Infant Death and Salvation

[Darrell C]

And you do not clarify what I ask you to.

but...I did...you are unable to receive it at this time.

I received your answer, "God is omniscient and aware of all man's sin," and find it...no answer to the question I posed to you, or the OP.

You are presenting a position that has men saved before they are saved, which essentially nullifies the Redemption of Christ.

Again, you are implying that the babe in the womb is in Covenant Relationship with God, which nullifies man's condition. If you could expound on why you take this view and give a Scriptural Basis for it then we have something to discuss

The statement from the confession says......ELECT INFANTS DYING IN INFANCY...
I no where spoke of all infants, so do not imply I did

So non-elect infants go to Hell.

Okay, I get that. At least that is the only reasonable conclusion I would draw from your statements so far. And I notice that no-one has chosen that option in the poll.

Now, where in Scripture do you justify this?

And let's look at the confession:


Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling

3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

Again...when does this take place? After death? Before death? Does this apply to the womb?

And how about a clear statement about non-elect infants dying in infancy?

And another issue you can define in these teachings...what exactly is the "Ministry of the Word?" Please explain that.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

You have a habit of changing what is discussed in the midst of these long filibuster postings...

On the contrary, I have consistently had to force you back to the topic. You are once again coming into the discussion with insult and even made direct statement that there is no need to discuss this, and I have asked you, I think twice already...why are you even participating?

I have no interest in your personal beef with men, Iconoclast, you need to get over that. You need to try to focus on the topic of discussion itself. There is no need to cluster this thread with posts having to deal with personal statements towards myself.

The Topic is Infant Death and Salvation, so decide if you want to discuss this from Scripture or not. If all you have is copy and paste from the teachings of men, and cannot bring your own perspective to the table, I don't have a problem with that, But at least try to stick to the topic.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Iconoclast said: ↑

I originally quoted from the 1689 conf of faith. It speaks of elect infants dying in infancy.....

Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption which you by pass and speak of the New Covenant instead.

Again, this nullifies man's condition, whether they are elect or non-elect, because it implies they are not...

Again, this nullifies man's condition, whether they are elect or non-elect, because it implies they are not

Nothing nullifies mans condition.....it does nothing to mans condition.

It does nullify man's condition.


Romans 5:8

King James Version (KJV)

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.


We have to change this to "While some of us were yet sinners...Christ died for some of us."

And I will be glad to look at the Scripture that teaches a "Covenant of Redemption" is not the New Covenant. Where do we find that in Scripture, Iconoclast?

Where do we find justification for your statement, "Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption," and how this is relevant to the topic of discussion?

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

And how is this relevant to the infant in the womb? There is a relevance, but, this verse is a long way from justifying "Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption," and in fact goes against what you are teaching, because it shows...

...a universal application in convicting all of sin...not just some.

Man was already considered as dead and fallen in Adam.

And I agree with that, I have consistently adhered to that simple principle in everything I have said.

Man is separated from God at conception, which is not nullified by some kind of Covenant that we do not find presented in Scripture. The only logical conclusion is that men are not held culpable until they reach an age where they can comprehend and then respond to what has been revealed to them. I reject "Age of Accountability, all men are, upon conception, separated from God, and that has to be dealt with. God does not just give the elect a pass in regards to their condition.

And the only Remedy for that condition is through God reconciling all who will be saved to Himself.

So the burden is on you to give a Scriptural Presentation that affirms that "Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption." I apready have an idea of what you will appeal to, but, I can tell you this, keep in mind the nullification of man's condition before you present the "From before the foundation of the World" passages. You are not going to deny the clear teachings that all men have to be reconciled to God, and while you won't yet acknowledge the simple truth that this did not take place prior to the Cross and Pentecost, that is precisely what Scripture teaches.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

The singular example is of course...the Old Testament Saint. They were saved by the grace of God despite the fact that their understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was non-existent.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham;

God preached the Gospel to all of Israel throughout the Kingdom years...and not one of them, including the Prophets...

...understood the Gospel.

It was a Mystery not yet revealed:


1 Peter 1:10-12

King James Version (KJV)


10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.


