• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Neither Arminianism nor Calvinism

I

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
37818 said:
So am I to understand you to believe little childern die an go to hell?
Click to expand...
I posted that they are guilty sinners having died in Adam rom.3:23.
They are not "safe". Any child who.is saved is not saved because they are safe, they would be saved because of mercy.
 
J

Jesus Saves!

Active Member
Psalm 139:15-16 KJVS
[15] My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. [16] Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Here is were David and Bathsheba's son died. Seems the child is with God and though he was sharpen in iniquity and a sinner, he hadn't come to the place of accountability when the law declares us guilty. Just thinking on scriptures.
2 Samuel 12:23 KJVS
[23] But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Revmitchell said:
I told you, you need to explain how those verses support you position not just make a claim.
Click to expand...

37818 said:
Names are already in the book, only to be kept in the book (Revelation 3:5; 1 John 5:4-5) or not to be written there (Exodus 32:33; Psalms 69:27-28; Revelation 20:15). Children are safe (Mark 10:14). Once we become of age to be held responssible, we must again become counted as children (Mark 10:15; John 3:3-4).
Click to expand...
The argument that the names are already in the book is based on the fact that nowhere in Holy Scripture are we told when or directly as why names are in the book to begin with, and names are said to be removed (Exodus 32:33; Psalms 69:27-28) or on a condition to never be removed (Revelation 3:5). And those who perish do not have their names in the book (Revelation 13:8; Revelation 20:15).

Now Jesus makes three claims. One, that the kingdom is for little children (Mark 10:14). Secondly, we must be counted as little children as a condition to enter the kingdom (Mark 10:15). And thirdly what Jesus told Nicodemus is that he must be born over and what Nicodemus understood and so asked (John 3:4).

So what is it of this that you do not understand?
 
JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
37818 said:
The argument that the names are already in the book is based on the fact that nowhere in Holy Scripture are we told when or directly as why names are in the book to begin with, and names are said to be removed (Exodus 32:33; Psalms 69:27-28) or on a condition to never be removed (Revelation 3:5). And those who perish do not have their names in the book (Revelation 13:8; Revelation 20:15).

Now Jesus makes three claims. One, that the kingdom is for little children (Mark 10:14). Secondly, we must be counted as little children as a condition to enter the kingdom. And thirdly what Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born over and what Nicodemus understood and so asked (John 3:4).

So what is it of this that you do not understand?
Click to expand...
Thanks for the explanation. I was also not following you and this helped. Sometimes we think inside our own boxes and miss entirely what others are saying.
 
R

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
37818 said:
The argument that the names are already in the book is based on the fact that nowhere in Holy Scripture are we told when or directly as why names are in the book to begin with, and names are said to be removed (Exodus 32:33; Psalms 69:27-28) or on a condition to never be removed (Revelation 3:5). And those who perish do not have their names in the book (Revelation 13:8; Revelation 20:15).

Now Jesus makes three claims. One, that the kingdom is for little children (Mark 10:14). Secondly, we must be counted as little children as a condition to enter the kingdom. And thirdly what Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born over and what Nicodemus understood and so asked (John 3:4).

So what is it of this that you do not understand?
Click to expand...

Oh I understand what you are saying fully, What you do not understand is that making a claim and attaching a verse to it is still only a claim. I have challenged your claim as being wrong and lacking any real break down of the verses you have provided to prove those verses match your claim.

Just because you say something is true and then attach a verse to it does not provide proof of your position. That is not exposition it is merely making an unsubstantiated claim.

So what part of what I am saying don't you understand?
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Iconoclast said:
I posted that they are guilty sinners having died in Adam rom.3:23.
They are not "safe". Any child who.is saved is not saved because they are safe, they would be saved because of mercy.
Click to expand...

So you are arguing mercy is not to be safe. You are not making sense. And mercy without justice also makes no sense. Jesus said the kingdom of God is for little children (Mark 10:14). And as a condition to enter it we must be counted as little children (Mark 10:15).
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Revmitchell said:
Oh I understand what you are saying fully, What you do not understand is that making a claim and attaching a verse to it is still only a claim. I have challenged your claim as being wrong and lacking any real break down of the verses you have provided to prove those verses match your claim.

Just because you say something is true and then attach a verse to it does not provide proof of your position. That is not exposition it is merely making an unsubstantiated claim.

So what part of what I am saying don't you understand?
Click to expand...
Why should should the kingdom of God be for little children? Why should that be a condition we chould be counted in order to enter? Do you think little children by virtue of being a little child merits the kingdom? The fact that those who perish do not have their names in the book (Revelation 20:15). How do little children get their names in the book? Why the promise on a condition to never have the name blotted out (Revelation 3:5)?
 
I

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
37818 said:
So you are arguing mercy is not to be safe. You are not making sense. And mercy without justice also makes no sense. Jesus said the kingdom of God is for little children (Mark 10:14). And as a condition to enter it we must be counted as little children (Mark 10:15).
Click to expand...
Mercy is for guilty persons.
Anyone ever saved is saved by God's mercy and grace.
No one is safe unless they are the object of God's mercy.
The verse in Mark does not say what you claim..
In Matthew it clarifies these children who believe in Him.
Mt18:6
 
GaoLu

GaoLu

Member
Both views capture important aspects of salvation. Both views taken to exclusive extreme may contain error.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Iconoclast said:
The verse in Mark does not say what you claim..
Click to expand...
Oh, so Jesus did not say as recorded in Mark 10, ". . . little children . . . for of such is the kingdom of God. . . ?" And Jesus did not say being a little child is a prequisit to entering God's kingdom?

I cannot make you hear what you do not want to hear.
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Christian Baptist said:
While infants and children have neither sensed their personal sin and need for salvation nor placed their faith in Christ, Scripture teaches that condemnation is based on the clear rejection of God's revelation--whether general or specific--not simple ignorance of it (Luke 10:16; John 12:48; 1 Thess. 4:8).
Click to expand...
Ah, so am to understand you think infants and little children do not need Christ's death and resurrection?
 
37818

37818

Well-Known Member
Revmitchell said:
Oh I understand what you are saying fully, What you do not understand is that making a claim and attaching a verse to it is still only a claim. I have challenged your claim as being wrong and lacking any real break down of the verses you have provided to prove those verses match your claim.

Just because you say something is true and then attach a verse to it does not provide proof of your position. That is not exposition it is merely making an unsubstantiated claim.

So what part of what I am saying don't you understand?
Click to expand...
To things you need to understand, one Christ died for all, this would include little chidren. Second, those whose names are not found in the book of life perish.

You think you understand my argument. My evidence was presented. You do not believe it is adequate for my conclusion. Give me a better conclusion.
 
Gup20

Gup20

Active Member
1 Corinthians 7:13-15 (NASB) 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.

I think this scripture speaks better to the holiness of children then Mark 10. Salvation & judgment have always been an inherited trait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top