John 3:16

[praise_yeshua]

But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

The "God" of something dead isn't a very powerful God. You should take the words of Jesus to heart.

And Jesus said to them, ?The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.?

Topic of Jesus' discussion was the resurrection, not immediate life after death. I do not deny a resurrection so I'm not sure what your argument is.

So... when Jesus spoke those words.... He was the God of the dead? You're one saying that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David.....were/are dead?

God is NEVER the God of the dead.... but the living. The ones asking the question were talking about the final resurrection. Jesus was making emphatic statement of fact. That those in Him, are never dead. They have Eternal life.

You can take a dirt nap if you want. I'm leaving this place. We'll come back for my old body one these days.

 

[rsc2a]

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

Since you believe in "the absolute freewill of humanity", I'll be waiting on the video where you show us you can fly.

"Squirrel".

Time for mom to tie another pork chop around your neck. You need "something" to play with you. You certainly don't belong in an adult discussion.

Yeah...I didn't think you believed in absolute free will.

Better be careful. Acknowledging you are bound by natural law is the slippery slope that will land you in determinism.

 

[Ransom]

Maybe. But you could join in. Where is this little boys soul?

Got it right here. For fifty bucks I'll let you play with it.

Is it dependent on God's will?

What isn't?

Automatic heaven? Hell since he never repented of his sin nature?

This is outside the scope of human knowledge in this world. It's God's prerogative.

What would you say to the grieving parent of an infant that just died?

"Do you trust God?"

 

[Smellin Coffee]

So... when Jesus spoke those words.... He was the God of the dead? You're one saying that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David.....were/are dead?

God is God. If they are dead, they are not accountable to anyone while in a death state because there is no mind, will or human nature.

God is NEVER the God of the dead.... but the living. The ones asking the question were talking about the final resurrection. Jesus was making emphatic statement of fact. That those in Him, are never dead. They have Eternal life.

Again, Paul said, For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. So you are saying either that Jesus isn't God or that Paul's theology was messed up. Pick your poison.

You can take a dirt nap if you want. I'm leaving this place. We'll come back for my old body one these days.

Not my call. I'm good either way. All I'm saying is I don't know because Jesus was clear only about a resurrection, not when it occurs whether after death or in one big, global event.

 

[praise_yeshua]

God is God. If they are dead, they are not accountable to anyone while in a death state because there is no mind, will or human nature.

Just what do you base this on?

Again, Paul said, For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. So you are saying either that Jesus isn't God or that Paul's theology was messed up. Pick your poison.

Sure. The dead don't have the status of the living. Its not either or. Both are correct. Jesus wasn't using Pharoah in his example. He was talking about His own. His "kin". Those born of God. It rather useless if they who are born of God are really.... "dead".

Not my call. I'm good either way. All I'm saying is I don't know because Jesus was clear only about a resurrection, not when it occurs whether after death or in one big, global event.

Yep. Jesus was talking about the resurrection but he was also.... talking about the nature of Eternal Life. Eternal Life doesn't include "death". When our bodies turn to dust. We are still "alive".

 

[praise_yeshua]

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

Since you believe in "the absolute freewill of humanity", I'll be waiting on the video where you show us you can fly.

"Squirrel".

Time for mom to tie another pork chop around your neck. You need "something" to play with you. You certainly don't belong in an adult discussion.

Yeah...I didn't think you believed in absolute free will.

Better be careful. Acknowledging you are bound by natural law is the slippery slope that will land you in determinism.

You certainly don't understand freewill. Freewill doesn't endow absolute power. Natural law doesn't demand the absence of freewill. You're dealing more with fatalism and predetermism than determinism.

Then again, I don't expect you understand the difference. You're a pretender. You don't know what you're talking about. We've discussed this before. You're entirely lacking in your understanding of systematic theology. You're all over the place and don't even realize it.

 

[Ransom]

I am surprised nobody quoted what Jesus said in Matthew 18:3-5 yet.

Or Proverbs 5:19.

 

[rsc2a]

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

Since you believe in "the absolute freewill of humanity", I'll be waiting on the video where you show us you can fly.

"Squirrel".

Time for mom to tie another pork chop around your neck. You need "something" to play with you. You certainly don't belong in an adult discussion.

Yeah...I didn't think you believed in absolute free will.

Better be careful. Acknowledging you are bound by natural law is the slippery slope that will land you in determinism.

You certainly don't understand freewill. Freewill doesn't endow absolute power. Natural law doesn't demand the absence of freewill. You're dealing more with fatalism and predetermism than determinism.

Then again, I don't expect you understand the difference. You're a pretender. You don't know what you're talking about. We've discussed this before. You're entirely lacking in your understanding of systematic theology. You're all over the place and don't even realize it.

Clearly, no one can ever be as smart as you. Or as humble. Or as kind. Or as...

