RE: Salvation for the un-accountable?

RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues

Message

bob97 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 9:47:15 AM)
quote: The not believing and bad consequences are the default position: that is the carry over from Adam. There can be no other conclusion…to think otherwise is just an emotional response. Bob

Heavendweller -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 12:33:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AboundinginHisGrace I just think what He did on the Cross will be for the children who didn't have the knowledge of good or evil. quote: greatdivide: I'm on that page too [:)] It just seems to me that what Jesus did on the Cross will have a greater impact on newborns than what Adam did in the garden. Hear ye, hear ye. I agree. "For the law was given through Moses, BUT grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." St. John 1:17 (emphasis mine) Heavendweller

Heavendweller -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 1:23:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunofone So I believe that God has concluded that ALL have sinned and come short of his glory,and as such ALL are worthy of his wrath.It is HIS,choosing and HIS good pleasure to save SOME.As Jesus ultimately states out of his own mouth,that he GIVES HIS LIFE FOR THE SHEEP! The sheep are those who the Father has given him.It's called CHOOSING,which like or not,is Gods CHOICE.I can be wrong,this is just what God has given me to see. Sonofone, So I'm thinkin' you would go for choice a? No one knows but God. Only God knows for sure which infants are going to Heaven. Again, your post is unclear. But then again, perhaps you are uncertain. Let's put this issue of infants' destinies into a practical scenario. Let's say that there is a husband and wife in your church who has lost their infant child to "SIDS." You know them rather well and have sat in with them in many Sunday school lessons and attended various church social gatherings with them. The parents are grieving intensely. They are concerned whether or not they will ever see their child again. They are personally seeking comfort and assurance that their infant child is in the Lord's presence. What would you say to confort them? Would you say anything, or would you refrain from speaking? Again, to be direct, I would give them my choice e. answer. Anyone else may join in to give their comments as well. BTW, I have been in situations like this myself and I think many of you have been/will be as well. Granted, sometimes it is better to be silent than unsettle a person when they are grieving. But, nonetheless, we each possess an understanding of what Holy Scripture says regarding this issue, and we will make a judgment accordingly. Heavendweller

bob97 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 1:32:44 PM)
Had a family member who by his own admission denied Christ…a bunch of baloney. After his death everyone runs around talking about how he has gone to be with the Lord and is in Heaven with his sister and mother. Now tell me is that right and how does that look to other non believers? To me it says…you don’t have to follow Christ to have eternal life in Christ. Bob

sunofone -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 1:34:55 PM)
quote: Sonofone, So I'm thinkin' you would go for choice a? No one knows but God. Only God knows for sure which infants are going to Heaven. Again, your post is unclear. But then again, perhaps you are uncertain. Let's put this issue of infants' destinies into a practical scenario. I thought I was clear,obviously I wasn't.I believe that only God's children are his children.I can be wrong,and I would be happy to find out I am. As for what I would say in the scenario presented.I would say whatever God gave me to say,or something polite like I'm sorry for your loss,or nothing at all.The circumstances are often the same when you know that someone has not bore evidence of a child of God that has passed. The beautiful thing about it all,is that I don't know,so I don't get to,or have to pass any judgment as to where someone went after they died.In any scenario. That's God's business,not mine.

FreeGrace -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 2:33:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob The Bible teaches that what Adam did in the garden had automatic consequences for all humans. What Christ did on the cross did not have automatic eternal consequences for all humans. To say that all infants or children below an age of accountability is saying that we are born saved and then at some point lose it and have to get it back. No, sir, it is not saying that at all. The issue is one of accountability. When does one become aware of God's existence (since He has made Himself evident to everyone per Romans 1)? And when does one become aware of their own sinfulness? Paul made a comment about persecuting the church in ignorance, which is completely different than what Romans 1 calls "suppression of the truth". Until a person becomes aware of "truth", meaning the existence of God, they have an excuse for not recognizing and honoring God. But, there is a point when God makes Himself evident to everyone, and there is no more excuse for not recognizing and honoring God, as Cornelius did. It should be obvious that those who die as infants/very small children, and certain levels of mental retardation will not become aware of God, and cannot be held accountable for recognizing and honoring Him. But since Christ died for everyone, that means that everyone is covered by His blood, so that those who didn't reach awareness for the above reasons are saved because Christ propitiated the Father for not only our sins, but the sins of the whole world, per 1 John 2:2.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 2:56:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob The Bible teaches that what Adam did in the garden had automatic consequences for all humans. What Christ did on the cross did not have automatic eternal consequences for all humans. So, would you agree, then that the automatic consequences for all humans of what Adam did is more effective and more powerful that what Christ did on the cross since what Christ did does not have automatic or eternal consequences for all humans?

