The Age of Accountability

[John Gilmore]

Matt Black,

1. The infant does profess his belief in Jesus through the mouth of a parent or sponsor. Regardless of the public profession, we can never be sure that an infant or an adult believes. They may be hypocrites.
We are commanded to preach the gospel to every creature. And that includes infants. We are commanded to teach and baptize all nations. And that includes infants.
2. Well, from your one page doctrinal statement, I can't tell if your denomination is Arminian or not. It does seem to be Christian, though. The key requirement for membership seems to be baptism by immersion. By contrast, my denomination has 636 pages of doctrine which every confirmed member must pledge to defend with his life.

 

[Eric B]

In Baptist Absolution, the sinner is forgiven because of works of surrendering one's life, the decision for Christ, the sinner's prayer, and the purpose-driven life. And, if that isn't enough, he may receive a lesser reward in Heaven reserved for those who don't do enough.

No, he's saved only by the decision, which the Bible does not consider a "work", but contrasts it with works, meaning physical acts. "surrendering" is the life that follows, and has no part in saving, itself; the "sinner's prayer" is a means by which the evangelist tries to lead the person into making the decision. It is certainly not "necessary", and can certainly be phony. "purpose driven life" may be just another term for the new direction one has taken in life. Some, of course, seem to make a whole Gospel out of it, but basically, it would be the same case as with "surrendering". Lesser rewards in Heaven are from standing at the Judgment seat of Christ, and having ones works "burned up" (shown to be done in a way not pleasing to God). This has nothing to do with salvation, but is a type of "punishment" for the already saved.

By contrast, in Lutheran Absolution, the sinner does nothing. He receives by faith alone that which is given by grace alone. It is a voice from Heaven saying, "I forgive you all of your sins."

But then if you make water baptism the requirement, rather than a means to the end, like the sinner' prayer (which has basically taken the role baptism was supposed to have. See here for discussion) then how does he "do nothing"? This is adding a work.

There is no sacramentalism in Baptist soteriology - we are saved solely by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice.

I am unfamiliar with the Baptist Union of Great Britian. Have they renounced Pelagianism? Most Baptists in America (e.g., Southern Baptist Convention) are Arminians.

Arminianism is neither "sacramentalistic", nor Pelagian(though Pelagianism might be considered hyper-Arminian). Once again, as I said above, the SBC is divided on the issue.

 

[Debby in Philly]

For those who get confused with all of the terms definitions in this question, here is a quote from an article in Christianity Today magazine:

"I am of another mind. I believe that we should, on biblical grounds, tell all parents of mentally disabled children that God loves their children, regrets terribly that they are disabled, and will, when they die, carry them gently into a heavenly life where every person is forever whole. How do I know?

Let me try an analogy. I know with absolute certainty that Doris, my wife of 52 years, will always love me and never reject me. I know this fact about her because I know her. It is the same way with God. I know he will always love and never reject a person who is mentally unable to make a rational decision to believe in him because I know him."

The article is not very long, but gives a good explanation of the various viewpoints.

LINK TO ENTIRE ARTICLE

 

[John Gilmore]

Eric B,

Once again, as I said above, the SBC is divided on the issue.

Yes, and I am amazed that the Sovereign Grace congregations did not immediately hand in their resignations. A faith based on the human work of acceptance is not justification by faith alone. By remaining in the SBC, they are giving false testimony to the world that they are Arminian.

You baptists quibble over the mode of baptism yet the central article of justification, the article by which the church stands or falls, is seemingly of no importance. Luther would be appalled.

