I think a more patient read through any of our best systematic theologians would cear up a lot of those inaccuracies and misunderstandings. In no way is Reformed theology Nestorian or Pelagian. He seems to think our sinful nature is some thing other than an ethical disposition against God; as if it is a thing/substance that God 'creates'. It's also clear that Christ came to 'do something', then 'accomlished' that thing, asked for his reward for having done it (John 17), and was rewarded for having done it. (I.e. the _pactum salutis_). There's a reason he's called the 'Last Adam' explicitly by Paul, and why Paul says things like he does in Rom. 5. Where Adam failed, Christ succeeded. etc.

I won't say more than that, but thanks for sending along. 🤙