The Instigator
telisw37
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
lefillegal1
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Who is the actual (FLESH!) Root of David. I say Adam started the line of David.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 44207
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

telisw37

Pro

If Christ came in the flesh then He used a individual race=Israel/Jew/Line of David.
Rev_5:5, And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
Rev_22:16, I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
lefillegal1

Con

Is that your proof? Misqouted bible texts. I need more to argue against. In the meantime you can figure out how to show me that Adam's bloodline is David's. What I mean by that is this
If Adam started his own bloodline then who started David's? Why, are they different? If there not then why isnt it just called Adam's line? If they are different then how is it Adam's still? Wouldnt that difference be the start of a new line? If it is indeed a new line why shouldnt it be credited to David, the person who started it? My questions can go on and on but I believe youll have a hard enough time just answering these. Good luck
Debate Round No. 1
telisw37

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I must correct him in saying that my opening statement in round one was my only proof that Adam started the line for David. I do say that is proof #1.
My opponent also falsely accused me of misquoting scripture. So i will ask my opponent to tell us all the correct usages of Rev.5:5/Rev.22:16 since my opponent claims to know more than Jesus Christ Himself. Because it is Jesus Christ's Angel giving the passage in Rev.22:16. Is my opponent saying Christ does not know His own roots?
Rev_5:5, And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
Rev_22:16, I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Next will educate my opponent where David's genealogy is found. Chronicles is the book that records the life of David as king along with the witness of Samuel.

1Ch_1:1, Adam, Sheth, Enosh,. I summit it as proof #2
Second witness. The bloodline of Mary leads back to Adam and David meaning King David was is the Great ............ grandson of David and a Great......................... Grandfather of Christ.
Luk_3:31, Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk_3:38, Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

My over-confident opponent is debating a biblical subject and does not know where the story of King David is found. His argument is a hypothetical, nonsense-able bunch of babbling questions right off the top of his own head. Who wished me luck when the bible say's the volume of the scriptures was written of HIM!

Psa_40:7, Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
Heb_10:7, Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Luk_20:37, Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
Luk_20:38, For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
Luk_20:39, Then certain of the scribes answering said, Master, thou hast well said.

Luk_20:40, And after that they durst not ask him any question at all.
Luk_20:41, And he said unto them, How say they that Christ is David's son?
Luk_20:42, And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luk_20:43, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Luk_20:44, David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his son?
Luk_20:45, Then in the audience of all the people he said unto his disciples,
Luk_20:46, Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
Luk_20:47, Which devour widows' houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation.

