the other pertains to group B. In any logical Venn diagram, we see that A does not stop being A nor does B stop being B when they are grouped into AB. I bring this logic forward because Paul was very likely trained in such logic as he was educated by Gamaliel, a Roman, and versed in Greek.

"All one in Christ Jesus" neither makes sense logically nor does it hold water, for many is not 1 without understanding the whole of what Paul is saying. We may all be Americans, but that does not make us all of Asian or African or European descent. But because we are all Americans, we share the freedoms and guarantees of a perfect America and must accept our equality in order to be fully and perfectly American.

While this is not a typical Hermeneutical answer, I think that the question is more about logic than text.

Regardless of belief, one does not preclude the other.


The context of Gal 3:28 is the covenant (cf 2:15-17). Those who are baptized (v27) are members of the covenant just as those who were circumcised in the Old Testament (OT) were members of the covenant. Compare 2:16 (Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made) with 2:29 (If you are in Christ you are Abraham's seed and heir of the promise.)

In saying that there is neither Jew nor Greek, 2:28 is saying that the covenant does not distinguish between Jews and Gentiles. There is no distinction with respect to the covenant as there used to be (cf Acts 10:13-15, 45; 11:7-9, 17-18; Eph 3:5-6). Likewise, with respect to the covenant there is no class distinction between men and women - in the NT women receive the covenant signs of baptism and the Lord's Supper unlike the OT where they did not receive the covenant seals of circumcision and Passover. It is not saying that anatomical differences or differences in calling or roles have been obliterated. Women are still anatomically different then men and still have different callings than men (cf Titus 2:4 with 2:6-8).

  • Welcome to BHSX. Thanks for your contribution. While all agree with your comments and quoted verses, this does not answer the question of the apparent contradiction between Gal 3:27, 28 and 1 Cor 14:34, 35.
    – user25930
    Commented Oct 29, 2018 at 21:40

In Philip Payne’s book, Man and Woman, One in Christ (Zondervan 2009), he builds a detailed, scholarly case on pp 217-267 that the Codex Vaticanus’s distigme (marks in the margin) at the end of v33 indicates that v34 and 35 are interpolations, the text not being Paul’s and added at a later date.

His position avoids the resulting contradiction in 11:5, 13 in that both men and (not so silent) women are permitted to prophesy and pray if they have the proper head covering.

Further evidence includes reading the chapter in context without these two verses, which flows logically without the digression.

He thoroughly documents additional arguments and historical commentary on the controversy.

  • Let me add the comment that I’ve always been baffled by unsupported downvotes. Upvotes and downvotes are supposed to indicate whether the post or answer was “useful.” It’s not supposed to be based on whether someone agrees or disagrees for some unstated reason. The above answer details a published scholarly work on the subject of the question. I didn’t state my own opinion, but merely referenced a scholarly work. If you downvote something, at least have the courtesy and courage to explain why.
    – Dieter
    Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 15:06
  • Why did Paul mean in Galatians 3:27-28 when he says that all of the Galatians were one in Christ? Does this contradict what Paul had taught elsewhere about the role of women in the ekklēsia (church)? Question^^ not whether the text in Corinthians or Timothy was in a margin. That is why I would downvote. You didn't answer question 1 and argued there was no real contradiction for question 2. What would a teacher grade this? Also no resource links, but you do quote and give page numbers, but in order to see that... I must have the book since there is no direct quote. Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 17:51
  • Your answer may be well accepted by one group of people who believe the Bible is flawed today, but it would not be accepted by the second group of people who believe the Bible is God-breathed and maintained by God. It would be the same if in talking about death, the Pharisees and Sadducees began to argue about life after death. The mere mention of life being after death groups them. Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 17:59
  • I also hate random downvotes... so I don't do it unless I have a really good reason... and these are not enough for me to downvote as I do not belong to the "Sadducee" group that holds to an imperfect Bible. Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 18:05
  • 1
    Patrick, I also believe in the perfection of the scriptures in the original manuscript. There have been many documented attempts to edit the scriptures, some successfully, which is why I check the MT against the LXX and DDS, and pay attention to variations in the New Testament text, most of which are fairly trivial. In Codex Vaticanus, there's a humorous margin note described in point 8 here: thetextofthegospels.com/2017/06/…
    – Dieter
    Commented Sep 9, 2023 at 2:00

No, it does not contradict, because in the first instance - the Galatians - the dimension is absolute, unconditional, the ontologico-metaphysical and supra-contextual, related to the very essence of human being, which is one and the same in man and woman, so that the Lord does not save one thing in woman and another thing in man, but it is one nature/essence that He is saving; and the final condition will be the one, which is symbolized by a comparison of this state with that of angels (Mark 12:25), and angels have no gender differences.