The revelation of the Gospel Mystery, the Hidden Wisdom of God...is through the Comforter in this Age.

Noah, Abraham, Moses, and even David...did not understand the Promise/s, and they did not receive the promise/s.

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Let me re-emphasize this verse:


Hebrews 11

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

We have received the Promises/s of God, they are not afar off, they are realized in New Covenant Relationship.

You are welcome to show the Covenant of Redemption you speak of from Scripture.

Darrell C,

And nothing I have said denies that, but what I have said is...that very thing.

you post contradictions many times, then this statement????

You are welcome to show the contradictions, and what you see as making my statement here invalid.

Here is the original statement:


Iconoclast said: ↑

This is another example....all sinners are separated from God...DEAD in Sin. not just infants.

And nothing I have said denies that, but what I have said is...that very thing.


So where is the contradiction, Iconoclast. You will not even post the timestamps in what you post because you know that your responses do not address the issues involved in the OP. You know it will be seen that you are trying to change the topic from Infant Death and SAlavation to your doctrine concerning Covenants. Go start a thread to discuss that if you like, but in this thread please try to stay on topic. I am not interested in your opinion of me, I am only interested in the Doctrine.

Both of your statements are...false allegations that not only can't be justified, but can be exposed as untrue.

You quote me even once where my doctrine denies that all sinners are separated from God...dead in sin. My position is...

...infants are as well.

Your position is...elect infants are not. That is the only logical conclusion. They are already in Covenant Relationship with God and are therefore safe. And that you stipulate only the elect infants are only makes it that much more interesting. You still need to clarify this from Scripture, because the commentaries of men are just not cutting it.

And I would rather not have this thread wasted with personal issues, so lets keep this doctrinal. If you think your doctrine is sound and can be justified by Scripture...great! That is the intent. If you have knowledge that can set the record straight, or at least help towards that goal...great. That is the intent of the Thread.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I agree with all of this, but, it doesn't really address the issue.

Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling

3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess.
( Matthew 22:14; Matthew 13:20, 21; Hebrews 6:4, 5; John 6:44, 45, 65; 1 John 2:24, 25; Acts 4:12; John 4:22; John 17:3 )

I too believe that infants are saved by Christ through the Spirit, though I believe all infants are, not just the Elect. Its just a given, all who are saved...are the Elect.

So this has already been addressed, not much more I can say until you actually respond to that address.

This does not address the issue because the Scripture provided deals with men who have been born and can receive or reject the revelation of God.

I actually agree with both points, yet we have a couple issues that could be discussed.

First, we still need to address whether there are non-elect infants that go into eternal separation.

here is one example....you say you actually agree with the posted statements......really???

Yes, really.

That's why I said...

I actually agree with both points, yet we have a couple issues that could be discussed.

First, we still need to address whether there are non-elect infants that go into eternal separation.

Second, do we see in point 3 a clear statement that salvation is accomplished by the Spirit separate from the Word of God, the "Ministry of the Word," which we see is normative in salvation for those who are born and grow up.

Third, when does regeneration take place? Every proof-text given refers to the revealed Gospel of this Age. So we can say we have two groups of infants that die in the womb, those in past Ages, and those in this Age. Those who take the position that men have always been regenerated by God prior to Pentecost may not see this distinction, but, the proof-texts above are specific to the Gospel of Christ Post-Cross, so they do not distinguish between the perfection of the Old Testament Saint, and this becomes a non-issue for them. However, we still have to answer the question, when does regeneration take place?


And I will leave those points for discussion. Thanks for the response.


I give you opportunity to discuss the topic, and this is what I get...

I actually agree with both points, yet we have a couple issues that could be discussed.

First, we still need to address whether there are non-elect infants that go into eternal separation.

here is one example....you say you actually agree with the posted statements......really???

Yes. And your example does not deny that.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

it does not seem to be so;

It would if you incorporated what I have already said.

Let's look at it:

in 10:4-Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved...

these statements cover all being discussed, those who are elect unto salvation, and those NOT ELECTED.....
you claim to agree then ask this????

