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

"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."