But in the second instance - the 1 Cor. - the dimension is relative and conditional, contextual, implying that women in the given traditional socio-political setting were usually not politically active, and therefore, not receiving the same education as men, they were not burdened by supra-family societal obligations like men, and so, men had a certain priority and dominion over them. But this is not absolute, but relative, for this setting can be and will be changed in eternity. But why only in eternity? Even in his own time Paul knew women to whom he would not say "keep silence in church", like, for instance, his disciple, apostlese Thecla. Paul taught her what and how to preach, for she made herself free from all earthly bonds and traditions, in order to embrace not Paul, but the Lord Jesus Christ. Of course in front of such a woman not she, but men should be silent when she speaks, and Paul would order men to be silent before such women.

Paul's relative enjoinment in 1 Cor. is the same as the enjoinment that slaves should be obedient to their masters (Eph. 6:5), but of course it is relative, and the same slave will not be under dominion of his master in the eternity.


No, the two verses are not contradictory. Gal. 3:26-28 establishes that all who are in Christ are of the same inheritance and are co-heirs because God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34)

But, the context of 1 Cor. 14 is speaking of the behavior of both men and women in the assemblies and their uncontrolled, out-of-order exhibitions of speaking with the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the first century AD. There were background cultural issues going on because of the beliefs of Jewish teachings and because of the Greco-Roman treatment of women. 1 2

The Rabbinical teachings of the Jews coming out of the Babylonian captivity during the second temple period rebounded with harsh strictures against women in both assembly and home life, as though by strictly controlling the women, they might avoid any further sins. Maybe the men thought the women were the main reason for their sins of idolatry against God.

The rabbis ruled that women had to sit on separate sides of the assembly, that they could not speak in the assembly, that all singing must be solemn chanting, they were not allowed to study the scriptures, and more. Women were not allowed to speak to men in public, as is still the case in many nations today.

But, Christianity offered women the equality of being co-heirs of the promise, and many women in the early years of the first century held prominent positions and did much for work of the conversions to Christ’s church. On the day of Pentecost, Peter quoted Joel's prophesy of the time of the second destruction of Jerusalem:

And it shall be in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 and also upon My men-servants, and upon My maid-servants, in those days, I will pour out of My Spirit, and they shall prophesy; (Acts 2:17-18, YLT)

The pouring forth of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost at the establishment of Christ’s church in approximately 30-31 AD fell upon both men and women, as had been prophesied from Joel 2:28, in a very male-dominated society.

What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? (1 Cor. 14:36, KJV)

Paul's question was addressed to the men who were prophesying!

And I commend you to Phebe our sister — being a ministrant of the assembly that [is] in Cenchrea — 2 that ye may receive her in the Lord, as doth become saints, and may assist her in whatever matter she may have need of you — for she also became a leader of many, and of myself. (Rom. 16:1-2, YLT)

and on the morrow Paul and his company having gone forth, we came to Cesarea, and having entered into the house of Philip the evangelist — who is of the seven — we remained with him, 9 and this one had four daughters, virgins, prophesying. (1 Cor. 14:36, YLT)

2 Euodia I exhort, and Syntyche I exhort, to be of the same mind in the Lord; 3 and I ask also thee, genuine yoke-fellow, be assisting those women who in the good news did strive along with me, with Clement also, and the others, my fellow-workers, whose names [are] in the book of life. (Phil. 4:2-3, YLT)

These women worked alongside Paul, spreading and teaching the good news to others.

Both men and women are “sons of God” (Gal. 3:26). Both men and women in Christ are of the seed of Abraham and co-heirs of the promise!

and every woman praying or prophesying with the head uncovered, doth dishonour her own head, for it is one and the same thing with her being shaven, (1 Cor. 11:5, YLT)

The women were praying and prophesying in public, and the issue here was that they were to cover their heads when doing so as a sign of subjection to both their husbands and to Christ.

In fact, a close examination 1 Cor. chap. 11 shows the subject is the conduct and manner of dress in the assemblies. 1 Cor. Chap. 14 is an extension of Paul's teachings of behavior in the assemblies. So, the women held a role of praying and prophesying in the first century A.D. in the assemblies as a part of those who received the gifts of the Holy Spirit in that day and time!