It doesn't cover all being discussed, Iconoclast, it simply makes a general statement concerning the elect that die in infancy, which presupposes a valid doctrine of non-elect infants going to Hell.

Secondly, would you explain to me exactly how an infant responds to...

...the Ministry of the Word?

First, we still need to address whether there are non-elect infants that go into eternal separation

.....????? where do non elect persons go DC? into limbo????

It's not for me to answer this question, Iconoclast...the burden is on you.

I made three points of discussion which distinguishes my agreement and points left for discussion which need to be ironed out.

Here it is again:


I actually agree with both points, yet we have a couple issues that could be discussed.

First, we still need to address whether there are non-elect infants that go into eternal separation.

Second, do we see in point 3 a clear statement that salvation is accomplished by the Spirit separate from the Word of God, the "Ministry of the Word," which we see is normative in salvation for those who are born and grow up.

Third, when does regeneration take place? Every proof-text given refers to the revealed Gospel of this Age. So we can say we have two groups of infants that die in the womb, those in past Ages, and those in this Age. Those who take the position that men have always been regenerated by God prior to Pentecost may not see this distinction, but, the proof-texts above are specific to the Gospel of Christ Post-Cross, so they do not distinguish between the perfection of the Old Testament Saint, and this becomes a non-issue for them. However, we still have to answer the question, when does regeneration take place?


Do you want to discuss these issues and find out why I agree with the two points? If so, great. If not, again, I ask...why are you even participating in the thread?

Here is the statement again:


in 10:4-Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved...


I fully agree that those that are called (and there are many that be called) receive of the Ministry of the Comforter, Which is first and foremost a Ministry to the unbelieving world population:


John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)


7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


That is just an incontrovertible statement of Truth directly from Christ Himself.

So the statement is correct in that regards, but, only so far as it applies to those who can receive of the Ministry of the Word.

To place that into a context of this discussion is absurd, because it implies that...

1. God ministers the Word to the infant in the womb, and...

2. ...fails.


Absolutely inadequate commentary that is not relevant to the topic itself.

So I will ask you again, please stay on topic, no sense in disrupting the thread with personal issues.

Keep it Doctrinal, Iconoclast.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

So you feel persecuted Darrell?

I hardly consider back-biting comments to be persecution, EWF.

I simply pointed out to you that my response was not throwing something at someone, it was actually dealing with what was thrown at me.

He wants to make it personal and tell me I need to repent because my doctrine is rejected, and he doesn't like the way I interact. Great. Again, I suggest he study Scripture so he can see why his insult is off-base (I'm beginning to sense a theme here, lol).

So I will field them as they come.

May I suggest the book "STUDIES in the SERMON ON THE MOUNT" by Martyn Lloyd-Jones as a good read!

Appreciated, EWF, but I spend very little time in books by men these days.

Secondly, your judgment of my character is not received as appropriate, though it may be well intentioned, even as the exhortation to repent may have been.

Third, give me a break, will ya? I can yank chains if I want to. lol

If you, or any other member has an issue with how I post, report it to Moderation...please.

I try to do a chapter a day & it has enlightened me as to Christs teachings.......its been a valuable tool.

May I suggest a chapter a day in the Book of Hebrews, for about a month.

I'm serious. Not trying to be a wise guy.

And can I ask, how much time do you spend in the Bible a day? Could you answer that for me?

Now I will tell you that that same book was a Christmas present from a Saint who thought it would enlighten me.....and it sat on my book shelve for about 20 years till I had the sense I was missing something & needed it. WHAT A GIFT! WHAT A GIFT!!!

Again, I am really happy for you, and I guess whatever works for you is fine. Me, I am always going to suggest commentaries are to be supplemental in our studies, not primary sources of "enlightenment." While I would agree there are some books that can help certain believers come to an understanding of issues not understood, or help them deal with character flaws and issues, I will tell you...

...the Word of God does it better.

God is our Teacher, my friend, and He wants to fellowship with us in His Word. I know this.

Now if you don't mind, please try to address the topic. I am not the focus of discussion, lol.


