Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
Webdog: Simple, faith is the only way to salvation. Faith comes from hearing (understanding). Understanding takes a mental capacity to do so, as does choice and acceptance. Either a fetus has the mental capacity to choose Christ or reject him, or he doesn't. There is no middle ground. Same applies to MR/DD, and knowledge and understanding are needed to actively choose are reject truth.[/QUOTE]
HP: How does a fetus have a capacity to choose or reject Christ? It might have potential if in fact it is allowed to develop, but what is this concerning capacity? Here is what you said :
Webdog: It would depend on the adult. An adult born mentally handicapped is not accountable. There is a point when we realize that the wrong things we do are against God, and this is when we are accountable. For some it may be 5, some 13, some 18...who knows.
HP: I saw in this that you were basically setting forth the idea that knowledge and ability are necessary for accountability. I saw you suggesting an age of accountability. I would agree with both of those ideas. The truth is that if one never hears of Jesus they still are held accountable for that which they did know, not for that which they have not heard of. Before we ever are accountable for the rejection of Christ, which again only comes to those that have heard the good news, we are first accountable for our acts of selfishness, those acts in violation of our intuitive understanding of that which is good and in accordance to love. We are sinners not because we are born sinners, but because when we came to the age of accountability, we chose selfishness as opposed to benevolence, voluntarily without force or coercion. The damning sin is not the rejection of Jesus Christ, but our first act of selfishness subsequent to the age of accountability.
What I was looking for in my former post was supportive evidence that blame can only be just and accredited to ones account subsequent to moral agency. Take this first truth of reason for example. Nothing can be blameworthy or praiseworthy without choice….or possibly state it this way: in order to do anything blameworthy or praiseworthy, one must have choice. Choice consists in having the ability and opportunity to do something other than what one does under the very same set of circumstances.
If choice is not present, and ability to do something other than what one does under the very same set of circumstances, no moral accountability, no moral praise or blame can be predicated of the intent or action.
Make sense?