Search results

To become by imputation, not by impartation. To become is an ongoing process. To be made is a once and done.

Growth is all about sanctification.

Yes and she denies even being a Christian.

2 Corinthians 5:21 (ASV) Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of God in him. (ESV) For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (ISV) God made the one who did not know sin...

Your theology on justification, righteousness and sanctification says otherwise.

The question here to be answered is who are the "many" for whom are made sinners and who are the "many" who are made righteous. The only rational and exegetically correct answer must be that the many are the same in both cases. It is the newborns that are being referenced. What that means is...

Behold, are you Catholic? One of the major differences between classic Roman Catholicism and Reformation Protestantism is that Catholicism teaches that we are made righteous while Reformation Protestantism teaches that we are declared righteous. You are so close to the truth, but so wrong in...

The problem here is that Romans 5:19 is not talking about the baptized believer, the born again. Just as the reference of the effect of Adam's disobedience to the newborn human being, so also is the reference of the effect of Jesus' obedience is to the newborn human being. What Paul is telling...

As I said, you are confused. You simply do not seem to understand the meaning of some words.

We are not made righteous; rather we are imputed with the righteousness of God. That is different, perhaps a subtle difference, but an important difference. We are not made righteous; rather we are declared to be righteous. We are not made sinless. We are forgiven. It is an act of God called...

But you will vote for Biden?

And the non-Chirstian speaks again.

That is traducianism and it is a lie. Original Sin or its worse brother, Total Depravity, is one of the very worst doctrines ever eisegeted into the word of God. Nature is not sin. Yes we have the nature of Adam, the nature that come directly from God. That is the tendency to sin, but the...

Adam didn't do anything to you, me or anyone else. If the effect of Adam/s sin changed you, then it was God who caused that to happen. I am not blaming God for anything. that is you, God blames me for my sin not Adam's. To blame me for Adam's sin would have been totally unjust. God is not...

I am happy to see that you agree with me.

You honestly believe that God did that to you? Shame, shame.

If God created this world, that is the entire universe including man, to be eternal then that is exactly how it would have been. That is not the case. God was not blindsided by Adam's disobedience. Adam's disobedience was not caused by God, but it was in God's plan from the very beginning...

Totally wrong. Everything there is wrong. Think about it just for a bit. What kind of God would do what you are saying He has done by holding the world accountable for what Adam did? Neither a just nor a gracious god would do such a thing.

That says absolutely nothing about what would have happened had Adam not eaten an apple. What a blatant act of eisegesis. And beside that, it doesn't saly that death passed upon all men because Adam sinned. It says death passes upon all men because all sinned. Moreover, we know from the...

That is correct. And that is correct up to a point. That is not correct. The consequence of Adam's sin was spiritual death. The consequence of Adam's ejection from the Garden was physical death. No, God didn't create death. Rather he didn't create physical immortality. No the tree of life...