Insufficient. In v. 27 the master clearly considers what he gave the servant to be "my own." They are still servants, and the money and cities they control still belong to him.
Did I think you were trained in philosophy?
What do you imagine what a reasonable reader would think when you wrote: Meanwhile, I thank you for the interesting thoughts and I'm wondering if you are a philosophy major or professor(!), and if your posted thoughts evolve from Kant's work.
What I wrote later was, Finally, at one time you thought I might have a background in philosophy.
In light of your earlier post, are you now claiming that you never thought I might have a background in philosophy?
So the answer is no; your only philosophical interest now appears to be a defense of your faith.
As does yours. Or perhaps you could point out where in this dialog you have demonstrated interest in philosophy for the sake of philosophy, rather than simply supporting and defending your beliefs. But I realize that this debate we have had is only a sample of our philosophical interests, and that this sample is neither large nor unbiased, so I would not presume to infer from this data where your philosophical interests lie. To do so would be quite irrational.
But tell me something. When I use philosophy, as you say, to defend my faith, am I using my mind, or not? And according to your idea of the "heaven's gatekeeper question" would God be pleased that I am using my mind in this way? Or would He rather that I apply my mind to rational ethics? Does it matter to Him (your God) how I use my mind, or does it make no difference?
And I have noticed that you have ceased responding to most of the points or questions I have raised in recent posts. You now pick one or two minor points and dispute them. In a war, when one army withdraws from the main battle and begins sniping at individuals on the other side, the army is generally either planning an ambush...or is in retreat.
Are you planning an ambush?
Why bother?
You are not alone in noticing such.