zoebob -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 2:59:40 PM)
No I wouldn't. Christ's death was not intended to save everyone. If it was and it obviously doesn't, then it isn't very powerful and couldn't save anyone. It saves who it is intended to save and for those people it is very powerful. However, just because it isn't effective for everyone doesn't mean it isn't as powerful...it just isn't intended for them.

Heavendweller -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 3:01:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Until a person becomes aware of "truth", meaning the existence of God, they have an excuse for not recognizing and honoring God. But, there is a point when God makes Himself evident to everyone, and there is no more excuse for not recognizing and honoring God, as Cornelius did. It should be obvious that those who die as infants/very small children, and certain levels of mental retardation will not become aware of God, and cannot be held accountable for recognizing and honoring Him. But since Christ died for everyone, that means that everyone is covered by His blood, so that those who didn't reach awareness for the above reasons are saved because Christ propitiated the Father for not only our sins, but the sins of the whole world, per 1 John 2:2. FreeGrace, Ditto! Again, I'm finding agreement with you. BTW, it is interesting to note that Charles H. Spurgeon, a well-known Reformed Calvinist, preached a sermon on this very subject. And he preached that infants who died went to Heaven. I'm sure if one looks it up on a Spurgeon website, they can find the sermon. If I recall correctly, Spurgeon emphasized the compassion and mercy of Christ in that sermon. Interesting, eh? Heavendweller

greatdivide46 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 3:06:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob No I wouldn't. Christ's death was not intended to save everyone. If it was and it obviously doesn't, then it isn't very powerful and couldn't save anyone. It saves who it is intended to save and for those people it is very powerful. However, just because it isn't effective for everyone doesn't mean it isn't as powerful...it just isn't intended for them. I see. So God intended sin for everyone, but did not intend salvation for everyone?

FreeGrace -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 3:13:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob No I wouldn't. Christ's death was not intended to save everyone. If it was and it obviously doesn't, then it isn't very powerful and couldn't save anyone. It saves who it is intended to save and for those people it is very powerful. However, just because it isn't effective for everyone doesn't mean it isn't as powerful...it just isn't intended for them. Christ's death was intended to save whosoever believes in Him. There is no limit as to the whosoever includes. The point is that Christ died for everyone so that whosoever believes will be saved. If He didn't die for everyone, the Bible couldn't honestly claim that that whosoever believes will be saved.

FreeGrace -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 3:16:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Heavendweller quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Until a person becomes aware of "truth", meaning the existence of God, they have an excuse for not recognizing and honoring God. But, there is a point when God makes Himself evident to everyone, and there is no more excuse for not recognizing and honoring God, as Cornelius did. It should be obvious that those who die as infants/very small children, and certain levels of mental retardation will not become aware of God, and cannot be held accountable for recognizing and honoring Him. But since Christ died for everyone, that means that everyone is covered by His blood, so that those who didn't reach awareness for the above reasons are saved because Christ propitiated the Father for not only our sins, but the sins of the whole world, per 1 John 2:2. FreeGrace, Ditto! Again, I'm finding agreement with you. Thank you again! quote: BTW, it is interesting to note that Charles H. Spurgeon, a well-known Reformed Calvinist, preached a sermon on this very subject. And he preached that infants who died went to Heaven. I'm sure if one looks it up on a Spurgeon website, they can find the sermon. If I recall correctly, Spurgeon emphasized the compassion and mercy of Christ in that sermon. Interesting, eh? Heavendweller Yes, very interesting. I'm aware he was a Calvinist, yet I recall reading a quote from him that indicated that he believed that Christ died for everyone. I wish I could find the source. I fully agree about his comment on the compassion and mercy of Christ, since Rom 11:32 seems to be saying the same thing.