God bless.

 

[revmwc]

And alas as normal iconoclast has sidetracked the Thread and got DC to use up precious space to answer off the OP

 

[Darrell C]

Original Sin, as God imputes to those who are only born of the flesh with his sin, and then we all confirm that sinner state by choosing and doing sinful acts...

We are ALL conceived in sin, born with sin natures bent away from God,

Scripture?

but the Lord can also choose to remit and not hold personally accounyible for their own states those such as Infants/mentally challenged, due to the Grace of the Cross///

I disagree: all of mankind is held accountable for their condition, that condition is not given a pass for anyone.

Their condition will be remedied through Christ in the same manner everyone else who is saved has their condition remedied.

Babies do not get a pass because they are innocent, they are covered, like the Old Testament Saint...

In like fashion, God imputes unto all saved in Christ and reborn anew HIS rightiousness now...

I agree. So that brings us back to the infant in the womb. When are they born again and brought into union with God?

So God decided to clothe and cover in that blood those such as discussed here...

True, He does that now. However, when does that take place throughout redemptive history?

Here are three options presented so far in the thread:


1. In eternity past;

2. In the womb;

3. After death.


Which is it, and what is the Scripture which is presented to justify the opotion chosen.


God bless.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I hardly consider back-biting comments to be persecution, EWF.

I simply pointed out to you that my response was not throwing something at someone, it was actually dealing with what was thrown at me.

He wants to make it personal and tell me I need to repent because my doctrine is rejected, and he doesn't like the way I interact. Great. Again, I suggest he study Scripture so he can see why his insult is off-base (I'm beginning to sense a theme here, lol).

So I will field them as they come.






Appreciated, EWF, but I spend very little time in books by men these days.

Secondly, your judgment of my character is not received as appropriate, though it may be well intentioned, even as the exhortation to repent may have been.

Third, give me a break, will ya? I can yank chains if I want to. lol

If you, or any other member has an issue with how I post, report it to Moderation...please.




May I suggest a chapter a day in the Book of Hebrews, for about a month.

I'm serious. Not trying to be a wise guy.

And can I ask, how much time do you spend in the Bible a day? Could you answer that for me?





Again, I am really happy for you, and I guess whatever works for you is fine. Me, I am always going to suggest commentaries are to be supplemental in our studies, not primary sources of "enlightenment." While I would agree there are some books that can help certain believers come to an understanding of issues not understood, or help them deal with character flaws and issues, I will tell you...

...the Word of God does it better.

God is our Teacher, my friend, and He wants to fellowship with us in His Word. I know this.

Now if you don't mind, please try to address the topic. I am not the focus of discussion, lol.


God bless.

Naa, your just a punk who has very little humility but thinks.....you know, I ain't goin there.

 

[Darrell C]

Naa, your just a punk who has very little humility but thinks.....you know, I ain't goin there.

Nice.

Well, at least you admit I think.





God bless.

 

[Iconoclast]

And alas as normal iconoclast has sidetracked the Thread and got DC to use up precious space to answer off the OP

Could you show this rmac....?....looks like you do not have much to say once again.
I answered the OP. As usual you have little to offer, and DC goes off topic as he does on most threads,not understanding what is offered so he goes around it and discusses what he wants to instead. Post 126 shows this.....

 

[Darrell C]

Could you show this rmac....?....looks like you do not have much to say once again.
I answered the OP. As usual you have little to offer, and DC goes off topic as he does on most threads,not understanding what is offered so he goes around it and discusses what he wants to instead. Post 126 shows this.....

But Iconoclast, I am on topic in Post #126. The point there is that the resource you presented doesn't really speak to the issue of infant death and salvation completely. It only speaks to one side from a Systematic Doctrinal Position. It has to be assumed that non-elect infants that die are not saved, which presupposes...non-elect infants that die.


in 10:4-Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved...


How does this speak to infant death? As I said before, this implies God ministers to the infant in the womb (and only He could actually do that) and...fails.

The non-elect in view here are clearly those who have been born and reached a level of growth in which they can understand both the Ministry of the Word and the Convicting Ministry of the Holy Ghost/Comforter (the "common operations of the Spirit" mentioned here).

