What's New
Escaping the Cult
Current Trends
Bible Doctrines
Bible Explanations
Emergent church
Latter Rain
Word Faith
Popular Teachers
Pentecostal Issues
Trinity / Deity
World  Religions
New Age Movement
Book Reviews
Web Directory
Tracts for witnessing
DVD Video
Web Search
The Persecuted Church


For printing  our articles please copy the web page by highlighting  the text first - then click copy in the browser-  paste the article into a word  program on your computer. When the text is transferred into word, click to save or print.      







Are we Born with Salvation, is our sin dormant?

Don Richardson’s message of Inclusivism

Richardson has been an influence over certain missionaries and their organizations that are willing to go beyond the pages of scripture for their success. His way has been touted as a victory into cultures that were closed. We get a better insight into what he actually believes in his new book “Heaven Wins.”

His book “Heaven Wins” claims to provide a Scriptural and effective case that those who die before they willfully choosing evil i.e. Before the age of accountability” are God’s.” By his writing, Richardson implies that he knows something from Scripture that we need to discover -- that the souls in heaven will outnumber those in hell, “because prebirth, infant and young child deaths affirm these are the majority of human souls.”

This topic reaches into the heart, something that we can empathize. So many children dying in a world ruled by sin. But does Richardson make his point clear? I don’t think so. Not factually or biblically. But I will let you discern the matter by the Scriptures he uses as his proof.

Andrew Bowling who did the forward says that Richardson’s book is saying “the souls in heaven will outnumber the souls in hell” (contrary to the evangelicals position that fewer will be saved). The forward says this is speculative, but still compatible with the Bible. Adding “this victory is a necessary motivation for the innumerable races of the entire universe to choose faithfulness to God.

(Underline mine)

I wondered at what this statement meant. Not far into the pages of the book, Richardson revealed what he believes the Bible teaches as God’s plan for the future. What is meant by the statement the innumerable races of the entire universe are clarified. There will be other people saved besides those on earth (which is a teaching found in Mormonism).

Universe salvation

We tend to assume, however, that God created all the angels that will ever exist inone batch. Assuming that angels in that one batch do not procreate, the original angelic population

remains constant forever. That would mean also that the percentages of angels who adore God versus

those who rebelled will also remain fixed forever. What if that is not the whole story? What if God

has a way to exploit the fall of a minority of angels in that first batch so as to guarantee that 100

percent of subsequent batches of angels will all remain loyal? That would surely alter the percentages in God’s favor over time! Hmmm . . .

Please allow me to introduce a theory with a very strange name:

The Single Poignancy/Double Poignancy Theorem” (p.16) (Underline mine)

Apparently Richardson thinking has brought him beyond the word to entertain his own theology.

He explains, “Double-poignancy persuasion is foreseen as guaranteeing 100 percent response from future hosts of freewill races God has yet to create on innumerable habitable planets cosmos-wide. And that is what assures God the pleasure of being worshiped, loved and praised by hosts of genuinely free finite beings, all without a single further abuse of freedom ever interrupting his and their mutual joy forever. Imagine this occurring on a scale so enormous as to be commensurate with the vastness of the universe itself. Apart from such a large-scale plan, what a waste of all that space waiting out there!”(underline mine)

His double-poignancy theorem has a planet-filled cosmos with 100% acceptance and rebellion at 0% He speaks of a “demo run” that put-to-the-test “demo” angels. Which implies some kind of experimentation on angelic life. Richardson thinks God must make use of space otherwise it becomes negligent on his part. Has he thought this through? The earth consists of 75% Water. What of all that wasted space for fish? I’m being facetious… Richardson insists on the majority needs to be won for there not to be a defeat.

Dave Hunt writes, “Any intelligent created beings with the power of choice (a necessity for worship and love), being less than God, would make less-than perfect choices. Sin is defined as coming "short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). God does not need to experiment ("Man rebelled, but let's try again on another planet" (p.370 Occult Invasion, Dave Hunt).