All have sinned and are justified without merit [freely, and without their own works or merits] by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, in His blood, Rom. 3, 23f
Now, since it is necessary to believe this, and it cannot be otherwise acquired or apprehended by any work, law, or merit, it is clear and certain that this faith alone justifies us as St. Paul says, Rom. 3, 28: For we conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law. Likewise 3, 26: That He might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Christ.
Of this article nothing can be yielded or surrendered [nor can anything be granted or permitted contrary to the same], even though heaven and earth, and whatever will not abide, should sink to ruin. For there is none other name under heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved, says Peter, Acts 4, 12. And with His stripes we are healed, Is. 53, 5. And upon this article all things depend which we teach and practice in opposition to the Pope, the devil, and the [whole] world. Therefore, we must be sure concerning this doctrine, and not doubt; for otherwise all is lost, and the Pope and devil and all things gain the victory and suit over us.
Martin Luther, Smalcald Articles

 

[koreahog2005]

John, here’s a link that gives the translators of the NASV:
http://www.gospelcom.net/lockman/nasb/nasbtrans.php

Here’s a link to an article by a guy I have talked to on another forum. He at one time was a “King James only” advocate:
http://www.fredsbibletalk.com/fb019.html

Debbie, I enjoyed reading the article from Christianity Today.

John, our current confession of faith, the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, implies an age of accountability. Notice the following statement:

“Therefore, as soon as they are capable of moral action, they become transgressors and are under condemnation.”

Unlike the 1925 Baptist Faith and Message, the first official Southern Baptist confession of faith, there is room under the most recent confession of faith, the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, for both five-point Calvinists and non-five-point Calvinists. Some quotes from the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message follow, and these quotes are almost identical to corresponding statements from the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message.

First, both groups can agree with the most recent confession’s description of depravity: “Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin.”

Second, both groups can agree with the most recent confession’s description of election: “Election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which He regenerates, justifies, sanctifies, and glorifies sinners. It is consistent with the free agency of man, and comprehends all the means in connection with the end.”

Third, both groups can agree with the most recent confession’s description of the atonement of Christ: “He honored the divine law by His personal obedience, and in His substitutionary death on the cross He made provision for the redemption of men from sin.” The description of the atonement in the 1925 Baptist Faith and Message would be unacceptable to some five-point Calvinists: “The blessings of salvation are made free to all by the gospel. It is the duty of all to accept them by penitent and obedient faith. Nothing prevents the salvation of the greatest sinner except his own voluntary refusal to accept Jesus Christ as teacher, Saviour, and Lord.”

Fourth, both groups can agree with the most recent confession’s description of saving grace: “Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God’s grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.” In this case a non-five-point Baptist would say the sinner’s response is to “conviction of sin,” and the five-point Calvinist would say the sinner’s response is to the “change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit.” The 1925 Baptist Faith and Message has a description of regeneration that is unacceptable to five-point Calvinists because it says that faith is a requirement for regeneration: “Regeneration or the new birth is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit, whereby we become partakers of the divine nature and a holy disposition is given, leading to the love and practice of righteousness. It is a work of God's free grace conditioned upon faith in Christ and made manifest by the fruit which we bring forth to the glory of God.” Notice in the 1925 version that regeneration is “wrought by the Holy Spirit” but is “conditioned upon faith in Christ.” Thus, in logical order, faith precedes regeneration in the 1925 version. Five-point Calvinists, of course, believe that regeneration precedes faith.

Finally, both groups can agree with the most recent confession’s description of perseverance: “All true believers endure to the end. Those whom God has accepted in Christ, and sanctified by His Spirit, will never fall away from the state of grace, but shall persevere to the end.” Obviously, all Southern Baptists believe that a Christian cannot become a non-Christian.

 

[Eric B]

Yes, and I am amazed that the Sovereign Grace congregations did not immediately hand in their resignations. A faith based on the human work of acceptance is not justification by faith alone. By remaining in the SBC, they are giving false testimony to the world that they are Arminian.

You baptists quibble over the mode of baptism yet the central article of justification, the article by which the church stands or falls, is seemingly of no importance. Luther would be appalled.

It's highly amazing that you see simple acceptance as a "work", but not baptism. Eph.2:8,9 clearly distinguish "faith" from "works". God withholding faith from people so they can remain trapped in sin (the main objection of Arminians) is not what the Church stands or falls on; it is only Augustine/Luther/Calvin, et.al own explanation of how God's sovereignty works out.

The Calvinistic SBC's seem to be trying to take over and "reform" the denomination from within.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by John Gilmore:
Matt Black,

1. The infant does profess his belief in Jesus through the mouth of a parent or sponsor.

By definition - that is impossible.

