A request

Adam probably wasn't there with Eve at the time. Adam wasn't "supernatural". If there is any blame to be placed, why not ask the question "why was the serpent even there to begin with?".....

Well, you will disagree but I believe the serpent was Satan or sent by Satan. Satan is referred to as "the god of this world" in 2 Corinthians 4:4. Satan has been at odds with the Heavenly Father from before time... When the morning star said In Isaiah 14, expressed a desire to ascend to heaven and exalt his throne above God's stars, claiming he would be like the Most High.

I believe that was the start of going after God's human creation
It is a difficult question for most people to consider, but I'll add to it a little more....

Is the "Serpent" going to be where you're going when you get to "paradise"?
No.
This planet has never been the final destination of the seed of Adam and Eve.
True.
Adam ate of the fruit because he took responsibility for Eve.
I disagree. I think Adam loved her so much and he saw how she loved the fruit and wanted to please her by accepting it from her.

He didn't want to leave her alone.
Not sure. She was not going to physically die at that moment and neither was he. And he did leave her alone long enough for her to get in trouble with that serpent.
The idea that Adam was to blame is preposterous.

I did not exactly blame him. I question why he was not close enough to protect her from the serpent.
Eve was in the transgression....

Agreed. And if by any chance she is found in heaven when I die and I see her, I am going to plant my foot squarely on her back side.
1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Are you sure he wasn't when he saw her living after she ate the fruit? She was deceived, certainly but I feel he was too.
Adam chose Eve.
God made her from his rib. He had no other choice.
He wasn't deceived. He knew what was going to happen to them.

I dont think he did until he ate the fruit
His argument was true.....

Gen 3:12 And God said to him, Who told thee that thou wast naked, unless thou hast eaten of the tree concerning which I charged thee of it alone not to eat?
Gen 3:13 And Adam said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me—she gave me of the tree and I ate.

God already knew what happened. Adam was right. He used the argument that need to be made to God. It was NOT an excuse. It was valid reason for his own actions.

But god did not excuse Adam for that.
God gave Eve to Adam.

Paul parallels this narrative in the bride of Christ.

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
(y)
The "Bride" Christ gave of Himself for......

Oh what manner of God has bestowed upon that we might be called the "sons of God". The twain becoming one flesh.
You understand this. Most do not
 
Nonsense. The "god" always varies.... It has endless throughout all of human history. People even turn "Jehovah" into a fake representation of God with what they believe about Him.

This is why Paul spoke of "casting down imagination and everything that exalts itself above the knowledge of God..... bring into captive every thought to the obedience of Christ"......

Your goal should be to refine what you believe about God narrowly to the point there can be no other....
I learn from these-Matt 24:45= the only ones( teachers) Jesus is with.
 
This is how they talk to me which is why I sometimes give it back to them and say they are brain dead...

Pete, I am going to ask this in private. I am not attacking you, nor am I calling you names. I am really curious.
Are you just playing at being stupid?
Or are you asking this question facetiously?

From many of your posts, you appear to be a well educated, intelligent man. But some of your comments and posts make you look like the most stupid, hard headed, ignorant person ever born.

There is ONLY ONE GOD.
God the Father is the same God as Jesus and the Holy Spirit of God. They are all the same. No, all "fathers" are not God, any more than all temples are THE TEMPLE (in Heaven). Even the Temple in Jerusalem was only modeled after the Temple in Heaven, and was not the REAL TEMPLE.

@Administrator @Runningman
This is what someone recently said to me. I won't name names lol, but they know who they are.

"One of my pet peeves with purists is that they refuse to accept a number of
Christianity's conventional concepts simply because they aren't stated in the Bible
in clear text that a 4th grade kid in elementary school can understand.

Well, I hope purists wake up and realize some day that the Bible wasn't written to
accommodate a child's IQ, rather, it was written to work with a mature IQ, i.e. an
IQ that can reason and add things up, so to speak.

Anyway, you've exhausted my patience; thus it's high time I moved you to my
ignore list. Others will still be able to see your comments, just not me. Sorry."
 
You are having your own debate.

There is not biblical translation that says that John says the Word was The God.

Unitarianism - 1
Trinitarianism - 1

Spend some time reading this explanation of where it is and how it was translated.

From an ancient manuscript from The Hebrew Gospels , John https://www.hebrewgospels.com/_files/ugd/c68db9_a93ec196f4b144948b2632acae6fefab.pdf


YOCHANAN

1. In the beginning was the Son of Eloah. The Son of El was both with El, and the Son of El was Eloah

And that right there, boys and girls is the proof that The Son of God was God.

