Featured Christ wanted to be a friend not a master

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

You all accuse me of claiming that "personal attack" when someone disagrees with my views...Here is a prime example of personal attack. I agree with someone and you attack me as playing politics and attempting to gain supporters. Has it occurred to you that I actually AGREE with what he said? Isn't it okay to say you agree when you agree?

Maybe I should start accusing you of trying to offend everyone and become the most despised person on this board...as that COULD be what some interpret by your manner, right? Why not just be KIND to each other as Christ tells us to do? Why does being KIND automatically get the accusation of "being fake" and "politicking" by you? Have you just never been genuinely nice to others simply because you are a nice person?

 

Wow....just wow.

 

Actually you are right about this. You have only addressed my views, not me personally. I wrongly mixed your comments in with those who are in agreement with you.

You are incorrect about this. You have not addressed my actual view. You have set up a strawman and attacked it while virtually ignoring my clarifying comments throughout this thread. You plucked statement from its context and misrepresented my actual views on this subject. That leads me to believe you aren't willingly to have an objective and profitable discussion about this topic. I could be wrong, and I hope I am.

 

Because it is obvious you are clamoring for affirmation.

But if you want to try the nice thing again, I'll go along, again. But you swill likely slip back into to snottiness again and I will get tired of it again and put you in your place again.

But if you want to continue the cycle... I'm game.

 

HAHAHAHAHA!

Extraordinary argument!!

HAHAHAHAHA!

 

Understood...maybe a better statement would be that Jesus wants to be MORE than a master...because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, he wants to be our friends, because he has made known to us his business and has included us in on it. Friendship, like fatherhood, is a higher, or better, or more mature relationship than a master/servant relationship. One is based in law and the other in unconditional love (grace). That is the distinction I was attempting to draw all along.

I think if you read back through this thread you will find that I have clarified this point of view consistently.

Can we now agree on this point?

 

So, then may we all conclude you are clamoring for refutation? If what I wrote seemed 'agreeable' then what you wrote must seem to be equally un-agreeable. Are you canidating to be the most despised on this board? You must be? Maybe it makes you feel like the martyr? Is that it?

 

What specifically do you not agree with about my statement?

What specifically did I take 'too far?'

 

I just read this again...I'm confused.

How do you conclude that my statement isn't problematic, and yet not agree with it? Either it is agreeable or it isn't, right? If it isn't agreeable then can you specifically point out why?

 

I have made bold the error.

A real life example of the early 1800's - Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings.

She was a lot closer than a friend and he was her "master."

 

There is no reason for the believer not to be the friend, the servant, and the slave.

Each title is not exclusive in relation to the others.

Some would hold the view that slave means some mindless drone of deficit relationship, and friend has the opposite meaning of one with an intimate fulfilling relationship.

But such thinking is neither biblical nor practically historical of humankind.

If one is to consider each title as more than a mere relationship but of also follow-ship, then there is no specific conflict of the believer stating they are the servant, friend and slave of the Lord Jesus Christ all at the same time.

 

Nothing? Okay...

 

I wouldn't call it bold, it's more like incognizant...but I agree with the premise.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

Quote where I did so and let's discuss rationally like adults, okay?

If you recall, you plucked my 'friend of God' comment out of its context, which was about female submission and Christ's headship being more in line with one who treats those he leads as 'friends' rather than 'slaves.' I'm not sure how that conversation would fit this accusation, but maybe you can explain? Or, maybe you can quote other examples?

OR...maybe this was a blanket unfounded accusation? We will see based on your response...

I couldn't agree more.

Jesus, NOT ME, said, "I no longer call you slaves, but friends..." What point would you suggest he is attempting to make if not the one I've expounded upon throughout this thread? Could it not be the shift from a law (master/servant) based relationship to a grace (father/son/friend) type relationship? After all, one of the major points of the New Testament is "you are no longer under law but under grace," right? I'm not sure why we are arguing this point? Maybe you can explain.

Again, you never explained what specifically you disagreed with about my statement. And you never explained why you didn't find what I said problematic, but yet you still didn't agree?

Maybe you were just feeling disagreeable that day?