Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The word "men" in this particular verse is translated from the Greek word ἄνθρωπος and means mankind in general. Or better yet, any human being. Obviously, the context will help determine how the word is being used.
Whether or not infants and children are implied is probably determined more by ones doctrinal position. Often too, ἄνθρωπος is used with reference to our human nature. This would imply infants and children within that context if ones doctrinal position agrees with it.
That's why I posed the question. I wanted to know if Finn holds to imputation of sin at birth. How one views this shapes other doctrines that they hold to.
Do you believe infants or children without the knowledge, sin? I am just curious is all.
I would say after my years of learning through the Word,,,is when we fall. I really don't feel a child can knowingly and willingly fall, since Jesus said the Kingdom belongs to those such as these-children.
Of course, I don't personally believe in original sin.
The concept of the "fall" (within reformed thinking which I believe to be biblical) is that we were all in Adam when he transgressed. We actually transgressed with Adam. And when born into this world, that transgression is imputed to our account.
This is one of the reasons I hold to the concept of UR. The Kingdom belongs to children (and we were all children once) at birth, in that all were in Adam when he fell and all were in Adam when he was clothed by God (Gen 3:21), after the fall. That covering of skins represents Christ's redemption for us, and that too is also imputed to all.
Do you believe infants or children without the knowledge, sin? I am just curious is all.
I believe it's in the sub-conscious level at birth. And as we develop through childhood, the sub-conscious emerges to the conscious level and makes sin known to us.
But I don't think children knowingly sin. They are pure in that regard. Though I believe it's in their human nature to do so. And when they do, the blood of Christ cleanses them. The angels are also appointed by Christ, over each child.
Last edited by AlabamaStorm; 12-13-2010 at 08:27 AM..
I believe it's in the sub-conscious level at birth. And as we develop through childhood, the sub-conscious emerges to the conscious level and makes sin known to us.
But I don't think children knowingly sin. Though I believe it's in their human nature to do so. And when they do, the blood of Christ cleanses them. The angels are also appointed by Christ, over each child.
I also agree with the ability to learn sin, because of the inherit desires placed within us 'because' of Adam's fall.
It reminds me of Paul writing that once he was alive, apart from the law. Once the law became known, to him, he fell. It reminds me of the knowledge of good and evil basically.
I think we all go through this in life. The desires of carnality take hold over us, because we are carnal in nature. But this is learned, no different than school. If a child never goes to school, then 2+2 is alien to him. For myself, it is the same with the law.
Being good or evil is alien if the difference is never known. They are innocent. Of course this is why I believe there are people who have never known the way of righteousness through Christ, that will be in heaven BECAUSE they have never been 'schooled' in the law, therego they must be judged with righteous judgement based upon what is written on their hearts. This is the Spirit poured out on all mankind. This law, written on their hearts.
Regarding the salvation of children who die as children
A few years ago there was a story in a Montreal paper about an Ohio lady who drowned her baby in the bathtub. Her defense was that she loved the baby so much that she wanted to make sure that her child would not have to suffer forever in hell. After serving a sentence she remarried, had another child and drowned it for the same reason. She trusted that God would forgive her because her intention, though warped by false theology, was for the good of her children.
The jury decided that she was mentally ill, BUT WAS SHE? The simple pragmatic fact remains that her two infants (according to Arminian theology) will spend eternity in heavenly bliss because she loved them so much that she insured, by killing them, that this will be so.
Arminian Christians (free willers) believe that there is a magical split-second in time before which a child, if they die, will go to heaven, and after which, if they die will spend eternity suffering in hell. They call this “the age of accountability”.
If I believed this nonsense I might take a gun into the largest maternity ward in Toronto and before the police arrived, kill every infant who had just been born. This would cause an enormous amount of suffering to the parents, but this wouldn’t matter much in the long run, because probably most of them (according to both Arminian and Calvinist theology) are destined to suffer forever in hell anyway, so why not save their babies from the same fate?
Don’t try to argue that what I would be doing would be wrong (Thou Shalt Not Kill). Christians kill others in war for far less worthy causes than trying to save their souls.
The fact remains that my act would, in fact insure the babies’ eternal salvation. If Arminian Christians are right, then infanticide would certainly be one of the most effective ways of “saving souls”. Besides, God forgives murder, especially when it is done for such a noble, though misguided cause.
Sure, they would lock me away in an institution, but I would spend my life reveling in the glow of the emotional "high" of knowing that I had, beyond any shadow of a doubt (even in the mind of Arminian Christians) guaranteed the salvation of the babies that I had killed.
