>>508472516
>Nice try twisting grammar to dodge the point
I twisted absolutely nothing you pathetic liar.
>Sure, “God exalted him” is past tense
Then you lied. You claimed "future-tense"
Not a single verb in that passage is future tense.
Try not to lie next time if you want to make a valid argument.
>it says “should bow,” not “have bowed.”
Which means right now. If you "should kill yourself" for being a retard it does not mean you're not a retard because you haven't killed yourself yet. You're making up mind-numbingly false logic
>If Christ’s kingship were fully realized now
It is. That is why you "should bow" right now. Your pathetic pilpul that not everyone has bowed YET does not invalidate the fact you "should bow" right now because God's kingship is fully realized right now.
Since you'll just deny this with more pilpul and lies I will catch you with a question. Does..
>at the name of Jesus every knee should bow
#1 Mean bow right now yes or no?
#2 mean or bow later when some arbitrary event is completed yes or no?
When you immediately fail to answer these two simple questions with yes or no I will accept your concession
>Adding “eventually” isn’t my invention
HAHA!!! You're one pathetic liar. You directly inserted a word that is not there because your point fails if you tell the truth and quote the verse directly.
>You’re desperate to read it as a present fact because the world clearly doesn’t reflect that reality.
>Stop pretending your cherry-picked verse overturns the obvious gap between the claim and the lived world.
Completely different (and dishonest) argument. Saying the verse is "wrong" becuase you think God would do X but he's not doing it is not a refutation to the fact the passage is independently saying we should bow right now, not "in the future"
There is NOTHING "future-tense" about that passage itself.
That was your claim and it is a lie.