His premise is that Heaven wins because more go to heaven then to hell is not God’s way of measuring success. In fact the Scripture teaches that God does not use the majority. Does God lose unless he has a majority as if there is some holy scoreboard?

“completed, and redemption well under way, I posit God’s vastly largerscale operation as almost ready to be launched. Now that the supremely poignant story of God as Redeemer supplements the grand witness of God as Creator, what next? Consider God as ready now to populate billions of habitable planets across the cosmos with still more races of freewill beings— all with zero abuse of free will occurring ever again.”

All those future races, free of sin, will find their environments also free of disease, death and

natural disasters. They will enjoy worlds that will be as this world would have been apart from the

Fall. As Paul wrote:

Creation was subjected to frustration [because of sin until the day when it] . . . will be

liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of

God (Romans 8:20-21).

I won’t go on quoting his concept as he continues to try and make this future fantasy into some actual Biblical teaching of the future God planned (including a diagram). Certainly the Bible explains to us a glimpse of the future, Richardson is making a theological teaching from silence, from his own predilection of theology of inclusiveness. Christ died for sin only once, on this planet for mankind (Heb. 9).

Yet, Richardson sees “a hidden in a plan that is yet . . . to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fullness [note Paul’s emphasis on something new waiting to be unveiled in the future of the cosmos, something that requires ages to prepare]—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ (Ephesians 1:9,10). This can only mean that evil, in due time, will not only be ultimately defeated but also ignominiously discredited and finally contained never to recur!

And he refers to Ephesians 2:7, “in the coming ages the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his

kindness to us in Christ Jesus” Again, Paul describes a great future unveiling of something very grand having a profound effect upon the cosmos: Creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed (Romans 8:19).”

Despite his presumptions on Scripture; if we read further it is explained. Rom. 8:22-23 “For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.” Which the Bible explains is the resurrection. We believers are the sons of God that will be resurrected into immortal bodies to serve under Christ on this EARTH because of this transformation taking place, we will be made sinless and immortal and serve in the millennial age.

To begin with, Richardson’s proposal is flawed because God is going to make a new heavens and earth after the thousand years of Christ on earth, then sin will be done away with. 2 Peter 3:13 “Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.” All will be without sin. This takes place after the 1,000 year millennium rule of Christ on earth. So to say as Richardson does, there will be those throughout the new heavens (the universe) choosing, repeating what took place on earth is completely unbiblical.

After the thousand years, the devil and mankind is judged (Rev.20:7) … Rev. 21:1-4 “Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God." And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away."

Rev 21:23-27 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light. And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it. Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there). And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it. But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.”

(Everything is focused on earth, there is nowhere that it says this will be repeated throughout the universe)

The Bible is silent on such an important matter. So unless he can absolutely prove by God’s word that what happened on earth will begin again with an Adam and Eve on other planets (Mormonism teaches this) and have the process repeated, his theory is in the category of a myth. Not that I’m surprised as Richardson is quite adept at turning myths into Bible facts.

I attended a lecture a number of years ago at Brigham Young University where I heard this very same concept by a speaker. Afterwards I spoke to the president of the university and posed this point to him, if there are other races on other planets then Christ Jesus would have to become each one of these to redeem them just as he became human on earth. He was stunned and responded that he never thought of it like that. Richardson’s proposition means there will be numerous incarnations as the redemption drama repeats itself over and over for innumerable races throughout time. I do not see this being upheld in the bible.

He goes as far as to use Job “to shame the angels for whom that persuasion was not enough”

The book of Job opens with Satan insinuating—amid a host of angels assembled presumably from

already inhabited nearby parts of the cosmos—that not even a man as righteous as Job genuinely

credits God as meriting unsolicited love. Satan slurs the integrity of the Almighty by accusing God of

bribing “love” from Job via the artifice of catering to Job’s greed!

Does Job love God for nothing? (See Job 1:9.)

