Ephesians 4:18
Discussion
You can’t quote Paul to defend rejecting Paul. That’s not an argument. That’s irony.
Broken clock
Even a broken clock assumes time exists objectively.
You reject objective authority but keep appealing to Scripture when it’s convenient.
Pick one
I already told you.
I reject authority.
I accept truth.
You conflate the two because it is convenient to outsource your due diligence to some "daddy".
Truth without authority is just your opinion with a halo.
If truth exists objectively, it has a source. That source has authority whether you acknowledge it or not.
You’re not rejecting authority. You’re just crowning yourself as the final arbiter of what’s true. That’s not freedom. That’s the oldest rebellion in the book.
“You will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
How exactly do you think we're supposed to ascend...by NOT becoming more God-like?
What do you think John 14:12 is about?
Following Christ doesn't mean "being a follower".
It means doing what Christ did: seeking truth wherever it could be found, whether that was with the Druids, Egyptians, Hindus, Buddhists, Nagas, Essenes, or somewhere else entirely.
Trailblazers are followers of Christ, not lemmings.
You’re asserting that truth can be found “wherever”without accounting for how you distinguish truth from error. By what standard do you evaluate the Druids against the Egyptians against Christ? You’ve made yourself the ultimate authority while claiming to reject authority. That’s incoherent. Every claim you make about seeking truth presupposes logical absolutes, moral standards, and the reliability of revelation, none of which your eclectic syncretism can ground. You’re standing on Christian assumptions to deny Christianity.
John 14:12 doesn’t teach self deification. It teaches that believers would do greater works in extent through the power of the risen Christ and the Spirit He sent.
By what standard? What the hell are you talking about?
I read the research that others have done.
I carry that in my mind without judgement as I continue researching.
This is where you and I part ways because you pick everything apart before a case can be built.
If you come into the kitchen when the cook is on step 1 and declare that the recipe he's cooking is shit, you haven't offered a valid criticism because you didn't actually sample what he was cooking.
"Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen. Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring. The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"
"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
You're afraid to empty your cup and sample what I'm brewing which ir ironic because the Bible tells you explicitly not to be afraid over 100 times.
You can’t reject all authority and accept truth. To claim anything is true, you’re assuming laws of logic, uniformity of nature, and standards to judge claims.
Where do those come from in your worldview? You’re borrowing from the Christian framework to argue against it. You say “I accept truth” but won’t answer to the God who grounds truth, logic, and intelligibility itself. That’s not independence. That’s theft. You can’t account for the preconditions of the argument you’re making. I can. You’re not rejecting authority. You’re suppressing the truth in unrighteousness while using the tools it provides. Romans 1:18-20.
That must be why you're enlightened and I'm not.
What is photismos?
You’re not arguing theology anymore. You’re just flexing Greek vocabulary to avoid the point.
St. Justin Martyr First Apology chapter 61
You’re citing a Church Father who affirmed the creeds, submitted to apostolic teaching, and died for the exclusive claims of Christ. He’d reject everything you’re arguing.
Stop strip mining patristic sources for quotes that seem to support you while ignoring their entire framework.