What is more interesting is that historically no such "ability of the infant to express his faith through his parents" is claimed by the NT church in the first or 2nd century.

And in fact the earliest documented practices for baptism outside of that described in scripture - supports only the baptism of believers.

John
Regardless of the public profession, we can never be sure that an infant or an adult believes.

On the contrary. IN EVERY CASE - we can be assured that the infant has NO CONCEPT of belief, rebellion, obedience, worship, confession, loyalty, sin, judgment or hell.

Abstract thought is not possible for infants.

Of course the "good news" is that they "can not" engage in hypocracy either. All of this is beyond them.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[John Gilmore]

koreahog2005,

Thanks for the links. The translation team makeup was as I expected. No Lutherans are even listed. I will continue to rely on the KJV exclusively, not because I am KJVO, but because it is the only English version that has been verified accurate by Lutheran scholars. The KJV and the Book of Concord are in complete agreement; however, the Book of Concord and modern versions do not agree.

I am amazed that the SBC stays together. The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message is horrible. No monergist could possibly agree to it: free agency, voluntary refusal, etc.

 

[koreahog2005]

John, I think you are confusing free agency with free will. The confusion is understandable, because the terms have been used interchangably in the past. Today, however, most people see them as quite different:

1. A free agent is able to do what he wants to do, but he cannot do what he doesn't want to do. A totally depraved person wants to sin and doesn't want to repent. Thus, without the intervention of the Holy Spirit to counteract that depravity, the person cannot surrender his life to Jesus in repentance and faith.

2. A person with free will forms a bias from a neutral position (equipoise). Some five-point Calvinists such as Arthur Pink and Augustine believed that Adam was created in equipoise and later formed a bias toward sin. The implication of this is clear: Because God did not create Adam with a depraved bias toward sin, and because God didn't force him to sin, God cannot be called the author of sin. Adam did not at first want to sin; he formed a desire for sin, and thus his sin was self-caused. It fit into God's sovereign plan. God knew with certainty that it would happen, and He allowed it to happen. God did not entrap Adam.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Eric B:
God withholding faith from people so they can remain trapped in sin

I wish God would do this just for you -- give you a vision of the world and every person in it, unchanged and unregenerated by His spirit, and God says to the world: Here you are - you can have faith and salvation anytime you want it. Just let me know!

Then I want to see your face when you watch the reaction of the world, and tell me with a straight face that the reason they all perish is that God withheld faith from those people so that they could remain trapped in their sin.

Who is saved and who is not is not a matter of what God withholds. It is a matter of what God gives.

 

[BobRyan]

God Draws ALL mankind to Him. God CONVICTS THE WORLD of sin and righteousness and Judgment. God so loved the WORLD that He gave...

God is not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance...

God is calling ALL men everywhere to come to the knowledge of truth...

God sends the ligth that shines in darkness and that light enlightens EVERY MAN..

God stands at the door and knocks so that if ANYONE hears His voice AND opens the DOOR HE WILL come in...

Calvinism constantly seeks to create a "vaccuum" scenario APART from this ALL MANKIND ministry of God and say "but see mankind can not respond".

Such would only be true IF GOD WERE NOT engaged in that ALL MANKIND ministry the Bible so often describes Him of doing.

And clearly He is doing it for HE paid the price for OUR sins and NOT FOR OURS sins only (the elect as the Calvinists like to insert "sometimes") BUT for the SINS of the WHOLE WORLD.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[John Gilmore]

Originally posted by koreahog2005:


1. A free agent is able to do what he wants to do, but he cannot do what he doesn't want to do. A totally depraved person wants to sin and doesn't want to repent. Thus, without the intervention of the Holy Spirit to counteract that depravity, the person cannot surrender his life to Jesus in repentance and faith.

The free agency you describe may exist in baseball but not in salvation. Paul was never able to surrender his life to Jesus, "the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do." With the mind he served the law of God but with the flesh the law of sin. He was delivered from the body of this death by God through Christ Jesus not through the choice of a free agent with a jump start from the Holy Ghost.

 

[koreahog2005]

The apostle Paul did indeed surrender his life to Jesus. He said, “But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ” (Philippians 3:7-8). After surrendering his life to Christ, a Christian’s motivation primarily comes from the Holy Spirit Who indwells his human spirit. The Christian, however, sometimes sins because of innate, sinful impulses in his flesh (Romans 7:23). In such cases he unintentionally does something he does not normally want to do (Romans 7:15). A mature Christian will make more good choices than an immature Christian, but both will continue to have an inner struggle between their good and evil impulses until physical death.

 

[John Gilmore]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John Gilmore:
Matt Black,

1. The infant does profess his belief in Jesus through the mouth of a parent or sponsor.

By definition - that is impossible.

</font>[/QUOTE]By Holy Scripture's definition, it is not only possible but commanded by God: Acts 2:39.

From the Lutheran rite of infant baptism:
Question: "Do you believe in Jesus Christ...."
Answer: "I do."

 

[John Gilmore]

koreahog2005,

You are confusing law and gospel. Surrendering one's life to Jesus is part of the law that no man can keep. The gospel is sheer grace apprehended by faith alone not through the works of the law.

With the help of the Holy Spirit, Paul did earnestly desire to surrender his life to Jesus (keep the law perfectly) but he could not. Instead, he trusted in the imputed righteousness of Christ alone not in his own righteousness.

 

[koreahog2005]

John, faith is not a work (Ephesians 2:8). True faith is evidenced by works (James 2:17-18). A good acronym for faith is f-a-i-t-h: forsaking all I trust him. Christians are willing to trust Jesus with every part of their lives. They have accepted Jesus as their Lord (master, boss). Paul was willing to forsake all and trust Jesus, and thus he was a true disciple (Luke 9:23; Luke 14:33). Only true disciples should be baptized (Matthew 28:19). Well, it's Sunday morning here, and it's time for me to go to church.

 

[koreahog2005]

John, I just arrived home from church, and I've thought of a good illustration for faith. Let me know what you think. General Lee surrendered to General Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865. Actually, the "surrender work" came after the commitment to surrender. General Lee signed the commitment, and later his men laid down their weapons. Some rebels continued fighting until they learned of his surrender. General Lee commanded 50,000 men in Virginia, but General Johnston commanded about 20,000 men in North Carolina. It took some time to get the word out that a surrender had occurred. At the moment we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells our human spirit. The Holy Spirit begins changing our mind and body. It's as if He begins shining a flashlight in the closets of a darkened house. He points out rotting things in those closets that need to be removed. This is the process of spiritual growth (sanctification) that comes after the initial commitment to surrender and lasts for a lifetime. Strictly speaking, General Lee did not surrender; rather, he made a commitment to surrender. When we say he surrendered, we mean that he was willing to do the work of surrender.

Similarly, it's the commitment to surrender, the willingness to surrender, that is important in the conversion process. God counteracts our depravity and gives us the ability to make the commitment to surrender. Receiving the gift of salvation involves a commitment to surrender every part of ourselves. This decision to surrender is not a meritorious decision. I am not aware of any soldier who has been awarded a medal because of his decision to surrender unconditionally. An unconditional surrender involves a commitment to cease resisting (to repent) and a willingness to hand over all one has to someone acknowledged as superior and trustworthy (to have faith). Surrender involves a change in sovereignty; there is a different ruler in one’s life. Lee acknowledged Washington as sovereign rather than Richmond. A Christian has acknowledged Jesus as his sovereign (his Lord).

 

[John Gilmore]

koreahog2005,

No one ever received faith by surrendering their live to Jesus or even deciding to surrender. Faith is given by the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the gospel (monergism) not through any act of man (e.g., deciding to surrender).

The standard of complete surrender to Christ (or cease resisting) should constantly be held up to non-believers to show them that it is standard that they can not meet. Only when they despair of their own work of surrendering to Christ or deciding to surrender (free agency) are they prepared to receive the grace of God.

The standard of complete surrender to Christ should constantly be held up to believers, not because they are slaves to the law, but as a guide for Christian living.