First, the word love is not found in this verse. The word is yare' -a primitive root; to fear; morally, to revere; caus. to frighten: Richardson actually changes the word to support his point about the angels. Satan challenge was about Job’s obedience

[The word love is found in Job19:19 about his friends abandoning him 'ahab;or 'aheb; a primitive root; to have affection for (sexually or otherwise)]

If we go to the verse prior we have the Lord using the same word, presenting Job as an example of someone who fears God- and is morally reverent.

Job 1:8-9 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?"

So Satan answered the LORD and said, "Does Job fear God for nothing?

I do not know what Bible Richardson used but even ESV—Scripture taken from the English Standard Version, says “who fears God.”

His imagination does not stop here, Richardson’s assumptions continue in his to provide proof for his worldview of inclusivism. I wondered how someone who is supposed to be well educated could hold these positions? Considering he endorsed Daniel Kikawa’s inclusive, universal god concept in ancient cultures (which was drawn on his own teaching), it's not surprising for him to teach a modified soft Universalism, called inclusivism. No doubt this will spark a new debate as others become aware of what this missiologist is presenting as Bible.

His new book began by correcting Rob Bell, but who will correct Richardson? Because he has error, just as Bell has error. Some may say, who are you to correct him? I’m not asking you to take my word for it as some would take his. Look at the Scripture and see if my explanations make sense and line up with the Bible.

Let’s begin by thinking things through by the Bible and not apply our own predilection - the way we would like things to be, lest we challenge God and His plans. Let’s examine further Richardson’s belief system that everyone is born with automatic salvation before an age of accountability.

His age of Accountability theory

There are two main points in his theory 1) general revelation and 2) people are born with a dormant sin nature that becomes activated when they reach an age of accountability (which is variable). We have already addressed general revelation.

We have a choice to listen to theological innovations or what is clearly presented in Scripture. To sum up succinctly what Richardson is saying: there will be more people in Heaven WITHOUT believing the gospel than with believing the gospel! Because all children, (actually, everyone who is born) automatically go to heaven before their age of accountability.)

Richardson claims the scriptures exclusivists use apply to those older, who can make a decision.

Are we to believe that everyone born is going to heaven (we all start off as children) but once we become accountable the same people may not be heaven bound and then go to hell?

I know many will entertain Richardson’s belief on this, because so many want God’s mercy to extend further than what we have thought. But for those who have studied the scripture carefully and have Biblically based hermeneutics that stays consistent with the scriptures context will recognize that many of the texts he is challenging cannot be substantiated by his unique interpretation (which has been used by other inclusivists).

Richardson teaches that ones sinful nature is dormant inside us when we are born, using the passage of Paul Rom.7:9, as his basis “Once I was alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.”

“Paul literally avers, that he, as a child, remained spiritually alive as long as the sinful nature he inherited from Adam lay dormant within him”. He did not die until that sinful nature, once activated, seduced him.” (Until an age of moral culpability). “Apparently Christ’s sacrifice atones for the mere presence of our sinful nature as long as it remains dormant atonement. That said, it follows that every individual is free from divine condemnation from conception until at least the first few years of life. Thus, children who die while their sinful nature remains dormant die Uuncondemned and enter heaven free from sin forever”. (underline mine)

This is a main basis for his proof in Heaven Wins that there will be far more in heaven than in hell. Richardson builds on this first foundation that men are not sinful until an age of accountability. This apparent semi pelagian view of sin (as identified in theology a 5th century teacher in Rome). It also happens to explain his worldview of inclusiveness of cultures; his accepting their worship of other gods as God (which is a different topic).

Richardson does not deny the sin nature is being passed on (original sin), but adjusts it so that he can present what he thinks is a revelation to challenge “exclusive view evangelicals” who he says are wrong.

He interprets this as Paul being spiritually alive until his sinful nature was activated, “seduced him.”

