The window to edit/delete is 15 mins but the website's info says 30.

Correct him?  Oh pulease, there's nothing there to correct, to quote Wolfgang Pauli, he "isn't even wrong".

I'm sure nobody thinks he is winning, and nobody cares if he thinks he is winning either, what he thinks is irrelevant.

I don't think you are losing or wrong, I just think you shouldn't let him upset you, he's not worth your time or your attention.

Well, this is interesting, want to share the story?

Ignorance is only bliss in the short term.

You said that Adaptable keeps commenting on your threads and debates. 

So how do you know he’s not baiting you into violating the RO so you get banned? 

Thanks for the rec. I’ll check them out today

I prefer reading source material. That isn’t google. I begin with the fact that no book is perfect because no holy writ is written by God. He inspires, but his inspiration is still interpreted on a sliding scale of accuracy.

I must separate the leadership in Rome, and the authority those leaders claim, from the faith of the people, which I cannot and will not fault.
So, Peter. He is identified as the source of the authority of the Roman church, and that appears to have grounding in a single verse in Matthew 16; verse 18, which declares [Jesus speaking] “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” You know how I feel about singular verse justification for any doctrine; I like context. In this case, I’ll go direct to the first verse of the chapter, in which Jesus warns his disciples about the leadership of the Jews, and their leavened bread. He means this in the sense that the leaders are disingenuous [I jest; they want his head]. He asks them who other people say that he is. Then, he asks pointedly, “Whom say ye that I am?”
Peter replies, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Thus comes Christ’s reply, and its beginning is often ignored. “…flesh and blood hath not revealed it [the knowledge of who Christ is] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Then comes, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.”
Usually, it is Peter who is presumed to be this “rock,” thus, it is claimed, the sole leader of the church. But do we later read that Jesus ordains Peter to that position? No. All 12 have already been ordained as Apostles, and we read that event, so it is clear. But what Christ says afterward that most ignore: “…and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” “It,” that is, the true rock, for Jesus does not say, “against you, Peter," which would be the correct vernacular if Peter was the rock.  In the Greek Septuagent, the wording is the same; “it,” not “you.”
So, what is “it?” Jesus already said, before even telling Peter he was anything, a rock, or otherwise. “…flesh and blood [man] hath not REVEALED it unto you [no man told Peter], but my Father…” Revelation is the rock of the church. And why not? Jesus said he would be departing back to heaven. Revelation from God, through the Holy Spirit, which was sent to the Apostles [not just Peter] on the Day of Pentacost, recorded in Acts. [“The Acts of the Apostles,” not just Peter].
So, when did the Bishop of Rome suddenly become “the Papacy” 300 years later, but we have no record of that becoming? Hearsay. And the church was not called after Jesus Christ [he called it “my church” in Matthew 16,  and elsewhere, not a “universal” ergo, “Catholic”] church, and not the “Holy Church of Rome.” These are all names coming from somewhere, someone else; but not Christ. I thought he was the Church, not a place. He is the focus, not a place. 
So, tell me, doctrinally, why, after the atonement of Christ was initiated in Gethsemane, and completed on the cross, and sustained by his resurrection, that Adam and Eve are still blamed today for staining all of us, their children? Seems to me, that doctrine ignores the atonement altogether.

I can explain it.

Eve represents our nature, Christ represents what balance to have between what we keep natural and what we fight against in our nature to become.

I am not saying Eve and Christ are sheer metaphors. God did choose to come in Christ's Yeshua form and play it out in specific ways to represent something that he clearly realised had not been yet done to us yet; showed us what to be AKA Christlike. He realised us humans struggled and he also foresaw this issue and left room for himself as future Messiah.

Now, why he waited many years to come I do not know. He clearly foresaw Mary as being a significant baby to (us Catholics say) select from conception to be an immaculate one equipped with the special womb to bring forth his human incarnation.

Now maybe I am committing heresy somewhere here. I do think this is the best way to explain it to a non believer to make sense of it all.

