Search results

Why is the believer who sins "condemned" when there is "no condemnation" in Christ?

Are you going to answer as to why there is "no condemnation" for the one who is in Christ (Ro 8:1), yet the believer who sins is "condemned" (Ro 14:23)? Are you even curious? No, probably not. You do not bother to believe in things that make sense, just anything that is sloppy nonsense.

OK Just for the sake of argument, let's grant all of that. We're still back to square one: how do you reconcile Romans 8:1, which says there is "no condemnation" for those "in Christ", with Romans 14:23, which says the believer who sins is "condemned"?

This thread is about how to reconcile Romans 8:1 with Romans 14:23--when you are interested, you may discuss the topic.

Go post your own thread about your Scripture you raised--this thread is about how to reconcile Romans 8:1 with Romans 14:23.

Go make a thread about it--this thread is about how to reconcile Romans 8:1 with Romans 14:23.

What is the explanation for how the believer is "condemned" if he sins (Romans 14:23) when there's "no condemnation" for those "in Christ" (Ro 8:1)? How do you reconcile the two realities?

What is the explanation for how the believer is "condemned" if he sins (Romans 14:23) if there's "no condemnation" for those "in Christ" (Ro 8:1)? How do you reconcile the two realities?

Read the title of this thread. Does it read, "Is GracePeace Born Again?"?

What is the explanation for how the believer is "condemned" if he sins (Romans 14:23) if there's "no condemnation" for those "in Christ" (Ro 8:1)? How do you reconcile the two realities? I erased that debunking of your assertion because I didn't want to let you take things off topic.

Here is the topic with which you may engage: 1. Remaining "in Christ" is by keeping God's Commands: a) believe, b) love (Jn 15:3-10 ; 1 Jn 3:23,24). 2. The spiritually immature, the children, are warned to "remain in Christ" (1 Jn 2:28). 3. Romans 8:1 says "in Christ" there is "no...

You are not welcome to flood my thread with irrelevant noise. Here is the topic with which you may engage: 1. Remaining "in Christ" is by keeping God's Commands: a) believe, b) love (Jn 15:3-10 ; 1 Jn 3:23,24). 2. The spiritually immature, the children, are warned to "remain in Christ" (1 Jn...

If you want to engage me in my thread, please be on topic: Here is the topic with which you may engage: 1. Remaining "in Christ" is by keeping God's Commands: a) believe, b) love (Jn 15:3-10 ; 1 Jn 3:23,24). 2. The spiritually immature, the children, are warned to "remain in Christ" (1 Jn...

It's not relevant to this discussion. Please stop flooding my thread with your irrelevant off topic discussion.

You have not asked a single question relevant to the topic I raised; you are raising a tangential that is your perennial topic you want to raise. Whether someone is a child of God or not has no bearing on whether Romans 14:23 condemns a believer who does not walk in faith, and whether that...

There is nothing else to speak about--either you make a coherent argument, or you have nothing to add to the conversation. You are dragging things off topic.

The Spirit of Truth permits people to have lop-sided theology, because He backs whoever speaks truth, to what ever degree they speak it--that DOES NOT mean that He is backing EVERYTHING you speak, only the parts of it that are true. I aim to combine the Word of the Spirit together with the...

Exactly. I acknowledge people can know God, and derive benefit by having a lop-sided theology, but I went to hell from listening to a preacher instead of God, so I will NEVER listen to a man, I will only listen to the Bible, and NEVER hold to incoherence no matter what it can grant me.

Paul calls the Law of Moses "the Law of my mind" to open the door to his later argument, "each man must be fully convinced in his own mind". This is also how the Gentile believers can be deemed "doers of the Law" without even knowing the Law (Ro 2:14): the New Covenant involves God writing His...

No, actually, this entire time I've remained absolutely dumbfounded at how any sane mind could actually entertain the incoherent bankrupt illogic you have been expressing here. Actually, I had already given you much information along those lines--you could easily have replied to that information.