Sorry Gene,I forgot how many pages I was behind in this thread. This will explain it:Dennison, you missed the earlier joke. I was challenged to prove that every mention of El Shaddai referred to the Father. It can't be done. So instead of letting Is 1:18 win the point, I challenged him to prove from scripture that Jesus is the Son of Man. As…[Read more]

Sorry Gene,I forgot how many pages I was behind in this thread. This will explain it:Dennison, you missed the earlier joke. I was challenged to prove that every mention of El Shaddai referred to the Father. It can't be done. So instead of letting Is 1:18 win the point, I challenged him to prove from scripture that Jesus is the Son of Man. As…[Read more]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 18 2010,00:30)Nike………..I must be missing something here , what are you trying to say, don't you believe that Jesus is indeed a son of Man.Hi Gene,Read the first post on this page. The one from Simply forgiven – I think it is the first post. Read the quotes from me.

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 18 2010,00:30)Nike………..I must be missing something here , what are you trying to say, don't you believe that Jesus is indeed a son of Man.Hi Gene,Read the first post on this page. The one from Simply forgiven – I think it is the first post. Read the quotes from me.

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 17 2010,19:47)I gave you good inferencial proof. Check some commentaries I'd be very surprised if any one of them ascribe the subject in Matthew 26:2 to the thief on the cross. Why? Because the contextual details in the passage make it plain that it is Christ. And of course you would concur with them, if you were being honest…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 17 2010,19:47)I gave you good inferencial proof. Check some commentaries I'd be very surprised if any one of them ascribe the subject in Matthew 26:2 to the thief on the cross. Why? Because the contextual details in the passage make it plain that it is Christ. And of course you would concur with them, if you were being honest…[Read more]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 19 2010,13:33)Hi all,we might as well copy the presidential debates and just have one judge, and two debators,  have the members of HN ask questions to where debators would argue about. what do ya think?I vote for impeachment of that idea.

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 19 2010,13:31)Idk Mike, its your show, choose what you want to do, im here to serve, in whatever you need me for, if you want me to state the obvious for public record than so be it.lol I can be your offical judge in whatever format you choose to debate.Again i believe you perfer a Q&A format. Where a person ask a…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 19 2010,11:32)Quote (david @ June 19 2010,11:20) The burden rests with you.No David. It's your assertion, the burden of proof rests firmly on you.We've been through this before, remember? I asked you to show me from the contextual details of the Genesis El Shaddai passages that the appelative is explicitly applied to the…[Read more]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 19 2010,13:14)Omgosh, A Formal debate is not hard.Again its very simple.Chill out Dennison Fine. Here's my complete opening statement:Stephen was able to see Jesus but only the glory of God before he died. No man can see God. Ergo, Jesus is not God.Good enough?mike

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 19 2010,13:11)Mike can you at this point agree to a debate with KJ? You can pick the resolve (a colossal advantage), let him pick the format and lets be done with all this posturing….Agree to a debate?  We HAVE ONE GOING!   Jack should agree to let others pipe in on our ongoing debate.  No arguments, just some “Answer th…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 19 2010,13:05)Yeah, you hang around like a bad smell….

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 19 2010,12:58)Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 19 2010,12:48)And why can't we finish what we've already started?  Prove you are serious about this and answer my 2 questions on our debate thread.      If you do that, and Dennison agrees you have DIRECTLY answered the points, we can move forward.  I have ALWAYS answered your RELA…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 19 2010,12:53)KJ's got first dibs, I'm happy to wait my turn. I agreed when it looked like your debate had fallen through but now Jack has made a very reasonable offer to you. You should take it up. We can do ours later when i'm on top of my other commitments.I'm not going anywhere……God willing.

Quote (Stu @ June 19 2010,05:27)It is amusing to watch christians arguing over how they will argue over their nonsense fantasy stories.Keep up the good work!StuartYes, Stu. Because we know that all you atheists agree on everything. mike

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 19 2010,03:20)And your disengenuous method of quoting others post!Hmmm…….Paul? ? ?

Hi JackQuote I am still burning from your false accusations that I said that Jesus is above His Father.You actually said that Jesus' love SURPASSED the love of God.  Water under the bridge.  But you shouldn't be mad at me about it – you're the one who said it.   Quote And we did discuss the Right Hand point on Echad 2. I even copied and pasted th…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 18 2010,19:54)Hi SF,I've got some thoughts but I'll wait to see if Mike accepts before I lay it out if that's okay. Mike might not like my conditions but I have to do this on my terms due to some other commitments I have.I already gave my conditions, Paul:1. No million word posts. Let's take ONE point at a time. I know…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 18 2010,16:53)Okay. As long as I can pick the topic, format and timeline.ME!

Quote (t8 @ June 18 2010,16:31)I second that. What about it. To make it easy, just one thing per topic and let people weigh in when one person decides to dodge a legit point.WITH