Age of Accountability

[Dave G]

I dare you to tell a woman who had a miscarriage or a still birth that her child went to hell because it was evil.

I'm not going to lie to her where God's word tells me something else.
Secondly, I'll not tell her something warm and fuzzy, just to please her "sense of justice", neither will I ever present a God who does not do with His creation as He sees fit.

...and I definitely will not ever tell a sister something that permits her to place her love of her child, ahead of her love for God.

God saves, and it is His prerogative to do with sinners as He wishes.


According to His word, there is no such thing as "innocency".
Not for a single one of us.

" For ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God".

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I'm not going to lie to her where God's word tells me something else.
Secondly, I'll not tell her something warm and fuzzy, just to please her "sense of justice", neither will I ever present a God who does not do with His creation as He sees fit.

...and I definitely will not ever tell a sister something that permits her to place her love of her child, ahead of her love for God.

God saves, and it is His prerogative to do with sinners as He wishes.


According to His word, there is no such thing as "innocency".
Not for a single one of us.

I am guessing that you hold to the Seminal View of transmission which is the position of Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and a small minority in the reformed community?

Do you therefore believe that infants are "Damned from the womb" and are therefore a proponent of infant baptism as a means to wash away this "Original Sin?"

Do you believe it necessary for one to hear and understand the gospel message in order to be saved or is such irrelevant to those who are the elect chosen in him before the foundation of the world?

Do explain.

 

[Dave G]

I am guessing that you hold to the Seminal View of transmission which is the position of Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and a small minority in the reformed community?

I hold to the literality of the words that tell us that there is no one who is righteous, not one.

That one of His saved must come to repentance in their lifetimes, no exceptions ( 2 Peter 3:8-9 )
That God uses the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe ( 1 Corinthians 1:21 ).

Do you therefore believe that infants are "Damned from the womb" and are therefore a proponent of infant baptism as a means to wash away this "Original Sin?"

No.
The elect are not damned from the womb, they are "the saved".

Washing an infant in water does nothing for the spirit.
It is a symbol of what the Lord has spiritually done for all those that have believed ( and will believe ) on His Son.

Do you believe it necessary for one to hear and understand the gospel message in order to be saved or is such irrelevant to those who are the elect chosen in him before the foundation of the world?

Salvation is not ultimately dependent upon hearing and believing...
In other words, I see the Scriptures teaching that God uses those things to bring His elect to the knowledge of their salvation.

Hearing and understanding the word of God are necessary happenings and evidences that all who are saved will experience and exhibit in their lifetimes.
The preached word is something that God uses to notify His elect of what He has done for them.

Their belief of His words mark them as being "of God" ( John 8:43-47 )...in other words, they are His elect, and they will respond from the heart, to the call of God when it is given.

That said, I hold that all men that have never believed on Christ through His words, prove that they are not His elect.

 

[Ascetic X]

Salvation is not dependent upon hearing and believing...
In other words, I see the Scriptures teaching that God uses those things to bring His elect to the knowledge of their salvation.

Hearing and understanding the word of God are necessary evidences that all who are saved will exhibit in their lifetimes.
The preached word is something that God uses to notify His elect of what He has done for them.

Their belief of His words mark them as being "of God" ( John 8:43-47 ).

You express the Calvinist Fantasy.

Scripture does not support your view that “Salvation is not dependent upon hearing and believing...”



Romans 10

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

 

[Kai]

In other words, I see the Scriptures teaching that God uses those things to bring His elect to the knowledge of their salvation.

This isn't a C/A debate thread, but I will just point out that Romans 10:9 tells us that if you confess Jesus as your savior, you will be saved—not because you already are saved.

To make that relevant to this discussion, Romans also refers to general revelation through creation and to Gentiles who, by nature, have a natural conscience of what the law requires. Newborns are not capable of understanding either.

 

[Dave G]

Newborns are not capable of understanding either.

Precisely.
So, if a newborn cannot hear and understand God's words, then how can they believe on His Son through the preaching of His word?

At the end of the day and according to the Scriptures, there is no salvation apart from the belief of the Gospel;
There never has been, nor ever will be:

" That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." <----- Does this not clearly lay out two of the evidences of a saved person?


My friends, this is what God says...not men.

 

[Kai]

So, if a newborn cannot hear and understand God's words, then how can they believe on His Son through the preaching of His word?
They cannot.


According to the Scriptures, there is no salvation apart from the belief of the Gospel.

Being a believer or an unbeliever requires the mental ability to choose either position.

