And the word is used by a wife to her husband. Yet the man has not power over his own body but the wife, same as the wife yields to her man. 1st Corinthians 7:4
Not sure where LORD is used by wife over husband.
Lord or not, the husband owes his wife his love, same as the great Lord owes His bride His love.
We don't disagree on the love part. I'm on record as stating that is the SINGLE and ONLY determinant of if you are God's or not. We don't disagree on love. I think you are taking two different points, and trying to make them one point. God is LORD to us as a race. He is married to the Church, but not to me personally, except that I'm part of the Church, hopefully. There is not as personal a claim in that marriage when you realize the marriage is to the body of Christ/Church.
Yes. So much of the time you have good theology behind your reasoning. If the Spirit left a man you have nothing but mud. You are a tool. But you are also elohiym, the offspring of God from conception and before. Your body is the temple of God's Holy Spirit or put another way, a space suit for the Son of God.
You go a little too Robert Heinlein here for my tastes. But the gist of what you say we'd be ok on. Some of your particulars I'll roll up and spit at you like a spitball...
Are you and the Father one?
That isn't for me to proclaim, that's His province. If I even dwell on it, I'm putting myself as first importance over Him.
However, scripture says if that is so, then I love as He does. I don't think I'm there yet. That seems a bit beyond me still. It also says that I no longer sin, and I'm quite sure I still do that. So my belief is most likely, not. It would be the same for most folks in here, although I couldn't presume to know who.
No works = evidence of no faith.
affirmative.
???? it specifically says we are tools of His righteousness. In some instances he refers to the body of Christ which is the Church, and sometimes to the individuals IN the body. Those can't be interchanged without changing the meaning of the message. Depending on the conversation, and the point, we may be referred to as either.
And I tell my children that they are my eyes and ears. They are my hands and feet. They are the apple of my eye. Christ is the head. The Holy Spirit, the Father, is the brains of the operation but that doesn't mean He failed to make us in His image.
THen you are telling your children they are tools. Don't read an insult in where there isn't one.
This is a both/and, situation not an either/or situation.
He tells us to come and let us reason together.
Not sure what this has to do with anything. But, yes, he teaches me through my discussing/arguing with you.
He does too serve us. Jesus spoke for the Father and yet got down to wash his disciples' feet.
Make up your mind. Is HE the head, or are we? Do the feet obey the head, or the head obey the feet? Washing their feet was an example of love, and an evidence that love manifests into a servant attitude. On earth, Jesus was different than He was / is as the Word which became flesh. As the Son of Man, he lived as a Man and was NOT Lord of anything at that time, other than the disciples. He was not ruling over Kings as the Lord of Lords/King of Kings role when the Messiah returns will be. His human role is done, fulfilled. Now He is Lord of Lords in truth. We don't hold expectations on the King of all Kings. We wouldn't hold expectations on the Kings on earth. (not that there are any...) KING OF KINGS holds a point of hugely substantial obeisance expected of us. Having expectations of him doing everything for us as if he were Santa is hugely missing the point.
Are you saying God has an elitist attitude?
Hehehe God is the very definition of Elite. Whatever attitude He has is Elite....
He drives my life but even from the passenger seat I can tell I'm a child, not a serf ...or a smurf. (although me and mine are about the right size and with a little blue body paint...)
what do you think SERF means?
Definition of serf
Bing Dictionary
serf[ surf ]
medieval farmworker: an agricultural worker, especially in feudal Europe, who cultivated land belonging to a landowner, and who was bought and sold with the land
Depending on the point being made in the verse, you are either child or serf for that conversation. There is no denying we are the tools he does His work through. Right? In that capacity, we will always be serfs, or servants, or subservient.
You know I believe that works are important. They reveal the heart. But you are wrong if you think that God is not indebted to us.
How, can an omnipotent being be indebted to anyone. :-|
Moreover, He constantly shows us that He thinks we are children, not strangers, outlaws or serfs or he would have fetched us to be hung in the village square already.
If you think serf goes with strangers and outlaws, that is the issue between us right off.
And if we would stop playing robinhood we'd realize that we are not under any laws that we cannot break. We aren't stealing God's royal game from His royal forests. We are hunting in our royal forests, and if we don't act like we believe it we could get ourselves killed out there.
Yeah, we see how well that worked for Adam, taking from the forest as if it were his, and not following the rules laid out by the actual LORD of the land.
You sure you wanna ride with that one?
What of the Promise to Abraham? Didn't Moses prove that God was beholden to His Promise? And didn't God say to Abraham that "I am thy exceeding great reward?" And children are His reward. Psalm 127:3 Just like I would tell my kids, "I'm your treasure and you are mine."
There is a difference in God fulfilling His promise, and you expecting Him to fulfill YOUR interpretation of HIS promises... As soon as we admit, we could be wrong on our interpretations, we start to actually live by faith. As soon as we realize we are totally dependent on Him to keep His promises, we can become poor in Spirit. Until then, we are missing the point. Being strong in Spirit takes you away from, not to Him.
God is obligated to Himself to have children and love them. To have a family for them. If God obligates himself to his own desires and principles concerning us does that make him less than omnipotent?
Nope, but you aren't talking about His obligation to Himself. You are discussing YOUR interpretation of His obligation.
Which puts your expectations, of His Will.
You don't think His love constrains Him? Like your love constrains you? 2 Corinthians 5:14
Do you presume to claim to know the fullness of GOd's love, and what it's ramifications are? If not, then admit you can't "expect" from Him, as you can't understand Him.
And my point was, I can't enforce on Him. Not He can't enforce on Himself.
What is God without love? What is a Father without His Children?
He is GOD. Perhaps we need to discuss what GOD is.
The jews, recognized God's ROYALNESS to the point of not looking at Him, not touching Him, not even saying or writing His name, nor the name we have for Him. They showed the King, His reverance. You are like, "Yo GOD, WazzzuuuupppppPP?! Whadda ya say we go get some food from the fish market, and feed those folks over there!"
How does the King's son act around the King?
In total obeisance.
You do realize that IF he was KING, then all the lands, were His, right? Someone "owned", more like occupied, land at HIS appointment. We are there/here to work the land. We are here to love the neighbors. We are here to carry the Gospel. We are Here to be His instruments to execute His will on earth. You can be His child if you wish to be so precocious, but even IF, you are still His tool that He will use. The tool serves the hand, not the hand serves the tool. Although, the hand will take care of the tool, so it can do it's job.
You owe no man anything but to love one another.
God is not a man.
Everyone we behold is a king, if they have taken the throne they were given.
Now you totally redefine the context the term is used in.
At this point we lost the common ground to discuss it.
