age of accountability

Hello Outsider,

I have sen you around, but if I remember right this is the 1st time we have talked. Good to meet you.

As Allan has stated, he and I have been around this block before. Its mainly me asking what he believes. For some reason I can't seem to get it. Maybe you can help.

This is where I do not understand your reasoning. What does "come to the knowledge of understanding" mean?

I asked this of Allan and he gave a answer that lead to another answer. I'll ask it of you...

Is that AOA? Allan says no. What do you say?

The child understands...and still does it.

Please don't get mad...I'm just asking.

YOU SAID..

I do not fully agree with this statement, but that is another subject. What I would like to ask her is this. When the child acted in they way he or she did above, was that a sin? If not, what does it take to sin?

Also...being AOA is no one age, in other words the age could range from 12 to 16 on up to 25. But how low can it go? Can a child sin at the age of 2? How about 1?

This verse tells me that AOA is 20 years old.

Well...I agree with this. What about today? Is a 19 year old still guilty?

I'm not sure why your child cannot feel remorse. My girls did and showed it. So I know they can at a age younger then 3. So is that the standard? Does it take remorse?

How about the 30 year old that lives "in sin" but does not know what sin is. Are they not guilty?

 

Hi Jarthur001,

I have seen many of your posts and enjoyed them. You seem to have a firm grasp of the Word. Praise God for the blessings He has given you.

I will answer for myself on why I see this in scripture. I do not pretend to know it all, but I will share with you what I believe God has revealed to me. Hopefully this will help you understand my view of AoA.

This is a difficult question. I do not think this is AoA but can be an illustration of it.
Let me explain it this way:
In order to be saved, one must first be guilty. I see the child, with the sin nature of Adam, guilty of disobeying the parent but not God. Now, I am aware of the commandment, but I am not so sure the child is aware of such commandment or able to grasp the understanding of it. I believe all they know is they will be in trouble with Daddy.

Maybe I already gave my answer.

I am not bold enough to set an age. I simply say it is when God speaks to a person. One scripture for this is Rom 7:9. A good illustration is Adam in the garden. Adam was free to eat of any tree until the commandment came to him. When the commandment came and he trespassed, he was then guilty, Not before.

Did they hit their knees and pray for forgiveness to the most high God or were they afraid of what daddy was going to do? My daughter gets those big tears flowing but I feel its because she is getting ready for a time out.
Children grow up differently. They mature at different rates and I also believe that God speaks to them and draws them on His time, not ours. How many 3 year olds do you know that have a firm grasp of the Bible? How many have repented and been born again? How many are ready to take on the devil and his tricks?

I will judge his work but not his soul. If God has spoken to him and holds him accountable for his sin, then he is guilty. If God has not spoken to him, then he is not guilty. This is obviously on the other extreme and would find this highly unlikely but only God knows.

Consider this:
Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

I do not think Christ was telling them that they had to be converted from their sinful ways to that of a childs sinful ways. I believe He was telling them that they must be innocent as children are.

Never good brother. Iron sharpens iron. I enjoy discussing the Word.

This is my view of the subject. I hope this helps you to understand why I believe this doctrine.

 

Did that child "know God, and glorify Him not as God"?????

Where there is no Law, there is no transgression, and its not talking about your law or mine, but God's.

Daddy's law will not send that child to hell.

BBob,

 

Thats what I was trying to say :laugh:

 

You were doing just fine, James likes me to be blunt........:laugh:

BBob,

 

There is no 'specific age' to be placed or set regarding the AoA. It is the age or better time when God reveals to that person certain truths. This is about the knowledge of good and evil before or according to God, not an understanding of right or wrong according to mommy and daddy or even civil governments. It is about sin and righteousness before and according to God. No man can teach another these things for they are revealed by God to man (all men).

