>>17930611
>Not in terms of labels
I already did, what you call "labels" is a subjective rejection of differences I point out.
>God's ability to communicate remained, unchanged and undegraded by the manifestation of His word
I never contested this, you brought this up for absolutely no reason.
>muh translations
You aren't muslim, translations are valid scripture. There are 5 translations that use because on biblegateway and the same word (https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_3588.htm) in Hebrew in other places is translated as that too. But anyway even the Septuagint uses a because as well.
>And you can quote it saying this, directly?
Yes! Are you blind it says that right there?
>He won't ever actualize any world where He has lied.
Why? You can't say because he said so or that he considers lying evil, since you believe statements like those could be lies themselves.
>the probability is zero
So he cannot do it in any possible world.
>reading images is too hard
Don't care! Your problem is that you blabber on about irrelevant things, if you didn't you could use the character limit comfortably.
>You continue to say things such as
That's about your godhood not Jesus. You are claiming to be God, do you know what the biblical punishment for that is?
>Do you think he was literally "torn from" God?
Yes! in the same manner I explained with the paper analogy. Nothing about that implies the Father could no longer speak. Whatever he does Jesus does according to scripture as I have demonstrated earlier. so he could be manipulated into doing whatever the Father wanted remotely.