That Paul did not die until his sinful nature was activated! This is not Paul’s point at all. All one needs to do is read it in context, it is about becoming aware of his sin, knowing his sin by the law; not that his sin became active. The law did not make the sin nature alive, but stirred it up to make it evident.

If we go back a few verses and read it in context: Romans 7:4-5 “For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.”

In other words, the law gave what was already at work strength. The law’s intent is to increase ones ability to sin, to have a standard of its practice so it would be evident to the person, and make them guilty. Paul’s point In Rom.7 the Law was given so that sin might be made known to all so we can be aware of our sinful state, (it would eventually lead one to believe in Christ). Paul says there is nothing good within him, maybe he should have instead said there is nothing bad or evil. All disobedience is sin and harmful.

Rom. 7:7 “I would not have known sin except through the law” (became aware of specifically of my sin (which he identifies as covetousness). V.11 “For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me.” V.13 “... But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good (the law), so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful.”

Paul is NOT saying sin was dormant but instead at work, he just didn’t know it. Greek scholar A. T. Robertson writes “Romans 7:7 I had not known coveting (lust), epithumian (NT:1912) ouk (NT:3708) eedein (NT:1472). But all the same the law is not itself sin nor the cause of sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful act” (from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)

Paul is not saying the sin nature lay dormant, not alive or inactive but that he was unaware of it until he understood his transgression by a standard, the law. We know this because Paul also writes on this matter in Rom. 3:20 “for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” The very purpose of the law was given to REVEAL Sin. Not for sin to be made active from dormancy, but that one becomes acutely aware that they already are sinning.

In fact, the law made one sin more. Romans 4:15 Paul says: “for the law works wrath; but where

there is no law, neither is there transgression.”

In Romans 5:20 he repeats in similar words: “And the law came in besides, that the trespass might abound; but where sin abounded, grace did abound more exceedingly.”

Paul explains that the Law came to cause us to sin more. The purpose was to make us aware of our nature so that we can accept the remedy, the gospel.

As an example, if you are driving 55 mph and there is no speed sign but then you see a sign to drive at 45 mph. You have become aware you’re breaking the law; but you were always breaking the law, but now you know you are. Now your choice is to slow down, or, continue resisting what you know is wrong.

1 Cor. 15:56 “The sting of death is sin; the strength of sin is the law.” Paul taught that the Law is a standard for the sin nature. What Paul means is that once one becomes aware of their sin by God’s standard and their sin is made known, it is understood as sin, it becomes evident to the one sinning to look for a solution.

Paul said, “Where there is no Law, there is no transgression.” He could not mean there was no sin before the Law was given, clearly there was. We all know Adam and Eve sinned, so did Cain and Abel, so did all mankind which God judged by the flood. The term transgression is a specific type of sin in violation of a specific commandment. Men were sinners before the Law was given, but they were not transgressors of the Law until the Law was given.

Richardson using Paul as an example actually refutes his own theory of an age of accountability, for Paul was over 30 years old and was a teacher of the Scripture when he came to know Jesus as His Messiah. Richardson says his sin was suppressed (inactive). Therefore he would be going to heaven before he believed in the gospel because of this so called age of accountability! Paul then becomes a very old “unaccountable child” assured of heaven; this is hardly credible. Paul says nothing of the sort. Where does the bible teach of activation and NON ACTIVATION? Then what do we do with others who are this age who have NOT had “their sin nature activated.”

Paul does not mean being alive means having his sin being dormant. Alive is the word zao:

1) to live, to breathe, to be among the living (not lifeless, not dead) 2) to enjoy real life:

a) to have true life that is worthy of the name b) to be active, blessed, and endless in the kingdom of God

3) to live, that is, to pass life, in the manner of the living and acting of mortals or character 4) living water, having vital power in itself and exerting the same upon the soul 5) metaphorically, to be in full vigor a) to be fresh, strong, efficient, 6) as adjective: active, powerful, efficacious.

For Paul also writes in1 Cor. 15:22: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” One must have the new nature transferred to them to be alive (in Christ) or they die. Paul is speaking of the spirit (the body is also be included). They do not become alive by the law, their sin becomes agitated, more active.