I am not saying that the lack of that ability automatically earns them a “free pass” into heaven, but I am saying they can't be judged and sent to hell on that basis.

I have no idea what ultimately happens to them, but I do know that hell must be ruled out if God is just.

 

[Dave G]

Romans 10

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

Exactly.
Have you read what this says, and clearly understood the words, my friend?

"If thou shalt confess with the mouth, and believe in thine heart that God has raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved".

So,
IF a person confesses with the mouth Jesus Christ and believes in their heart that God has raised Him from the dead, that person shall be saved.


In Romans 10,
I clearly see God sending a preacher -----> Preacher preaches God's word --------> Preached word of God is believed -------> Person who believes God's word confesses with the mouth Jesus Christ -----------> Assurance of salvation is given to that person.

Under these "restrictions", anyone who is outside of this process has no claim to salvation, do they?
Yet, I see professing Christians every day that refuse to believe God's word alone on the subject, and instead resort to a series of "what if" statements that His word simply doesn't express...

Anywhere.

Again ( and as I've stated above ) , there is no salvation apart from the belief of the Gospel....
Yet some of the people that have posted here believe that there is.

Why is that?

 

[Dave G]

I have no idea what ultimately happens to them, but I do know that hell must be ruled out if God is just.

God is just, and His justice demands that everyone outside of Christ be judged according to their works and be cast into the Lake of Fire ( Revelation 20 ).
Do you see any exceptions to this in His written word?

I do not.

Therefore, if only a person who has confessed with the mouth Jesus Christ and has believed in their hearts that He is risen from the dead can have assurance of their eternal life, where do the rest stand?
Right here:

" And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." ( Revelation 20:11-15 ).

No one whose name is written in the Book of Life will be cast into the Lake of Fire.
All the rest will be.


That means that anyone who has not believed on Christ and confessed Him with the mouth, has ever had their name written in the Book of Life.

 

[Ascetic X]

Again ( and as I've stated above ) , there is no salvation apart from the belief of the Gospel....
Yet some of the people that have posted here believe that there is.

And there is no damnation apart from rejecting God.

A fetus or baby cannot accept or reject God. God rewards according to deeds. What deeds did a fetus or baby commit?

John 3

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

 

[Kai]

Do you see any exceptions to this in His written word?

Paul addresses the nature of fallen man in Romans 1 and 2 and specifically ties that to those who have received enough general revelation and have developed a natural conscience to understand the difference between right and wrong.

Anyone who falls outside of that category can't be held to the same standards.

 

[Dave G]

And there is no damnation apart from rejecting God.

"There is none righteous, no not one".
"For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

" But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe."

 

[Deacon]

A parent's sin can provoke God to extend his judgment to children and infants.
Even family or community sin can provoke such judgement.

> Pharoah's and Egypt's first born (Exodus 11-12)
> Achan's sin (Joshua 7)
> Idolatry of Judah (Jeremiah 44:1-7)

Rob

 

[Dave G]

Paul addresses the nature of fallen man in Romans 1 and 2 and specifically ties that to those who have received enough general revelation and have developed a natural conscience to understand the difference between right and wrong.

Anyone who falls outside of that category can't be held to the same standards.

Anyone of us, no matter how great or small, is held to God's standards... no exceptions.
His word tells us exactly who and who will not be judged for their works and be cast into the Lake of Fire.

There is no ambiguity, there are no loopholes.

God judges men in perfect righteousness, not on what we feel is "fair".
If His word says that only those that have confessed with their mouths the Lord Jesus and believed in their hearts that He was raised from the dead shall be saved, then God means what He says.

Anything other than what God states in His word, is not to be trusted ( Proverbs 3:5-7 ).


That said, I take my leave of this thread and wish you all well.

 

[Kai]

That said, I take my leave of this thread and wish you all well.

I appreciate you taking the time to present your side.

 

[Kai]

A parent's sin can provoke God to extend his judgment to children and infants.
Even family or community sin can provoke such judgement.

> Pharoah's and Egypt's first born (Exodus 11-12)
> Achan's sin (Joshua 7)
> Idolatry of Judah (Jeremiah 44:1-7)

Hi Rob.

I agree that Scripture gives examples of God bringing judgment upon children and even infants because of the sins of their parents or community. I don't think anyone needs to deny that.

My position has been that there's a difference between an infant dying as a consequence of God's temporal judgement on earth and being spiritually condemned or eternally lost. Those are two different things.

