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.
A baby has a sin nature is all that I am saying; and as such the baby does sin even if it does not know the difference between right and wrong. If a mother says not to eat anything out of a cookie jar, we all know the cute anecdote of how the baby tells his mother that it didn't eat any of the cookies even with the chocolate smudging his face.
The age of accountability means that even though the child is a sinner, sin will not be accounted to him because he didn't know any better. Not knowing any better does not mean that a person cannot do what is wrong. Someone who doesn't know that it is wrong to steal can indeed steal. Is it therefore not a sin for him to steal? But if he doesn't know any better, he will not be held accountable for trespass...which would be the violation of a known standard.
Sin is different from trespass. Sin is when you violate the standard whether you know what the standard is or not. Like I said, if I don't know that it is wrong for me to steal, it is still wrong for me to steal. If I do, and don't know any better, I have sinned, but I have not committed a trespass. For that, I would have to know that it is wrong to steal.
I disagree. I believe we sin when when willfully disobey one of God's commandments. And if I baby truly could sin, God would be entitled to punish him.
A baby has a sin nature is all that I am saying; and as such the baby does sin even if it does not know the difference between right and wrong. If a mother says not to eat anything out of a cookie jar, we all know the cute anecdote of how the baby tells his mother that it didn't eat any of the cookies even with the chocolate smudging his face.
The age of accountability means that even though the child is a sinner, sin will not be accounted to him because he didn't know any better. Not knowing any better does not mean that a person cannot do what is wrong. Someone who doesn't know that it is wrong to steal can indeed steal. Is it therefore not a sin for him to steal? But if he doesn't know any better, he will not be held accountable for trespass...which would be the violation of a known standard.
Sin is different from trespass. Sin is when you violate the standard whether you know what the standard is or not. Like I said, if I don't know that it is wrong for me to steal, it is still wrong for me to steal. If I do, and don't know any better, I have sinned, but I have not committed a trespass. For that, I would have to know that it is wrong to steal.
I would actually love it if those doctrines were false. However, I am fully aware that Jesus taught these doctrines and that they are told to us plainly in His word.
Therefore, whether you are willing to accept it or not, these doctrines are true.
I'm with you. It is not easy for me to accept that people that I know and love and care about are going to be cast into everlasting fire. However, the Bible teaches that this is what is going to happen.
Of course this motivates me to pray for and evangelize those whom I know and love and care about. I think that this is the proper response to understanding that Jesus' words on the subject are unbending.
I have a hard time with this. My mom shunned me in an attempt to "lovingly discipline" me back under Watchtower's control. Other people believe their child will be tortured forever for some perceived transgression. I don't know who you are harboring these beliefs about but you said it was someone you love. How do you wrap your mind around that? How do you say to yourself that their death/torment is some kind of divine beauty? I would like to think if I had a belief system where my daughter wound up being on the outs of it I would choose her. Why do you choose your beliefs over your loved ones?
I lost my stepdaughter a year and a half ago. I spent a good three months trying to convince myself I was crazy and made it up. I would rather be insane than have her be dead. So I guess that shows I would choose my daughter over my beliefs.
The more I think about it I'm leaning toward people that do this not understanding the concept of unconditional love. People serve a purpose, they are not the purpose. I'm imagining the way they value themselves is similar.
The more I think about it I'm leaning toward people that do this not understanding the concept of unconditional love. People serve a purpose, they are not the purpose. I'm imagining the way they value themselves is similar.
I disagree. I believe we sin when when willfully disobey one of God's commandments. And if I baby truly could sin, God would be entitled to punish him.
For "all" "have sinned" and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).
Yes, most certainly God can punish a baby for the fact that it is born dead in trespasses and sins; however I believe that He chooses not to if those sins are not actual trespasses against a known moral precept.
Of course, but you are arguing as if there is only one way to read Scripture. That simply isn't so. There are many translations, many interpretations, and many differences in how people understand Scripture. There isn't even a common agreement as to which parts are literal, which parts are parable, and which are allegorical. Everyone argues from Scripture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie24
There are many interpretations but only one truth to that scripture. Scripture does not have many meanings, it has an intended purpose. It always results into one truth, but sometimes very elusive and I will admit I'm not right about everything!
But it's for sure that if I engage my now lazy self, you will have to show me from scripture my error.
There is one interpretation to every proverb according to Proverbs 1:6 (kjv); perhaps many applications.
Not that I agree with the Jehovah's Witnesses way of doing things; but I am reminded of the following scripture.
Mat 10:37, He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
They like this one:
Matt 10
. 34Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.…
Matt 10
. 34Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.…
Look where that gets them.
I think that that scripture applies more than anything else to the ones who receive Christ when members of their family are against it.
it is not saying that we ought not to love our family; but that we ought to love Christ over and above our family.
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.