Eph. 2:1 “And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins.

One must first recognize their condition of sin to accept the gospel. Richardson has this the opposite. One cannot ask Jesus to be the savior unless they first know they are a sinner, that they have a condition of sin. That is the gospel message.

Col. 2:13 “And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.” Clearly Paul is saying we were in the condition of sin and made alive AFTER we accept the gospel.

Though Richardson does say he believes we are born with sin; it’s not activated, alive.

The problem is that we are all are sinners by our inherited nature, our human nature, which is the only one we have when we are born. It is not just our actions that make us a sinner, but that sin within us shows itself by our actions (Ps. 58; Job 15:14, 25:4; Eph. 2:3; Rom. 5:12-19). Sin is the base nature for all our sinful habits.

If what Richardson is saying is not bible doctrine. Then Christ could have been born through two human parents and never had his sin activated. Like anyone else born he could then have had his sin stay dormant by not acting on it. However, the reason that He had a virgin conception was to bypass the sin nature of man, to have sinless blood as He took on human flesh.

Adam's death was first spiritual, and then physical. God told him the day he eats of the forbidden tree he will die, he did spiritually. This is why he hid and was in shame, guilty, Humanity is all born with a built-in physical death warrant, because of our sin nature was inherited from Adam, we are spiritually dead. You are either spiritually alive or dead. We are ALL born spiritually dead (separated from God), we are not neutral (dormant) as Richardson teaches.

Death came into the world by Adam’s sin. Rom. 5:12-14 “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned-- (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” Paul is referring to those who are not like Adam and purposely disobeyed the command[s], they still inherited death. Want to know if one is a sinner, do they naturally die?

According to Richardson, we are all born potential sinners that can one day go to hell because we make a decision. If left with no decision, all go to heaven! Then we do not sin until we become accountable. What does this mean?

If you are not sinning, then you are just like Jesus. Without a sin nature you are sinless without having a virgin conception like Jesus. We call that false teaching.

Richardson writes:

“Paul infers an age of accountability again in Ephesians 2. He advises Gentile converts that they became spiritually dead only when the sinful nature they inherited at conception ceased to be dormant. Spiritual death ensued—as in Romans 7:9—not due to a dormant sinful nature but due only to an activated sinful nature! Note Paul’s point: As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins (Ephesians 2:1).

Four verses later, Paul infers an age of accountability again in Ephesians 2:5. This time he even

includes himself, a Jew, as sharing a common past with former pagans in Ephesus. Paul wrote:

Even when we were dead in transgressions.

Observe that in both passages Paul links spiritual death with actual transgressions committed

following childhood, obviously, rather than concurrent with conception.” (p.30)

Richardson interprets this as one's sin nature being dead instead of us being dead IN OUR SINS.

Eph. 2:1 “And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins V. 5 “even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)” It does not mean dead to trespasses and sins (dormant, inactive) but dead from it, thus we are made alive.

This is everyone’s condition before the Lord brings life by His spirit, so how Richardson can say Rom.7 does not mean this is beyond credulity. Speaking to those who are now saved Ephesians 2:3 and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.”

“And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins” Nothing can be clearer; we had been in sin dead to God and were made alive.

“Eph 2:1The structure of the passage is broken. Paul having prominently in mind the thought "God quickened you as He did Christ," begins with "you also." Then the connection is interrupted by Eph 2:2-3, which describe their previous condition. Then Eph 2:1 is taken up in Eph 2:4, by "but God," God introducing a new sentence.

Who were dead ontas (NT:5541) nekrous (NT:3456). Better, the English Revised Version (1885): "when ye were dead," thus giving the sense of the continued state in the past expressed by the participle "being."