Are these verses linking David to Jesus out of context too?
lefillegal1

Con

Although my opponent would like you to believe I dont know scripture, he is sadly mistaken. In attempt to attack me he has exposed himself. FIRST and foremost I never claimed nor stated indirectly, that I know more then Jesus. If I made any assumptions about knowing more than someone, clearly that someone is you. Now if you cant see the sarcasm in my questions, then it can be doubted that you yourself know the meaning of " context" Due to the fact that you TRIED to confuse, instead of educate me about scripture, Ill take the time and use scripture CORRECTLY, to educate you about " context" and your flagrant misuse of it.
Who is the actual (flesh) "Root of David". I say Adam started the line of David.
First and foremost i have to point out your misuse of the phrase "Root of David". The phrase itself, is never used in the bible as a reference to flesh. So to ask who is the acual (flesh) root of David is frivolous. But for the sake of argument, Ill use a verse you referenced to prove my point. All translations I use will come from the KJV.
Rev. 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star"
Clearly "root" points to spiritual, while "offspring" points to flesh. Even here Jesus himself states that he is the offspring of David. This begs the question of why Adam wasnt mentioned instead? We can find part of the answer in
Romans 1:3"Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;"
In this verse we have Paul testifying of both Jesus' spiritual and fleshly body. The spiritual is stated with "his Son" and the fleshly is stated in the obvious. A closer examination of this shows Jesus was fashioned after David's flesh, automatically disqualifying being fashioned afterAdam's flesh. But how is a reader to determine this to be true? Well lets examine what Adam was and how it relates to Jesus. What Adam was, was the "first" man. What flesh was this first man made of? Appearently, Adam's flesh was made of "the dust of the ground". Now lets compare that with Jesus. Jesus was the "second" man.
1Cor. 15:47 "The first man is of earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven" What can be easily overlooked in this verse, is the fact that Jesus was the "new" type of man. So while the bible states that Adam's flesh was made of the ground, it also states that Jesus flesh was made out of David's. This makes perfect sense because flesh made out of one ingredient, should be different from a flesh made out of a different ingredient. Another way to look at it is to pretend we are baking cookies. Im baking chocolate chip, youre baking oatmeal. Although they are both indeed cookies they are not the same. The ingredients you began with will produce a different "type" because they are not the same ingredients i started with.
To say that Adam started the Line of David is also frivolous. At the same time its a faulty representation of the truth. First and foremost God starts any and all bloodlines. He decides who your actions will be attributed to. Adam had other sons and daughters but their bloodlines had nothing to do with Seth's. Was this by Adam's choice or God's? God made the difference in Adam's offspring not Adam. Now lets address your reasoning as to why Adam is the start of the Line of David. Here again the phrase "Line of David" speaks of a spiritual line not a fleshly line. It can be stated that Adam is father of all flesh, because indeed we all die, but its not stated that way in the bible. The bible doesn't even state if Adam's flesh was in fact his own flesh. Yet it does infer that David's flesh was in fact David's. In itself, this is a minor point but it shows where our attention should be focused. We are all offspring of Adam or man to be more precise, but the believers amongst us are actually revealed to be God's offspring. For we are not the men born of the flesh, but we are of the men which were born of the spirit. Understand when God seperated A people for himself, he did just that. God made and set the standard for their distinction. One thing that made them distinct, was the fact, that while all men shared Adam's bloodline, they did not share their (jews) bloodline. This may seem unimportant but it serves to show that you must be of Abraham's first then Isaac's and finally Jacob's/Israel's bloodline to be qualified as God's chosen people. It also shows that Adam's bloodline played no role in being qualified as Hebrew/Israelite/Jew. So obviously the distinction is spiritual but it is reflected in its fleshly form as circumcision. The circumcision itself being a change in flesh(although God was focused on spirit). This change in flesh represented no small thing though itself was a small change. It was the physical representation of Gods covenant to his promised and separated people and at the same time it was a physical representation of change in spirit. When the "fleshly" descendants of God's chosen stumbled, God opened his door to the spiritual descendants.
Romans2:28-29 "for he is not a jew, which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God"
The bible records that even if a man has Abraham's, Isaac's, Jacob's/Israel's bloodline, meaning "outwardly jew" he could in fact, not be "Jew". If even the "outwardly jew's" bloodline has no effect in being called "Jew" how then, could Adam's? This shows flesh has little, if any, meaning concerning bloodlines. It also serves to show my point. Which is, if the "outwardly jew" is in fact not a "jew" , then he must be reverted back to Adam's bloodline., which is different from Abraham's, Isaac's, Israel's, Judah's and thus David's bloodline. Therefore Adam could not be the start of David' s line.fleshly or spiritually. Since Adam's bloodline is 1) before David's and 2) at the same time, a different and seperate bloodline. This begs the question is all flesh the same? The bible records its not.
1Cor.15:39 "All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds."
Did you notice the brackets in that verse? They may or may not be italicized in your bible translation. Whether or not if they are in your translation, and whether you realize it or not, they are there for a specific reason. Now since you assumed that I dont know scripture, Ill presuppose that you share the ignorance of those who dont know the reason why they are in brackets or italicized in some translations. Those words are not apart of the original manuscript but are put into it "only" for the ease of translation. Upon looking at this verse for face value it would originally state "All flesh not the same flesh:but one flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, another of birds." Being understood as stated above, the possibilities of different flesh among men is not excluded. So my question to you now is, can you point me to the verses in the bible which say All men share "Adam's flesh" instead of his "sinful nature"? That is if you can first PROVE what "Adam's flesh" is? And more importantly WHO made the distinction in "Adam's flesh" vs the distinction in David's flesh. I say GOD made that distintion and He started the Line of David. Ill even take it further and say if any man started the Line of David, then it was David himself. After all, it was David's ACTIONS and ATTRIBUTES which started the "line" anyway, NOT Adam's. Keeping the meaning of "line" in "context" would save YOU the embarrassment of assuming things, especially the things of which you clearly have know knowledge about.
Debate Round No. 2
telisw37

Pro

I beg to differ with my opponent use or claim's that the Root of David is not the first actual flesh man who had children, beginning David's bloodline. Like a actual tree begins at the Root,
And if Jesus say's He is the Root of David meaning the Alpha of the Bible. The man who was with God and was God. See John 1;1.
So by changing what God said into false traditions of man is saying, You are saying that you do, know more than Jesus.

Nor did my opponent give a solid answer for Rev.22;16 where Christ claims to be the Root and Offspring of David. Yet my opponent clearly said the Root of David is always spiritual and never means a flesh man. And not virgin born Christ in the flesh.
I appeal to the those who have God given common sense. The Root of David is Adam the first man listed in David's family line. Not what false religions teach their blind pew potato's. Who are serving Antichrist.

