Search results

You have succeeded at making the thread about what it was not meant to be about. You did not decide to argue that Romans 14:23 didn't refer to a believer, you went another route--the long route to being debunked instead of the short route.

Your entire argument relies on the invalid assumption that 'if you're born of God you can never be unborn of God"--the assumption has been debunked both in the theoretical realm, and in the practical (eg, Jesus "doesn't know" Christians can't sin (Mt 18), nor that they can sin and be "unborn of...

Yeah, you have: when you say those born of God don't sin, you're contradicting Romans 14:23, 1 Corinthians, where he is continuously rebuking the Church for sinning, Revelation 2 and 3, where Christ rebukes sin in the Church. No, it says because the Seed remains in him--to abide in Christ is by...

1. When you contradict Scripture using Scripture, that is proof you're misunderstanding Scripture. The reason I didn't pursue it is because now you're going to have to go back and prove, from the context of Romans 14:23, that the person spoken of as having sinned is not a believer--ie, the same...

Everyone who makes assertions here claims it is what "God's Word" says. You say "this is what God's Word says", and I say "this is what God's Word says". The difference comes down to whether people are going to believe that what ever we claim has made more sense of the Scripture.

Everyone who makes an argument here is claiming it is what "God's Word" says. We'll see if anyone finds what you claim "God's Word" says convincing.

OK Everyone can read your reply. The question posed has been as to how to reconcile Romans 8:1, which states there is no condemnation for those in Christ, with Romans 14:23, which states that the believer who sins is "condemned"; your answer is that believers never sin. OK We'll see if anyone...

All right. You've provided your "answer". We'll see if anyone believes it. Thanks for interacting.

Quote Romans 14:23 and explain where I've gone wrong.

You have nowhere addressed Romans 14:23. Please quote Romans 14:23 and explain why the believer who sins is condemned when there is no condemnation for those in Christ.

No, you didn't address Romans 14:23.

Yeah, so, again, we're back to square one: why is the believer who sins "condemned" (Romans 14:23) when there's no condemnation for those in Christ (Romans 8:1)?

Everything I've said is in Scripture. Romans 8:1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Romans 14:23But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

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?