# Children and salvation



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

I apologize if this subject has been covered in previous threads. I am curious as to what your beliefs are regarding children who die before being baptized or saved. What is their destiny?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> I apologize if this subject has been covered in previous threads. I am curious as to what your beliefs are regarding children who die before being baptized or saved. What is their destiny?



Baptism isn't required for salvation, so that is a mute point for me.

As far as salvation goes, depends on if they've reached the age of accountability (ie able to understand what salvation is and their need for it).  If they've not reached that age, then I believe they go to Heaven when they die.  I get this based on David & Bathsheeba's first son as well as different places in the Bible that references to children as innocent.

Here is a good book on it.

Safe in the Arms of God by John MacArthur.


http://www.amazon.com/Safe-Arms-God-Truth-Heaven/dp/0785263438


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

What determines wether they have reached the age of accountability? What if they have never been to church or exposed to the bible?


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 24, 2009)

Hi Sterlo,

You will find that people who die before having had one full, fair chance to make the choice, are promoted to the next world ( go to heaven) where they can make the choice there. All of God's creature children get one full and fair chance to choose.

God does not hold lack of time or un-fortuitous circumstances against us....that wouldn't be fair. Among His many Divine attributes, God is the God of _Fairness._


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

Does the bible address this directly?


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> What determines wether they have reached the age of accountability? What if they have never been to church or exposed to the bible?



They're mental ability.  Can a 2 year old understand the gospel?  Can a 40 year old who has mental retardation?

As far as never been to church or exposed to the Bible, that doesn't matter.  As Paul tells us in Romans, All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.




Cornelia_Hiker said:


> Hi Sterlo,
> 
> You will find that people who die before having had one full, fair chance to make the choice, are promoted to the next world ( go to heaven) where they can make the choice there. All of God's creature children get one full and fair chance to choose.
> 
> God does not hold lack of time or un-fortuitous circumstances against us....that wouldn't be fair. Among His many Divine attributes, God is the God of _Fairness._



Where is that in scripture?


----------



## addictedtodeer (Jun 24, 2009)

IF salvation belongs to God, is directed by Him and fulfilled by Him THEN God can save whomever He so desires whenever He desires to do so. Salvation relies on God not on man (John 1:12-13)

From Chapter 10 of the Westminster Confession of Faith:
_III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word._

One of the scripture proofs the WCF uses is Luke 18:15-16
_Luke 18:15  Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them. And when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. 
Luke 18:16  But Jesus called them to him, saying, "Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 
Luke18:17  Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it." _
Both the words infants and children in these passages were used to refer to babies as well as children.  It gives a interesting perspective on God's power to save.


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> They're mental ability.  Can a 2 year old understand the gospel?  Can a 40 year old who has mental retardation?
> 
> As far as never been to church or exposed to the Bible, that doesn't matter.  As Paul tells us in Romans, All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
> 
> ...





So you are saying that there is no salvation even for those who have not had the opportunity to be exposed to the word?


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> So you are saying that there is no salvation even for those who have not had the opportunity to be exposed to the word?



That may be what he is referring but he would be wrong.

See Sterlo, here the explanations start branching off to new subjects and threads.

Some people won't see outside their particular set of beliefs, even going so far as to state that nothing good exists outside of their beliefs (their beliefs is the *only* way).

Many of us on here just hate to burst their bubble, but that thinking is not true or factual. 


The majority of participants on this forum and residents of this state are one flavor of Christian of another...so most of the responses you get will be from the Christian perspective.

That doesn't mean that there are no other good sources of truth, facts, and information on this world as a whole. 

God is "bigger" than just one group of His children or one set of His children's beliefs.


Peace and learn well


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

Cornelia
I have to side with you on this one. How can a baby sin and fall short of the glory of God?


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 24, 2009)

I will agree with you on that point Sterlo. The "fall of man" is one of the errors in Christian doctrine.





Sterlo58 said:


> Cornelia
> I have to side with you on this one. How can a baby sin and fall short of the glory of God?


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 24, 2009)

Cornelia_Hiker said:


> That may be what he is referring but he would be wrong.
> 
> See Sterlo, here the explanations start branching off to new subjects and threads.
> 
> ...



As usual,you are totally "off the wall." Urantia calls!


----------



## earl (Jun 24, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> As usual,you are totally "off the wall." Urantia calls!





Totally uncalled for cd . may you never have to walk a mile in his shoes.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> So you are saying that there is no salvation even for those who have not had the opportunity to be exposed to the word?



No...that is not what I'm saying.

That is what the Bible says...and I choose to believe the Bible as the supreme authority on religion.  You don't have to agree with it, but that is what I use when it comes to debating religion.



Cornelia_Hiker said:


> That may be what he is referring but he would be wrong.
> 
> See Sterlo, here the explanations start branching off to new subjects and threads.
> 
> ...



See my response to Sterlo above.




Cornelia_Hiker said:


> I will agree with you on that point Sterlo. The "fall of man" is one of the errors in Christian doctrine.



Again, the Bible states many a time that there is "none righteous"  and that "all have sinned."

Doesn't take long to see the sin nature in a child.


----------



## wholenotem (Jun 24, 2009)

Cornelia_Hiker said:


> Hi Sterlo,
> 
> You will find that people who die before having had one full, fair chance to make the choice, are promoted to the next world ( go to heaven) where they can make the choice there. All of God's creature children get one full and fair chance to choose.
> God does not hold lack of time or un-fortuitous circumstances against us....that wouldn't be fair. Among His many Divine attributes, God is the God of _Fairness._



Are you speaking of God in the "Christian" sense or just what you think God would do?


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 24, 2009)

earl said:


> Totally uncalled for cd . may you never have to walk a mile in his shoes.



"Touche' " as the swordfighter folks say.


----------



## earl (Jun 24, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> "Touche' " as the swordfighter folks say.



No offense . Just trying to keep it light .  Have a good one .


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 24, 2009)

You do a fine job on the "lite," earl.Hope you have a good 'un,too,compadre.


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

RJ,

One of the main problems I have with the literal translation of original sin is that it would seem that it condemns even aborted babies.  I cannot wrap my arms around the idea that a loving God would not accept innocent babies into heaven. 

I have lots of questions and concerns about how man interprets what is supposed to be the word of God when the conclusion is that God is not loving but vengeful. 

I am not condeming your faith or opinion but have struggled with the contradictions like this particular issue. How can we love God unconditionally if he does not do the same?????  Can't seem to get past that. One of many inconsistancies in Christian beliefs that has bothered me all my life.


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo,I understand what you feel about the seeming inconsistencies in God's Word.It takes much study and prayer  to learn that there aren't any inconsistencies -  just human misunderstanding and not reading thoroughly enough to grasp the context of what we read.

Here's a real good study Bible that has helped me tremendously:
Life Application Study Bible,published by Zondervan.It takes a little while to learn how to use,but is very much worth the effort.It's some money well spent,too.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> RJ,
> 
> One of the main problems I have with the literal translation of original sin is that it would seem that it condemns even aborted babies.  I cannot wrap my arms around the idea that a loving God would not accept innocent babies into heaven.



Okay...maybe you didn't understand my first reply.  I believe that aborted babies go to heaven based on the examples cited above.



			
				Sterlo58 said:
			
		

> I have lots of questions and concerns about how man interprets what is supposed to be the word of God when the conclusion is that God is not loving but vengeful.


God is not vengeful...He is just



			
				Sterlo58 said:
			
		

> I am not condeming your faith or opinion but have struggled with the contradictions like this particular issue. How can we love God unconditionally if he does not do the same?????  Can't seem to get past that. One of many inconsistancies in Christian beliefs that has bothered me all my life.



God does love us unconditionally.  He sent His Son, Jesus, to die....death on a cross, to pay for our sins.  He imputed our Sin penalty on Christ and imputed Christ's righteousness on us (See 2 Cor 5:17-21).  All you have to do is accept this free gift that God gives (Rom 6:23).


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

"Okay...maybe you didn't understand my first reply. I believe that aborted babies go to heaven based on the examples cited above."

I do not recall you saying this in a previous post.


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> "Okay...maybe you didn't understand my first reply. I believe that aborted babies go to heaven based on the examples cited above."
> 
> I do not recall you saying this in a previous post.





Hi Sterlo.

This was recently discussed in another thread.


I think a difference must be drawn between "children who haven't made the choice yet" and potential children that haven't been born yet."


Suggesting that there's some big room or lab in heaven somewhere that houses petri dishes or incubators with developing fetuses is....a stretch.

Or that God magically transforms a fetus into a baby in an instant so that it can continue on in normal development....is also a stretch.

I don't think those scenarios makes any sense and I can't stretch that far.

Thanks


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> "Okay...maybe you didn't understand my first reply. I believe that aborted babies go to heaven based on the examples cited above."
> 
> I do not recall you saying this in a previous post.




See my first post.  I'd say that an aborted baby who has a soul would not have reached the age of accountability and would be considered an "innocent" by God.  I really do recommend the book below if it is something that you or a loved one recently went through (losing a child or infant).  It is an encouraging read for sure.



rjcruiser said:


> Baptism isn't required for salvation, so that is a mute point for me.
> 
> As far as salvation goes, depends on if they've reached the age of accountability (ie able to understand what salvation is and their need for it).  If they've not reached that age, then I believe they go to Heaven when they die.  I get this based on David & Bathsheeba's first son as well as different places in the Bible that references to children as innocent.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

RJ

You did cover that issue. My bad, and I appreciate the info on the book


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> RJ
> 
> You did cover that issue. My bad, and I appreciate the info on the book



No problem....the book can give many of the references as to where in scripture it talks about children and salvation given to them.  I pray that the Lord will give you the answers you need to reconcile your questions and thoughts that you have on these topics.


----------



## Madman (Jun 24, 2009)

I believe the question can only be answered by knowing The God of the Bible.  The Judeo/Christian God of creation.

