E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
ok Peter. It is getting to the point you are unable to hide, He used the same line of excuse whenever he was being asked to explain something, I will tell you like I told him, You do not get to interpret words when it comes to other people. If your going not say THEY do something, THEY GET TO INTERPRET WHAT THEY BELIEVE!! (How many times have I said these exact words to you in the past?Hi,
Maybe words do not have the same meaning to you as to me.
You are saying I have not understood these sentences
"We are in the flesh. We still have the "Old Man", which means we will still sin. Yet, we have been declared holy, righteous, perfect, and sinless by God."
Bud is saying we are in the "old man", is actually in sin and still sinning, ie not cleansed, pure and holy.
He then says the uncleansed, impure, and unholy is declared holy, righteous, perfect and sinless.
Maybe I have miss-understood, but it appears not.
If we are forgiven, purified, cleansed, washed clean, we are not dirty or defiled or unholy.
Simple analogy, if as a child you come in from playing and are dirty, declaring you clean can be done.
Or being cleaned, and when clean being declared clean.
Now it appears to me, Bud is saying though we are dirty we are told we are clean.
I am saying this is not true, we are cleansed, and once cleansed declared clean.
Is there something wrong here in my understanding of the two positions?
How is this slander to any degree, please tell me, I want to seriously know because I have no intent to
slander or lie?
Why do you refuse to answer peoples question What does in the flesh mean?