Instigator / Con
2
1420
rating
396
debates
43.94%
won
Topic
#4256

You can prove biblically the eternal Son.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
2
0

After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

Mall
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two months
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
0
1500
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

This is not necessarily a debate about what those that believe in the false doctrine of the trinity.

But it is a topic I rarely if at all see regarding the Son.

I will elaborate the topic further in round 1 but if you do have questions on the topic, please come forward and I will clarify.

Of course the onus is only on the affirmative (pro position) to stand biblically accurate. If you can't prove the topic statement true it is because you failed to provide biblical substantiation and or the counter points demonstrated your position to be inconsistent/non biblical.

Round 1
Con
#1
Let me go over in full by what I mean by the eternal Son because there are those in the comments guessing what I mean by the brief explanation but are a little timid to face this challenge.
I understand not wanting to get caught in what is perceived to be a trap.
 But it's just an amicable discussion filled with edification.
The eternal Son meaning a being separate from His Father , outside of God as an individual entity that had an infinite everlasting past. That means no beginning perhaps "with" God but outside of God, not in the plan or mind of God.

So the other side has the mission of proving the nature of the Son eternally. The scripture speaks of the nature of angels. The Son of the Father was flesh and blood but prove that the Son did not have a beginning.  

The topic is concerning the eternal Son, not the eternal God so there has to be a being separate outside of God. It can't be what you can say in thought, intention, plan or will of God. That's still tied to God. God's will, work, words are of God, not detached. That would all be the eternal God.

There really isn't any scripture of none that I know that can establish the eternal Son such as this. But there are those that speak, communicate as if there is a such being and they confuse folks many times behind a trinity doctrine when semantics are just being blended up in a figurative argumentative blender. 

Titles and identities are one thing but trying introduce anything other than God where the scripture says I am the LORD and there is none else, falsehood.
Pro
#2
Forfeited
Round 2
Con
#3
I rest my case .
Pro
#4
Forfeited
Round 3
Con
#5
This is disappointing y'all. Who can take a shot at this topic?

Folks in the comments say "me" but it looks like all bark, no bite.

Then you accept the challenge and forfeit the debate.
Pro
#6
Forfeited
Round 4
Con
#7
I rest my case. Mic drop as they say.
Pro
#8
Forfeited
Round 5
Con
#9
Here's another one for the books.
Pro
#10
Forfeited