Right and wrong are perceptions of good and evil and the definition (of that commonly accepted right and wrong) is derived from those in authority. Like fathers and mothers and another is civil governments, all of these display rights and wrongs from a certain perspective but these are not true representation of godly righteousness and sin. They are only shadows or illistration of them. The ultimate and only absolute however is that which is defined by God. A child knows what is right and wrong in relation to what his parents desire and is accountable once he understands that which is good and bad to them. So it is with God and the AOA.

Why do you consistantly and purposely twist this passage.
I will submit this however - What you give could illistrate or show that by the age of 20 one has had to have already reached such an accountability. So you could state that all above the age of 20 (of a competent mind, thus able to serve) were fully accountable for their sin having attained by now such an understanding.

However what you gave can also be referred to exegetically as an 'age of service' whereby those reaching this age can serve most anywhere in Jewish culture. And for those of service to God (like in the passage you give) they are accountable for their sin - just as in the passage where they (those 20 and older who were in His service) were to go and take the land but they determined not to for fear. Therefore they were all judged (those over the age of 20) for their sin (disobedience) since they all knew what was good in the sight of God in this and that which was not. All those 19 and younder (down to the infants) had no sin in the matter since it was not something they were to be accountable for. The sin laid squarely upon those who what the Lord desired and choose otherwise.

This is the reason for Jesus statement:

 

Good deal.

Maybe I should state my views in a short statement. Bro Bob and Allan know of them, but maybe you do not. I have a "Feeling" that there maybe a AOA. However I can not prove it in the Bible. The only age that can be tag as AOA is the verse and one other verse that speaks of age 20. We have talked about one. I'm sure we will get to the other. So....being that I can not base doctrine on feeling, I am forced to make this statement. My view is..."I do not know"

The Bible is not clear

I understand your point. To me I do see the child as the sinner, not for what he does, but the attitude in how he does it. The attitude show he knows..he understands that he is wrong..yet he still does it. To me this is sin. The father of a home is a picture of God. This is how the young child can relate to who God is. In other words, My hands as well as any fathers hands were huge when placed beside my girls hands when they were babes. Just in this is a picture of God to them. My little girls would her me pray to my "Father in Heaven" and know that I as a full grown person has someone greater then me. To my little girls I was the strongest person they knew. If I have a Father, that person must have very very strong and large hands.

Then when I read the story in Isaiah 40 where it says God measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, that shows the young child just how big God is. Dads hands are big, but God can hold all the water in the world in his hands. As my girl said when she saw the ocean for the 1st time...."dad...that is a big drink of water".

The Bible is clear that it is a sin to disobey your father. Does the child know that this is in the Bible? No. Nor does some teens, but teens sin. If a teen can believe in God and be saved from his sin, he must be a sinner. If a child can believe and be saved from his sin, he must be a sinner.

The reason I press the "age" is because the word age is in the phrase and there is only one age given in the Bible. Now you will find others trying to force scripture to say something for them, for they are driven to prove they are right, but this is all a "feeling" they have with no proof.

If it is not "a age" then it seems like we want to go with understanding. I say this not just to you, but this seems to be the logic used on this subject. I'll not go into the total depravity of man debate, because we would get off the subject. I only bring it up to remind you that there is a ton of support for this.

I want to go another way with this. In John 3 Jesus is talking to a non-believer. He tells he that he must be born again. Nic replies...and shows he does not understand. Then Jesus says.."You are Israel's teacher," "and do you not understand these things?"

I think verse 18 is clear that people are not condemned when they do not believe. They are ALREADY condemned before they reject.

18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Now this is talking about salvation, but we are talking about it also. When does a young child become a sinner? When he understands Gods laws and rejects them? I feel this passage overrules such thoughts. They are condemned before they understand. How far back does this go? This passage does not say. But we have others that say it goes back to birth.

I know some 25 year olds that act like 3 year olds.