14. And so El was made flesh and dwelt among you. And we saw his light - and that he is echad alone, and was brought forth
from the Father, who is full of grace and truth.

Check mate.
In John 1:1,2 and beyond, the Word is never called The God. Synergy knows what I am talking about.
 
The scriptures are very clear as to confessions made by God's children as to who Christ was, and to deny who Christ truly was is to reject the word of God.

Jehovah God, revealed first to Moses, came into this world as a Man to redeem His elect people. The invisible, incomprehensible, and infinite God was made flesh to bodily, physically die for us in the person of of His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ. He was not a phantom or spirit, for He said, “A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as you see me have.”

The Almighty Creator God took on the flesh of mere human creatures well below His own angels. The infinite God of heaven became intimately connected to an infant of poverty in the earth. Great! He that the heaven of heavens cannot contain limited Himself to a child of a poor couple in a stable. Manifest. Clearly revealed to the eye, mind, or judgment; open to view or comprehension; obvious. The Word became flesh to declare and reveal God, and the Word of life was manifested (John 1:14, 18; 1st John 1:1:2). Jesus is the brightness of His glory and the express image of God far above the angels (Hebrews 1:1-4). Men and devils have sought for over 2000 years to compromise or deny the full deity of Jesus Christ.

Here is one main reason I truly desire to debate this alone against any other person with me, because I refuse to use the Greek to prove any doctrine, I trust the word of God in the KJV bible that was given to the English speaking people of this world. Also, I believe in the trinity in this sense: According to the work of redemption of God's people. The Godhead is ONE, manifest to us as three according to the redemption of the elect. That's one reason that the trinity is for the most part a NT teaching. Even though some saints understood that the Messiah was God incarnate according to Isaiah 9:6, etc.

The Word did not just share the divine nature, the Word was God PERIOD! Without any qualifications. The Word was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ, by the Word joining Himself to the tabernacle of God's only begotten Son. Jesus being manifest in the flesh has little meaning, for without flesh there is no Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was not manifest in the flesh; God manifest in the flesh was Jesus; know the difference. The Son of God was not manifest in flesh; God manifest in flesh was the Son; know the difference.
There are plently of examples about who to confess Jesus as. Would you be satisified with copying the confession Jesus approved or and leaving it at that?

Peter said the son of man is the son of God. Jesus agreed.

Matthew 16
13When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, He questioned His disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”
14They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
15“But what about you?” Jesus asked. “Who do you say I am?”
16Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven.

So who is the Living God? Let me give you a hint, Jesus is never called the Living God in all of Scripture. Just one of the many many divine names and titles that don't apply to Jesus. (The Living God is the Father)
 
In John 1:1,2 and beyond, the Word is never called The God. Synergy knows what I am talking about.
I don't care what Synergy knows about you or what you are talking about............

Sigh. My point was The Heavenly Father never was called "THE" God by people who know and love him. Or by any Trinitarian.

JN 1:1 states and the Word was God. Unless you are in the NWT or that ancient Hebrew doc I posted yesterday.

OF COURSE THE WORD WAS NEVER CALLED THE GOD.... ANYWHERE.

That would be saying the Word was the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit rolled into a nice package with a big bow on it.

Quit using THE in reference to the Heavenly Father ... The can only apply to The "singular" Godhead which is three and since you do not believe... stop using it

As to Jn 1: 14 we are told And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Since you are having trouble with the Word.... OBVIOUSLY.... can you tell us all what this verse tells you about who the Word was?
 
@Runningman
Anyway, you've exhausted my patience; thus it's high time I moved you to my
ignore list. Others will still be able to see your comments, just not me. Sorry."
How are you two going to debate anyone when you are fighting against each other? Or, is this all fake? I do not trust anyone who denies the deity of Jesus Christ. If one does not love the truth, it is impossible for them to truly love anyone, in the manner in which is taught us from Paul in 1st Cor.13. The only one they love is themselves, and that's not biblical love.

True love, in the biblical sense, is not self love, but rather love that is rooted in God's word before................................................

"ME ~ my rights"........must be denied, and show others the love of God, by putting them before us, even to a point of self denial, even if they may be wrong. Our natural inclination is towards self-love, which can lead to pride, ambition, and a total disregard for others and the destruction of good friendship, etc.
 