mch3172 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 9:05:41 PM)
This is a really difficult question, and one that brought me in college from a staunchly free will and predestinarian theology to a Reformed (Calvinist) one. I completely agree with zoebob's critique of the idea of an "age of accountability" below, having never found any reference to such a concept in scripture. The key point is that salvation isn't up to us, or our limited capacity: it is up to Almighty God. I think the Reformed response to this question is the much more encouraging one, and allows us to appreciate God's love and grace more fully. From the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapt. X: "Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how He pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word." This gave me a lot of encouragement in my faith, and I hope it does the same for other readers. quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob The Bible teaches that what Adam did in the garden had automatic consequences for all humans. What Christ did on the cross did not have automatic eternal consequences for all humans. To say that all infants or children below an age of accountability is saying that we are born saved and then at some point lose it and have to get it back.

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 9:31:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob The Bible teaches that what Adam did in the garden had automatic consequences for all humans. What Christ did on the cross did not have automatic eternal consequences for all humans. So, would you agree, then that the automatic consequences for all humans of what Adam did is more effective and more powerful that what Christ did on the cross since what Christ did does not have automatic or eternal consequences for all humans? What Adam did was just as much part of God's plan as the Lamb heading to the cross before the foundation of the world... John

FolkSingerBlues -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 9:38:42 PM)
Seems like many of the answers I read here continue to be religious as opposed to Christian. So far one great power has been dismissed from this conversation. The power of the "the ruler of the kingdom of the air". Perhaps we believe even in his power which is as big of a mistake as having a form of Godliness denying it's power. The answers here continue to be explored through the glasses we feel most safe in approaching the Bible with. I acknowledge the need for theology, but bad theology is as devastating and destructive as no theology. I would be so bold to say that Calvinism and Arminianism are both highly flawed doctrines although they contain some truth within them both. We have fell so far (and I mean WE) from who God is because we want him to be something that makes us feel good. We try to rewrite the pages of the Bible by recreating God in our image. Take your Calvinism and Arminianism and hold on to them as tightly as you can, all the while just know that we will miss WHO God has revealed himself to be because we are to scared that he won't be who WE WANT HIM TO BE!

greatdivide46 -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 10:26:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe What Adam did was just as much part of God's plan as the Lamb heading to the cross before the foundation of the world... I don't have a problem with that. My problem comes in saying the what Adam did has a greater effect on mankind than the Lamb heading to the cross.