That is the reason John 16:7-9 was quoted.

So I ask you, if infant death and salvation is addressed by this statement, would it not imply God fails in His efforts? The effort is implied in the statement.


God bless.

 

[Iconoclast]

Darrell C

Here is the problem DC....You have been answered, you claim you have not been answered because you do not properly process the answers given to you. This is a personal problem you have to wrestle with.
In the other thread...Biblicist laid this out in detail, you reacted and rejected what he said there.
Now you are doing the same thing expecting different results????

I received your answer, "God is omniscient and aware of all man's sin," and find it...no answer to the question I posed to you, or the OP.

here is how I began my response to you, after Annsni, and TC and all the reformed persons offered answers that you reject.
Hello DC,
This quote from the 1689 confession of faith I believe to be the perfect answer in that it leaves all of it in God's hands....
Who, and how many persons are elected is up to God entirely from start to finish anyway.
If any person is non elect they will not be in heaven.
That is the only proper answer, regardless of the speculations of men...
Even good men like Spurgeon speaks from emotion rather than scripture on this issue. God is God....we are not;
25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
DC.....I trust God and His wisdom...
If he has not elected all men...he has a Holy reason not to do so...

If he has elected all infants dying in infancy He has a holy reason for doing so.

If he has not elected all infants who die in infancy He would also have a Holy reason for doing so

This speaks to more than omniscience.....it speaks to God's Eternal Decree.[which you deny exists}
So you start off by denying the response, but the core teaching of the bible as revealed to the Church.

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

There is an eternal purpose DC.....you do not like it, you reject the godly teachers that have been given to the church......yes...it is just YOU AND YOUR BIBLE....

When others of us use those links you complain, then decry that we are making it personal, claiming an insult???

Now you expect me to go back through the whole thread and explain again what you set aside in the first place???? This is exactly what I said would take place and now it has once again......okay....let me go back and show it to you once again-

In post 27 you were given several short answers that you seek to side step;

{Not for me DC..... I just trust God 100% on this.....
There will be no non elect persons in Heaven at all.
This is your thought, not mine. I leave it to God.
I see no clear expression of this in scripture addressing this topic.
your speculation.....we do not see as God does.}

I tried not to make it more personal than needed to be.

your response in part again shows a lack of understanding that would take a different thread to unravel; you said;

But here's the thing, Iconoclast...God has given us His Word so we can know what He thinks. While it is true that men take differing views as to what that is on any given issue, wouldn't you agree that we can conclude on most issues based on what He has given us, His Word?

I don't see this particular issue as any different. We should be able to conclude dogmatically in regards to man's condition in the womb.

We can know ONLY what God reveals for us to know....



we as created beings do not know what an infinite God thinks

we as created beings do not know why God does what he does

we do not know the exactness of His holy , righteous judgment.

To suggest what you have is folly, you are welcome to it of course, but you go down that road alone.

 

[Iconoclast]

Darrell C

Here is the problem DC....You have been answered, you claim you have not been answered because you do not properly process the answers given to you. This is a personal problem you have to wrestle with.
In the other thread...Biblicist laid this out in detail, you reacted and rejected what he said there.
Now you are doing the same thing expecting different results????

Here again was the exchange in Post 33;

Darrell C,
And that's okay. If the matter is settled for you, great

I SAID AT THAT TIME....
I think leaving the issue in God's hands settles it for everyone.

Are you not content with leaving it in God's hands?
I said to you when you said you wanted to discuss this more;
I see that you do, but I might not be the most helpful person to discuss it with as I see it as clear cut.

I see and understand what is known and understood to be THE COVENANT OF REDEMPTION.

Simply put, it is The Covenant agreed upon and determined to come to pass by the members of the Godhead before time was. You deny such a thing exists and really are not looking for an answer to the questions you are asking are you? I told you a few times before, if you do not get this right, you have no hope to answer the theological puzzle you claim now that you want an answer to you.

