The unborn and infant deaths

BROTHER BOB: So - born again before birth?


BROTHER JOE:

Brother Bob, I suggest you become familiar with the following scriptures below seeing as you find it so hard to believe the the Holy Ghost can quicken an individual from the womb:

"But thou art he that took me out of the womb: THOU DIDST MAKE ME HOPE WHEN I WAS UPON MY MOTHERS BREASTS." (Psalm 22:9)

"I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God FROM MY MOTHERS BELLY." (Psalm 22:10)

"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb" (Psalm 139:13)

"Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. " (Isaiah 49:1)

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jeremiah 1:5)

"and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb" (Luke 1:15)


Brother Joe

 

BROTHER BOB: Did he "confess Christ" before birth?

Did he "convess the trinity" before Birth?

Did the unborn infant know that Christ was coming to pay for his sins?


BROTHER JOE: Brother Bob, you may be surprised when you arrive in heaven and see the vast amount of elect regenerated children of God whom the Holy Spirit gave a knew heart and who died and went to heaven and DIDNT even know Jesus's earthly name before death, much lest grasp the doctrine of the trinity.

But wait, before you start accusing me of heresy...at least let me first defend my statement from the Bible below-you can then try to rebutt the points if you disagree with them:

1) There will be people whom the Holy Spirit regenerated whom have never heard the gospel because otherwise Revelation 5:9 would be false which clearly says, "And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of EVERY KINDRED, and TONGUE, and PEOPLE, and NATION"

Many nations, peoples, and tribes have never heard the gospel, further history records of some peoples, tribes, and nations dying off without ever being exposed to the gospel. Thus for the Revelation verse to be true some of these individuals must have been regenerated (born again) in the same manner as we-by the sovereign means of the Holy Spirit independent of the means of man.


2)"31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." (Matthew 25:31-40)


This passage of scripture clearly shows whom Jesus called into heaven-those whom were visiting the prisoners, clothing the naked, and feeding the poor. These are signs of regenerated children of God. Notice the text does not list any qualifiers beyond these deeds. Also notice those whom did the acts were unaware upon doing them they were doing them to Jesus. My point? Dont you think some people have done these very acts whom have never heard the gospel?? These acts dont make one born again, but this passage makes it obvious that they are signs of a regenerated child of God-one whom the Holy Ghost has quickend.


3) 1 John 4:7 states, "Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. "

Is it logical to conclude only those people who have heard the gospel and accepted it are the only ones who have ever loved on this earth? Brother Bob, have you EVER had ANYONE you thought to be unsaved because of their differing doctrinal beliefs (perhaps a family member or friend) show you love before in your life? If yes, I submit to you based upon the authority of scripture that person is a child of God who has been regeneratd sovereignly by the Holy Ghost. "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." (John 3:8)

Brother Bob, remember"love is of God; and EVERY ONE THAT LOVETH IS BORN OF GOD, and knoweth God. " (1 John 4:7)


By grace,

Brother Joe

[ September 01, 2004, 07:24 PM: Message edited by: BrotherJoe ]

 

Brother Joe-

there is no question that the Holy Spirit has power and influence over the human body when He chooses to.

However - the idea that the unborn understand worship, sin, rebellion, judgment, heaven or hell - could never be defended from scripture, science or nature.

I think we can all agree there.

If you have come across such a genius as an unborn or a newborn - please share your experiences.

No reader in Bible times - would have thought that the unborn were "makind decisions for Christ" or "weiging the concepts of salvation" or any such notion.

Texts like this show DEPENDENCE on God - but so also do the animals depend on God according to the Psalmist. However they have no theological or doctrinal leanings in that regard.

"I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God FROM MY MOTHERS BELLY." (Psalm 22:10)


Here also is an example of non-living objects like Islands (and we see it with trees and mountains in other places) --

"Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. " (Isaiah 49:1)

These texts show that a proper exegesis of them will not get you to your "genius infant" or "super-unborn" idea.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Here is the problem for your view Joe -

No "faith expressed" by the unborn, by the new born, by the infants...

This is where we agree.

I also agree that the unborn and the infants that die - go to heaven.

What I don't agree to - is that they have the "FAITH" of the believer OR that they have the FAITH of the Romans 2 pagan that has no Bible and yet is circumcised in heart, born again and shows the New Birth work of the "LAW written on the heart".

good point. however this is where you and I agree.

you make good arguments - but you are missing the one from Romans 2:11-16 where God shows that pagans who have no Bible at all- are "justified" in the future "Gospel judgment" of 2:16.

Justified - as in shown to have already been transformed by the Holy Spirit in the New Birth.

In Christ,

Bob

 

WHY are all infants necessarily elect?

Because a god who would send an infant to Hell would be a devil.

 

This gets back to the "Calvinist future scenario" and the innescapable truth that what you "say" about salvation, the gospel and how it works "reflects the kind of God you believe in". You are unnavoidably "describing God" when you do it.

That means that Nick is right to see a "different" description of God in the Arminian view than the one that consistent Calvinists draw.

So when some calvinist like Pinoy comes along and insists that CONSISTENT Calvinism would have the SAME Unconditional Election (Arbitrary selection within group) applied to infants as to adults - we CAN NOT fault him for "being consistent". In fact he makes a very good point in arguing that his fellow Calvinists are simply whimping out to fail to consistently apply the model to the unborn and to infants.

The perfect "poster argument" to illustrate why the "calvinist future scenario" so perfectly illustrates calvinism.

In Christ,

Bob

 

That is in fact what Arminians say about Calvinist - to the point that Calvin himself confesses "we appear to have an Arminian text".

So objectively - there is no way for the Calvinist to suppose that Arminians are not viewing them in exactly the same way as you describe above.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I'd be very careful with your words billwald.
Sin is what sends people to hell, not God.
Gina

 

Gina,

The point is that God can do something about those infants. IF (as almost everyone here claims) God DOES save at least SOME of them - THEN He already establishes the principle by which the lost may be saved.

IF - God says that the principle is nothing more than "arbitrary selection within group" then "we have a problem".

In fact - we have the future Calvinist scenario "problem" in magnified triplicate.

Fortunately we have no text where God claims to do such a thing. Only in the various explanations of Calvinism do we see someone even come close to it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

God can do something about children being harmed, murdered. There was a woman in our town in the paper today, found guilty of aggravated murder, two counts, the victims were her twin daughters, the method was setting fire to a child's bed.
God didn't do anything to save them from death by fire. Has He ever done anything to save a child from being murdered by a parent?
Does it set up an impossible view of God?
No.
Gina

 

Is God intervening in the sufferings of humanity via "arbitrary selection"? Let's test that.

Does God promise in His word "I am not willing for anyone to suffer any injustice but for all to be trouble free in this life"?

OR does He in fact say "IN this world you HAVE trouble. Take courage I have overcome the World"?

IF in fact God was making the SAME grand promises for personnal safety that He makes about salvation and evangelism --- THEN to protect some infants and not others WOULD show the "Calvinist future scenario" problem just as saving some infants and not others - would do the same thing in real life.

In Christ,

Bob