sunofone -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 10:43:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues Seems like many of the answers I read here continue to be religious as opposed to Christian. So far one great power has been dismissed from this conversation. The power of the "the ruler of the kingdom of the air". Perhaps we believe even in his power which is as big of a mistake as having a form of Godliness denying it's power. The answers here continue to be explored through the glasses we feel most safe in approaching the Bible with. I acknowledge the need for theology, but bad theology is as devastating and destructive as no theology. I would be so bold to say that Calvinism and Arminianism are both highly flawed doctrines although they contain some truth within them both. We have fell so far (and I mean WE) from who God is because we want him to be something that makes us feel good. We try to rewrite the pages of the Bible by recreating God in our image. Take your Calvinism and Arminianism and hold on to them as tightly as you can, all the while just know that we will miss WHO God has revealed himself to be because we are to scared that he won't be who WE WANT HIM TO BE! Folksinger I have a confession to make.I am actually angry when I hear you post like this.It's like the person that starts an argument and then backs off and says I'm not going to argue with you. You make your points for what you believe is true,and what you believe is false,then claim that none of us can do the same,because our view is tainted. I have introduced scripture to support what I see.I would be glad for someone to give me the benefit of their analysis of what I have posted.This is the benefit of a forum,people can challenge you,maybe point out some blind spots in your theology. I don't like the hit and run tactic you employ,I think it is unfair,and childish.I suspect you mean well,in taking the highroad.But it comes off as if the highroad is owned exclusively by you. I think it is intellectually,and spiritually dishonest to make statements about all positions being flawed,and tainted by our individual lenses,than turn around around and tell us what you see is right.That judgment alone,is a position that you hold is true,so you too have a position that needs to stand the scrutiny of inspection. It is more honest to state what God has given you to see as confirmed by scripture,and let us judge for ourselves if your understanding meets the test. If you have a point of view I would prefer you make it,stand by it,and allow us to examine it and come to our own conclusion whether it holds up.I don't like how you choose to engage in discussion,as you are the only one highly favored to see the error of all positions,excluding your's of course. I just needed to confess that to you.I'm spitting angry[:@]I borrowed that from a movie I saw lol I am angry though. Here's another example of what I mean here although there are uite a few: It would seem that if God means what he says and says what he means he has made who he has chosen easy to recognize. It is those who believe. So while we can talk about God being sovereign (which he is) he however has made it known how he demonstrates his sovereign choice. He chooses those who believe. Since I brought up the word "sovereign" I will expound on that. God has sovereignly chosen to hold all accountable and to judge them. Those who decide to live a life as if they are "un-accountable" can make that choice, but cannot make the choice not to be HELD accountable. Therefore we see a small glimpse of his sovereign governance. quote: ORIGINAL: zoebob The Bible teaches that what Adam did in the garden had automatic consequences for all humans. What Christ did on the cross did not have automatic eternal consequences for all humans. To say that all infants or children below an age of accountability is saying that we are born saved and then at some point lose it and have to get it back. I would strongly disagree zoebob. What Christ coming to earth, and being the sin sacrifice has had eternal consequences on humans. You either believe in him or you don't. If you do believe the consequences are good. If you don't believe, well the consequences not so good. I do think that sin has repercussions that we can't begin to grasp the understanding of, just as we can only get a glimpse of just how powerful God's grace is. Both have consequences. The moment you choose to enter the arena and give your opinion,you forfeit the right to turn around and say everyone else's opinion is tainted by their lenses. Why not just state your opinion using scripture and let us judge.What's the harm in that?I know I don't claim to know it all,but I stand by what God has given me to see,and I welcome dissent,in fact I love when someone offers me a perspective that I have not considered,or overlooked.It's how I grow and learn. That's enough I've vented,and I feel better now.Sorry everybody I had to say that.

FolkSingerBlues -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/15/2008 11:20:12 PM)
sunofone, I'm glad to see passion stirred inside of you. I'm even glad that you are angry. I'm further glad that you decided to voice that anger. I still stand by what I have previously stated. The difference between my posts and others is not that I'm right, nor that I have insight that others don't have, nor that I'm wise. The difference is I admit that EVEN MY OWN statements can be flawed when I make assumption, speak on how "I feel" God should be or do. All of us are for sure entitled to our opinions on scripture, but none of our opinions should be a test of fellowship. The reality those opinions ARE a test of fellowship. I have been a accused of being "in the Arminian camp" since I have began to discuss the views I read in Scripture. That is simply not the truth. The interesting thing is that there are plenty of people of equal intelligence, superior intelligence, less intelligence and even ignorance that I have discussed many things of a theological nature. All the while I have never lost respect for any of them UNLESS THEY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND the opposing view. That has NEVER required them to agree. Nor do I require you to agree or anyone else. Discussion is interesting, debate should be firey (but fair). I do however encourage people that I am in discussion on any subject with to read the verses they cross reference and read the text and find the truths that lay "on top" of the passage before we begin to discuss deeper implications. As I would encourage anyone to do. Because understanding is of the utmost importance. A wise man we both respect once said: quote: A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. Proverbs 18:2 I edited this post because the text to my Scripture reference was the wrong one...lol