He is just,
He is righteous,
He is love,
He is omnipotent,
He is omniscient,
Etc., Etc., Etc.,

From everything that He has chosen to reveal about Himself I am convinced that whatever He does WILL be the right thing.
He loves my children more than I ever can and should they have passed before they made a “decision” for Christ He would have done the right thing.  Same for any child that has mental challenges.
I yield to HIM.
Tough topic.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 24, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> God is not vengeful...He is just




Wonder if the children of Jericho felt that way?


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 24, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> Wonder if the children of Jericho felt that way?



 They were deafened by the screaming and crushed by the falling walls. Another confusing example of being "just".


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 24, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> They were deafened by the screaming and crushed by the falling walls. Another confusing example of being "just".




I'm sure they did not blame any deity, as they knew it was clearly the result of some trumpet blowing Hebrews that had been circling their city for days like wolves around sheep.
Strange thing, this idea of children not understanding when adults harm them.  For whatever reasoning.


----------



## post450 (Jun 24, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> Wonder if the children of Jericho felt that way?



WTM,  that was while man was governed under the "law" of Moses, not the grace of Jesus Christ. You also may remember under the "law", at one time, almost 15,000 Hebrew men, women, and children were killed by God for questioning Moses in the wilderness. Can't say that God was not fair or that he was a respecter of persons. The people of Jericho could have surrendered, but they placed their faith/trust, not sure which you prefer, in a wall to protect them. Before you spin this the direction you are going, God, as an absolute supreme being, does not consider what is right or wrong in man's eyes, if he did, he would not be an absolute supreme being.

As a side note, many Christians interpret the Bible to believe that Jesus offered Salvation to all those who had died prior to his crucifixion when he descended into depths of the earth.

Just my $0.02.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jun 24, 2009)

Just for the sake of inspiring individuals to read and study, let me say this:  Many of our points of view concerning this subject are nothing more than our point of view.  God will decide.  God will make the choice.
The solution is to give your life to God and give your free will to Jesus Christ.  Be a good example for all other people.  Tell the story of Jesus to everyone you can.  Raise your family in the Lord.
God will take care of the eternal life issues.


----------



## tell sackett (Jun 24, 2009)

Preach it brother


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 24, 2009)

post450 said:


> WTM,  that was while man was governed under the "law" of Moses, not the grace of Jesus Christ. You also may remember under the "law", at one time, almost 15,000 Hebrew men, women, and children were killed by God for questioning Moses in the wilderness. Can't say that God was not fair or that he was a respecter of persons.



Wanna discuss the millions who were not Jews, Gentiles or Greeks?  How 'bout that part of the world?

Only one people lived under the "law" of Moses, and they acknowledge the existance of no other peoples?


----------



## post450 (Jun 25, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> Wanna discuss the millions who were not Jews, Gentiles or Greeks?  How 'bout that part of the world?
> 
> Only one people lived under the "law" of Moses, and they acknowledge the existance of no other peoples?



Sure, but I may not understand what you mean. I thought Gentiles were generally considered those not Jewish(everybody else).

According to the Bible, God didn't make a covenant with the millions of other people at the time he did with Abraham or give them the Law of Moses. He counted Abraham's faith as righteousness and the Hebrews were clearly his chosen people, but they rejected God repeatedly as the Law of Moses was to cover sin, not remove it. As I stated in my previous post, Jesus was the ultimate and perfect sacrifice for all of mankind, including those millions you are referring to, and he presented a way out for those who he ministered to during his 3 days in the heart of the earth. BTW, there were accounts of Gentiles serving the Hebrew God before Christ, including Rahab, the harlot in Jericho.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 25, 2009)

post450 said:


> Sure, but I may not understand what you mean. I thought Gentiles were generally considered those not Jewish(everybody else).
> 
> According to the Bible, God didn't make a covenant with the millions of other people at the time he did with Abraham or give them the Law of Moses. He counted Abraham's faith as righteousness and the Hebrews were clearly his chosen people, but they rejected God repeatedly as the Law of Moses was to cover sin, not remove it. As I stated in my previous post, Jesus was the ultimate and perfect sacrifice for all of mankind, including those millions you are referring to, and he presented a way out for those who he ministered to during his 3 days in the heart of the earth. BTW, there were accounts of Gentiles serving the Hebrew God before Christ, including Rahab, the harlot in Jericho.


 
In my opinion, you nailed it!


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 25, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> Wonder if the children of Jericho felt that way?



Did you not read my first post in regards to children?



How many times am I going to have to reference prior posts.  It's called reading comprehension people.


----------



## earl (Jun 25, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> Did you not read my first post in regards to children?
> 
> 
> 
> How many times am I going to have to reference prior posts.  It's called reading comprehension people.





So killing children,babies, and the unborn is OK for religious reasons because they get a get into heaven free card. Pretty atrocious no matter how you spin it.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

post450 said:


> Sure, but I may not understand what you mean. I thought Gentiles were generally considered those not Jewish(everybody else).
> 
> According to the Bible, God didn't make a covenant with the millions of other people at the time he did with Abraham or give them the Law of Moses. He counted Abraham's faith as righteousness and the Hebrews were clearly his chosen people, but they rejected God repeatedly as the Law of Moses was to cover sin, not remove it. As I stated in my previous post, Jesus was the ultimate and perfect sacrifice for all of mankind, including those millions you are referring to, and he presented a way out for those who he ministered to during his 3 days in the heart of the earth. BTW, there were accounts of Gentiles serving the Hebrew God before Christ, including Rahab, the harlot in Jericho.



That WHOLE idea of a deity CHOOSING a single people to perform his routines and plans with turns off many to this religious belief system.

The Chinese and many other peoples on the opposite side of the planet are not considered Gentiles.  According to this belief system, they were left out.

Some folks simply need to look at historical evidence as to just exactly how long humans have existed, where they have existed and what different cultures have believed for thousands of years BEFORE the writings of Moses.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> Did you not read my first post in regards to children?
> 
> 
> 
> How many times am I going to have to reference prior posts.  It's called reading comprehension people.




I read YOUR interpretation of the Bible, and your presented opinion.

It is not unique, by far.

But when you state all you consider for valid historical research is the Bible, with extrememe predjudice against any other sources, it weakens your argument considerably.

Exclusivism to the point of blindness.

But that's your choice.


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 25, 2009)

There is none so blind as he who WILL NOT see.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

There is none so BLINDED as those who refuse to look around.


----------



## post450 (Jun 25, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> That WHOLE idea of a deity CHOOSING a single people to perform his routines and plans with turns off many to this religious belief system.
> 
> The Chinese and many other peoples on the opposite side of the planet are not considered Gentiles.  According to this belief system, they were left out.
> 
> Some folks simply need to look at historical evidence as to just exactly how long humans have existed, where they have existed and what different cultures have believed for thousands of years BEFORE the writings of Moses.



We can add Africans, Native Americans, and Islanders from all over the world to the original list, and regardless of whether or not they were/are considered to be Gentiles (I still say they are) they are mankind and Christ's death on the cross was to pay for their sins as well. That's the bottom line to Christianity. You can refuse to acknowledge that, it's your prerogative, but I gave an answer as to those you presume to have been left out(Christ ministering those who had died in the heart of the earth was all of mankind, not just Hebrews). I think the presumption of exclusion is unfounded. You might be surprised at the growing number of predominatley Asian American churches in this country and Asian churches around the world. They are direct descendants of those you would like to cling to as support for your theory, but they have chose to accept and embrace the Christian faith. I find it odd that they are not turned off by the Gospel for this reason, but yet you are?

I suggest that you read John 10:16 and interpret it as you like.

Is your problem with our interpretation of the Bible or the simply the Bible itself? As far as historical research goes, a good portion has supported what the Bible states and archeological findings continue to occur that further substantiate the Bible as fact, although we as Christians do not require historical research to confirm our faith. 

I know we are way off topic here and I apologize to the OP.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

post450 said:


> Is your problem with our interpretation of the Bible or the simply the Bible itself?




Great subject for a new thread post!


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 25, 2009)

post450 said:


> We can add Africans, Native Americans, and Islanders from all over the world to the original list, and regardless of whether or not they were/are considered to be Gentiles (I still say they are) they are mankind and Christ's death on the cross was to pay for their sins as well. That's the bottom line to Christianity. You can refuse to acknowledge that, it's your prerogative, but I gave an answer as to those you presume to have been left out(Christ ministering those who had died in the heart of the earth was all of mankind, not just Hebrews). I think the presumption of exclusion is unfounded. You might be surprised at the growing number of predominatley Asian American churches in this country and Asian churches around the world. They are direct descendants of those you would like to cling to as support for your theory, but they have chose to accept and embrace the Christian faith. I find it odd that they are not turned off by the Gospel for this reason, but yet you are?
> 
> I suggest that you read John 10:16 and interpret it as you like.
> 
> ...



If WTM45 is in on a thread in this forum,he will be attacking Christianity no matter what the topic.That seems to be his only purpose here - to try and cause doubt among weaker believers.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> If WTM45 is in on a thread in this forum,he will be attacking Christianity no matter what the topic.That seems to be his only purpose here - to try and cause doubt among weaker believers.



You can go to port arms, I'm not attacking anything.
I'm trying to get people to think.  Express their beliefs.  Stand up and say why you follow somthing.  Explain what that something is.  Determine if it is real or simple emotion.
It's that simple.
And it matters not what the religious belief system is.

As long as man has been able to communicate, sitting around a fire talking about the unknown has been going on.
That's all it is.

If someone starts to see things they never thought of before, or finds holes that faith can not fill, then they now have a reason to dig deeper and work out some answers for themselves.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jun 25, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> If WTM45 is in on a thread in this forum,he will be attacking Christianity no matter what the topic.That seems to be his only purpose here - to try and cause doubt among weaker believers.




You got it.

That's what just about every thread on this forum has turned into in recent weeks.


----------



## WTM45 (Jun 25, 2009)

Ronnie T said:


> You got it.
> 
> That's what just about every thread on this forum has turned into in recent weeks.




OK.  I'll let you have the forum.
It's your pulpit.  Rejoice!

Hopefully everyone will enjoy the exclusivism, and the wars between the denominations.  Remember, there is only ONE right way on here, so be careful what you do and say or you will get pushed out!