Last edited:
@Administrator maybe we can have more than one debate happening at the same time. Since there is one going on now with several posters maybe we can have a more traditional debate with @Runningman against a Trinitarian besides @Red Baker. The same with @Runningman

Maybe @Fred @synergy @praise_yeshua @Titus would be interested. Or another Trinitarian in this thread.

Maybe a sign up sticky where we have @Runningman vs ___________. and another @Studyman vs _____________. @Keiw1 vs __________. etc......

And maybe set a time limit for 1 week. This gives time for prep and a following debate the next week. It can be on many topics and not only Trins vs non trins. We could have Calvinists against non calvinists for example as another debate topic. :)
 
Now you accuse a vicious accuse

When you write things like "The Christ you promote, a Christ that sent Eve into the world with, as you and Civic preach, the deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked talking snake, with no warning, and no "Assistance at all" from this Christ, to engage this monster. A monster "from without", your very words.

.................with no warning, and no "Assistance at all" from this Christ, to engage this monster.Pay attention... in Genesis 1 ans 2 there was no Christ. "No anointed one" or "chosen one," "or messiah." Not in the sense we think of our savior....Give me the thread so I can read this for myself, because God made Adam to take care of Eve.... he didn't. Period. I want to read what RB has said.

In my understanding it was the Christ, (The Scepter of God's Kingdom Ps. 45) through whom God created all things, including the talking snake and Adam and Eve. Isn't that the very foundation of this debate, that "This God" became the prophesied Messiah?

Here is Red Bakers religion concerning this Christ, who became a man in the person of Jesus.

"After God created everything including angels, he left them to their own selves without securing their state in which he created them in, with an exception of the elect angels, them he secured their first estate in which he created them for. Many of the angels left their first estate, and the devil the prince among them, caused Adam and Eve to disobey God, through his subtilty, deceiving Eve first, and she her husband." (#169 Satan and his lies)

As you can see, Calvinism at it's very core, blames the Holy One of Israel, the God of Abraham, for the sins of mankind and even of the devil. Did the Christ place an "Elect Angel" in the garden?

In another place, he said the Christ/God sent Eve into the presence of this Evil that would deceive the whole world, "with no assistance at all".

I mean no offence here, but can't you see the pattern? Red's "judgment" blames God for not helping Eve and satan turn away from Him. Your "Judgment" blames Adam, who God placed over Eve. Eve's "Judgment" blamed a voice that God placed in the garden. Adam's "Judgment" blamed the Woman God gave her.

So when the lipstick is removed, you are all blaming God for the fall of man. But that isn't God's Judgment is it. You can read it for yourself, God's Judgment and yours are two completely different judgments. So then what really happened in the Garden? Wasn't it that Eve rejected God's Judgment, and replaced it with her own, concerning the world God placed her in?

Isn't that the lesson the Christ wants us to learn thro0ugh this story?

Secondly, I don't know if you were ever a parent or not, I'll assume that you were. Please just consider that if you told your son not to steal, even opening the Bible and showing him God's Own Words. And then you sent him off to school, and he was enticed by a voice to steal anyway, would you accept your own judgment and excuses from him?

"But Mom, it's your Job to take care of me", you left me alone with only your words. God "Made you" to take care of me, it's not my fault that I stole of my own free will, it's your fault that I stole, you should have been there to stop me."

We both know that wouldn't fly don't we? My guess is that you would take that boy and whatever he stole back to school and make him give back what he stole, and apologize to who he stole it from, and then you would probably ground your son for a month, in hopes that the chastisement would instill in him the importance of listening to and obeying his Mom, for his own well being.

You feel that the Word was supposed to protect Eve? I dont.

I really want you to understand what I believe, so you can address it honestly. Just hearing or "having" the Word of God protects no one. Hitler "had" the Words of God. The devil "Has" the Word of God. The Pharisees "had" the Word of God. In the example I used of a son, he "had" the Words of God. But as you can surely see, it is being a "Doer" of the Words of his Mom, that would have protected her son from stealing. Had the son simply believed his Mom, or had Eve simply Believed God's Word, and became a "doer" of His Sayings, and not a hearer only, she wouldn't have taken of the tree.

We are told to "Put On" the Armor of God as protection from the enemies in our mind. Just "Having" the armor doesn't help anyone.