Jesus dying obviously did not guarantee everyone heaven and did not worn as a complete negation of all sin and Eve. It was also God experiencing what it was to be human even the ugly gruelling parts. Perhaps experiencing all that first habd rather than watching it second hand helped him to more completely forgive. Now that is indeed heresy but to me, it makes a lot of sense as to why Jesus was necessarily human literall growing from baby to adulthood and not a blatant alien, demigod or angel coming down to us. God had omniscience but not a true, first hand experience of our vodies and how we physiologically experience pain, greed, lust, all of it. This element was new for him via Jesus. That is why I believe he then became a lot more forgiving than he was in OT. Again I am not ordained, this is heretical as I am saying God changed but I do not see a possible reason why I am wrong. It makes huge sense. I am not saying he was not perfect, I am saying he was always going to be what he is now and will be. That means my heresy is that he did change, does even, however it is innate to him and a perfect progression.

There is no way to say he never changed his mind ever. If he never ever changed outlook or mind, what exactly do we pray for? Solely to thank and praise? What about prayers for others and ourselves for him to alter things, pleading with him? Prayers for the dead and that they may go to heaven even if he originally deemed them to Hell (2nd coming, think about it)...

Eve, only,  as nature? And what was Adam? Not natural? 

Neither Eve, nor Adam, nor Christ are metaphors. They are real people of history, and worthy of praise. I note that you do. not speak tor the atonement but petehaps by very oblique commentary, and you're mostly giving God an excuse to not understanding humanity. We should consider ourselves  blessed by Christ's atonement, why not Adam and Eve? What prevents them from that forgiveness if they repent? Do you think they did not? Yes, he told Eve childbearing would be hard, and Adam that he would work by the swear of his brow. Gee, life is hard. It 's also a test to see if we will rise above Satan's sour attitude about us, and be godlike. Christ told us to be perfect, as is our Father in Heaven. And why not? Accomplishing that in mortal lifetime may be near impossible, but death is not the end, is it?

And isn't it easier to consider that God knows humanity because he was, once, a mortal man, himself, and had a God for him as we have him, today? Seems more reasonable than that God created us, but did not really understand us until he sends Christ to live vicariously through him. And you draw such distinction between the O.T. and N.T., as if they contain combative doctrine. Christ said he did not come to destroy the law [the O.T.] but to fulfill it. Fulfill by simplification of the law, like offering us two commandments instead of not only 10, but a myriad more in three additional books. The two: love God. Love our neighbor. With those two met, we satisfy every single law of the O.T.  ad then some. That's fulfillment. The Sermon on the Mount cures every single social ill we face today. As a political platform, it's the best evert conceived. Also happens to be a good spiritual guide, politics aside, and everything else. Why else do you think I into eternal progression if I have to stop my progression short of becoming like my Father in Heaven. We are all his children. Why would that not be his desire, as well, for us to become like him? Is he that jealous of his job? That's what's heresy. The universe is a big place. Room for more than one god. otherwise, what? We get to reach an end point that is less than his, and we get bored with eternity for nothing left to do but play a harp? No thanks.

Yeah, I was born on his birthday, twenty-five years after his.  He was once a heart surgeon, and world-reknowned. He has even lectured in China on techniques he has innovated in heart surgery. I attended a meeting with my brother long ago while I was a senior in high school, and my breather was in med school, President Nelson was speaking. After the meeting, my brother wanted to meet him, so we waiting in a short line, and we met him. Asking about us, my brother first introduced himself, and then me, and then said he was currently in met school. "So, do you study on Sunday," he asked. "Yes, all the time," my brother replied. "It's a day I can rest and not have interruption after I go to church." He nodded and told my brother, "Yes, I get that often. But I promise you, if you will leave Sunday to devotion to the Lord, study to midnight Saturday night and go to bed, then give the Lord his due until Sunday midnight, and then study medicine, or go to bed, and after church, study his word, and not anatomy, he will bless you abundantly. You will study with clarity and will learn and retain more, and then follow that advice throughout your life." Then he turned to me, "Young man, you do the same, and I promise you will have the same blessings." He was right. My brother says he was right.  I pass that advice to young people all the time, giving them the same promise, with my assurance that the promise was indeed fulfilled. At 100, he is still very sharp of mind, but becoming feeble. He frequently makes a point that the Lord is near at hand, that his coming had best be prepared for yesterday, like no other time in history. I think he is right in that, as well. 

You have a way of pointing out things I overlook