Too bad for those who do not follow the literal translation method, Calvinism, Spurgeon, Schofield or Graham.  Watch out you sinful Catholics, you NT unbelieving Jews and those who follow a "prosperity gospel!"

Occam's razor is alive and well!

Take care everyone!


----------



## Randy (Jun 25, 2009)

We are born the children of God.  For me personally that is why I do not believe we have to accept Him to go to Heaven but rather reject Him in order to go to He ll.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jun 25, 2009)

Randy said:


> We are born the children of God.  For me personally that is why I do not believe we have to accept Him to go to Heaven but rather reject Him in order to go to He ll.



Now there you go.
Can you give us some scriptural references please?


----------



## ToLog (Jun 25, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> OK.  I'll let you have the forum.
> It's your pulpit.  Rejoice!
> 
> Hopefully everyone will enjoy the exclusivism, and the wars between the denominations.  Remember, there is only ONE right way on here, so be careful what you do and say or you will get pushed out!
> ...



Nah, we don't want to lose "anyone" who thinks, or acts differently than the rest of our small group. 

we need the diversity. 

a contribution, for free, to a forum like this, is a gift, for sure.

otherwise, we'd all likely become in-bred. 

have anyone ever seen in-bred deer?  they can become quite grotesque looking. what is needed is a full exposition of all the differences.  something like solving a multi-dimensitional quadractic equation, more or less. 

said another way, when those multi-dimensional quadractic angels start swarming down here on Earth, we all should pay attention. 

we need everyone's viewpoints. No one is holding a gun to our heads (at this moment) and saying we should all agree.

we're trying to find common ground. personally, i like high-ground myself.


----------



## Randy (Jun 25, 2009)

Ronnie T said:


> Now there you go.
> Can you give us some scriptural references please?


I can not quaote any specific references except for Romans.  The whole Book of Romans.  I believe we are born with the Spirit of God in our hearts.  At some point in life we become aware of this Spirit of God.  We learn about Jesus and His death and rise from it to
save us from sin.  We then either have faith in Jesus Christ and therefore continue to receive God's Righteousness or we choose not to have this faith and therefore reject God's rifghtenousness.  We all were given this righteousness through Jesus's death even before we were born and if we believe in Him, we are alive in Christ.  If we choose not to belive in Him, we are dead in sin.  Because God gave us this righteousness through the death of His son even before we were born, we do not have to accept it but in fact we must reject it through not believeing. 

Now is this scriptual?  It depends on how you read it.  Rather than believing we have to accept God's righteousness after we learn about it, I read it that it was given to us all at that time and therefore we must reject it.  Rather than looking at it as a child getting old enough to accept Jesus, I look at it as a child getting old enough to reject Jesus.


----------



## Diogenes (Jun 25, 2009)

Astounding.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> We are born the children of God. For me personally that is why I do not believe we have to accept Him to go to Heaven but rather reject Him in order to go to He ll.


 
Randy, respectfully, I believe it is the opposite.

We are born sinful and the result of sin is death:

_*<SUP>5</SUP>* Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
         And in sin my mother conceived me.(Psalm 51)_

_ <SUP id=en-NKJV-14783 class=versenum value="3">*3*</SUP> The wicked are estranged from the womb;
         They go astray as soon as they are born (Psalms 58)_

_ <SUP id=en-NIV-28045 class=versenum value="12">*12*</SUP>Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— <SUP id=en-NIV-28046 class=versenum value="13">*13*</SUP>for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. <SUP id=en-NIV-28047 class=versenum value="14">*14*</SUP>Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come. (Romans 5)_

If we do not choose Jesus (Life), we are condemned already. We choose to remain dead, if we do not choose life.

_*<SUP>18</SUP>* “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3)_

Unless we enter into the spiritual body, and become a new creature, we remain flesh and remain dead.

_<SUP id=en-NKJV-26116 class=versenum value="1">*1*</SUP> There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. <SUP id=en-NKJV-26117 class=versenum value="2">*2*</SUP> This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”
<SUP id=en-NKJV-26118 class=versenum value="3">*3*</SUP> Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 
<SUP id=en-NKJV-26119 class=versenum value="4">*4*</SUP> Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 
<SUP id=en-NKJV-26120 class=versenum value="5">*5*</SUP> Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. <SUP id=en-NKJV-26121 class=versenum value="6">*6*</SUP> That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. <SUP id=en-NKJV-26122 class=versenum value="7">*7*</SUP> Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ (John 3)_


----------



## farmasis (Jun 26, 2009)

For the original question:

This is what Moses (one of two people who were credited to be a friend of God) said about God's ability to make the correct decision of who will be spared.

_*<SUP>25</SUP>* Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”_ 

Now, back to Romans 5. The law reveals sin. Sin is there before the law exposes it, and death (the wage of sin) is also there. But, there is not penalty of sin without the law. And since we will all stand and give an account of ourselves, we must understand the law to know that we broke it and to recieve the penalty for it. I do not think this is a specific age, but when a child recieves knowledge of the law, and the realization, they need a savior.

_<SUP>13</SUP>for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. <SUP id=en-NIV-28047 class=versenum value="14">*14*</SUP>Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, (Romans 5)_


----------



## Diogenes (Jun 26, 2009)

Either ‘Belief’ is completely shameless, and can justify anything and everything, or folks simply refuse to think on their own.  Or both.  

Reading this stuff, thread after thread, causes one to actually question not only the educational system in this land, but also the reasoning behind maintaining it.  Clearly it isn’t working.

Education has brought us this: “A Special Note to Atheist: You cannot KNOW that God does not exist! You can wish, hope, or think, but you cannot KNOW!”

Hopefully the speaker of that quote meant a particular Atheist, and lacked the plural on purpose.  Hopefully, also, the speaker saw the easily demonstrated flaw, revealed by simply eliminating the word ‘not’ from what is an odd and unmade argument.  It would be quite difficult to demonstrate that knowledge is asserted by the lack of same.  Those things that others may not know with absolute certainty do not suddenly and mysteriously accrue to a certainty on the part of another.  Knowledge (the ‘KNOW’ portion of the assertion, so stridently capitalized) is empirical, and is based on what can be demonstrated.  Arguments based entirely on ‘knowledge’ that only a few seem to hold, and on  ‘knowledge’ that cannot be demonstrated factually or duplicated are no arguments at all, and fall into the realm of baseless superstition.  You cannot KNOW that God does exist, so give your certainty a rest, and try challenging something you can actually demonstrate to be true.  I can as easily demonstrate Athena, simply by the assertion made.  

Then we get things like this – “that was while man was governed under the "law" of Moses, not the grace of Jesus Christ.”  Well.  That changes everything, doesn’t it?  The really thin part of the Book of All Truth is brought into play, to once again justify and back away from the really thick part of the same book.  But folks seem to move with seamless alacrity between the two, in seeking quotes to justify whatever they wish to explain away.  And here we thought that the whole Protestant Reformation was designed to evict those nasty and apologist Papists who would dare interpret the One True Word as allegorical rather than as literal.  So, did God change when your own mind did? 

I grow weary of hearing that the OT God was different than the NT God, while simultaneously hearing of the literal Creation and the literal Flood, and all the like.  Stand on a stable bit of land folks, or quit with the shifting of your own sands to suit the occasion.   Did your God, consciously and deliberately, kill every living thing on His Earth, in Genesis 6:7 --  “And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them,”  or didn’t He?  Did your God premeditatedly mass-murder innocent children, in Exodus 11:5 --  “And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts,” or didn’t He?  God is sort of portrayed as something of a recidivist where wiping His folks out is concerned.  So the New God didn’t do those things?  Or He changed His mind, and promises not to do it anymore?    

Do not qualify, weasel, and cherry-pick.  That is seriously dishonest and causes you to appear to be fools.  Nothing in any of that OT stuff says that those who got ‘smited’ left and right throughout the entire mess would be anything other than just plain ‘repenteth’ of by your God, and it seems a bit odd that God can repent of his own acts and Creations, but there you have it, in writing.  What you are putting forward, as ‘explanations’ contradict your own assertions.  An Omnipotent, all-knowing, all-seeing Creator would, by definition, be incapable of making a mistake.  To assert that it was mankind’s mistake is to weasel – we are Created, or not – and with us is Created our Sins and/or our capacity to Sin.  We cannot have both free choice and Omnipotent Creation and oversight, since the two ideas cancel each other out.  And the sudden appearance of a doctrine of ‘forgiveness of sin,’ in the NT, which applies only to ‘believers,’ is about the thinnest bit of arrogant and superior-minded nonsense ever.  

You folks can’t even agree on this one – one side says that all non-believers are condemned.  Another side says that some, because God (in His omnipotence) only revealed himself to you, personally, are not at fault, and can be ‘saved,’ but only if they suddenly see your point of view.  And some say that innocents, such as children, are saved automatically.  Some others, on the other hand, are asserted to be pagans and heretics, and are doomed for Eternity.  Wouldn’t some of these be also the innocent children of those pagans and heretics?  Wait!  Some of you have another rationalization to cover that possibility – It is only because they have not yet had a chance to hear from you, and be ‘Saved’ by your Word, and so it is not their fault . . .  

Do you never tire of thinking up new rationalizations to cover any and all permutations?  No wonder this effort requires so much money . . .

Astounding.


----------



## post450 (Jun 26, 2009)

Diogenes said:


> Either ‘Belief’ is completely shameless, and can justify anything and everything, or folks simply refuse to think on their own.  Or both.
> 
> Reading this stuff, thread after thread, causes one to actually question not only the educational system in this land, but also the reasoning behind maintaining it.  Clearly it isn’t working.
> 
> ...



Sir, you too are astounding in your very own way. 

You bring to mind a scripture, Proverbs 26:12 .


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 26, 2009)

post450 said:


> Sir, you too are astounding in your very own way.
> 
> You bring to mind a scripture, Proverbs 26:12 .


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> I can not quaote any specific references except for Romans.  The whole Book of Romans.  I believe we are born with the Spirit of God in our hearts.  We all were given this righteousness through Jesus's death even before we were born and if we believe in Him, we are alive in Christ.