I have time to think things out more than many people whose jobs occupy their mental facilties...so when you offer these weak comments that to explain takes more effort than it is worth, I simply suggest to you I am not the best person for you to ask, because I am going to see through your objection from the beginning.....okay I will show you or whoever might take time to read this;

you say-in post 123-124 { which I have in times past asked you to define,and at this point in time you still cannot explain it}

you say in 124-

So where is the contradiction, Iconoclast. You will not even post the timestamps in what you post because you know that your responses do not address the issues involved in the OP

.

Another bogus conclusion by you-

You know it will be seen that you are trying to change the topic from Infant Death and SAlavation to your doctrine concerning Covenants

.

I had posted earlier that if you do not understand the covenant of redemption...which you indicate you cannot see any teaching of it.....you will not come to truth here.

So you want me to explain the answers without using what we are given to understand it???

Go start a thread to discuss that if you like, but in this thread please try to stay on topic. I am not interested in your opinion of me, I am only interested in the Doctrine.

I have discussed that issue before. It figures in this discussion. Your failure to grasp that fact is your problem , not mine. I am not offering opinions of "you".....just reacting to "your" posts.

What is your Biblical Basis for the idea that all are sinners at conception?

Roms3:23
romans 5;12-21
psalm 51:3
psalm 58:3

Secondly, if this is the case, then how is it that the Elect that die as infants...are saved?

The confessional statement already given several times does this already.....notice....it offers the scriptural answer.....listen....I cannot read and think for you....you need to do that for yourself-

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Jesus said you cannot know when and how the Spirit moves upon any elect soul....That is God's business ...
I answered this on topic which you now claim I did not answer;

All elect sinners are saved the same way. There might be different means employed by God but the same salvation is the result. I see in scripture God dealing with all of His sheep, young or old, rich or poor by means of the Covenant of Redemption being fully accomplished in the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The blood that propitiates the wrath of God is applied as a covering to the elect children;

11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one:

for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.[/QUOTE]

 

[Iconoclast]

Darrell C

It does nullify man's condition.

not at all


Romans 5:8

King James Version (KJV)
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

We have to change this to "While some of us were yet sinners...Christ died for some of us."

We do not have to change this at all. We just have to understand that romans 5..."us"...is speaking of justified elect persons, and those who will be justified and have the peace with God spoken of in 5:1....

Do I have to explain everything to you DC?

And I will be glad to look at the Scripture that teaches a "Covenant of Redemption" is not the New Covenant. Where do we find that in Scripture, Iconoclast?

And here we have it.......your denial of what is the core teaching of scripture

Let me guess...........your objection is......you do not see the ....words.....Covenant of redemption written out in any verse of scripture....so in your mind...it cannot exist is that it????

I can have some fun with this-

If I am reading the sports page and read an article that discusses and mentions the following items;
the strike zone
a stolen base
the pitchers mound
two doubles
a balk
a single
a grand slam
an earned run average
a batting average
the foul pole
the plate umpire

Would you struggle mightily to grasp what sport the article was speaking about?
Would you deny that sport exists because it was not mentioned by the name of it ?
If everyone other than you knew exactly what sport was being spoken about would you dismiss all of them?
If you denied the sport existed after reading all the elements and descriptions....do you think anyone should take you seriously after such objections???

Where do we find justification for your statement, "Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption," and how this is relevant to the topic of discussion?

The C.O.R . deals with all men who are saved. The topic is about salvation.....and you want to know how this is relevant???
If the C.O.R. deals with all persons who will ever be saved, why would it not deal with elect infants?

And how is this relevant to the infant in the womb?

Why would you exclude them?

There is a relevance, but, this verse is a long way from justifying "Election is based upon a person being in the Covenant of redemption," and in fact goes against what you are teaching, because it shows...

it shows you are one confused puppy???

Man is separated from God at conception, which is not nullified by some kind of Covenant that we do not find presented in Scripture

.

Your denial and utter confusion here is the source of your trouble and frustration....look no further....this is most of it!

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
Some time after 3pm Pacific, this thread will be closed.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.

Six Hour Warning
Some time after 3pm Pacific, this thread will be closed.