@sonship said

You say the office of the Son of God is not eternal and that there is no "eternal Son" in the Bible. How come in your zeal to uphold monotheism Christ is no longer the eternal God the Son?

@divegeester said
How should I know what you do or don’t understand?

@sonship said
Then how do you know I'm pretending?

@divegeester said
I’m suggesting that you are pretending that you don’t understand what I believe the godhead in order to then argument again some straw man you set up.

I’ve told this probably 6 or 7 times now.

On the day, the event and time when 1 Cor. 15:28 says "then the Son Himself also will be subjected to Him who has subjected all things to Him, that God may be all in all" where will Jesus Christ be?

Is it that I look round and He is no longer there or in existence?
Is it that He is just an ordinary man with no deity any longer?

On the day right after He "hands over" [or delivers up] the kingdom to His God and Father, WHERE is He?

@sonship
It is pretty clear to me that you have little comprehension about what I believe. I think the problem is that you are a very poor listener, which is a trait typical of those of a dogmatic mindset and who want to preach their views to others, rather than seek to understand.

If I give you some explanation, if I repeat what I’ve already said to you dozens of times, will you take it in?

@divegeester

The answer to your question is that I will re-examine and see if there has been something I have misunderstood you to be meaning.

This answer of "Yes I will re-examine" is not a complete agreement with you on your first paragraph's indictment.

I have said on this forum a few times before, my style of apologetics is mainly to show why what may be a problem to someone else is not a problem to me. I do not intend to bludgeon anyone down to submission World Wrestling like. Rather I just
aim to say - "You have an objection to my faith? Here's why that particular problem to you is not a problem to me."

So explain if you wish.

@sonship said
@divegeester

The answer to your question is that I will re-examine and see if there has been something I have misunderstood you to be meaning.

This answer of "Yes I will re-examine" is not a complete agreement with you on your first paragraph's indictment.

I have said on this forum a few times before, my style of apologetics is mainly to show why what may be a pro ...[text shortened]... ith? Here's why that particular problem to you is not a problem to me."

So explain if you wish.

@sonship said
@divegeester

So explain if you wish.

@divegeester
Yes.

@sonship said
@divegeester
Yes.

@divegeester

I misread your question.
I was rushing and thought is said "Would you like me to explain?"
My answer was "Yes."

Then coming back I noticed it was "What would you like me to explain?"

Explain what I said in the immediately previous posts about what happens to Christ after He "hands over" or "delivers up the kingdom" to His God and Father. Explain what you mean about that terminating Christ's office as Son of God.

Now, I have something I might write to Mercury. So excuse me while I give him some attention.

@divegeester said
Do you think your behaviour is somehow endearing or edifying?

@divegeester said
Do you think your behaviour is somehow endearing or edifying?

@divegeester said
An open question then...

If there is such a thing as the trinity, then which part or parts of the trinity became flesh?