Found it for you Randy.

Rom 3:10-12

10  as it is written,
         "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; 

11  THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
         THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; 

12  ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS;
         THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD,
         THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2009)

farmasis said:


> For the original question:
> 
> This is what Moses (one of two people who were credited to be a friend of God) said about God's ability to make the correct decision of who will be spared.
> 
> ...



It sounds to me like you still believe we are under the Law.  We are not.  When Jesus died on the cross there was no more Law.  We are now covered under Jesus' Blood.  Assuming of course we believe in Him.  Even further in Romans it asks so now that we are covered can we just continue to sin without worrying.  Then the Bible tells us no and gives and example using marriage. 

I understand this is a different concept than what we have been tought.  It was not until I was older that it was revealed to me.


----------



## earl (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> It sounds to me like you still believe we are under the Law.  We are not.  When Jesus died on the cross there was no more Law.  We are now covered under Jesus' Blood.  Assuming of course we believe in Him.  Even further in Romans it asks so now that we are covered can we just continue to sin without worrying.  Then the Bible tells us no and gives and example using marriage.
> 
> I understand this is a different concept than what we have been tought.  It was not until I was older that it was revealed to me.





This is interesting.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> It sounds to me like you still believe we are under the Law.  We are not.  When Jesus died on the cross there was no more Law.  We are now covered under Jesus' Blood.  Assuming of course we believe in Him.  Even further in Romans it asks so now that we are covered can we just continue to sin without worrying.  Then the Bible tells us no and gives and example using marriage.
> 
> I understand this is a different concept than what we have been tought.  It was not until I was older that it was revealed to me.



We're not still under the law?  In other words, are we not still condemned by our sin?  The only difference is that Jesus paid the penalty for that sin and we don't need to keep making sacrifices to cover our sin.


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> We're not still under the law?  In other words, are we not still condemned by our sin?  The only difference is that Jesus paid the penalty for that sin and we don't need to keep making sacrifices to cover our sin.



No we are not under the Law.  We are not condemned by our sins anymore again assuming we believe Jesus died for us.  Does this mean we can now sin all we want to?  No, again read Romans.


----------



## rjcruiser (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> No we are not under the Law.  We are not condemned by our sins anymore again assuming we believe Jesus died for us.  Does this mean we can now sin all we want to?  No, again read Romans.



I think we are thinking the same...maybe not.  I'll clarify.

We are condemned by our sins....Rom 6:23..For the wages of Sin is death...

But Christ's death covered our sins and His resurection conquered death so that we might have eternal life.

As far as sinning all we want...you nailed it.  Beginning of Rom 6 nails that one for us.


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2009)

Correct.


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 26, 2009)

Good to see ya,Randy.You're one of the "salty" ones!


----------



## Randy (Jun 26, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> Good to see ya,Randy.You're one of the "salty" ones!



Meaning?


----------



## farmasis (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> It sounds to me like you still believe we are under the Law. We are not. When Jesus died on the cross there was no more Law. We are now covered under Jesus' Blood. Assuming of course we believe in Him. Even further in Romans it asks so now that we are covered can we just continue to sin without worrying. Then the Bible tells us no and gives and example using marriage.
> 
> I understand this is a different concept than what we have been tought. It was not until I was older that it was revealed to me.


 
Sorta agree.

'We' are not under the law. We meaning Christians brought with a price. But, the law is not done away with by any means. The law is every bit binding to day as the day it was written. And those not saved by grace through faith will be judged by the law. Grace satisfies the penalty of the law, and does not make it null and void. The law will be in effect until heaven and earth pass away, that is when New Jerusalem is established. So, until you are able to accept the atoning sacrifice and the propitiation of your sin, you are under the law.

But, we were not talking of Christians nor those who have rejected Christ. We were talking about those who die before the age of accountability, and in my opinion not Christians, but not yet responsible yet for their actions.

_*<SUP>17</SUP>* “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-23247 value="18">*18*</SUP> For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-23248 value="19">*19*</SUP> Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-23249 value="20">*20*</SUP> For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matt 5)_


----------



## Sterlo58 (Jun 26, 2009)

Ronnie T said:


> You got it.
> 
> That's what just about every thread on this forum has turned into in recent weeks.



Remember folks this is a spiritual discussion, debate and forum, not a CHRISTIAN discussion, debate and forum. 
WTM45 is debating his spiritual beliefs. I have steered clear of this forum many times because it seems to be Christian versus Non-Christian. That is not the purpose of this forum. I have seen Cornelia Hiker ridiculed for his belief in Urantia. I have read some of this book. Although I do not believe it to be the Gospel, It is no more incredulous than many stories from the bible. Even as a child in a strictly religious family, I questioned some of the almost fairy tale like stories in the bible ( Noah's Ark for example ).
Let's remember that this is spiritual debate not Christian Vs non-Christian. JMHO


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 26, 2009)

Randy said:


> Meaning?



We are to be salt and light in this world - as Christians.Don't MAKE me look it up,but it's in the Bible.  In other words: You're near-'bout as blunt and to the point as I am.


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 26, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> Remember folks this is a spiritual discussion, debate and forum, not a CHRISTIAN discussion, debate and forum.
> WTM45 is debating his spiritual beliefs. I have steered clear of this forum many times because it seems to be Christian versus Non-Christian. That is not the purpose of this forum. I have seen Cornelia Hiker ridiculed for his belief in Urantia. I have read some of this book. Although I do not believe it to be the Gospel, It is no more incredulous than many stories from the bible. Even as a child in a strictly religious family, I questioned some of the almost fairy tale like stories in the bible ( Noah's Ark for example ).
> Let's remember that this is spiritual debate not Christian Vs non-Christian. JMHO



Some very good points,Sterlo.

This also is an outdoor forum in the very deep south,smack in the middle of the Bible Belt.Anyone who thinks the vast majority of members on Woody's are not Christians is simply wrong.I will continue to question why anyone who thinks we are a bunch of dumb rednecks/crackers,Republicans,born-again,gun-totin' bigots..........     would even bother to read what is written here by the above-mentioned nefarious characters known to inhabit this part of the world........... much less get involved in an argument they will never win.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jun 26, 2009)

Sterlo58 said:


> *WTM45 is debating his spiritual beliefs*. I have steered clear of this forum many times because it seems to be Christian versus Non-Christian. That is not the purpose of this forum. I have seen Cornelia Hiker ridiculed for his belief in Urantia. I have read some of this book. Although I do not believe it to be the Gospel, It is no more incredulous than many stories from the bible. Even as a child in a strictly religious family, I questioned some of the almost fairy tale like stories in the bible ( Noah's Ark for example ).
> *Let's remember that this is spiritual debate not Christian Vs non-Christian*. JMHO



I might be wrong but it's my impression that WTM45 doesn't have any spiritual beliefs concerning a God.  I also believe that in the case of WTM45 this is definitely a Christian verses atheist forum.
But thank you for you input.


----------



## crackerdave (Jun 27, 2009)

There is only one reason for someone with no belief in God to spend so much time arguing on a spiritual forum.


----------



## Diogenes (Jun 27, 2009)

Crackerdave: “This also is an outdoor forum in the very deep south,smack in the middle of the Bible Belt.”

Darn, who knew that someone decided to put the internet there?   

And catch this!  Farmasis: “'We' are not under the law. We meaning Christians brought with a price.”   Yikes!  Look out folks – the LAW only applies to YOU!   (Run.)


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 27, 2009)

Diogenes said:


> Either ‘Belief’ is completely shameless, and can justify anything and everything, or folks simply refuse to think on their own.  Or both.
> 
> Reading this stuff, thread after thread, causes one to actually question not only the educational system in this land, but also the reasoning behind maintaining it.  Clearly it isn’t working.
> 
> ...



I'll try to answer a few of your questions as briefly as I can and I won't quote any scripture since some of you don't like it to be quoted in defense of Christianity. 
Did God knowingly and willingly kill many people in the Bible and premeditate the death of the firstborn children of Egypt? Yes he did. 
Did the unsaved children (children meaning those too young to "understand" for lack of a better word) that were killed go to heaven? I don't know, but I hope so.
Is the NT God different than the OT God in that he doesn't destroy folks anymore? It appears that after Christ's sacrifice, God doesn't feel the need to destroy anymore, at least not until the end. He doesn't destroy folks in the NT that I can find.
Is God capable of making a mistake? Nope.
Can we have an omnipotent creator with complete oversight and still have free will? Yes, God gave us our own free will to choose. 
Does that mean that God knew what we would choose? I suppose it does, but that still doesn't mean we don't have free will.
Do I never tire of thinking up new rationalizations to cover any and all permutations? No, not yet. I guess that where my faith comes in. 

I tried not to "cherry pick" your questions. I may have combined a few of them for the sake of brevity though. I chose not to address the first part of your post since it seemed to be directed at another member. Well, enjoy!


----------



## heavymetalhunter (Jun 28, 2009)

Cornelia_Hiker said:


> Among His many Divine attributes, God is the God of Fairness




tell that to the people who died on september 11th, or all those babies who get left in dumpsters.


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

Cornelia_Hiker said:


> Hi Sterlo,
> 
> You will find that people who die before having had one full, fair chance to make the choice, are promoted to the next world ( go to heaven) where they can make the choice there. All of God's creature children get one full and fair chance to choose.
> 
> God does not hold lack of time or un-fortuitous circumstances against us....that wouldn't be fair. Among His many Divine attributes, God is the God of _Fairness._



Heavy Metal Hunter,
Cornelia Hiker is referring to God's judgement being fair when it comes time for us to be judged, not the causes of death that we face in this world. 
God allows people to have free will, so that is why some choose to commit the horrific crimes you referred to...and you're right, those deaths aren't always fair.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> I'll try to answer a few of your questions as briefly as I can and I won't quote any scripture since some of you don't like it to be quoted in defense of Christianity.
> Did God knowingly and willingly kill many people in the Bible and premeditate the death of the firstborn children of Egypt? Yes he did.
> Did the unsaved children (children meaning those too young to "understand" for lack of a better word) that were killed go to heaven? I don't know, but I hope so.
> Is the NT God different than the OT God in that he doesn't destroy folks anymore? It appears that after Christ's sacrifice, God doesn't feel the need to destroy anymore, at least not until the end. He doesn't destroy folks in the NT that I can find.
> ...



