darinhouston wrote: ↑Tue Apr 25, 2023 11:15 am
dwight92070 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:19 pm
Dwight, I really don't know why we have so much trouble communicating. I will only answer your last question -- the specific context is the immediate context of the answer - that of whether he would have split allegiances and prefer or choose something else over serving and following Jesus. Since Jesus is fully aligned with his Father, one can be fully enslaved to Christ while remaining fully enslaved to the Father's will. It's a perfect vertical relationship.
Not if Christ is not God. It's idolatry to be voluntarily and fully enslaved to someone who is not God. "No one can serve two masters ..." Matthew 6:24 You cannot serve (love, worship) Jesus and God at the same time, if Jesus is not God. Nowhere does the Bible say that we are to love all people to the utmost. I'm sorry you're having trouble communicating. I don't think I'm having that issue. The Bible doesn't say that He has a "perfect vertical relationship with His Father". Nor does the Bible say that "Jesus is fully aligned with His Father". It says that He is the Father. " ... And His name will be called wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father ..." Isaiah 9:6 "I and the Father are One." John 10:30 "God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory."
It is your presuppositions are keeping us from having a meaningful discussion. I simply don't agree with your assumptions. Until we get through that, we'll continue to talk past each other on the details. Not to be in "debate" mode, but this is the first point in debate - to have a meaningful debate or "constructive argument" (and not just a disagreement), you have to figure out where the first and most fundamental premise is on which you disagree. In this response there appear to be a couple.
Dwight -What have I presupposed without backing it up with scripture? What did I assume that is not backed up with scripture? Your differences of interpretation could also be categorized as your presuppositions and your assumptions. But with you, it always seems to be one-sided. You're the expert on debate methods and on how to have a meaningful discussion. And if I don't "fall in line" with the way you say it should be done, then I am at fault. I am always the one who is keeping us from accomplishing anything meaningful. Whether that's intentional or not, all you're doing is focusing on things other than the topic at hand and wasting my time and yours.
The first is whether Jesus is the same person as the Father. We have discussed this at great length and we don't agree with one another - notably, you don't agree with any "Trinitarian" scholar or the church dogmas on the Trinity, either. If we don't agree on that, any more specific points of difference are irrelevant.
Dwight - So here's your "rule" on this issue: If I don't hold to the traditional view of the Trinity, then for me to bring up any of my beliefs that differ with yours or the classic Trinitarian's, become irrelevant. Once again, I'm wasting my time, so I might as well not say anything.
The second is whether it is idolatry to be enslaved to Christ if he's not God. Again, I don't agree with this premise and you can't prove it from Scripture.
Dwight - The scripture's I quoted proved it, but as always, you don't take scripture at face value.
The basic concept of agency and especially royalty bely this.
Dwight - That's your presupposition and your assumption.
If an agent is completely and perfectly serving the interest of their lord, and especially where our service to the lord is dictated to be carried out in service to the agent, then being completely sold out to that agent is consistent with being fully enslaved to the lord.
Dwight - Sounds real intellectual, but the Bible says that there is only ONE that we are to be completely sold out to - not TWO.
With respect to scripture not saying "Jesus is fully aligned with his father," I have pointed out before that this is exactly the way some of the passages we have disagreed on should be interpreted.
Dwight - Should be interpreted? That's your presupposition again. I guess it's not just me that is keeping us from having a meaningful discussion. And this is why, according to you, "we're talking past each other".
Perfect image/representation does mean he's not the thing that's mirrored. It is presumed by the text itself.
Dwight - If that was the only description of Jesus in scripture, I might agree with you, but obviously the full description of Jesus goes far beyond that, even calling Him God.