1Jo_2:18, Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1Jo_2:22, Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jo_4:3, And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jo_1:7, For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

My opponent denies that The Root of David came in the flesh! Notice my opponent refers to one verse of scripture then like the scribes of old just babbles along right off the top of their own head.

Strongs# 3335 - formed means squeezed into, the potter
I appeal to the reader to look-up or Google this word formed and see that my witness is true.
When did God form Himself? Gen.2;5-7 the man to til the ground, and common sense say's that means to make plants grow. Can man make plants grow without the weather? No!
" Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses saith the LORD and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed neither shall there be after me.
" Is Isaiah wrong too?

My opponent babbles more about the outwardly Jew's????
Another bible fact is the Jews came from the sperm of Adam. His=God's people.
The gentiles did not come out of Adam, Because those people were already here. Created in Gen.1;26.

Next I appeal to the common sense of the reader, Host=People.
Gen_2:1, Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
No Adam yet.

" Gen 2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah where there is gold; Gen 2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. Gen 2:13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. Gen 2:14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. "
Notice the gold, (Not of cows.)
Notice the pearls, (Not for pigs.)
Notice the named nation of Assyria no Arabs. Did God forget the people of Assyria?
Notice the named nation of Ethiopia. Did some of Adam's children turn into black people, and others turn brown?
Where did red ruddy white people come from? Adam (Strongs#119) means red ruddy.
Create the land of Havilah outside of Eden because God set a trap for Adam and Eve.
I would like my opponents to explain his religious based argument. And will be the first to agree that what you are saying is taught by the religious right. Who is 99.9% wrong about what is written in the bible.

I will close this round by pointing out that my opponent said that Christ and David did not share the same bloodline.
Claiming again to offer personal wrong opinion denying the bible text. Because a very careful bloodline record called a genealogy listed naming the men in Adam's family from umbilical cord to umbilical cord.
Proof all men do not share the bloodline of Adam. Next I guess my opponent will say that a genealogy is not a birth record but something spiritual, in attempt to fix his false religion who taught him this misinformation posted in this debate.

2Ti_2:16, But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
Tit_1:10, For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:
Tit_3:9, But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
lefillegal1