sunofone -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 12:02:31 AM)
quote: The difference between my posts and others is not that I'm right, nor that I have insight that others don't have, nor that I'm wise. The difference is I admit that EVEN MY OWN statements can be flawed when I make assumption, speak on how "I feel" God should be or do. I'm glad you were able to take what I said in such a kind spirit.I'm not trying to continue the conversation down a negative path,as my anger has passed;I do want to show you where I myself have said something similar to what you just voiced during the course of my posting here: quote: What I am requesting Sonofone, is that you be a bit forth coming and direct. What do YOU think happens to infants? Heavendweller BTW, I'm inclined to go with the e. choice. I don't mean to come off as being evasive,and certainly not all knowing.I also don't mean to imply that my point of view is scriptural whereas others are not.I know for the most part we all seriously try to evaluate and appraise the scriptures as we best we can. We're all just trying to learn or state what we have been given to see.I don't think anyone is going for blood here.I hope to learn and share,as with anytime I post.It's give and take.I give what I have and take what others offer.I just want the same from you,without the notion that only you are above the fray.

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 3:56:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe What Adam did was just as much part of God's plan as the Lamb heading to the cross before the foundation of the world... I don't have a problem with that. My problem comes in saying the what Adam did has a greater effect on mankind than the Lamb heading to the cross. It's more what God decreed than what Adam did... John

SovereignIsHe -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 3:59:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues sunofone, I'm glad to see passion stirred inside of you. I'm even glad that you are angry. I'm further glad that you decided to voice that anger. I still stand by what I have previously stated. The difference between my posts and others is not that I'm right, nor that I have insight that others don't have, nor that I'm wise. The difference is I admit that EVEN MY OWN statements can be flawed when I make assumption, speak on how "I feel" God should be or do. All of us are for sure entitled to our opinions on scripture, but none of our opinions should be a test of fellowship. The reality those opinions ARE a test of fellowship. I have been a accused of being "in the Arminian camp" since I have began to discuss the views I read in Scripture. That is simply not the truth. The interesting thing is that there are plenty of people of equal intelligence, superior intelligence, less intelligence and even ignorance that I have discussed many things of a theological nature. All the while I have never lost respect for any of them UNLESS THEY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND the opposing view. That has NEVER required them to agree. Nor do I require you to agree or anyone else. Discussion is interesting, debate should be firey (but fair). I do however encourage people that I am in discussion on any subject with to read the verses they cross reference and read the text and find the truths that lay "on top" of the passage before we begin to discuss deeper implications. As I would encourage anyone to do. Because understanding is of the utmost importance. A wise man we both respect once said: quote: A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. Proverbs 18:2 I edited this post because the text to my Scripture reference was the wrong one...lol Total comedy... Thanks I needed a laugh tonight... [:)] John

DaveW -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 6:32:11 AM)
This (infant salvation) is an issue that is un-defined in scripture(with the possible exception of Jewish infants). We would all do well to leave it that way.

sunofone -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 7:04:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaveW This (infant salvation) is an issue that is un-defined in scripture(with the possible exception of Jewish infants). We would all do well to leave it that way. Why is that Dave?What is the harm,in searching out the ways and means of salvation?If we can't say for certain who,not as in individuals as no man can know,rather who as in category is accepted and rejected of God,how can we preach a gospel of inclusion and exclusion. If we would do well to leave this matter to God,why not adopt the UR position and call it a day?As we can not tell what standard God will use to judge men. I believe that only God's children are saved regardless of age or mental condition.I haven't as yet ran across a scripture that supports any other position.I've seen God kill babies with indifference,why should I believe that he saves them just because there infants?

FolkSingerBlues -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 9:39:08 AM)
quote: I have been a accused of being "in the Arminian camp" since I have began to discuss the views I read in Scripture. That is simply not the truth. The interesting thing is that there are plenty of people of equal intelligence, superior intelligence, less intelligence and even ignorance that I have discussed many things of a theological nature. All the while I have never lost respect for any of them UNLESS THEY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND the opposing view. The last sentence should have read: All the while I have never lost respect for any of them UNLESS THEY DIDN'T TRY TO UNDERSTAND the opposing view. As for my comedy routine, John I'm glad I can amuse you. I'm sure God ordained my post for you entertainment...lol

FREELUTH -> RE: Salvation for the un-accountable? (6/16/2008 12:46:43 PM)
A very good article on the Lutheran view of this subject. http://www.orlutheran.com/html/trinfbap.html I know some will disagree, put is always good to try and understand other Christians views.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI