No dead babies, little children, infants in Hell?

[jdlongmire]

Hey, I'm not the one that said I illuminated scripture, that was you."But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things..." Try the Biblical approach, my friend. Then there will be no need for your attempts to illuminate scripture.

It is not clear! That is what you want it to say, therefore you had to add your words to make it come out the way you want it to. And please do not try to do me any favors by seeking to shed light on something for me. You must have great confidence in your illumination skills. I do not!

Get your self right first, then maybe what you say to others will be taken seriously! :thumbs:

I have confidence in Scripture interpreting Scripture, which illuminates itself to believers through the Holy Spirit. And I am not and do not make any assertion that Scripture does not make for itself.

You have not interacted with the Scripture you posted or tried to illuminate your understanding of it for others other than posting mockery. Your own actions betray you.

 

[joyce]

No dead babies, children and infants in hell

If you really give it some serious thought here, you will come to the conclusion that all babies and infants are with Him. Here is the reasoning here: Mankind's life follows the 7 dispensations, and the first dispensation is that of Innocence, when a child comes into this world it does not know good from evil. You don't have to take my word for it though, just watch them, a child will run around the house stark naked if it isn't taught by it's parents that it must wear clothes, compare that with Adam and Eve in the garden. When a child reaches the age of knowing good from evil then he is accountable; but not until then, the Jewish rule is usually around 12; but, I think the real rule is whenever a child knows good from evil. So; a child dying without the knowledge of good and evil goes to be with the Lord.
YSIC
Joyce

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally Posted by Jarthur001
yes...God knows all things and this includes our death.

This is the weakness of the freewill view. God knows all people.
When the Bibel says..""For whom He FOREKNEW He also predestined..."...God knows all people. Did God predestine all people to heaven? No one would say this

.

What did He predestinate them to?

I believe it was to be conformed unto the image of His Son. He foreknew who would believe and predestinated them to be conformed to the image of His son.

[/QUOTE]
You have changed subjects. We will get to predestination later as it comes in the text. You had brought up the word foreknew. I was trying to show you the error in saying this word has a simply meaning about knowing a person. Why, because God knows all people and yet all men are not predestinated. So back to foreknow..

Do you see where it must mean something greater then just knowing the fatcs about what will happen, because God knows the facts about all men.

So foreknew must mean more then just knowing about people and what they do.

The "time thing" applies to both God and man. God is not limited to time, which means God will never end. It also could mean, but would not hurt if it did not include that God was before time. Saying God is timeless does not mean God does not use time. This use of time by God is not just limited to telling us when something happened.

He uses time for man. He created time for man. The Sun rules the day and the moon the night. All for men, He didn't need any of them.

Of course God needs nothing and no one. But you seem to want to strip time from God. There is no reason to do this. God is not bound to time, because God will never end. He is everlasting to everlasting. But this does not mean he works away from time. When time was made at that point God used it and still uses it till time is no longer. When time is no longer, God will still be.

Let me ask you this. Did Christ come and die on the cross?

In Malachi we are told that the sacrifice cannot be polluted, lame or sick. The story of Thomas tells us that there were real nail scars in Christ hands. Was there a time when there was no scars in Christ hands? If there were scars in Christ hands before the cross, this would make a polluted sacrifice.

Going from no scars to scars means that time has past.

This takes nothing away from the fact that Christ is God. It shows how time is indeed part of us and God.

Time was part of creation. Before the world was, there was no time. When God chose He chose before time was. This does not mean it is the same as choosing today at noon. It means before creation God chose. Sense creation because God works in creation, saving lost sinners and other things, God also works in time. This does not limit God. Time exist because God made it, and God using it. Time is Good. At some point time will stop. God will not stop, God goes on forever.

I believe it says before the foundation of the World. I have chosen you out of the World.

Indeed it does say this. This only shows that there is time. Before....means time has past. There was a point when there was no earth, now there is a earth. Something changed. If anything changes time has past. Time is a measurement of change. The change is not within God, but within man. So When God foreknows, the foreknowing is man (creation) other wise it would just read God knows.