Con

"I beg to differ with my opponent use or claim's that the Root of David is not the first actual flesh man who had children, beginning David's bloodline."
So your claim is Adam, the first actual flesh man IS the Root of David. And your proof is a misinterpretation of Rev.22:16 which you claim speaks of flesh and not spirit. Ok got it.
"No solid answer for Rev.22:16"
Rev. 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star"
An important part of reading is comprehension. So let me explain it further, since you obviously missed it the first time. If the "Root of David" is speaking about flesh (your claim) and not about spirit (my claim) , then it can be said Adam=Root of David, and Root of David=Jesus, therefore Adam=Jesus and Jesus=Adam! Wow! Are you serious? Well that's YOUR logic not mine.
"I appeal to the those who have God given common sense. The Root of David is Adam the first man listed in David's family line."
YOU state here that "The Root of David IS ADAM.But in Rev.22:16 Jesus states HE is the Root of David. Who's lying, You or Jesus? I think its fair to say YOU!
"My opponent denies that The Root of David came in the flesh! "
And I'm the antichrist!? I'm the liar? Where did I deny the Root of David came in the flesh? Show us. I denied "Adam" was that Root of David, thats all. Do not confuse what you believe about me, with my actual belief.
"Notice my opponent refers to one verse of scripture..."
Really, Can you not count correctly also? Ill ignore yet another lie about me.
"When did God form Himself? Gen.2;5-7 the man to til the ground, and common sense say's that means to make plants grow. Can man make plants grow without the weather? No!"
Youre saying God formed himself, in Gen.2:5-7, and your reason was to make plants grow..therefore God formed himself to make plants grow!? Now that's a new revelation indeed!
" Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses saith the LORD and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed neither shall there be after me."
"Is Isaiah wrong too?"
No! But you are.! According to YOU God was formed, right, So if no other God was formed before OR after him, then how is it that the "Root of David" was formed twice? Once in in Adam and another in Jesus? So again, using the same verse you referenced I ask YOU is Isaiah wrong or are YOU?
"My opponent babbles more about the outwardly Jew's????"
So the Apostle Paul was nothing more than an antichrist who babbled? It was him I was quoting in Rom.28-29.He is the one who spoke of the "Outwardly Jew". I guess those are a few of the verses YOU COULD NOT COUNT right?
"The gentiles did not come out of Adam,
Because those people were already here. Created in Gen.1;26."
Really? Then why does the same man (Adam) which YOU referenced in Gen.2:5-7, call his wife's name Eve? Gen.3:20 says"And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."
Do I really have to explain the "'all" and "living" from that verse. Because last time I checked "all" means "all," and living means "with life". So if Eve is the mother of all living" that would include the gentiles, but thats not possible if the gentiles, according to you, were here before Adam because Eve came from Adam right? If the Gentiles were here before Adam then how is Eve the mother of all living? I cant wait to read the answer to this, that is if you dont duck it like youve done most of my questions.
"Next I appeal to the common sense of the reader, Host=People.Gen_2:1, Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. No Adam yet."
I feel my point above adresses this but I'll add how you blantanly ignored a definition and tried make it fit your purposes. Strong's Concordance H6635 "host" actually says: 1.a mass of persons (or figuratively, things), especially regarding organized for war. (an army) 2. By implication, literally or figuratively (specifically hardship, worship).
I now ask, why did YOU exclude the full definition of "host"? Was it to decieve the readers or YOURSELF?
" Notice the gold, (Not of cows.)...
Notice the named nation of Assyria no Arabs...."
I did notice the gold, the pearls and named nations but did YOU notice that Genesis was written when these people (the Assyrians, Ethiopians, etc ) were around. Why wouldnt Moses use landmarks they would recognize? Ex. I move into my grandparents house when they die. One day my parents come to visit. My dad says " The window in your room, is where I first saw your mom"
Lets look at "context" in action. Isnt the window located in "my" room?Yes. Is this the same window in which my dad FIRST saw my mom? Yes. So why did my dad refer to it as "your" room. I wasn't even born when he first saw my mom! Do you now see why YOU need to FULLY understand "context"? No, not yet? Ok another example. Anyone can say "drive north, then turn east," If given those directions to follow you could end up anywhere. You could drive north past where you were supposed to turn east. Now if someone gives the same directions, with landmarks for references, you'd have a much better chance of locating where to go."drive north to king st. Then turn east.'" Now lets say "king st." was john ave when I was younger but you werent aware of that, would I not use the street name(king st.) you are familiar with. So again, why wouldnt Moses use landmarks his readers were familiar with? Just because he used landmarks as references doesn't mean the people familiar with those landmarks were there in the beginning. You assume that they were, but as I just showed, offer no proof that they were.
"Adam (Strongs#119) means red ruddy."
Did you read the Strong's Concordance BEFORE you read The Bible,? Because this adam (strong's119) is not found anywhere in the creation account. However, Adam (strong's 120 and 121) are found in the creation account. Care to explain, albeit just for laughs.
"I would like my opponents to explain his religious based argument."
Am i hitting the very core of YOUR weak theology so hard that you think its more than one of me. Well I'm just one man(with Christ). Or is YOUR theology so blasphemous that you knew the Holy Spirit would help me? Notice YOU went from addressing "me" in the plural (opponents) to addressing me in the singular (his) Thats because Im one with Christ and our witness us true! What religion did my argument point towards genius? If you must know then my answer is, first a question. What religion did Jesus Christ follow? Because as a true christian I follow Christ wherever he may go. PERIOD.
"I will close this round by pointing out that my opponent said that Christ and David did not share the same bloodline."
Enough with the lies! Where did I say David and Christ do not share the same bloodline, please highlight it for ALL to see and not just yourself.
"Proof all men do not share the bloodline of Adam"
Are you siding with me now? Because, I stated previously that you have to prove to me that all me DO share Adam's bloodline.
"Next I guess"
Exactly! Youre doing alot of geussing! So let me leave you with the one Timothy verse YOU are obviously not familiar with:
2Tim.2:15'Study to show thyself approved unto GOD, a workman that needeth not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth"
And from:
Rom.10:2"For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge."
And from 1Cor.15:34 especially for YOU:
1Cor15:34"awake to righteousness and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame."
Debate Round No. 3
telisw37

Pro

I will let the reader ponder the biblical facts presented. The bible also say's that Satan has deceived the whole world, and my opponent is proving that to be true. The debate is about who is the root of David. Jesus is the Alpha of the bible meaning Christ was is Adam who was in the Garden of God. My opponent is obviously trying to explain false traditions created by man, but not written in the word of God.