How many 15 year olds have a firm grasp of the Bible. If knowing about God is needed before sin counts as sin, should we even share the gospel? Of course this is folly, but i'm sure you see the point. In fact this was the point that Paul made in Romans. Its not that he was not guilty before he knew the law, he just did not know of his guilt before he know the Law. but he was indeed guilty.

This I would hands down disagree with. Man is guilty even if he does not know he is guitly.

Psalm 14

1 The fool has said in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.

2 The LORD looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
3 They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;

 

hi ya Bob....

long time no chat.

 

I am with you on this brother. I do not believe it is an "Age", but it is in the title. I see the age of the those under 20 (In the OT) as a shadow to come. Again, they were innocent of that sin only because God said they were. God said they didn't know, so that means they didn't know.

Amen! I agree all together with you. In order to be saved, we must first be lost. I for one, do not believe that a young child can be saved, simply because I do not feel they were ever lost. I know a lot of people who say they were saved at a very young age. I believe they were. They have an experience and many that I know are still following the Lord today. This is why I do not put an age to it.

This is were I differ. Again, it is understanding but its not (I know that sounds irregular). I place itat the time God speaks to a person. When He speaks to their heart. Understanding comes with it, but it is not all up to a persons understanding or willingness to accept understanding. When God speaks to a person for the first time, they are guilty. They may not accept it but they are and they know they are.

I do see your point and it is valid. I think we will both agree that not knowing God will not save anyone. I believe God speaks to everyone when they come to the age to be responsible for their sin. I believe He draws them. The gospel is the good news. It is that we are guilty but there is One that paid the price so we don't have to face the penalty for our sin.
I wonder what law Paul was talking about? He was guilty of not believing in Christ. He was a hebrew of hebrews. He followed the law (Or at least, he felt like he did). It wasn't until he was confronted by Christ that he knew he was guilty of anything - imo.

I agree. We are guilty even if we don't know it. Being guilty and being held accountable for that guilt are two different things.

And they were too. I am a believer in total depravity. Maybe not the way you see it. I believe that no man, on their own will seek God. I feel there is enough Bible to support that. I do however, believe that when God calls, you are not totally depraved anymore. But we must consider this, the person who wrote Psalm 14. Did he seek God? Did he understand? If not, then why did he write it? If he did, then maybe he was speaking generally. As in all nations. Just a thought.

I enjoy this discussion. Like I said earlier, I do not profess to know all the answers. Maybe together we can help one another grow. At the least, we will help one another understand why the other believes or not on this issue.

 

Hello,

Sorry I am very busy for the next few right now. I saw your post just after you posted it, but have not had the time to reply. However, I wanted to get back to you in a short post.

It seems like God sees sin is always sin, even if we do not know it. And...It seems like we are guilty even if we do not know we are sinning. In the OT they had a sin offering for sins of ignorance...not knowing they were sinning.

Num 15:27 ¶ And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of the first year for a sin offering.


Num 15:28 And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.

Lev 4:22-23 When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty; Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

Lev 4:27-28 And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty; Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.

Also please look at these verses and tell me what you think...

A

I'll get back with ya tomorrow.

 

Hi James;
I always read your posts!

BBob,:wavey:

 

James, that offering was made 'after they found out' they had sinned when at the time they didn't know that is was. Of course God sees sin as sin but their sin still is not imputed against them (thus being guiltly) until they knew it was sin and therefore the need for the sacrifice. If you will notice the scripture states "and is guilty" refering to judgment given but who determines this? The priests who know the law and expounds it to them who have given offence unknowingly.

The first is his sin being brought to his by another and the second is his realizing it himself.

 

I read many of yours also. I don't have as much time to post as I use to. I'm putting together a church planting group in out state. This is more work then I thought.


I hope all is well.

God bless...

James

 

Brother James,

I know what you mean. I am also and I understand. I do look forward to good discussion and I thank you (And the others) for discussing this with me.