 

[Cutter]

You have not interacted with the Scripture you posted or tried to illuminate your understanding of it for others other than posting mockery. Your own actions betray you.

I have already tried the scriptural approach with you and it did not work. You view all scripture through the prism of Cavinism, much like all Calvinist. I'm glad I'm not a member of the "ism" family, just a Christian. Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism is not biblical! End of discussion!

 

[Brother Bob]

You have changed subjects. We will get to predestination later as it comes in the text. You had brought up the word foreknew. I was trying to show you the error in saying this word has a simply meaning about knowing a person. Why, because God knows all people and yet all men are not predestinated. So back to foreknow..

Do you see where it must mean something greater then just knowing the fatcs about what will happen, because God knows the facts about all men.

So foreknew must mean more then just knowing about people and what they do.



Of course God needs nothing and no one. But you seem to want to strip time from God. There is no reason to do this. God is not bound to time, because God will never end. He is everlasting to everlasting. But this does not mean he works away from time. When time was made at that point God used it and still uses it till time is no longer. When time is no longer, God will still be.

Let me ask you this. Did Christ come and die on the cross?

In Malachi we are told that the sacrifice cannot be polluted, lame or sick. The story of Thomas tells us that there were real nail scars in Christ hands. Was there a time when there was no scars in Christ hands? If there were scars in Christ hands before the cross, this would make a polluted sacrifice.

Going from no scars to scars means that time has past.

This takes nothing away from the fact that Christ is God. It shows how time is indeed part of us and God.





Indeed it does say this. This only shows that there is time. Before....means time has past. There was a point when there was no earth, now there is a earth. Something changed. If anything changes time has past. Time is a measurement of change. The change is not within God, but within man. So When God foreknows, the foreknowing is man (creation) other wise it would just read God knows.

Of course when things change, shows time, but God changes not, the same yesterday, today and forevermore.

The scars in the hands and time passing. My argument is that God was there at the same time as no scars and scars, for he is Omnipresence. Do you understand what I am saying James? I may be confusing the issue.

BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

He was spiritually dead before becoming a Christian, he just didn't know it, only when he became alive in Christ was he able to see it.



Me, too - blessings!

This would make Paul dying twice spiritual, according to your theology of "original sin" and then dying when the Law entered, seems to me.

BBob,

 

[webdog]

He was a "dead man walking" - he was not (and all the elect, pre-regeneration, are not) aware of his spiritual death until exposed to the Law through the Spirit.


from here

Ah, but Paul didn't say "I realized I died", or even "I realized I was born spiritually dead" he said "I died". Cut and dried.

 

[webdog]

No - I contend that infants, dying in infancy, are elect - stained by original sin, but covered by the blood of Christ through His grace.

Infants, not dying in infancy, pass through infancy into the age of reason - they will then either pass into the ordo salutis and confirm their election or continue in unrepentant sin and confirm their reprobation.

...then you believe in another dispensation of salvation...election, which is heresy. Sinners need to be saved by grace through faith. Faith comes by hearing (understanding). Since infants cannot have faith, in you system they MUST go to hell. One is not saved because they are elect.

 

[Rippon]

All Scripture Cited Is From The NLTse

Job 25:4 : How can a mortal be innocent before God? Can anyone born of a woman be pure?

Psalm 51:5 : For I was born a sinner -- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.

Psalm 58:3 : These wicked people are born sinners; even from birth they have lied and gone their own way.

Isaiah 48:8 :"Yes, I will tell you of things that are entirely new, things you never heard before. For I know so well what traitors you are. You have been traitors since birth."

These passages were given in post #25. Just a reminder of some biblical truths.

 

[jdlongmire]

...then you believe in another dispensation of salvation...election, which is heresy.

This is so silly, I hesitate to answer, but I did, here.

One is not saved because they are elect.

and this one is so silly, that if you persist, I am going to add you to my standard response link to skypair.

 

[webdog]

Job 25:4 : How can a mortal be innocent before God? Can anyone born of a woman be pure?