 

[Ascetic X]

A parent's sin can provoke God to extend his judgment to children and infants.
Even family or community sin can provoke such judgement.

> Pharoah's and Egypt's first born (Exodus 11-12)
> Achan's sin (Joshua 7)
> Idolatry of Judah (Jeremiah 44:1-7)

Rob

Jeremiah 44 is not saying that men of Judah will be receiving judgment for the sins of their fathers. It says they and their fathers sinned.


Jeremiah 44:9

Have ye forgotten the wickedness of your fathers, and the wickedness of the kings of Judah, and the wickedness of their wives, and your own wickedness, and the wickedness of your wives, which they have committed in the land of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem?



Ezekiel 18:20

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I have wondered about this. I believe we will be in the resurrection who we are in this present age minus the sin and minus our present decrepit, corrupted bodies.

I have been told that we will all be 33 years old as Christ was when he was crucified and resurrected but what of his appearance in Revelation with his hair being "White like wool?" Will we be static in our age and stature even in the age to come in our resurrected bodies? I am not saying that we will "Grow old" (as we understand it now) but will there or will there not be any distinction between those who are older or younger in age?

Our personalities have developed over time through experience, what we have learned, and so forth and has literally become who and what we are. Will this all go away in the age to come? If the answer is no, then what of the infants who hardly experienced a life in this present world and have therefore not had the time to develop who they would've become as mature adult human beings?

What will I look like in the age to come? A man who will likely live no longer than 80-something years (unless I get run over by a Peterbilt or something) as compared to Adam who had lived 900+ years on this earth? How would my level of wisdom and knowledge be in comparison to his? How would our level of wisdom and knowledge be compared to someone who died in infancy having never even learned to talk or voice his or her own opinion? I do not think they will be resurrected as "infants" but they may likely be in infancy regarding knowledge and experience and will have all of eternity in which to catch up with everyone else and we who have had opportunity to live full lives are not anywhere close to being finished with our own learning!

My thoughts anyway.

The Bible does not inform us how exactly our resurrected glorified bodies will be in regards to appearance of age. Just that we will be in His likeness. But if babies are resurrected as babies, then by deduction, the elderly will be resurrected with elderly bodies, imo.

 

[Ben1445]

Romans 7:9
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

When would that have been??

Romans 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I hold to the literality of the words that tell us that there is no one who is righteous, not one.

That one of His saved must come to repentance in their lifetimes, no exceptions ( 2 Peter 3:8-9 )
That God uses the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe ( 1 Corinthians 1:21 ).

I do not believe that anyone disputes this.

No.
The elect are not damned from the womb, they are "the saved".

But what about the non-elect and at what point are the elect "saved?"

Washing an infant in water does nothing for the spirit.
It is a symbol of what the Lord has spiritually done for all those that have believed ( and will believe ) on His Son.

Nevertheless, it is a practice of those who hold to the seminal view of transmission. It is upon this Augustinian premise that the Catholic Church dogmatized infant baptism. The Lutheran view is rather complicated and I still do not fully understand it but I digress...

Salvation is not ultimately dependent upon hearing and believing...
In other words, I see the Scriptures teaching that God uses those things to bring His elect to the knowledge of their salvation.

Rom 10:14 - How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Do you believe that God's elect are "saved" without ever hearing the gospel? I believe that Romans 10:14 clearly teaches otherwise and therefore underscores the urgency of the gospel message!

Hearing and understanding the word of God are necessary happenings and evidences that all who are saved will experience and exhibit in their lifetimes.
The preached word is something that God uses to notify His elect of what He has done for them.

Their belief of His words mark them as being "of God" ( John 8:43-47 )...in other words, they are His elect, and they will respond from the heart, to the call of God when it is given.

That said, I hold that all men that have never believed on Christ through His words, prove that they are not His elect.

Was there ever a time when one who is elect was "dead in trespasses and sin, walking according to the lust of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind and were by nature the children of wrath" (Eph 2:1-3)?

It seems to me that we are both Calvinist but you would be Supralapsarian whereas I am Infralapsarian in my understanding of God's eternal decrees. Would I be correct in my assessment here?

Are you familiar at all with the Federal view of transmission? Could you do me a favor and look at my response on post #6 and let me know where you may have some objections? What objections would you have regarding the Federal view?

This may not be a "Calvinist-Arminian" discussion and for you and me, it is more of an intramural matter anyway. Nevertheless, it is something that always comes up in discussions such as this. You seem to be the only one giving any real dissent from the so-called "Age of Accountability" so it would be interesting to hear your input here.