This demonstrates that you have no idea what exegesis is. No concept of what a sincere discussion is. (It is not simply stating your views---that is done at the beginning of a conversation and it moves on from there). You give scripture (always isolated from any context)that you have taken as supporting your views. I return showing with context, surrounding, historical, the full counsel of God on the subject and related subjects, that show it does not, or may not if you prefer, support your view. In response to that if you disagree, you show where it is wrong, and why, using the same method, the same criteria. I do my part. You do not do yours.
That btw is how the word is rightly divided/handled, that keeps it consistent within itself.
To say that you do not understand what I mean or what I refer to, shows that you cannot or will not even learn by example on how to exeget, expound, or discuss. Let alone give any consideration to what anyone says beside yourself and those who agree with you that, in this case, Jesus is not God. (Your view, not mine.) It shows no genuine interest in searching for truth. You are happy with your truth, say it is God's truth on the basis that it is yours, and have no interest in actually finding out. You will hear nothing that says otherwise, so that is a locked door, a locked mind. You will not even learn by example, how to have a discussion and actually support a view.
I will quote from my own post a specific. If you think what I am saying is not accurate, then you must show me why it is not accurate, if you think what I say does not present Jesus as deity, as the Word eternally with the Father, then it is on you to present a valid case against it. Not just hearsay or supposition or speculation, or what ifs and sometimes. If you don't do that, I am not wasting anymore of my time in the discussion.