First of all, I would like to applaud you for recognizing that some people cannot accept that the proof for the Bible being the truth is what it says in the Bible.  I also appreciate your ability to admit that you don't know what God's ultimate plan is.  (Perhaps you should discuss this with those who think they possess  the magical "discernment" ability).

Though you hope that God would have the same sense of justice that you have, how is it that you are able to accept that he may not?  If you use him as a model for your own morality,  how then does this shape your concepts of right and wrong?


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

Sorry Ambush, I had to let the dog out.

Here's where we get into opinion and faith a little bit. Bad things have happened in my life where I've wondered why God was allowing this to happen to me and thinking it wasn't fair. 
Now, in the long run, I see what God was trying to teach me. I can accept that God's judgement is right and that my way is wrong because he's God and I'm not. I just try to follow his commandments as best I can. I know that I'll make mistakes, but like a father loves his children no matter what they do, God will still care for me.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> Sorry Ambush, I had to let the dog out.
> 
> Here's where we get into opinion and faith a little bit. Bad things have happened in my life where I've wondered why God was allowing this to happen to me and thinking it wasn't fair.
> Now, in the long run, I see what God was trying to teach me. I can accept that God's judgement is right and that my way is wrong because he's God and I'm not. I just try to follow his commandments as best I can. I know that I'll make mistakes, but like a father loves his children no matter what they do, God will still care for me.



Why could you have not accepted that the things that happened in your life, both good and bad were random?  Surely you understand that in hindsight one can connect random events and make them appear to be related?  

I guess what I'm getting at is: why is it so necessary, psychologically, emotionally or physically for you to believe there is a plan or a planner?


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

ambush80 said:


> I guess what I'm getting at is: why is it so necessary, psychologically, emotionally or physically for you to believe there is a plan or a planner?



I have a friend named John who's an atheist or agnostic depending on how he feels that day. We've debated a whole range of subjects over the years. When we debate spiritual and religous subjects, I make sure to tell him before I go that I'm still praying for him. His response is always,"If it makes you feel better!".

I guess that's my answer. It makes me feel better. However, I concede that random events can be connected. But....I have had some personal events happen in my life that were not random and those are the ones that truly make me have faith in God.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> I have a friend named John who's an atheist or agnostic depending on how he feels that day. We've debated a whole range of subjects over the years. When we debate spiritual and religous subjects, I make sure to tell him before I go that I'm still praying for him. His response is always,"If it makes you feel better!".
> 
> I guess that's my answer. It makes me feel better. However, I concede that random events can be connected. But....I have had some personal events happen in my life that were not random and those are the ones that truly make me have faith in God.


 
Why the Christian God?  Does he seem like a nice guy to you; fair and just?


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> Heavy Metal Hunter,
> Cornelia Hiker is referring to God's judgement being fair when it comes time for us to be judged, not the causes of death that we face in this world.
> God allows people to have free will, so that is why some choose to commit the horrific crimes you referred to...and you're right, those deaths aren't always fair.



If he's omniscient, and therefore, never surprised by anything, then how can freewill exist.  We've gone over this a hundred times but I've never heard your take on it, and I would love to; you seem like a pretty rational guy.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> I have a friend named John who's an atheist or agnostic depending on how he feels that day. We've debated a whole range of subjects over the years. When we debate spiritual and religous subjects, I make sure to tell him before I go that I'm still praying for him. His response is always,"If it makes you feel better!".
> 
> I guess that's my answer. It makes me feel better. However, I concede that random events can be connected. But....I have had some personal events happen in my life that were not random and those are the ones that truly make me have faith in God.



Was it extraordinary evidence?  Maybe you wouldn't mind sharing your testimony.  Maybe in a PM if, you'd be more comfortable that way.


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

ambush80 said:


> Why the Christian God?  Does he seem like a nice guy to you; fair and just?





ambush80 said:


> If he's omniscient, and therefore, never surprised by anything, then how can freewill exist.  We've gone over this a hundred times but I've never heard your take on it, and I would love to; you seem like a pretty rational guy.



Without getting too much into my personal experiences because I don't feel comfortable posting something so personal, I worship the Christian God because he's the one that spoke to me. As I alluded to above, what may not seem fair, just or nice to me may be part of a bigger plan to teach me or others a valuable lesson in our growth as children of God. 
I feel that God can be omnipotent and all powerful because I believe the time isn't just linear. It goes across both the x and y axis if you think of it like a graph. There are choices that we make of our own free will that determine if that graph goes up or down as it continues to move right across the graph. God may know what we're going to choose but that doesn't mean he makes us choose one way over another. To me, that's more proof of his love for us by letting us choose our way or his way.


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 28, 2009)

RoosterTodd said:


> Heavy Metal Hunter,
> Cornelia Hiker is referring to God's judgement being fair when it comes time for us to be judged, not the causes of death that we face in this world.
> God allows people to have free will, so that is why some choose to commit the horrific crimes you referred to...and you're right, those deaths aren't always fair.




Thank you RT, you have reasoned correctly here.



Once again a thread like this one has changed course and has devolved into a Bible Beliefs versus Any-All Other Beliefs type debate. And once again, nothing gets solved and no one changes their mind and even believers within the same belief system can't always agree so gee whiz I wonder why we even bother with it.

Truth and facts don't know democracy. It doesn't matter which train of thought is in the majority. Just because the majority of any group vote to "do something," it doesn't mean that the thing voted on is _right / or the right thing to do."_

My concern is for the people who essentially closed their minds and are happy-comfortable with their present beliefs....and apparently feel that they don't need to learn anymore. They already know it all. They may continue to study their beliefs and for a lifetime, but they will not search or even consider looking outside their prescribed belief system for additional truth and accurate information (facts) which they _could add and be complimentary to_ their present beliefs.


I wonder how these people will react or even recognize if God should _do something new,_ and something that can't be cross-referenced to their present belief tenets, creeds or doctrines. Will they even be able to recognize that God done something new? 

I look with curiosity at folks who can't see the Old Testament and the New Testament for what they actually are.

Old Testament records span periods of thousands of years and pretty accurately show the _changing God concept of men_ in the part of the world where these events took place. 

"I am God, therefore I change not"

How many times is that repeated in the Bible? Dozens? True every time. 

Yet the record seems to indicate that God keeps changing His mind and doing this thing one way and then later changing His mind and doing something else and on and on like that.

I don't think so

I know not so

God doesn't change. Men's concept of Him changes. As we evolve and civilization progresses we learn more (earned experience) and are shown more (revelation.)

And many of these God-concept changes are more or less accurately portrayed in the Bible and other such sacred texts.

There is much is the Bible and all other sacred texts of today's living religions that is good, beautiful and true. But there is also much recorded that is false, ugly, untrue, misrepresentative of the Father in Heaven and/or historically inaccurate.


Where does it state in any of these books that all should turn their brains off, stop thinking and reasoning, and just blindly follow what the text says gall darnit or ELSE !!!!   ???

Oh but now the priesthood(any religious ecclesiastical structure) WOULD just love exactly that. Keep that there iron grip on the people so they will do what we say, keep coming back, and fork over loot. Yeah yeah, the "professional religious class" just loves that. That's there bread and butter. Whether it be the guy down the street or the larger sanctioning body. Don't mess with our paying jobs now.....

Nevermind that Jesus' own example is ignored here. Jesus mainly functioned as a teacher, not a preacher, and never solicited money for his service.


Ooooh ooooh but but but "a worker is worthy of his hire" and that's why preachers can preach for money and and and and....   hogwash.


The apostles and other workers after Jesus left had NO IDEA that these letters they were writing back and forth would be saved, revered, and later compiled into a book of "holy" writings for everyone to follow for all time. If they knew that was going to happen, they would not have written these things in the first place. The letters, and in their original form, were just what they were and nothing more.

And then this "men commissioned and approved" Bible assembled by direction of King of France, of all nutballs, in 1615 comes down to be what some of you want to base all of your life beliefs on without and intelligent questioning or reasoning on your parts?

You're kidding everybody right?



Dear group, I believe in God and Jesus. Because I have discovered for myself, and via all efforts and resources and experiences, that they are real and part of the overall truth of our existence on this planet. I used to be a Bible-believing Christian. But it wasn't enough. I refused to don a pair of blinders, refused to accept one one source of information that was obviously  incomplete and many times contradictory;  and keep seeking and searching for additional truth, facts, information and experiences.

And so I did. There is more and more reliable information out there if you will but look for it. And your heart will be gladdened when you find it.

"Ask and you shall receive, seek and you shall find."


Our planet has a long and storied history. God has not sent only one Son to us and has provided not just one group of teachings that are to suffice all people and over all time. 

Consider these words, lift up your eyes out of your one book, remove the blinders and ask God to show you all there is to see that your being can absorb. He will fail you not.

God is not totally incomprehensible to us. It is our lives on our planet that is in play here. So it only makes sense that we should be able to clearly understand what His purposes and plans for us are. And much is. God does things that makes sense. God does not do things that don't make sense. 

There's a lot of stuff in the olden records that doesn't make sense and is unreasonable. The old teachings served the evolving minds of the people who lived BACK THEN. Much of what survives today in the olden records doesn not apply to us now and much is inaccurate from the original forms anyway.


The proper attitude is to always remain a student. None of us knows everything and it behooves everyone to KEEP LEARNING - KEEP SEEKING and be willing to accept truth in any form that it chances to appear in front of you.....lest you chance rejecting the work of God and angels who strive to bring you more goodness....but you won't take off the blinders or pick your eyes up from your one book to see it or accept it.

That is a great modern shame


----------



## mtnwoman (Jun 28, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> There is only one reason for someone with no belief in God to spend so much time arguing on a spiritual forum.