Trespasses ... sins paraptoomasin (NT:3852) ... hamartiais (NT:263). See the notes at Matt 1:21; 6:14. "Trespasses," special acts. "Sins," all forms and phases of sin: more general. (from Vincent's Word Studies of the New Testament)

There are Greek scholars disagree with Richardson’s interpretation.

Col 2:13[All trespasses]-Greek, `all our [ta (NT:3543)] trespasses:' the cause of `deadness.'

(From Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary) this means we were sinning because we are sinful.

A.T. Robertson makes it clear.

Eph 2:1 When ye were dead ontas (NT:5541) nekrous (NT:3456). Present active participle referring to their former state. Spiritually dead.

Trespasses and sins paraptoomasin (NT:3852) kai (NT:2498) hamartiais (NT:263). Both words (locative case) though only one in Eph 2:5. (From Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)

To make certain that this is what it means Paul further elaborates

Eph 2:1-6 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,” If you are walked according to the world which is fallen, you were living the same pattern; it also tells us you were once a son of disobedience, meaning sinning. V. 3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others. 4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved).

It does not mean your sin was dead, but you are dead because of your sins and transgressions.

Eph 2:5 “made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions.” This does not mean our sins came alive but a new relationship was introduced with God which makes us alive when we in a sinful state.

Col. 2:13 “When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins”

The sin nature develops, gets stronger but it was always there from our conception.

Col. 2:13 Dead nekrous (NT:3456). Morally, as Eph. 2:1:5; Rom. 6:11. In your sins en (NT:1697) tois (NT:3543) paraptoomasin (NT:3852). The best texts omit en (NT:1697) "in," and the dative is instrumental, "thorough or by." The English Revised Version (1885): "through your trespasses."

(From Vincent's Word Studies of the New Testament)

Eph 2:5 Quickened us together with Christ sunezooopoieesen (NT:4752) too (NT:3543) Christoo (NT:5481). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb suzooopoieoo (NT:4752) as in Col 2:13 which see. Associative instrumental case in Christoo (NT:5481). Literal resurrection in the case of Jesus, spiritual in our case as pictured in baptism” (From Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)

Eph 2:1[Who were dead in trespasses and sins] On the meaning of the word "dead," see the notes at Rom 5:12; 6:2. It is affirmed here of those to whom Paul wrote at Ephesus, that before they were converted, they were "dead in sins." There is not anywhere a more explicit proof of depravity than this, and no stronger language can be used. They were "dead" in relation to that to which they afterward became alive- i.e., to holiness. Of course, this does not mean that they were in all respects dead. It does not mean that they had no animal life, or that they did not breathe, and walk, and act. Nor can it mean that they had no living intellect or mental powers, which would not have been true. Nor does it settle any question as to their ability or power while in that state. It simply affirms a fact-that in relation to real spiritual life they were, in consequence of sin, like a dead man in regard to the objects which are around him. (From Barnes' Notes)

The child of God, believers were once dead in their trespasses and sins have been quickened or made alive by God, unto God. They are no longer spiritually dead, but they have been quickened to become the children of God by the Spirit giving them life. They have been made spiritually alive by being united with Christ (II Cor. 5:14-15; Eph. 2:5; Col. 2:13).

How anyone cannot get the meaning of this portion of scripture wrong is perplexing, as it ends with Paul stating

Eph 5:6-8 “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them. For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light” (NIV).

The difference is night and day, we were sinners because of Adam’s nature, now we children of God, in Christ having the new nature to have us rule over the old. You are not a dormant sinner born with the nature of Adam.

pt.3 Inclusivism- salvation for all children

Copyright (c) 2013 No portion of this site is to be copied or used unless kept in its original format, the way it appears. Articles can be reproduced in portions for ones personal use, any other use is to have the permission of the author first. Thank You.

To Support



We would like to hear from you. Please send us an e- mail and let us know how we can be of  more help. As our time is just as valuable as yours is. Please keep in mind, that we only have time to answer sincere inquiries. We will use discretion in answering any letters. 

NOTE: we do not accept attachments,  please send the mail viewable in email.