Was Jesus born again?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by truthseeker3139

uhmm, I'm sure you're right on this one.

How do you stand? Belief that we resurrected as far as God is concerned, or we just pretend we did?

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Wow, I am amazed you call this false doctrine. Wow.

Most views of Original Sin are as is Total depravity. He has many videos on this. Just something to study as he coers a lot of subjects.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That is not true.

The term "firstborn" is a totally different word than born or begotten. It's a noun indicating status. The first person resurrected can be found in the OT

Jesus was, however, the first person transformed into a glorified man

Praxeas... what you just said did not argue against what I said. Read it again. I said BORN =

[truthseeker3139]

Originally Posted by mfblume

How do you stand? Belief that we resurrected as far as God is concerned, or we just pretend we did?

Romans 6:4
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.


Sounds like spiritual resurrection to me!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Praxeas... what you just said did not argue against what I said. Read it again. I said BORN =

You said he was the first to be brought forth from the dead, but he wasn't. He was the firstborn OF the dead

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You said he was the first to be brought forth from the dead, but he wasn't. He was the firstborn OF the dead

so to be brought forth from one position to another is wrong? LOL Talk about symantics. The whole point of the orignal meaning is postion of born asyou pointed out and I don't disagree. The word used in which you are correct is positional or stature in relations to others etc... BUT the first realization of what born is still the same. he reference to the text is not about natural birth. The bringing you to one state to another is the point of born. Thus he is brought forth from one point to another.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I disagree with your conclusion, but I asked the question to see what your answer would be. The point is your answer claims man did not need Calvary as soon as man was born, in my estimation.

Blume as I pointed out there is still the point of justice in which God MUST do before he judges. Man is not guilty before his birth. Does man need Christ? of course he does. That is not the same point of whether he is born guilty of sin before he takes his firstbreath.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

He was brought forth from the dead, not saved from his sins which is what Jesus was talking about in Jn 3 a totally DIFFERENT purpose for using the word "born"

IS this NOT what my point was? LOL

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by mfblume

(sigh) lol. Come on. It's not that hard.

I am trying to determine if you believe only a sin committed people, themselves, will send a person to hell and not the sin nature in and of itself given from Adam.

Mike no one will go to hell for their sin nature, every man will be judged according to their works (what they did)

Since no one will go to hell for their sin nature and are judged according to their works, YES I believe sin commission is what sends people to hell. The Bible lists works of the flesh in galatians. These are a result of their sin nature but their sin nature doesn't hate, steal, lie, commit adultery, witchcraft; they are sins committed by us BECAUSE of our sin nature.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Mike no one will go to hell for their sin nature, every man will be judged according to their works (what they did)