 

[koreahog2005]

John, the apostle Paul obviously had made the commitment to surrender his life to Christ: “Whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. . . . I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish” (Philippians 3:7-8). Even though Paul had made that commitment, he had not yet experienced complete sanctification: “Not that I have already obtained it, or have already become perfect, but I press on in order that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:12). God initiated the process and gave Paul the ability to surrender, but Paul was involved in making the commitment to surrender.

By holding up surrender as an ideal but not a requirement, you seem to be saying that a person can receive Jesus as Savior but not as Lord. Jesus will not be our Savior without being our Lord. We must be willing to surrender to His sovereignty, His Lordship. That is the essence of saving faith. We must be willing to commit ourselves to follow Him.

An example of the necessary choice to commit oneself is found in 1 Kings 18:21:

“And Elijah came near to all the people and said, ‘How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.’ But the people did not answer him a word.”

The group mentioned in 1 Kings 18:21 was hesitating between two opinions. They had not committed themselves to either God or Baal. A lecturer in Hebrew and Greek studies at the University of Edinburgh, A. Graeme Auld, commented on the passage:

Elijah turns his people’s neutrality or indifference between Yahweh and Baal to his own advantage. They become umpire or jury.

(Auld, “I & II Kings,” The Daily Study Bible [Old Testament], page 120)

The group was in a neutral transitional phase (equipoise). Elijah, King Ahab, and the prophets of Baal were already committed one way or the other and thus were not in equipoise.

Elijah told the group to make a decision to follow either God or Baal. God’s power was demonstrated to the uncommitted group, and they formed a bias toward God. In verse 39 they fell on their faces and said, “The LORD, He is God.” Auld discussed the significance of this profession of faith:

When Yahweh’s power is demonstrated, the people acclaim him not simply as being worthy of being called “a god”. The Hebrew of verse 39 rendered rather more literally than in RSV has them say: “Yahweh, he is the god”. They recognize him now as “the [sole] god”—or simply, as RSV has it, as “God” with a capital “G”.

(Auld, page 120)

Immediately after they made their public profession of faith, they were asked to seize the prophets of Baal (verse 40). This first act of obedience was performed in front of King Ahab and proved that their faith was genuine. They had truly become followers (disciples) of God.

The Bible says that non-Christians can reject salvation when God offers it to them:

“And as He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and began asking Him, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ ” (Mark 10:17)

“And looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him, and said to him, ‘One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.’ But at these words his face fell, and he went away grieved, for he was one who owned much property. And Jesus, looking around, said to His disciples, ‘How hard it will be for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!’ ” (Mark 10:21-23)

Jesus loved this man with the highest form of love (agapao in Greek), and the man obviously had the opportunity to receive eternal life, but he rejected the offer of salvation. The young man was unwilling to surrender every part of his life to Jesus. Jesus said, “No one of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions” (Luke 14:33). Non-Christians cannot earn their salvation by good works, but they must be willing to let Jesus be Lord of every area of their lives, including their possessions, to receive the gift of eternal life. Donald A. Carson, professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, discussed the young man’s unwillingness to commit himself to Jesus:

What the word “perfection” suggests here is what it commonly means in the OT: undivided loyalty and full-hearted obedience. This young man could not face that. He was willing to discipline himself to observe all the outward stipulations and even perform supererogatory works; but because of his wealth, he had a divided heart. His money was competing with God; and what Jesus everywhere demands as a condition of eternal life is absolute, radical discipleship. This entails the surrender of self.

(Carson, “Matthew,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 8, page 424)

 

[John Gilmore]

koreahog,

Jesus loved this man with the highest form of love (agapao in Greek), and the man obviously had the opportunity to receive eternal life, but he rejected the offer of salvation. The young man was unwilling to surrender every part of his life to Jesus. Jesus said, “No one of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions” (Luke 14:33). Non-Christians cannot earn their salvation by good works, but they must be willing to let Jesus be Lord of every area of their lives, including their possessions, to receive the gift of eternal life.

Jesus was not preaching the gospel to this man but the law. He was trying to show the man the demands of the law: perfect obedience to the Master. The preaching of the law either makes presumptous men who imagine they can fulfill the law's demands (pharisees) or it leads to despair. In this case, the man was grieved in his heart but it was not a despair that led to contrition.