And we continue to post to them, in hopes that some of the lurkers can have both sides of the story. Some lurkers are seeking something, we at least want them to get something else besides people making fun of them if they believe in God, it's uncool to believe in God, you're ignorant if you believe in God, etc etc.
They are here to educate us by showing us that we shouldn't believe in God, but what if they are wrong and lead someone astray? That is scary. I didn't do it when I was far away from God...I don't want to be judged for persuading someone else not to believe it God, because believing is silly and come to find out that I was wrong in not believing.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 28, 2009)

Diogenes said "Yikes! Look out folks- the LAW only applies to you"

I know you are a pretty learned man, so maybe you read that too quickly. Either way, I will help you out. What I said was that those who die without Christ will be judged by the Law, Christians will not. 

At the Great White Throne of Judgement, those who are not Christians will be judged by the law for salvation. Christians will give account of their deeds good or evil and it is called the Judgement seat of Christ. For Christians, salvation is secure.


----------



## Big7 (Jun 28, 2009)

rjcruiser said:


> No...that is not what I'm saying.
> 
> That is what the Bible says...and I choose to believe the Bible as the supreme authority on religion.  You don't have to agree with it, but that is what I use when it comes to debating religion.


Not really....

IV. 1 Peter 3:21
"Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" 

Most Protestant churches teach that baptism is just symbolic and does not actually save us. Why, then, does Peter say that baptism does indeed save us? Because baptism, contrary to Protestant teaching, is salvific (effecting salvation). Through the merits of Christ's resurrection, baptism, the sacrament of Christian initiation instituted by Christ, washes us clean of original sin, makes us adopted sons and daughters of God, and brings us to salvation. 

Unlike Protestant teaching, baptism is not just a symbolic act of pouring, sprinkling or immersing one in water (otherwise Peter would not have said that it saves us). It is not just an appeal to God through a symbolic gesture. This is why Peter says it is "not as a removal of dirt from the body." Most scholars say that Peter was referring to circumcision (the ritual of initiation in the Old Covenant) when he writes about the “removal of dirt from the body.” Circumcision was a symbolic gesture before God that could never save us. But, at a minimum, Peter is teaching that baptism does not deal with the exterior, but the interior life of the person. 

Thus, Peter teaches that baptism saves us “for a clear conscience.” This deals with the interior life. Similarly, the author of Heb. 10:22, in regard to being washed with the pure water (of baptism), says we are sprinkled “clean from an evil conscience.” Baptism removes original sin which darkens our consciences. It purifies the interior life of the person. Baptism is not just an external, symbolic, ceremonial gesture (otherwise, the sacred writers would not write about the purification of the conscience, where sin is born). 

Thus, through the resurrection of Christ, baptism now actually saves our spiritual lives, just as Noah's ark (which Peter says baptism "corresponds to") saved his family's natural lives. In baptism, we are washed clean of original sin and become adopted sons and daughters of the Father. This is why Paul writes to Titus, in reference to baptism, that “He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ, so that we might be justified by His grace and become heirs of eternal life.” Titus 3:5-7. Paul echoes Peter’s teaching that baptism saves us by regenerating our interior lives, namely, our souls, which are now endowed with God’s divine and sanctifying grace. We thus become children of God and heirs of the kingdom. 

Only the Catholic Church teaches that baptism, by virtue of the merits of Christ and their application to us, is salvific. The Protestant churches, contrary to 1 Peter 3:21 (and Titus 3:5-7; John 3:5; and Heb. 10:22) teach that baptism is only symbolic. For more on the striking parallels of these Scripture verses, please visit my link on Baptism.


----------



## ambush80 (Jun 28, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> There is only one reason for someone with no belief in God to spend so much time arguing on a spiritual forum.



Is: "Trying to figure out what makes y'all 'tick'" a good reason? Or to put it another way: "Curiosity".


----------



## Big7 (Jun 28, 2009)

*And.....*

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE 
32. While Jesus has instituted the Sacraments of the Catholic Church as an absolute necessity to maintain one's righteousness and as an assurance of the free gift of salvation, God is not bound by His Sacraments. He can and does make exceptions under certain circumstances.

33. "The Lord himself affirmed that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commanded his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments." (C.C.C. # 1257)

INFANT DEATH 
34. "Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam's sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the 'death of the soul.' Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin." [Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1512] (C.C.C. # 403)

35. Should a Catholic or a non-Catholic infant die after having received the Sacrament of Baptism, he/she is assured salvation. The same applies to baptized infants who died weeks or months later from Sudden Infant Death (SID).

36. "Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called. The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifested in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth." (C.C.C. # 1250)

37. "As regards children who have died without Baptism, non- Catholics or those from Catholic families, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,' allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism." (C.C.C. # 1261)

38. In other words, non-baptized infants, Catholic or not, have no assurance of being saved, the status of their salvation being left to the great mercy of God.

ABORTIONS AND MISCARRIAGES 
39. The Catholic Church teaches that human life begins at the moment of conception. From that moment, the individual "must be treated as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being." (C.C.C. # 2274)

40. Therefore in cases of abortions or miscarriages (embryo/fetus), keeping in mind the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding the death of unbaptized infants, the salvation of these individuals, Catholic or non-Catholics, who have not yet reached the stage of birth can only be entrusted to the mercy of God. (C.C.C. # 1261)

41. The view that aborted souls are as little angels in Heaven does not reflect a Catholic teaching. The Catholic Church does not know the exact status of those who are aborted because it cannot speak on behalf of God regarding the final judgment of individuals.

PRIOR TO THE AGE OF REASON 
42. In accordance with the teachings of the Catholic Church, a minor who has not completed the seventh year of age is called an infant and is considered incapable of personal responsibility; on completion of the seventh year, however, the minor is presumed to have the use of reason. (Canon Laws # 11 and 97.2)

43. Prior to the completion of the seventh year of age, an infant, not having sufficient knowledge to understand the difference between right and wrong, is incapable of committing a sin. As such, a baptized child, Catholic or non-Catholic, who dies prior to reaching the age of reason, is assured salvation. The same cannot be said regarding an unbaptized child who dies prior to reaching the age of reason.

CHILDREN WHO HAVE REACHED THE AGE OF REASON 
44. A baptized Catholic child who:

(A) has reached the age of reason, and

(B) who is in a state of grace because he/she

(C) has received the Sacrament of Confession on a regular basis and

(D) received the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist during Sunday attendance at the Holy Mass as required by the Precept of the Church, (Canon Law # 1247)

will be assured salvation upon death.

45. The same cannot be said regarding:

(A) a baptized Catholic child who has not maintained his/her righteousness through the Sacraments;

(B) a baptized non-Catholic child who belongs to a religion that does not enjoy the Sacraments of Confession and Holy Communion;

(C) an unbaptized child who has reached the age of reason.


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

Big7, 
Fascinating reading. You make a convincing argument and support it with scripture very well. While I'm not Catholic, I have quite a few friends that are, and we have discussed the subject occasionally. I don't personally have a problem with infant baptism, as a matter of fact some Methodist practice it. I absolutely agree with #37 which relies on God's mercy for children, which is boundless. Again, good post!


----------



## Randy (Jun 28, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> We are to be salt and light in this world - as Christians.Don't MAKE me look it up,but it's in the Bible.  In other words: You're near-'bout as blunt and to the point as I am.



That is the only way I know how to be.  I ain't much for dancing aroung truths and being sympathetic.

As for Farmisis response about the Law.  Nobody is under the Law anymore.  Nobody will be judged according to the Law.  You get to Heaven one way now and that is believing that Jesus Christ die for your sins.  Those who do not believe that will not be judged as to wheather they followed the Law or not.  Only if they believe that Jesus died to give us the rightousness.  It will not matter if you followed the Law or not.  Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven.


----------



## earl (Jun 28, 2009)

crackerdave said:


> There is only one reason for someone with no belief in God to spend so much time arguing on a spiritual forum.





If what you say is true, riddle me this. Why do christians spend so much time on a spiritual forum beating the snot out of each other ?


----------



## Lowjack (Jun 28, 2009)

earl said:


> So killing children,babies, and the unborn is OK for religious reasons because they get a get into heaven free card. Pretty atrocious no matter how you spin it.



It only seems that way to people that have no hope of an after life.
The body is just Dirt, God cares about the soul, the body will be brought back eventually, so death is not the end of all ,except for atheists.


----------



## Lowjack (Jun 28, 2009)

earl said:


> If what you say is true, riddle me this. Why do christians spend so much time on a spiritual forum beating the snot out of each other ?


I don't see that happening among real Christians ,only those who think they are, and atheists who like to stir the pot....................................like you, LOL


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 28, 2009)

earl said:


> If what you say is true, riddle me this. Why do christians spend so much time on a spiritual forum beating the snot out of each other ?




Religionists aren't perfect and most of them are sincere and try to do good to others. In this world, that may be about all you can ask. Times are tough on many fronts.

Discussion forums attract many folks who like to argue and just see their own names up in lights arguing....from both sides. This activity COULD be all moderated away but usually isn't...so the problems you witness persist.

If ya don't like it, hit the road. Sorry to be so frank about it.

Why complain about conditions here and still stay? Another curious situation that makes no sense.


Oh here's a real doozy for y'all. There's a forum called http://www.debatingchristianity.com

Run by atheists. They trick anyone who will enter with the name and do what they can to chop them up until they run away screaming. Real horses rears. Looks like some of the crowd here would have a great time there.


----------



## redneckcamo (Jun 28, 2009)

yall hijacked the fool outa this thread !!  


back too the subject tho ...... my son died before he was 3 years old ..... there is no doubt in my mind that he is absent from his body ..... an present with THE LORD !!


----------



## The Original Rooster (Jun 28, 2009)

redneckcamo said:


> yall hijacked the fool outa this thread !!
> 
> 
> back too the subject tho ...... my son died before he was 3 years old ..... there is no doubt in my mind that he is absent from his body ..... an present with THE LORD !!



He absolutely is. God's mercy and grace is without end.