Psalm 51:5 : For I was born a sinner -- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.

Psalm 58:3 : These wicked people are born sinners; even from birth they have lied and gone their own way.

Isaiah 48:8 :"Yes, I will tell you of things that are entirely new, things you never heard before. For I know so well what traitors you are. You have been traitors since birth."

These passages were given in post #25. Just a reminder of some biblical truths.

...and also taken out of context, as has been repeatedly shown to you.
Eph. 2:1
1 And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins,

 

[webdog]

This is so silly, I hesitate to answer, but I did, here.

Silly is believing infants and fetuses can exercise faith. You've been watching too much sci-fi TV. I'll be sure to add the NICU to my places I share the Gospel, since they apparently can understand and comprehend the Gospel

and this one is so silly, that if you persist, I am going to add you to my standard response link to skypair.

Whatever floats your boat.

 

[Jarthur001]

...and also taken out of context, as has been repeatedly shown to you.

lets go through them one by one.

Psalm 51:5 : For I was born a sinner -- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.


David is talking in the passage how bad of a sinner he is.

what is out of context?

 

[webdog]

lets go through them one by one.

Psalm 51:5 : For I was born a sinner -- yes, from the moment my mother conceived me.


David is talking in the passage how bad of a sinner he is.

what is out of context?

2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!
3 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Now, according to your view...we are sinners from conception. However, if we are going to take this literally (and not figuratively like the text should be taken...we are in a poetic book), you have quite a contradiction 3 chapters later where it states we are sinners from birth. Which is it...from conception...or birth? That's 9 months difference!

 

[jdlongmire]

Ah, but Paul didn't say "I realized I died", or even "I realized I was born spiritually dead" he said "I died". Cut and dried.

Concerning v9, I think John Calvin said it well:

9. For I was alive, etc. He means to intimate that there had been a time when sin was dead to him or in him. But he is not to be understood as though he had been without law at any time, but this word "I was alive" has a peculiar import; for it was the absence of the law that was the reason why he was alive; that is, why he being inflated with a conceit as to his own righteousness, claimed life to himself while he was yet dead.

from here

That is - he was a dead man claiming that he was alive - a spiritual zombie - an animated corpse.

 

[webdog]

Concerning v9, I think John Calvin said it well:



from here

That is - he was a dead man claiming that he was alive - a spiritual zombie - an animated corpse.

You can take John Calvin's word for it...I'll take Paul's "I died".

 

[Jarthur001]

2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!
3 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Now, according to your view...we are sinners from conception. However, if we are going to take this literally (and not figuratively like the text should be taken), you have quite a contradiction 3 chapters later where it states we are sinners from bith. Which is it...from conception...or birth? That's 9 months difference!

You got to be kidding ...right?

Lets play your little silly game. You take your pick. Your idea falls in both cases.

Sorry about that.

BTW...where does it say that the sin stopped or started in verse 5???
It does not...does it?



Now how will you twist it?

Mean time...learn how to read and understand the Psalms.

 

[webdog]

You got to be kidding ...right?

Lets play your little silly game. You take your pick. Your idea falls in both cases.

Now how will you twist it?

Mean time...learn how to read and understand the Psalms.

I'm sensing anger James. Usually a sign that an answer is not forthcoming...

It was your "silly game"...remember, James? Are you going to give an answer...or just provide ad hominems that has become your MO these last few years here?

Gotta love when poetic language should be taken literally :laugh:

 

[Jarthur001]

I'm sensing anger James. Usually a sign that an answer is not forthcoming...

It was your "silly game"...remember, James? Are you going to give an answer...or just provide ad hominems that has become your MO these last few years here?

Gotta love when poetic language should be taken literally :laugh:

then you sense wrong on this too.

I laugh at your logic.

again lets get back to your game.

2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!
3 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

when does it say that sin started? Conceived????????

this is a hoot. when will this folly stop??

 

[jdlongmire]

You can take John Calvin's word for it...I'll take Paul's "I died".

So...how do you interpret that statement in v9, anyway?