Fact! Adam is the first man in David's bloodline so He is the Root. And Alpha of the bible.
Notice that Rev.1;8 which is, means- Currently on the throne, Which was in Eden in the beginning, And which is to come to restore Eden!!!
My opponent is just wrong. But he is religiously right according to traditions of man.
Rev_1:8, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Rev_1:11, Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
Rev_21:6, And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Rev_22:13, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

My opponent asked me to explain Who is the mother of all living.
Eve will be called the mother of all living when Christ will rules this earth. Because simply if you deny the root of David then you are dead. (Spiritually right now!)

I again remind my opponent that the debate is about who started the line of David, not his particular religion. Their are 43,000+ Christian religions all babbling different things while holding up a bible, because the people are too lazy to read it for themselves.

My opponent posted:
An important part of reading is comprehension. So let me explain it further, since you obviously missed it the first time. If the "Root of David" is speaking about flesh (your claim) and not about spirit (my claim) , then it can be said Adam=Root of David, and Root of David=Jesus, therefore Adam=Jesus and Jesus=Adam! Wow! Are you serious? Well that's YOUR logic not mine.
"I appeal to the those who have God given common sense. The Root of David is Adam the first man listed in David's family line."

But he never used his reading COMPREHENSION to explain Luke 3;38!
" Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos which was the son of Seth which was the son of Adam which was the son of God. "

Is my opponent saying this genealogy/birth record spiritual too? I say Christ came in the flesh through the bloodline of King David. I ask the reader to decide who is correct according to the bible, and not correct according to the false traditions set up by man.

I also would like to remind my opponent that we are debating facts, not personal beliefs. I do not debate common sense when speaking about God! Why? God is not logical according to man's standards. But that is also written. Has my opponent ever even read a bible, with understanding?
Isa_55:8, For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Isa_55:9, For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
Isa_55:10, For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
Isa_55:11, So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

I will correct my opponent again, Adam was formed to til the ground. Means control the weather, can man control the weather today? No, however they try.
Case point; Cain had a different job than Able.
Why was Cain upset when God took that ability away. Was Cain upset not being allowed to plow in the hot sun. But mad about becoming a City Planner?
Gen_4:9, And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
Gen_4:10, And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
Gen_4:11, And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
Gen_4:12, When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.
Gen_4:13, And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
Gen_4:14, Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
Gen_4:15, And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
Gen_4:16, And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
Gen_4:17, And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.
Now is my opponent saying Cain returned home to Eve and waited for them to have a daughter to marry!
Yes Adam did have other children but Seth was the next son. So where did Cain get his wife. From the land of Nod created in Gen.1, it was one of the nations finished in Gen.2:1
I say the witness of the bible is true.

Outwardly Jew????????????? He just made that up.
Jesus was born a flesh man Jew. Christ came to His own family first. Jew first, because it is only right to offer a gift to your own family member before a stranger. Example if I gave a car to my friend, but my own son needed one for college. That would be wrong and unfair to my son.
Rom_1:16, For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom_2:9, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom_2:10, But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

I will offer a second witness about the family of God! Yes God has a family. Israel.
" Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. Rev 7:5 Of the tribe of Juda were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad were sealed twelve thousand. Rev 7:6 Of the tribe of Aser were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nepthalim were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses were sealed twelve thousand. Rev 7:7 Of the tribe of Simeon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar were sealed twelve thousand. Rev 7:8 Of the tribe of Zabulon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin were sealed twelve thousand. "

Here are the Gentiles= Everybody else that made it.
Rev_7:9, After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Rev_7:10, And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.

I appeal to the common sense of the reader.
lefillegal1

Con

lefillegal1 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by lefillegal1 3 years ago
lefillegal1
I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. I apologize for the forfeiture. I would like to continue this debate but understand if my opponent would not.
Posted by telisw37 3 years ago
telisw37
I never said they were. You did. Adam was formed to til. The host(Means PEOPLE!!) were finished.
Gen_2:1, Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Adam was formed to til the ground.
Gen_2:5, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Posted by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
Aren't Adam and Eve the 1st humans? Are you mixing Adam with Abraham?
Posted by telisw37 3 years ago
telisw37
To learn the truth about the bible. Also 99.9% of all religions are just wrong.
" Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Rom 1:21 Because that when they knew God they glorified him not as God neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened. Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise they became fools Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man and to birds and fourfooted beasts and creeping things. Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Rom 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator who is blessed for ever. Amen. "
Posted by AnsweringAtheism 3 years ago
AnsweringAtheism
I don't understand what the point is in this debate. What exactly are you trying to prove?
Posted by telisw37 3 years ago
telisw37
No Adam started the Jewish Hebrew race. Not all of mankind.
Posted by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
Assuming you intend to debate someone of the Judeo-Christian faiths, would't Adam be the start of all lines, including David's?
No votes have been placed for this debate.