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.
Any thoughts about 1st Corinthians 7:14 ?
Minor children are Not cut off because of a believing parent.
Right, but then...at some point we are accountable for our own sins and supposedly we sin from the very first time we disobey our parents. What is that point? Crawling or toddling infants willfully disobey their parents.
One answer just given above is that this happens when a child is told "no," knows what it means but does it anyway - my God, that could be six months old. The baby crawls to the outlet, you cry out "no," she glares at you because she WANTS to touch the outlet and she keeps crawling.
There are just too many holes in this sin/accountability/go to hell circle (IMO...and my opinion only) for it to make sense unless God is really cruel. So I can't get behind it. It doesn't make any sense and it's unbelievably cruel if even tiny children can roast for thousands of years screaming until God finally throws the Lake of Fire into the abyss or whatever.
Right, but then...at some point we are accountable for our own sins and supposedly we sin from the very first time we disobey our parents. What is that point? Crawling or toddling infants willfully disobey their parents.
One answer just given above is that this happens when a child is told "no," knows what it means but does it anyway - my God, that could be six months old. The baby crawls to the outlet, you cry out "no," she glares at you because she WANTS to touch the outlet and she keeps crawling.
There are just too many holes in this sin/accountability/go to hell circle (IMO...and my opinion only) for it to make sense unless God is really cruel. So I can't get behind it. It doesn't make any sense and it's unbelievably cruel if even tiny children can roast for thousands of years screaming until God finally throws the Lake of Fire into the abyss or whatever.
No, my point was not as when it was capable of "severe judgment" being meted out (as if it is), but rather when it is ACCOUNTABLE. There is a difference. Peace
But then his death wasn't for anything as we're still going to sin anyway and still have to atone for it anyway...I may just not be understanding this correctly.
If Jesus' death didn't wipe out ALL sin but only the sin up until then because afterward, people were going to just keep creating new sin anyway, then I just don't get what Jesus' death proved (or did).
Especially since he didn't really die.
It was kind of a hollow sacrifice all round, in my book.
But then his death wasn't for anything as we're still going to sin anyway and still have to atone for it anyway...I may just not be understanding this correctly.
If Jesus' death didn't wipe out ALL sin but only the sin up until then because afterward, people were going to just keep creating new sin anyway, then I just don't get what Jesus' death proved (or did).
Okay, let me try again to explain my belief. Not everybody else's, mind you, just mine.
I believe that because of Adam's transgression, two kinds of death entered the world: (1) physical death, meaning the cessation of all brain activity and the related shutting down of the body's organs and (2) spiritual death, meaning estrangement from God.
Jesus Christ's death paid the price for physical death. Had it not been for His sacrifice, death would be the end. Nothing would follow this life. But, because He conquered death, He made it possible for us to do so, too. That gift is unconditional. You don't have to do a single solitary thing to be assured to a life after this one. Everyone who has ever lived will be resurrected.
Jesus Christ's death also paid the price for spiritual death -- but this is conditioned upon our faith in Him, our repentance of our sins, and our obedience to His commandments. If we are sincerely repentant and do our best to keep His commandments, through our faith in Him, we will be forgiven for our sins -- without having to be punished for them. He bore our punishment, thereby satisfying the demands of justice.
Jesus' death didn't "wipe out sin." I never said anything remotely like that, and to be perfectly honest, I haven't seen anybody else say anything like that either. It wipes out the consequences of sin in the ways I explained. Again, this is as I personally understand His Atonement.
Right, but then...at some point we are accountable for our own sins and supposedly we sin from the very first time we disobey our parents. What is that point? Crawling or toddling infants willfully disobey their parents.
For starters, "sin" is the voluntary transgression of a religious law or moral principle. It could also be said to be a violation against one's own conscience. When a toddler disobeys his parent, he isn't "sinning." It is impossible to "sin" without having the capacity to distinguish between right and wrong. Babies and small children are therefore incapable of sinning. And nobody just wakes up one morning having that capacity.
Quote:
One answer just given above is that this happens when a child is told "no," knows what it means but does it anyway - my God, that could be six months old. The baby crawls to the outlet, you cry out "no," she glares at you because she WANTS to touch the outlet and she keeps crawling.
Wanting to touch the outlet despite being told "no," is part of how a child develops; it is not sinning.
Precisely! As I've said a million times before, Jesus atoned for Adam's sin. Therefore, we don't all start out life being guilty of it. It's a no-brainer.
Adam's sin?
May I clarify that catchy phrase?
It was because of our ability to be as gods, (made in the image of) that the sentence of separation came into play.
Being a god, is the same as being....quote "Gen_3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
The separation comes after the word "lest".....Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man;.
I mean come on......a god in the flesh without lust?
1Jn_2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Pretty much condemned because of the flesh....don't you think? Not because Adam sin-ed.
So, in a sense you are saying the same thing (a million times before) but not understanding its true meaning.IMO.
Eating of the fruit of the tree is as a child hood story. Even a child can understand what disobedience means.
But one who has left the milk of the word and eaten of the meat of the word aided by the Holy Spirit will see the spiritual side of that story.
For starters, "sin" is the voluntary transgression of a religious law or moral principle. It could also be said to be a violation against one's own conscience. When a toddler disobeys his parent, he isn't "sinning." It is impossible to "sin" without having the capacity to distinguish between right and wrong. Babies and small children are therefore incapable of sinning. And nobody just wakes up one morning having that capacity.
Wanting to touch the outlet despite being told "no," is part of how a child develops; it is not sinning.
::Sigh:: Sin is "missing the mark" and that requires that you know there IS a mark to miss and still miss it. Adam and Eve did not sin, they simply learned their first lesson in right and wrong (Good and Evil). From that point on, they knew there was such a thing as "missing the mark" because they knew the concept of Good and Evil (right from wrong). As look3467 pointed out:
Quote:
[i]Being a god, is the same as being....quote "Gen_3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:
The word translated as lest actually mean perhaps. IOW "perhaps he will put forth his hand and take also from the tree of life . . ." It means we now have the potential to do just that because we know the difference between Good and Evil, but we were not remotely evolved enough to have the ability to do so..
Well I'm just going to shut this discussion down and give everyone the answers that they are pondering in theirs heads.
Jesus himself the Son of God the son of man said to his disciples Apostles in training (suffer the little children to come unto me)
( and )
Forbid them not for (such is the kingdom of heaven)
The Kingdom of Heaven is (made up of people that are like little children)
Little children have not reached the age of accountability and are Blameless in the eyes of God.
Adults under the authority of JESUS are blameless because they are covered by his perfect Righteousness!!!!
Look it up yourselves it''s in Matt 19:14 in your dust
covered BIBLES...lol...
Hmmmm....I don't think that you thought this one through....
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.