That entire idea interferes with not only free will but also predestination but I wont go into that as you have to have a more solid belief to understand

We know by virtue of the very Law God gave Adam and Eve, that they had free will. There is no Law needed for a robot. It simply does what it is programed to do. Adam and Eve, like the God who made them, had free will. But free will must have limitations. Even God places limitation on His Own Free will. He is a Just God. No one makes Him Just, HE simply understands that an unjust "GOD" will end up destroying His Kingdom, so HE places limitations, boundaries, etc., for the Good of His Kingdom. God placed limitations, boundaries on Adam and Eve as well, because HE Loved them and wanted the best for them. Just as you would place boundaries and limitations of your children, and for the same reasons.

As soon as HE said, "Thou shall not", HE created a choice for them. Just as HE gives all men of all times.

Duet. 30: 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that "I have set before you" life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore "choose life", that both thou and thy seed may live:

20 That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: "for he is thy life", and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

And I understand this world's popular religious philosophies, promoted by this world's religious system. I have simply learned to choose God's Judgments over theirs.
 
@Administrator maybe we can have more than one debate happening at the same time. Since there is one going on now with several posters maybe we can have a more traditional debate with @Runningman against a Trinitarian besides @Red Baker.

Maybe @Fred would be interested. Or another Trinitarian in this thread.
We can do that. We just need to get everyone on the same page so they know how is the set up is laid out.
 
In my understanding it was the Christ, (The Scepter of God's Kingdom Ps. 45) through whom God created all things, including the talking snake and Adam and Eve. Isn't that the very foundation of this debate, that "This God" became the prophesied Messiah?

Here is Red Bakers religion concerning this Christ, who became a man in the person of Jesus.

"After God created everything including angels, he left them to their own selves without securing their state in which he created them in, with an exception of the elect angels, them he secured their first estate in which he created them for. Many of the angels left their first estate, and the devil the prince among them, caused Adam and Eve to disobey God, through his subtilty, deceiving Eve first, and she her husband." (#169 Satan and his lies)

As you can see, Calvinism at it's very core, blames the Holy One of Israel, the God of Abraham, for the sins of mankind and even of the devil. Did the Christ place an "Elect Angel" in the garden?

In another place, he said the Christ/God sent Eve into the presence of this Evil that would deceive the whole world, "with no assistance at all".

I mean no offence here, but can't you see the pattern? Red's "judgment" blames God for not helping Eve and satan turn away from Him. Your "Judgment" blames Adam, who God placed over Eve. Eve's "Judgment" blamed a voice that God placed in the garden. Adam's "Judgment" blamed the Woman God gave her.

So when the lipstick is removed, you are all blaming God for the fall of man. But that isn't God's Judgment is it. You can read it for yourself, God's Judgment and yours are two completely different judgments. So then what really happened in the Garden? Wasn't it that Eve rejected God's Judgment, and replaced it with her own, concerning the world God placed her in?

Isn't that the lesson the Christ wants us to learn thro0ugh this story?

Secondly, I don't know if you were ever a parent or not, I'll assume that you were. Please just consider that if you told your son not to steal, even opening the Bible and showing him God's Own Words. And then you sent him off to school, and he was enticed by a voice to steal anyway, would you accept your own judgment and excuses from him?

"But Mom, it's your Job to take care of me", you left me alone with only your words. God "Made you" to take care of me, it's not my fault that I stole of my own free will, it's your fault that I stole, you should have been there to stop me."

We both know that wouldn't fly don't we? My guess is that you would take that boy and whatever he stole back to school and make him give back what he stole, and apologize to who he stole it from, and then you would probably ground your son for a month, in hopes that the chastisement would instill in him the importance of listening to and obeying his Mom, for his own well being.



I really want you to understand what I believe, so you can address it honestly. Just hearing or "having" the Word of God protects no one. Hitler "had" the Words of God. The devil "Has" the Word of God. The Pharisees "had" the Word of God. In the example I used of a son, he "had" the Words of God. But as you can surely see, it is being a "Doer" of the Words of his Mom, that would have protected her son from stealing. Had the son simply believed his Mom, or had Eve simply Believed God's Word, and became a "doer" of His Sayings, and not a hearer only, she wouldn't have taken of the tree.

We are told to "Put On" the Armor of God as protection from the enemies in our mind. Just "Having" the armor doesn't help anyone.



We know by virtue of the very Law God gave Adam and Eve, that they had free will. There is no Law needed for a robot. It simply does what it is programed to do. Adam and Eve, like the God who made them, had free will. But free will must have limitations. Even God places limitation on His Own Free will. He is a Just God. No one makes Him Just, HE simply understands that an unjust "GOD" will end up destroying His Kingdom, so HE places limitations, boundaries, etc., for the Good of His Kingdom. God placed limitations, boundaries on Adam and Eve as well, because HE Loved them and wanted the best for them. Just as you would place boundaries and limitations of your children, and for the same reasons.