 

[Smellin Coffee]

God is God. If they are dead, they are not accountable to anyone while in a death state because there is no mind, will or human nature.

Just what do you base this on?

Common sense. Never knew the brain waves were still kicking in a skeleton.

Sure. The dead don't have the status of the living. Its not either or. Both are correct. Jesus wasn't using Pharoah in his example. He was talking about His own. His "kin". Those born of God. It rather useless if they who are born of God are really.... "dead".

OK

Yep. Jesus was talking about the resurrection but he was also.... talking about the nature of Eternal Life. Eternal Life doesn't include "death". When our bodies turn to dust. We are still "alive".

There is nothing contextual in the passage that links the nature of eternal life, specifically after death before the resurrection. If you want to read into it, go ahead but it isn't there. Again, I'm not denying that life like that exists. What I am saying is that Jesus never left proof text for us to indicate it was. And if so, how cruel was it to resurrect Lazarus and Jairus' daughter for pulling them from the presence of God to this sin-cursed earth?

 

[praise_yeshua]

God is God. If they are dead, they are not accountable to anyone while in a death state because there is no mind, will or human nature.

Just what do you base this on?

Common sense. Never knew the brain waves were still kicking in a skeleton.

Sure. The dead don't have the status of the living. Its not either or. Both are correct. Jesus wasn't using Pharoah in his example. He was talking about His own. His "kin". Those born of God. It rather useless if they who are born of God are really.... "dead".

OK

Yep. Jesus was talking about the resurrection but he was also.... talking about the nature of Eternal Life. Eternal Life doesn't include "death". When our bodies turn to dust. We are still "alive".

There is nothing contextual in the passage that links the nature of eternal life, specifically after death before the resurrection. If you want to read into it, go ahead but it isn't there. Again, I'm not denying that life like that exists. What I am saying is that Jesus never left proof text for us to indicate it was. And if so, how cruel was it to resurrect Lazarus and Jairus' daughter for pulling them from the presence of God to this sin-cursed earth?

I didn't read anything into it. Jesus said that Jehovah is God of the Living. That implies Eternal Life. No death involved. Eternal life is..... Eternal life. You can confine it the discuss of those religious nuts wanting to argue. Jesus was revealing more than just a few things about the resurrection.

 

[abp]

I'mnot the one calling God a worthless idol

Calvin is your worthless idol. You know.... the "little g"..... god.

I never said the One True God is worthless. Just what you've replaced him with.... You know that "breast" you suckle on called "Calvin's teat".

Ummm .... seriously?

And you all say I have issues. LOL

Seriously!!!

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

I hate it because the teaching damns souls. It replaced the True Gospel with a fabricated idol were people don't control their own destiny. The product of liberal mind seeking to absolve itself of controlling their actions.

Arminian ?grace!? How strange the sound,
Salvation hinged on me.
I once was lost then turned around,
Was blind then chose to see.
What ?grace? is it that calls for choice,
Made from some good within?
That part that wills to heed God?s voice,
Proved stronger than my sin.
Thru many ardent gospel pleas,
I sat with heart of stone.
But then some hidden good in me,
Propelled me toward my home.
When we?ve been there ten thousand years,
Because of what we?ve done,
We?ve no less days to sing our praise,
Than when we first begun.

 

[Biker]

First, you have to get over your emotions and see what God says first. Nowhere in Scripture taught that babies get a free pass into Heavan. The verse I pointed out in Romans spells out exactly that It is God's divine choice to whom He chooses. God's purpose to His own glory outweighs how we feel.
Romans 9:11 For though her sons had not been born yet or done anything good or bad, so that God?s purpose according to election might stand?

I'll try. Sorry it's so long...Per your own beliefs there is no free pass for little ones in heaven,, this automatically means sin is imputed. Calvinists believe by grace you have been saved... and righteousness is imputed at salvation. So all Calvinists must believe babies go to heaven since FAITH results in instant salvation. And we cannot even entertain that some babies will possess faith when they have not that ability. GOD TELLS US the little ones cannot decipher good vs evil (Deut 1:39) so all babies must be damned to hell if we believe in election...as you do.

Deut 1:39 ?Moreover, your little ones who you said would become a prey, and your sons, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall enter there, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it.

God acknowledges ^^"little ones" have no ability to grasp good vs evil just as Adam and Eve didn't... up until their eyes "were opened" Gen 3
we know how Evil came about and was unleashed -via the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.- It contained a virus of sorts just waiting for someone to unleash it onto humanity. Actually the law came into effect then sin was unleashed. Before that, God called his creation "good". Because just like "little ones" Adam & Eve had no knowledge of evil vs good. So they were not held to the law until such time as they had that ability.

Romans 5-Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world,[ and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned? 13for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

 

[Biker]

"For though her sons had not been born yet or done anything good or bad, so that God?s purpose according to election might stand?" Rom 9:11

Exactly, great verse. As with everyone, all adults including Israel (aka those that belong to him) were held to... "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith?and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God?  not by works, so that no one can boast."

"Since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities?his eternal power and divine nature?have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse" Rom. 1:20

Men are without excuse which begs the question.. who is with excuse, then?  The little ones? makes sense to me

"And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, 3 and said, ?Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven". Matthew 18:2?3

Seems straight up to me ^^ We are to convert like little children so we can enter the Kingdom of Heaven...just as they do.

 

[biscuit1953]

This is a question that has been asked forever.  I had a small child killed in an automobile accident in 1992 and was tormented for several years wondering if he had reached the "age of accountability."  It is very easy for someone who has not lost a child to counsel someone in that situation to just "trust God."  John MacArthur is a "five point Calvinist" and I want to present in part what he says about the subject because I believe it is the truth.  I won't argue with anyone on the subject.  Believe what you will.

First question, who qualifies as an infant or a child?  That's really not the question because we're not talking about an age of accountability.  Get the word "age" out of this discussion. We're talking about a condition of accountability...not an age.   Who are we talking about?

Answer...those who have not reached sufficient mature understanding in order to comprehend convincingly the issues of law and grace, sin and salvation. This is certainly an infant in the womb. This is certainly an infant at birth. This is certainly a small child. And this is certainly a mentally impaired adult at any age.  This is not an age, this is a condition.

Are all children conceived as sinners?  Children are born morally corrupt. They are born with an irresistible bent toward evil. And any notion that children are born morally neutral and free from a predisposition to sin is absolutely contrary to Scripture. If infants were not sinful, if they were not morally corrupt, then they wouldn't die. If they were born innocent or pure or morally neutral there would be no basis for their death. Psalm 51:5, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, in sin my mother conceived me." It doesn't mean he was an illegitimate child, that's not the case. But from the very conception sin was there imbedded in his nature.

Now that leads us to a third question,  "Well, if they're all sinners, if they're all born in sin, they're all guilty then they're all damned to hell. And all the little ones who die by the millions and billions because they are sinful deserve death and hell and that's where they go since they can't repent and since they can't cry out to God for mercy and grace, they can't believe in Jesus Christ, they all go to hell."

What does Scripture teach about damnation?  Revelation chapter 20, Scripture teaches, and listen very carefully, Scripture teaches, and here's a summary statement I'm going to show you how it comes through Scripture teaches that men and women are saved by...what?...grace, but damned by works...by works. Scripture teaches that all condemned sinners earn their eternal punishment by their sins.  Scripture always, always connects eternal condemnation to the sinner's deeds, works...always. In John 8:21 and 24 the most significant damning work Jesus says, "Because you believe not in Me you will die in your sins and where I go you'll never come." The greatest of all the sinner's evil works is unbelief...unbelief. And unbelief is always singled out as the primary damning sin.

It is the sins that sinners commit that constitute the record that is established against them by which condemnation falls from the throne of God. Little children don't have that record. In Jonah 4:11, "Should I not have compassion on Ninevah, the great city on which there are more than 120,000 persons who don't know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?" There are people there, God says, who deserve compassion because they don't know the difference, they don't know the difference between their right and left hand. He's speaking of those who are infants, or those who are mentally incapable of understanding truth. And God says they deserve compassion because of that condition.

Written in 1907 by R.A. Webb, "If a dead infant were sent to hell on no other account than that of original sin, there would be a good reason to the divine mind for the judgment because sin is a reality. But the child's mind would be a perfect blank as to the reason of its suffering. Under such circumstances it would know suffering but it would have no understanding of the reason for its suffering. It could not tell itself why it was so awfully smitten and consequently the whole meaning and significance of its sufferings being to it a conscious enigma, the very essence of the penalty would be absent and justice would be disappointed, cheated of its validation," end quote.
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/80-242/the-salvation-of-babies-who-die-part-1

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

This is a question that has been asked forever.  I had a small child killed in an automobile accident in 1992 and was tormented for several years wondering if he had reached the "age of accountability."  It is very easy for someone who has not lost a child to counsel someone in that situation to just "trust God."  John MacArthur is a "five point Calvinist" and I want to present in part what he says about the subject because I believe it is the truth.  I won't argue with anyone on the subject.  Believe what you will.

First question, who qualifies as an infant or a child?  That's really not the question because we're not talking about an age of accountability.  Get the word "age" out of this discussion. We're talking about a condition of accountability...not an age.   Who are we talking about?

Answer...those who have not reached sufficient mature understanding in order to comprehend convincingly the issues of law and grace, sin and salvation. This is certainly an infant in the womb. This is certainly an infant at birth. This is certainly a small child. And this is certainly a mentally impaired adult at any age.  This is not an age, this is a condition.

