Obedience

[tragic_pizza]

Yes, some of us have been disciplined of late.

MEE, is the virgin birth, or a lack thereof, a particular doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism? I guess I didn't understand DHK's line of questioning.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Yes, some of us have been disciplined of late.

MEE, is the virgin birth, or a lack thereof, a particular doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism? I guess I didn't understand DHK's line of questioning.

Yes tragic_pizza, the virgin birth is the doctrine of Oneness Pentecostals...after all it is in the Bible. We hold to all true doctrine of God's Word.

MEE

 

[tragic_pizza]

OK, I thought so.

 

[tamborine lady]

Hey Mee, thanks, I was wondering what happened there, now I know!!

I miss a lot of stuff, but it doesn't matter Jesus still loves me!!

I guess I better watch myself, I could be next!! LOL!

Peace,

Tam

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:

MEE, is the virgin birth, or a lack thereof, a particular doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism? I guess I didn't understand DHK's line of questioning.

Oneness does not believe that man is born with a sin nature. If that be the case, then my basic question is: What is the necessity of the virgin birth for Christ, if man is not born a sinner?
I don't know if MEE agrees with Oneness or not, concerning man having a sin nature from the day that he is born. Where do we get if from? Romans 5:12
DHK

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by DHK:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tragic_pizza:

MEE, is the virgin birth, or a lack thereof, a particular doctrine of Oneness Pentecostalism? I guess I didn't understand DHK's line of questioning.

Oneness does not believe that man is born with a sin nature. If that be the case, then my basic question is: What is the necessity of the virgin birth for Christ, if man is not born a sinner?
I don't know if MEE agrees with Oneness or not, concerning man having a sin nature from the day that he is born. Where do we get if from? Romans 5:12
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]DHK, ONENESS did explain to you that his new baby would sin one day. Go back and read his posts, since he can't defend himself, now that he can't post anymore.

MEE

 

[DHK]

That's right. He did explain "that his son would sin one day." That part is not up for dispute. The question is: "Is he born a sinner?" Oneness denies that he is. He made that clear, changing the meanings of Psalms 51:5 and 58:3 to fit his own interpretation. It is very clear what he said and what he meant. He does not believe that we are born with a sin nature. Do you? If you don't, then what would be the necessity of the virgin birth.
What does Romans 5:12 mean?
What does Psalm 58:3 mean?
DHK

 

[tragic_pizza]

Being born with a sin nature is most decidedly not the same thing as being born a sinner.

If a child is born a sinner and dies at birth, then that child is condemned to a Hell he never had an opportunity to earn though sinful nature. I remian unsure of the version of Scripture you read, DHK, but every version I have read prtrays the Everlasting as a God of vast mercy and undefatigable grace.

The sin nature, on the other hand, is a kind of spiritual DNA code that promises we will sin, boldly and with knowledge thereto. Thus a child born with a sin nature, who dies at birth, is not laible for sins he never committed.

Since it is a spiritual fact that the sin nature is passed through the male, Jesus being born of a virgin removed the sin nature from Him. Was He tempted to sin? Yes. Could He have sinned? Most certainly.But "He that knew no sin became sin," and certianly to have had his spiritual DNA coded with the sin nature would have negated this most important truth of the Gospel.

 

[DHK]

Make all the hair-splitting differentiations you want. Oneness denies them both. Go back and read his posts. They are very plain. His son is not a sinner, nor does he have a sin nature. He denies both. Again I say there is no necessity of the virgin birth of Christ if man is born without a sin nature. The consequences of denying such a doctrine are grave. We are sinners at birth because we have a sin nature. Rom.5:12.
DHK

 

[tamborine lady]

Tragic_Pizza said:Being born with a sin nature is most decidedly not the same thing as being born a sinner.

If a child is born a sinner and dies at birth, then that child is condemned to a Hell he never had an opportunity to earn though sinful nature. I remian unsure of the version of Scripture you read, DHK, but every version I have read prtrays the Everlasting as a God of vast mercy and undefatigable grace.

The sin nature, on the other hand, is a kind of spiritual DNA code that promises we will sin, boldly and with knowledge thereto. Thus a child born with a sin nature, who dies at birth, is not laible for sins he never committed.

Since it is a spiritual fact that the sin nature is passed through the male, Jesus being born of a virgin removed the sin nature from Him. Was He tempted to sin? Yes. Could He have sinned? Most certainly.But "He that knew no sin became sin," and certianly to have had his spiritual DNA coded with the sin nature would have negated this most important truth of the Gospel.

I totally concur,TP, we are born with a sin nature, not as sinners!!

Excellentpost!!

Peace,

Tam

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by DHK:
Make all the hair-splitting differentiations you want. Oneness denies them both. Go back and read his posts. They are very plain. His son is not a sinner, nor does he have a sin nature. He denies both. Again I say there is no necessity of the virgin birth of Christ if man is born without a sin nature. The consequences of denying such a doctrine are grave. We are sinners at birth because we have a sin nature. Rom.5:12.
DHK

I was not splitting hairs. You were simply stating your argument poorly.