----------



## earl (Jun 28, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> I don't see that happening among real Christians ,only those who think they are, and atheists who like to stir the pot....................................like you, LOL



And that my friend only helps make my point . There isn't a one of ''you'' who can tell me who the''real'' christian is.  I do not doubt that there is one or two who would put you in as ''one who thinks he is ''due to your exorcism posts.  You could be satan stirring the pot.


----------



## Cornelia_Hiker (Jun 28, 2009)

redneckcamo said:


> yall hijacked the fool outa this thread !!
> 
> 
> back too the subject tho ...... my son died before he was 3 years old ..... there is no doubt in my mind that he is absent from his body ..... an present with THE LORD !!




I agree my friend. Your 3 year old is on the Mansion worlds. Now your job is to see to it that you make it there too.

God bless you


----------



## earl (Jun 28, 2009)

Lowjack said:


> It only seems that way to people that have no hope of an after life.
> The body is just Dirt, God cares about the soul, the body will be brought back eventually, so death is not the end of all ,except for atheists.







So your answer is yes ,it's OK ?  If it keeps innocents  from being killed I will be well served with my dirt nap.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 28, 2009)

Randy said:


> As for Farmisis response about the Law. Nobody is under the Law anymore. Nobody will be judged according to the Law. You get to Heaven one way now and that is believing that Jesus Christ die for your sins. Those who do not believe that will not be judged as to wheather they followed the Law or not. Only if they believe that Jesus died to give us the rightousness. It will not matter if you followed the Law or not. Jesus is the ONLY way to Heaven.


 
I never said you can get to heaven by abiding to the law.

Randy, prayerfully consider these verses.

Jesus said himself..
*<SUP>17</SUP>* “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. <SUP id=en-NKJV-23247 class=versenum value="18">*18*</SUP> For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. <SUP id=en-NKJV-23248 class=versenum value="19">*19*</SUP> Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches _them,_ he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matt 5)

Then Paul...
*<SUP>16</SUP>* I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. <SUP id=en-NKJV-29174 class=versenum value="17">*17*</SUP> For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. <SUP id=en-NKJV-29175 class=versenum value="18">*18*</SUP> But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (Gal. 5)

Wouldn't the opposite be true?

*<SUP>12</SUP>* For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (Romans 2)

Christians are to also keep certain law. Not that our salvation is in jeapordy if we break it, but because we are commanded to. And when we break God's law, we are guilty. But, through God's abundant mercy, there will be no condemnation.

Here James talks to Christians:

*<SUP>5</SUP>* Listen, my beloved brethren: .....<SUP id=en-NKJV-30296 class=versenum value="8">*8*</SUP> If you really fulfill _the_ royal law according to the Scripture, _“You shall love your neighbor as yourself,”_<SUP class=footnote value='[a]'>[a]</SUP> you do well; <SUP id=en-NKJV-30297 class=versenum value="9">*9*</SUP> but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. <SUP id=en-NKJV-30298 class=versenum value="10">*10*</SUP> For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one _point,_ he is guilty of all. <SUP id=en-NKJV-30299 class=versenum value="11">*11*</SUP> For He who said, _“Do not commit adultery,”_<SUP class=footnote value='[b]'>[b]</SUP> also said, _“Do not murder.”_<SUP class=footnote value='[c]'>[c]</SUP>Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. <SUP id=en-NKJV-30300 class=versenum value="12">*12*</SUP> So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. <SUP id=en-NKJV-30301 class=versenum value="13">*13*</SUP> For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (James 2)


*<SUP>2</SUP>* By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. <SUP id=en-NKJV-30622 class=versenum value="3">*3*</SUP> For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. (1 John 5)


----------



## Randy (Jun 28, 2009)

Farmisis, All of what you posted is right even what Jesus said.  But what must be understood is that He did fullfill the law.  His death GAVE all people from that point on Rightousness even before they were born.  So it in effect removed the Law or at least being judged by it.  God said this to Paul in Romans.  Which Paul then asked in Chapter 3 what advantage is there in being a Jew.  He was saying that since nobody has to follow the law anymore why do the Jews have to.  God says later in Romans 3:21 that now the Rightenous of God without the Law is manifested.22 Even the Rightousness of God which is faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe:for there is no difference.

So once Jesus died on the cross all sins are forgiven, assuming you believe in Jesus.  This does not mean we should not obey the Law.  In fact in Romans 6:15 Paul asks "What then?  Shall we sin because because we are not under the Law?". God goes on in Chapter 6 to say No.  We are Slaves to Righteousness.  And Chapter 7 goes on to give an illustration frpom marriage.
So we are still required to follow the Law but we are no longer judged by it.

But we are getting off topic here.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 29, 2009)

Randy said:


> Farmisis, All of what you posted is right even what Jesus said. But what must be understood is that He did fullfill the law.


 
Corrrect, but He did not remove it.



> His death GAVE all people from that point on Rightousness even before they were born. So it in effect removed the Law or at least being judged by it. God said this to Paul in Romans. Which Paul then asked in Chapter 3 what advantage is there in being a Jew. He was saying that since nobody has to follow the law anymore why do the Jews have to. God says later in Romans 3:21 that now the Rightenous of God without the Law is manifested.22 Even the Rightousness of God which is faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe:for there is no difference.


 
You are reffering to circumcision, food and other Jewish custom laws and you are right.



> So once Jesus died on the cross all sins are forgiven, assuming you believe in Jesus. This does not mean we should not obey the Law. In fact in Romans 6:15 Paul asks "What then? Shall we sin because because we are not under the Law?". God goes on in Chapter 6 to say No. We are Slaves to Righteousness. And Chapter 7 goes on to give an illustration frpom marriage.
> So we are still required to follow the Law but we are no longer judged by it.


 
If you are a child of God, that applies. The verse you quoted by Paul is for Christians.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2009)

farmasis said:


> Corrrect, but He did not remove it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You are still missing my point.  Being a Christian, believeing that Jesus died for our sins, is the ONLY way to Heaven for anybody anymore (since His death and resurection).   We are all to follow the Law but we are not judged by it.  Nobody is.  If you are not a Christian, you are not going to Heaven no matter how much of the Law you follow.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 29, 2009)

Randy said:


> You are still missing my point. Being a Christian, believeing that Jesus died for our sins, is the ONLY way to Heaven for anybody anymore (since His death and resurection). We are all to follow the Law but we are not judged by it. Nobody is. If you are not a Christian, you are not going to Heaven no matter how much of the Law you follow.


 
I have not disagreed with that point at all.

The argument is that you don't believe the law is binding to anyone. Unbelievers are under the Law and will be judged according to it, as written in Rev 20,

*<SUP>11</SUP>* Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31045 value="12">*12*</SUP> And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God,<SUP class=footnote value='[c]'>[c]</SUP> and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is _the Book_ of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31046 value="13">*13*</SUP> The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31047 value="14">*14*</SUP> Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.<SUP class=footnote value='[d]'>[d]</SUP> <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31048 value="15">*15*</SUP> And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2009)

Yes, there will be some judged by the Law that died before the requirements of the Law were removed by Jesus' death.

As for unbelievers, well they will not be judged by the Law only wheather or not the believe that Jesus died for their sins.  And since they are Unbelievers there really is no judgement.  It is cut a dry.  You believe adn go to Heaven you don't and don't.  They can not believe in the Law and follow the Law and not believe in Jesus and still go to Heaven unless of course they died before Jesus.  Things changed wiht Jesus' death, including the removal of being judged by the Law.


----------



## farmasis (Jun 29, 2009)

Randy said:


> As for unbelievers, well they will not be judged by the Law only wheather or not the believe that Jesus died for their sins. Things changed wiht Jesus' death, including the removal of being judged by the Law.


 
All I can do is quote the Bible. It doesn't say unbelievers are judged by belief, it says deeds.

<SUP>11</SUP> Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31045 value="12">*12*</SUP> And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God,<SUP class=footnote value='[c]'>[c]</SUP> and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is _the Book_ of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31046 value="13">*13*</SUP> The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31047 value="14">*14*</SUP> Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.<SUP class=footnote value='[d]'>[d]</SUP> <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-31048 value="15">*15*</SUP> And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev. 20)



Uncle.


----------



## Randy (Jun 29, 2009)

Ahh yes, our works (not deeds).  But that is not a judgement as to entering Heaven or not.  We will be judged by what is wrtten in the books.  We will be known as we were on earth.  We all are required to follow God and spread his word.  Some do better than others.  This judgement is where our rewards come in.  No way I should expect the same rewards as some of our great christian leaders.  They have truely dedicated their lives to God way more than I have.  As such their rewards will be greater.  None of us are equal and as such we will be known as we are here on earth.  Some will sit on His shoulder.  Some on His right side and some on His left.  I am quite sure I will be close to Gods left foot....so that He can kick me when I open my mouth!


----------



## farmasis (Jun 30, 2009)

Randy said:


> Ahh yes, our works (not deeds). But that is not a judgement as to entering Heaven or not. We will be judged by what is wrtten in the books. We will be known as we were on earth. We all are required to follow God and spread his word. Some do better than others. This judgement is where our rewards come in. No way I should expect the same rewards as some of our great christian leaders. They have truely dedicated their lives to God way more than I have. As such their rewards will be greater. None of us are equal and as such we will be known as we are here on earth. Some will sit on His shoulder. Some on His right side and some on His left. I am quite sure I will be close to Gods left foot....so that He can kick me when I open my mouth!


 

Christians are not judged on works for salvation, only grace through faith. We will recieve rewards for our works that has nothing to do with our salvation, that we will lay at the feet of Jesus.

All unbelievers will be judged according to the Law, hence their deeds in Romans 20. The law is in full effect, grace only removes the penalty of the law for those who put their trust in Jesus. 