As soon as HE said, "Thou shall not", HE created a choice for them. Just as HE gives all men of all times.

Duet. 30: 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that "I have set before you" life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore "choose life", that both thou and thy seed may live:

20 That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: "for he is thy life", and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

And I understand this world's popular religious philosophies, promoted by this world's religious system. I have simply learned to choose God's Judgments over theirs.
Are you joining Runningman and Peterlag in the debate?

I have not heard from you, so dont send me your war and peace length threads until this gets settled one way opr another.

OH YES... I still am forum debating. Peterlag was last in a DM.....
 
Last edited:
I pray to God that no newbies are reading this right now because this is the perfect definition of "Snakepit" and they all would scared to sign up.hilarious.gif
 
@Administrator maybe we can have more than one debate happening at the same time. Since there is one going on now with several posters maybe we can have a more traditional debate with @Runningman against a Trinitarian besides @Red Baker. The same with @Runningman

Maybe @Fred @synergy @praise_yeshua @Titus would be interested. Or another Trinitarian in this thread.

Maybe a sign up sticky where we have @Runningman vs ___________. and another @Studyman vs _____________. @Keiw1 vs __________. etc......

And maybe set a time limit for 1 week. This gives time for prep and a following debate the next week. It can be on many topics and not only Trins vs non trins. We could have Calvinists against non calvinists for example as another debate topic. :)
I'd be willing to sign up but only against a unitarian opponent that understands the Koine Greek NT. I have yet to meet one. I'd be surprised if one does exists. For example, see Post 191 from which @Runningman has yet to respond to. We must both agree to a common source of authority for the debate to go anywhere.

Also, @Runningman appointed himself the Score Keeper in Post 191. I personally don't think we should keep score because it requires a neutral non-biased person to keep score who is rare to find.
 
The Christ "of the Bible" didn't do to Eve what your adopted religion preaches. Your christ may behave in this manner, your christ may create laws impossible for a man to obey, then slaughter men when they don't obey. Your christ may place requirements of Faith on the backs of men, a faith HE Himself refused to live by when HE became a man.

I already showed you Reds own words concerning why Eve sinned. It is a widely popular and believed on Philosophy that God created laws impossible to obey, and yet HE killed thousands of men who disobeyed Him. Red is only one of "many" who come in Christ's Name that preach it is God's Laws that are "Beggarly Elements" of this world, and a "Yoke of Bondage" God placed on the necks of men who trusted Him. This teaching is the very foundation of Catholic and her Protestant daughters religious philosophy. But when a man reads what is actually written, a different Gospel is found.

Also, it is widely taught that Jesus wasn't a mortal human, but came to earth "as God man". They promote the teaching that Jesus overcame Sin, Temptation and death, because HE was God with access to God power no other human was ever allowed access to. In other words, God, the Holy One of Israel, came to earth as a man, but withheld from Himself the "Sinful Flesh" Red preaches to the world HE creates in all men at birth, "because of Adams sin". And according to Red, his Jesus overcame sin and temptation because HE retained for Himself "God Powers" He Himself withheld from all other humans. And that Jesus "overcame", not by Faith, that all others are to Live By, but by accessing God Powers HE withheld from everyone else. Then, when HE overcame, "Because" God can't sin, "Because" can't be tempted, and "Because" God Can't die, HE Glorified Himself by giving Himself a Name above all other Humans.

I will not join this world's religions in such a judgment against the Holy One of Israel.

Jesus, when dealing with the mainstream preachers of His Time, always removed the lipstick when discussing the religious philosophy of the mainstream religions of His Time. Doing this reveals the true nature of a doctrine or philosophy, but can be pretty offensive to those who promote it.

My hope is that others might consider what is actually written in Scriptures, and believe it.

Also... I also do not know if you believe Jesus is God? In the Trinity?

I believe Jesus is the Holy One of Israel, "The Scepter of God's Kingdom", who His God sent into the World in the very beginning to show me in the way that I should go, who became a mortal human for the purpose of Redemption.

I know how popular the whole "Triune God" philosophy is in the world God placed me in, given that many pagan cultures have promoted it. It's pretty clear to me that according to Jesus own Words, HE wasn't a Trinitarian as promoted by the Catholic and her protest daughters.

1 Cor. 11: 3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
 
Back
Top Bottom