Here is a link to hundreds of similar cases. consequences
A few years ago there was a story in a Montreal paper about an Ohio lady who drowned her baby in the bathtub. Her defense was that she loved the baby so much that she wanted to make sure that her child would not have to suffer forever in hell. After serving a sentence she remarried, had another child and drowned it for the same reason. She trusted that God would forgive her because her intention, though warped by false theology, was for the good of her children.
The jury decided that she was mentally ill, BUT WAS SHE? The simple pragmatic fact remains that her two infants (according to Arminian theology) will spend eternity in heavenly bliss because she loved them so much that she insured, by killing them, that this will be so.
Arminian Christians (free willers) believe that there is a magical split-second in time before which a child, if they die, will go to heaven, and after which, if they die will spend eternity suffering in hell. They call this “the age of accountability”.
If I believed this nonsense I might take a gun into the largest maternity ward in Toronto and before the police arrived, kill every infant who had just been born. This would cause an enormous amount of suffering to the parents, but this wouldn’t matter much in the long run, because probably most of them (according to both Arminian and Calvinist theology) are destined to suffer forever in hell anyway, so why not save their babies from the same fate?
Don’t try to argue that what I would be doing would be wrong (Thou Shalt Not Kill). Christians kill others in war for far less worthy causes than trying to save their souls.
The fact remains that my act would, in fact insure the babies’ eternal salvation. If Arminian Christians are right, then infanticide would certainly be one of the most effective ways of “saving souls”. Besides, God forgives murder, especially when it is done for such a noble, though misguided cause.
Sure, they would lock me away in an institution, but I would spend my life reveling in the glow of the emotional "high" of knowing that I had, beyond any shadow of a doubt (even in the mind of Arminian Christians) guaranteed the salvation of the babies that I had killed.
Here is a link to hundreds of similar cases. consequences
Personally, I could care less what crazy people do. I know you like to spam, so have at it.
Millions upon millions have been killed over doctrinal beliefs, so why would a crazy mom be any different?
Personally, I could care less what crazy people do.
Millions upon millions have been killed over doctrinal beliefs, so why would a crazy mom be any different?
I don't believe the Mom was crazy. What she did was in response to eternal hell theology. What she did made perfect sense within the framework of her eternal hell theology.
The point of posting what I did was to show how "crazy" your doctrine of eternal hell "age of accountability" is and what it frequently leads to.
Here is a link to hundreds of similar cases. consequences
It is just one of the many reasons why I rejected ET and embraced the following UR interpretation of the Bible instead. ABSOLUTE ASSURANCE IN JESUS CHRIST absolute assurance in jesus christ
Last edited by rodgertutt; 12-13-2010 at 09:21 AM..
Reason: correction
I don't believe the Mom was crazy. What she did was in response to eternal hell theology. What she did made perfect sense within the framework of her eternal hell theology.
The point of posting what I did was to show how "crazy" your doctrine of eternal hell "age of accountability" is and what it frequently leads to.
Here is a link to hundreds of similar cases. consequences
It is just one of the many reasons why I rejected ET and embraced the following UR interpretation of the Bible instead. ABSOLUTE ASSURANCE IN JESUS CHRIST absolute assurance in jesus christ
Nice try Rodger, I do NOT believe in ET.
And any mother who would kill their children, is freaking looney,,,
I believe it's in the sub-conscious level at birth. And as we develop through childhood, the sub-conscious emerges to the conscious level and makes sin known to us.
But I don't think children knowingly sin. They are pure in that regard. Though I believe it's in their human nature to do so. And when they do, the blood of Christ cleanses them. The angels are also appointed by Christ, over each child.
Dear Alabama,
The reason "all sin and fall short of the glory of God" and that includes children, is due to death being passed into them from Adam (Romans 5:12).
How can a baby be a sinner? They are dying or in a dying condition from birth. Often the dying is so prevalant they die right after birth.
All babies need saved by what Christ did even if they died a split second after being born.
Also, the scripture states:
Mat 18:10 "See that you should not be despising one of these little ones, for I am saying to you that their messengers in the heavens are continually observing the face of My Father Who is in the heavens."
Those little ones are still sinners. Could it be that christ was not talking about ever "little one" in the whole world but those specific little ones who came to Christ? That is just a question.
Isn't it nice though that Christ did die for all babies, little ones and adults and that all of them will one day enter into the blessings Christ died to bring them into?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Regarding the salvation of children who die as children