You must consider the time period, and that these newly converted Hebrews had suddenly been given new spiritual gifts with which they were learning to contend. They weren’t born with these gifts; they had to learn how to handle them.

If everyone spoke/prophesied at the same time, then there was disorder. If one prophet spoke, the one sitting next to him was to keep still. If those with gifts of tongues (foreign languages) spoke when there was no foreigner attending the assembly, then what use would that be? If there was no interpreter of that foreign language to tell those in the assembly what the tongue-speaker was saying, then no one would benefit.

Likewise, the prophet’s wives - "your women" - were not to interrupt their husbands while speaking in the assembly. But, moreover, 1 Cor. 14:36 is admonishing the men for their tendency to belittle the women as their male-dominated society had been taught to do by their Rabbis. And, that is why the comment about “as also saith the law” is key.

Why would Paul be putting women under the commandment of the law, while preaching throughout his ministry that all of us have been liberated from the law? (Rom. 3:28. 6:14, 7:16, 8:2; Gal. 3:11, 13. 4:15, 5:18; etc) Paul did not quote any scripture in 1 Cor. 14:34-35. Whenever he quoted scripture he typically provided the reference, or said, "it is written." If Paul actually made these statements in 1 Cor. 14:34-35, and there is some question about the authenticity of them, then Paul was quoting back to the men their Rabbinical laws, not God’s law. 3

Again, consider 1 Cor. 14:36, "What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?“

The word of God did not come from men, nor did it come to them only! Paul could not have been teaching that women should remain silent in church when he had previously discussed the dress and conduct while praying and prophesying in church in chapter 11. If these verses are not an addition by some malicious translator, then Paul was chastising the men for their disparity of women.

The problem in 1 Cor. chap. 14 was the orderly conduct in the assemblies with the misuse of the gifts of the Holy Spirit given to the first-century believers. The whole issue was simply that the wives of the prophets were not to interrupt their husbands during assembly and worship service.

Paul plainly shows in other scriptures that women were deacons, ministrants to the assembly, and workers along with men to teach others outside of the assembly. And, as the women and men were praying in the assemblies as the Holy Spirit moved them, then the women were speaking in "church."

1 Cor. 14:35 does not put women beneath men and does not contradict Gal. 3:26.


  1. During the First Temple period women may have held some sacred offices, but with the final victory of monotheism in Judaism at the beginning of the Second Temple period women were completely excluded from officiating in Jewish cultic practices. Their secondary role in the cultus was exemplified by the existence of a women’s court in the Jerusalem Temple, beyond which women were not allowed to proceed into the Inner Court unless they were bringing a special sacrifice (Josephus, Wars 5:198–9, Mishnah Middot 2:5–6).

    Source: Post Biblical and Rabbinic Women

  2. What Role Did Women Play in Ancient Rome

  3. Did Paul Really Say, "Let the Women Keep Silent in the Churches"?

  • @Agarza, can you please reverse your edit of my post? I use italics for the scriptural quotes to call attention and separate God's words from my words. I've done this for years.
    – Gina
    Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 13:59
  • The use of blockquote formatting already separates your words from the source you are quoting. Furthermore, the use of italics can be confusing to the visually impaired that uses a screen reader since italics can denote an emphasis in the wording.
    – agarza
    Commented Aug 14, 2023 at 14:56

Galatians 3:27-28 is an allusion to Genesis 27:1-29. Isaac's eldest son Esau (representing the Jewish people) was entitled to the birthright (the inheritance) but Jakob (representing the believing gentiles) was not. His mother (probably for godly reasons) secured the inheritance for her youngest, Jakob by dressing him up as Esau!:

Gen 27:1  And it came to pass after Isaac was old, that his eyes were dimmed so that he could not see; and he called Esau, his elder son, and said to him, My son; and he said, Behold, I am here.  Gen 27:2  And he said, Behold, I am grown old, and know not the day of my death.  Gen 27:3  Now then take the weapons, both thy quiver and thy bow, and go into the plain, and get me venison,  Gen 27:4  and make me meats, as I like them, and bring them to me that I may eat, that my soul may bless thee, before I die.  Gen 27:5  And Rebecca heard Isaac speaking to Esau his son; and Esau went to the plain to procure venison for his father.  Gen 27:6  And Rebecca said to Jacob her younger son, Behold, I heard thy father speaking to Esau thy brother, saying,  Gen 27:7  Bring me venison, and prepare me meats, that I may eat and bless thee before the Lord before I die.  Gen 27:8  Now then, my son, hearken to me, as I command thee.  Gen 27:9  And go to the cattle and take for me thence two kids, tender and good, and I will make them meats for thy father, as he likes.  Gen 27:10  And thou shalt bring them in to thy father, and he shall eat, that thy father may bless thee before he dies.  Gen 27:11  And Jacob said to his mother Rebecca, Esau my brother is a hairy man, and I a smooth man.  Gen 27:12  Peradventure my father may feel me, and I shall be before him as one ill-intentioned, and I shall bring upon me a curse, and not a blessing.  Gen 27:13  And his mother said to him, On me be thy curse, son; only hearken to my voice, and go and bring them me.  Gen 27:14  So he went and took and brought them to his mother; and his mother made meats, as his father liked them.  Gen 27:15  And Rebecca having taken the fine raiment of her elder son Esau which was with her in the house, put it on [same word as in Galatians 3:27-28!] Jacob her younger son.  Gen 27:16  And she put on [same word as in Galatians 3:27-28!] his arms the skins of the kids, and on the bare parts of his neck.  Gen 27:17  And she gave the meats, and the loaves which she had prepared, into the hands of Jacob her son.  Gen 27:18  And he brought them to his father, and said, Father; and he said, Behold I am here; who art thou, son?  Gen 27:19  And Jacob said to his father, I, Esau thy first-born, have done as thou toldest me; rise, sit, and eat of my venison, that thy soul may bless me.  Gen 27:20  And Isaac said to his son, What is this which thou hast quickly found? And he said, That which the Lord thy God presented before me.  Gen 27:21  And Isaac said to Jacob, Draw night to me, and I will feel thee, son, if thou art my son Esau or not.  Gen 27:22  And Jacob drew night to his father Isaac, and he felt him, and said, The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.  Gen 27:23  And he knew him not, for his hands were as the hands of his brother Esau, hairy; and he blessed him,  Gen 27:24  and he said, Art thou my son Esau? and he said, I am.  Gen 27:25  And he said, Bring hither, and I will eat of thy venison, son, that my soul may bless thee; and he brought it near to him, and he ate, and he brought him wine, and he drank.  Gen 27:26  And Isaac his father said to him, Draw nigh to me, and kiss me, son.  Gen 27:27  And he drew nigh and kissed him, and smelled the smell of his garments, and blessed him, and said, Behold, the smell of my son is as the smell of an abundant field, which the Lord has blessed.  Gen 27:28  And may God give thee of the dew of heaven, and of the fatness of the earth, and abundance of corn and wine.  Gen 27:29  And let nations serve thee, and princes bow down to thee, and be thou lord of thy brother, and the sons of thy father shall do thee reverence; accursed is he that curses thee, and blessed is he that blesses thee.

Paul's theology mostly derives from the law, the writings and the prophets but most importantly from 7 mysteries that Jesus personally directly revealed to him. These are extremely foundational teachings. One of them is found here:

ASV 1Ti 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.

This teaches, I believe that Paul is saying that godliness in the Church Age is not religious activity but Christ. Christ is the very life of the believer:

Gal_2:20  I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Col 3:1  If then ye were raised together with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated on the right hand of God.  Col 3:2  Set your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are upon the earth.  Col 3:3  For ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in God.  Col 3:4  When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in glory.  Col 3:5  Put to death therefore your members which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry;  Col 3:6  for which things' sake cometh the wrath of God upon the sons of disobedience:  Col 3:7  wherein ye also once walked, when ye lived in these things;  Col 3:8  but now do ye also put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful speaking out of your mouth:  Col 3:9  lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his doings,  Col 3:10  and have put on the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of him that created him:  Col 3:11  where there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman; but Christ is all, and in all.

1Co 1:30  But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption:  1Co 1:31  that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

Paul's "exchanged life" does not mitigate Paul's abhorrence of the idea of women in authority in the home or assembly:

1Ti_2:12  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

KJV unless otherwise noted

  • 1
    -1. No need for so long quotations. No need for full verse references everywhere. If you don't use any other translations besides KJV you don't need to say "unless otherwise noted". All this just testifies to a lack of attention...
    – user2672
    Commented Aug 1, 2018 at 18:30
  • My comment is more general than just this answer. Your overall contribution on this site classifies as noise.
    – user2672
    Commented Aug 1, 2018 at 18:53
  • I have raised concerns before; you continue to post low quality content. I don't need your belittling comments.
    – user2672
    Commented Aug 1, 2018 at 19:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.