Christians who accept evolution are in error! According to the bible alone!

"Well I will address my opponents false statement about Adam was not literal, or did he say allegory? Please clarify what was literal, and when, and at what point, did the bloodline of Adam stop being a metaphor? When, at what point did a actual, factual, real detailed 'live birth' record umbilical (flesh) cord to umbilical (flesh) cord. That leads from Adam to Noah to Abraham to Virgin Mary to Jesus Christ."I admit that I do not know at exactly which point the Genesis account transitions from metaphor (or parable, if you will) to historical narrative. This is, however, irrelevant to the debate at hand. Might I also point out that theistic evolution does not preclude the existence of a flesh and blood couple named Adam and Eve at some point in history."My opponent's religion ignores the 300+ prophecies concerning Jesus. He had to be a first born of a pure daughter of a direct descendant of Eve."I am unaware of any messianic prophecies that allude to Eve. However, even if such prophecies exist, this does not serve as evidence that a literal Eve existed. One can reference a fictional character to make a point without believing that that fictional character exists."My opponent said The first Adam was not God in flesh just as Jesus was is God in flesh. Yet the entire world wants the world to be restored to the time of Eden. Duh? Who was in charge of Eden? Adam." I am not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. "My opponent denies any part of the bible that exposes his false religion." A more accurate statement might be that I interpret certain parts of the Bible differently from you. "My opponent claims that St.Luke and St.John are liars!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. 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."I made no such claim. And again, one can reference a fictional character without believing in that character's existence. "My opponent said Adam is not relevant? I ask my opponnet is he an expert in what parts of God Word,is relevant, or which part, to throw out, change or ignore?"At no point did I label Adam as irrelevant or call for throwing out or changing or ignoring certain parts of the Bible. "My opponent quoted : ' To clarify again, I never said that David did not exist. Also, viewing one biblical character as metaphorical does not necessisitate viewing other characters as such.') So I ask my opponent how did his religion decide which is metaphorical? Please explain how a metaphore BEGAT King David that really existed?"Adam represents the progenitors of humanity. The original human beings gave birth to the line that led to David. "Anyone trusting a person Protestant religious teaching is not a wise person. Did God's Word change? Or did the god of your Prostant faith change? Is your god two-faced or does he straight up just lie?" Umm... what? "I refute my opponent's assertion that Passover being changed to East'ar (A PAGAN RITUAL) is not relevalent to this debate. Example: If a lawyer catches a witness on the stand lying, the evidence is not creditable. And and be thrown out by the judge, and the judge may order the jury to vote ignoring that witness who lied."Whether or not Christians should celebrate Easter is a separate topic of discussion, and one that I have not disclosed my beliefs on. I can't be convicted for "perjury" if I have said nothing. "This debate is about evolution and the bible, and the errors of Christians who carry a bible yet choose to babble on in ignorance!"Glad we're back on track. "My opponent claims to serve the Prostestant god, and not a Pope! I ask my opponent does he understand who Martin Luther was? And the fact that the early Protestant Church fathers wore caps! I can inform my opponent that Protestant fatih came right out of the Catholic religion."Or maybe not.The Protestant church fathers wore caps. Okay. What's your point? There is no biblical proscription against male head coverings that I am aware of, so I am unsure what your complaint is.Also, I am well aware that Protestantism emerged from Catholicism. That is why it is called "Protestantism." "My opponent posted:'Actually, I'm Protestant, so no, I don't "trust a papal cap wearing Pope.' But, like so many of my opponent's points, whether I am Catholic or Protestant is irrelevant to this debate.'I ask my opponent to explain what is that item on Martin Luther's head?"You caught me red-handed. Protestantism must be a lie of the devil. Lol. "Was he not a priest?"No, actually he was one of the creators of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, meaning that Christians have no need for priests. "He even wore a hat when he left his papal duties! Now I assert that my opponent's witness is not true or creditable, and he seems to make up (Lie?) as he goes? For the record I am not intersted his which branch out of the 1000's of different types/demonations/franchises of Christian religions who carry bibles, to give the pretene that they are bible based, however my opponent just proved, that Protestants only babble like the rest!"My opponent does not seem to realize that his views are in that group. "For the record: nor did I ask which religious franchise he is a member of! I boldly stated that according to the bible Christ is, was, always will be Lord of the Sabbath!"Correct on both counts. You began attacking me without asking which denomination I belong to and Christ will always be Lord of the Sabbath. "In regards to Mary in your closing statement please educate (LOL) me which one of the flesh (BEGETEN/SPERM/BY SEX!!!!!!!!!!!) men in Virgin Mary's, Adam's, David's (OR CAIN'S WHO KILLED ABLE!!!!) birth record was also a myth, allegory, parable, metaphore or figure of speech." See my reply to your question about David's lineage. "Next I must close with asking which body part (Not the brain for sure!) did my opponent pull Theistic Evolution out of?????????"Actually, I rather doubt that that was necessary. Also, I must point out that I did not create the doctrine of theistic evolution and so can't claim credit for pulling it out of anywhere. "Did Darwin the Atheist repent, and get saved and was called by God to teach the gospel by teaching Protestant Christians that men evolved from maggots to monkeys?"At no point in his life was Charles Darwin an atheist.[1]"Making the Creator God a liar who claimed to have created KIND AFTER KIND!!! So why God need Noah? At what point/on what day in Genesis in Theistic Evolution did maggots turn to men? Educate us all!"I do not believe that God lied. I believe that you interpreted his words poorly."Thank you for this debate!"Umm... you're welcome?In conclusion, I would like to remind the audience that my opponent carried the burden of proof and failed to fulfill it.Sources1. http://en.wikipedia.org...