*<SUP>31</SUP>* *Do we then nullify the law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the law. (Romans 3)*

If the law is not in effect, sin is not in effect. 
*<SUP></SUP>* 
*<SUP>19</SUP>* Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28006 value="20">*20*</SUP> Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law _is_ the knowledge of sin. (Romans 3)

*<SUP>7</SUP>* What shall we say then? _Is_ the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, _“You shall not covet.”_<SUP class=footnote value='[a]'>[a]</SUP> <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28094 value="8">*8*</SUP> But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all _manner of_ _evil_ desire. For apart from the law sin _was_ dead. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28095 value="9">*9*</SUP> I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28096 value="10">*10*</SUP> And the commandment, which _was_ to _bring_ life, I found to _bring_ death. <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28097 value="11">*11*</SUP> For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed _me._ <SUP class=versenum id=en-NKJV-28098 value="12">*12*</SUP> Therefore the law _is_ holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. (Romans 7)


No Christians will be at the great white throne of Judgement. No unbelievers will be at the Judgement seat of Christ. 

This is what Jesus says that he will say to those at the great throne of Judgement..

*<SUP>21</SUP> Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. <SUP>22</SUP> Many will say to Me on that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles? <SUP>23</SUP> And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.*


----------



## Randy (Jun 30, 2009)

UNCLE

we will agree to disagree.


----------



## Diogenes (Jun 30, 2009)

Wow!  You can agree to disagree about the Holy Words of God?  

How, if I may humbly ask, can Sacred Decrees be in any way ambiguous?

Children.  Salvation.   Seemed pretty simple.  

But . . . I guess not.  Thanks for the example, anyway . . .


----------



## farmasis (Jul 1, 2009)

Diogenes said:


> Wow! You can agree to disagree about the Holy Words of God?
> 
> How, if I may humbly ask, can Sacred Decrees be in any way ambiguous?
> 
> ...


 
Easy. Imperfect men trying to understand a perfect God.

 <SUP id=en-NKJV-18745 class=versenum value="8">*8*</SUP> “ For My thoughts _are_ not your thoughts, 
      Nor _are_ your ways My ways,” says the LORD. 
       <SUP id=en-NKJV-18746 class=versenum value="9">*9*</SUP> “ For _as_ the heavens are higher than the earth, 
      So are My ways higher than your ways, 
      And My thoughts than your thoughts. (Is. 55)


----------



## Randy (Jul 1, 2009)

Diogenes said:


> Wow!  You can agree to disagree about the Holy Words of God?
> 
> How, if I may humbly ask, can Sacred Decrees be in any way ambiguous?
> 
> ...



There are how many religions/denominations based on basically the same book?  It is apparently not simple at all.  Again I compare it to science.  With all the proof there are still very different theorys about stuff.  It has been my experience throughout life that very few people see anything exacty the same.  Even if it is black and white.


----------



## Free Willie (Jul 1, 2009)

*Early Teachings on Infant Baptism*

For you folks who attend "Bible Believing churches...this is what was taught BEFORE there was a Bible:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Early_Teachings_of_Infant_Baptism.asp

Early Teachings on Infant Baptism


Although many Protestant traditions baptize babies, Baptists—and "Bible churches" in the Baptist tradition—insist that baptism is only for those who have come to faith. Nowhere in the New Testament, they point out, do we read of infants being baptized. 

On the other hand, nowhere do we read of children raised in believing households reaching the age of reason and then being baptized. The only explicit baptism accounts in the Bible involve converts from Judaism or paganism. For children of believers there is no explicit mention of baptism—either in infancy or later. 

This poses a problem for Baptists and Bible Christians: On what basis do they require children of believers to be baptized at all? Given the silence of the New Testament, why not assume Christian baptism is only for adult converts? 

This, of course, would be contrary to historical Christian practice. But so is rejecting infant baptism. As we will see, there is no doubt that the early Church practiced infant baptism; and no Christian objections to this practice were ever voiced until the Reformation. 

The New Testament itself, while it does not explicitly say when (or whether) believers should have their children baptized, is not silent on the subject. 

Luke 18:15–16 tells us that "they were bringing even infants" to Jesus; and he himself related this to the kingdom of God: "Let the children come to me 
. . . for to such belongs the kingdom of God." 

When Baptists speak of "bringing someone to Jesus," they mean leading him to faith. But Jesus says "even infants" can be "brought" to him. Even Baptists don’t claim their practice of "dedicating" babies does this. The fact is, the Bible gives us no way of bringing anyone to Jesus apart from baptism. 

Thus Peter declared, "Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children" (Acts 2:38–39). 

The apostolic Church baptized whole "households" (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor. 1:16), a term encompassing children and infants as well as servants. While these texts do not specifically mention—nor exclude—infants, the very use of the term "households" indicates an understanding of the family as a unit. Even one believing parent in a household makes the children and even the unbelieving spouse "holy" (1 Cor. 7:14). 

Does this mean unbelieving spouses should be baptized? Of course not. The kingdom of God is not theirs; they cannot be "brought to Christ" in their unbelief. But infants have no such impediment. The kingdom is theirs, Jesus says, and they should be brought to him; and this means baptism. 

Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, or "the circumcision of Christ": "In him you were also circumcised with . . . the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead" (Col. 2:11–12). Thus, like circumcision, baptism can be given to children as well as adults. The difference is that circumcision was powerless to save (Gal. 5:6, 6:15), but "*aptism . . . now saves you" (1 Pet. 3:21). 

The first explicit evidence of children of believing households being baptized comes from the early Church—where infant baptism was uniformly 
upheld and regarded as apostolic. In fact, the only reported controversy on the subject was a third-century debate whether or not to delay baptism until the eighth day after birth, like its Old Testament equivalent, circumcision! (See quotation from Cyprian, below; compare Leviticus 12:2–3.) 

Consider, too, that Fathers raised in Christian homes (such as Irenaeus) would hardly have upheld infant baptism as apostolic if their own baptisms had been deferred until the age of reason. 

For example, infant baptism is assumed in Irenaeus’ writings below (since he affirms both that regeneration happens in baptism, and also that Jesus came so even infants could be regenerated). Since he was born in a Christian home in Smyrna around the year 140, this means he was probably baptized around 140. He was also probably baptized by the bishop of Smyrna at that time—Polycarp, a personal disciple of the apostle John, who had died only a few decades before. 


Irenaeus



"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]). 

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]). 


Hippolytus



"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]). 


Origen



"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]). 

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]). 


Cyprian of Carthage



"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]). 

"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5). 


Gregory of Nazianz



"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]). 

"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28). 


John Chrysostom



"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]). 


Augustine



"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]). 

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]). 

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]). 

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]). 


Council of Carthage V



"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]). 


Council of Mileum II



"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]). 


NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials 
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors. 
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004 

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted. 
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004*


----------



## tell sackett (Jul 1, 2009)

Free Willie, The only basis for anyone(child or adult) to be baptized is after accepting Christ as savior. It is done as a profession of faith and a symbolic burial of the old man and the resurrection unto new life. P.S. I give your avatar 5 stars.


----------



## earl (Jul 1, 2009)

farmasis said:


> Easy. Imperfect men trying to understand a perfect God.
> 
> <SUP id=en-NKJV-18745 class=versenum value="8">*8*</SUP> “ For My thoughts _are_ not your thoughts,
> Nor _are_ your ways My ways,” says the LORD.
> ...






I accept that. Now can you tell me why man repeatedly preaches that his way is the only way and if you don't believe as I do you are going To he11 ?
  If there was a book that knew I didn't understand , I don't think I would be so adamant .


----------



## WTM45 (Jul 1, 2009)

earl said:


> I accept that. Now can you tell me why man repeatedly preaches that his way is the only way and if you don't believe as I do you are going To he11 ?
> If there was a book that knew I didn't understand , I don't think I would be so adamant .




Exclusivism.
The desire to be the one who is right, and everyone else is wrong.  The desire to be the select, special or chosen.
Superiority.


----------



## Diogenes (Jul 1, 2009)

See, also: narcissism, egotism, narrow, selective, clannish, arrogant, cliquish, disallowing, ostracizing, repudiating, ignoring, forbidding, and ignorant.  (Just a few, but I have a whole mess of them, where words are concerned . . . )


----------



## tell sackett (Jul 2, 2009)

WTM45 said:


> Exclusivism.
> The desire to be the one who is right, and everyone else is wrong.  The desire to be the select, special or chosen.
> Superiority.


You're right, it is exclusive, but don't stumble over the simplicity of it. Jn.14:6- Jesus saith unto him, I am THE way,THE truth, and THE life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me. You can choose to accept it or reject it, the choice is yours.


----------



## crackerdave (Jul 2, 2009)

Randy said:


> Ahh yes, our works (not deeds).  But that is not a judgement as to entering Heaven or not.  We will be judged by what is wrtten in the books.  We will be known as we were on earth.  We all are required to follow God and spread his word.  Some do better than others.  This judgement is where our rewards come in.  No way I should expect the same rewards as some of our great christian leaders.  They have truely dedicated their lives to God way more than I have.  As such their rewards will be greater.  None of us are equal and as such we will be known as we are here on earth.  Some will sit on His shoulder.  Some on His right side and some on His left.  I am quite sure I will be close to Gods left foot....so that He can kick me when I open my mouth!




He'll have me lined up with His right foot,brother!


----------



## farmasis (Jul 2, 2009)

earl said:


> I accept that. Now can you tell me why man repeatedly preaches that his way is the only way and if you don't believe as I do you are going To he11 ?
> If there was a book that knew I didn't understand , I don't think I would be so adamant .


 
The Bible says the only sin that is unforgivable is blaspemy of the Holy Spirit. When the Holy Spirit calls, and man rejects, there will be no forgiveness.

All the rest is what man added.

Some Christians here have told me that I am wrong for wearing a cross around my neck, singing songs in church, listening to contemporary Christian music, not using the KJV Bible, yada yada yada.

I try to not worry about what man thinks.


----------



## farmasis (Jul 2, 2009)

Diogenes said:


> See, also: narcissism, egotism, narrow, selective, clannish, arrogant, cliquish, disallowing, ostracizing, repudiating, ignoring, forbidding, and ignorant. (Just a few, but I have a whole mess of them, where words are concerned . . . )


 
I see all of those in your posts.

Interesting that you can insult all believers by calling them ignorant seemingly without any sanctions.


----------