Are all children conceived as sinners?  Children are born morally corrupt. They are born with an irresistible bent toward evil. And any notion that children are born morally neutral and free from a predisposition to sin is absolutely contrary to Scripture. If infants were not sinful, if they were not morally corrupt, then they wouldn't die. If they were born innocent or pure or morally neutral there would be no basis for their death. Psalm 51:5, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, in sin my mother conceived me." It doesn't mean he was an illegitimate child, that's not the case. But from the very conception sin was there imbedded in his nature.

Now that leads us to a third question,  "Well, if they're all sinners, if they're all born in sin, they're all guilty then they're all damned to hell. And all the little ones who die by the millions and billions because they are sinful deserve death and hell and that's where they go since they can't repent and since they can't cry out to God for mercy and grace, they can't believe in Jesus Christ, they all go to hell."

What does Scripture teach about damnation?  Revelation chapter 20, Scripture teaches, and listen very carefully, Scripture teaches, and here's a summary statement I'm going to show you how it comes through Scripture teaches that men and women are saved by...what?...grace, but damned by works...by works. Scripture teaches that all condemned sinners earn their eternal punishment by their sins.  Scripture always, always connects eternal condemnation to the sinner's deeds, works...always. In John 8:21 and 24 the most significant damning work Jesus says, "Because you believe not in Me you will die in your sins and where I go you'll never come." The greatest of all the sinner's evil works is unbelief...unbelief. And unbelief is always singled out as the primary damning sin.

It is the sins that sinners commit that constitute the record that is established against them by which condemnation falls from the throne of God. Little children don't have that record. In Jonah 4:11, "Should I not have compassion on Ninevah, the great city on which there are more than 120,000 persons who don't know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?" There are people there, God says, who deserve compassion because they don't know the difference, they don't know the difference between their right and left hand. He's speaking of those who are infants, or those who are mentally incapable of understanding truth. And God says they deserve compassion because of that condition.

Written in 1907 by R.A. Webb, "If a dead infant were sent to hell on no other account than that of original sin, there would be a good reason to the divine mind for the judgment because sin is a reality. But the child's mind would be a perfect blank as to the reason of its suffering. Under such circumstances it would know suffering but it would have no understanding of the reason for its suffering. It could not tell itself why it was so awfully smitten and consequently the whole meaning and significance of its sufferings being to it a conscious enigma, the very essence of the penalty would be absent and justice would be disappointed, cheated of its validation," end quote.
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/80-242/the-salvation-of-babies-who-die-part-1

The problem with this argument is that it starts from an assumption about informed salvation (the ability to comprehend convincingly the issues of law and grace, sin and salvation) and then works from there to justify the salvation of those without said ability.  This is nothing but mental gymnastics to achieve the desired end, which is to somehow move people WE THINK should go to heaven into that category. 

IMO (and this is my view), it's much simpler than that.  Jesus saves whomever he will.  That's all there is to it. 

 

[rsc2a]

IMO (and this is my view), it's much simpler than that.  Jesus saves whomever he will.  That's all there is to it.

But, but, but...

 

[subllibrm]

IMO (and this is my view), it's much simpler than that.  Jesus saves whomever he will.  That's all there is to it.

"Well that's not fair!"

Said the many people who have  little if any understanding of God and His sovereignty.

 

[praise_yeshua]

IMO (and this is my view), it's much simpler than that.  Jesus saves whomever he will.  That's all there is to it.

But, but, but...

and BOTH of you think you're so "special". Isn't it ironic how you NUTS talk of being part of the elect and yet you have absolutely no idea if you are not. Neither one of you have had an experience where you can genuinely say you believe you where regenerated.

That is why you fight so hard to defend your nonsense. Its the ONLY thing you have to hold onto.

I have nothing to prove to any of you. I know I'm saved. I was there when it happened. I had a life changing experience in which the very God of all creation changed my heart. Eternal life was imparted to me. All of you hate to talk about feeling because most of you have NEVER FELT anything. All you have is a "Jesus might save me" attitude....... or you've got a

"I asked" and that's all I know.

I "FEEL" sorry for you. I really do. I know most of you don't like what I have to say. I know some of you are down right opposed to me. It doesn't matter. It never has. I argue with.... sometimes forcefully.... so you might change.

 

[praise_yeshua]

IMO (and this is my view), it's much simpler than that.  Jesus saves whomever he will.  That's all there is to it.

"Well that's not fair!"

Said the many people who have  little if any understanding of God and His sovereignty.

Oh the evils done in the name of "sovereignty".

 

[biscuit1953]

Romans 9 clearly teaches that some men are destined for hell and the purpose is for God to receive glory in the display of His wrath as well as His mercy.  However, it says "But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?"  No scripture hints of infants being tormented for their sins to the glory of God.