To muddy the water even more.... What about the man who was helping to carry the Ark and he stumbled and touched it by accident? He died immediately. The reason is because they were told not to touch it.
My entire reasoning behind my view of this doctrine is not because I want to believe my children or anyone's children are safe, I believe it because it is what I feel the Lord has shown me in His Word.

"but now commandeth all men every where to repent"
Go back to your experience. When you went through your repentance. Now think of a child. Do you think a child can bear that? Do you think a child can feel that type of remorse? People are different, maybe some can but I know I could not. I can remember when God first spoke to me and I felt the guilt. Its not a question of if a child sins in our eyes. The real question is do children sin in eyes of God? Do they sin against Him?

I am curious about the OT sacrifices. This maybe a good question to ponder. I wonder if 3 year olds provided goats for their sacrifices?

I hope all is well brother. Thanks for your time and this discussion.

 

yes the offering was told to be offered after they came to understand they had sinned.

They also didn't know it was sin when they sinned. But it was still sin allan. That is the point of the wording is it not?

Lets do it this way. Lets say that the Bible made it very clear that picking up a rock was a sin. Lets say that all believers held to this view.

Now Joe does not know the Bible and is picking up a rock. Joe is sinning in ignorance.

Now Tom tells Joe that the Bible says we should not pick up rocks. Joe now knows Gods law but Joe does it anyway. Joe is sinning willfully (Heb)

Bottom line both times Joe sins. The wages of sin is death. All sins both known and unknow.

Even Pelagian admitted that sin came on man after the act even if he was not aware of that sin. He said we aren't sinners in Adam (OS). We will sin just as he did because we follow him as a "bad example". We become sinners when we sin, Pelagian said. Of course this was rejected by the church.

But you seem be be going way beyond this. You seem to be saying we are not "sinners" as in "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God".. till we know what sinning is. When I say "sinner" in this phrase, I mean not the act of sin, which you just said you agree with. But you're saying that the person may sin and indeed they will sin, but the person is not in the "position" of being a sinner as in one under the guilty of sin till one becomes aware of the truth of God???

Under this idea, if Christ had not come, and the Gospel had not be told, then no one would hear the Gospel to in turn reject the gospel and because there is no guilt and there is no rejecting of the gospel, then all would go to heaven for all would die with no guilt. It seems like Christ has done a disservice under your plan.

Are you sure this is what you mean?

I'm not sure I can say that is what is meant Allan. But if we were to go with your view, it still would not matter. The person sinned.

I have been wanting to write one of my longs ones on what sin is and how God views sin and the guilt that comes with all sin, but Getting the time to do it has been hard.

 

This is a good point and if it comes down to understanding of sin before guilt comes, then my case is over.

Having a feeling of guilt and being guilty are not the same are they? Many a murder will tell such stories to justify their deeds. They will say they had a right to kill. They show no guilt for they fell they are not guilty. However, the judge says they are. They may die in jail know they murdered, but also thinking they had a right to murder, and never come to reality of their guilt.

I agree

In Christ...James

 

David was elected over his bothers by God and this is why he would also seek God and understand God.

 

You are all over the place here. From calling me worse than a Pelagain to having me presumably saying that no man is in sin if he isn't told the gospel. James, you're getting as bad as Skypair anymore. You know perfectly well nothing in your above is what I believe and we have been over much of this before many many times. You construct a straw man then tear your own concoction down. When you ask me something I give you scripture and the explanation behind it. Then you ask something else, and I do the same. Then you make up something later on the has nothing to with what I have previously stated.

You need to go back and read what has been written already instead of assuming because you rarely ever come close. Nothing I have stated herein comes close to your assumptions about what I have said and am saying.

You seem to be taking this to that of adults when we are speaking of unborns, infants, children, and infirm of mind. Stay on topic.

remember - Allan is not the one to say that they are not held accountable unless they understand, God is through His word. It is not Allan's view but God's.

I have answered most everything above in one or more posts in this thread, and nothing I have posted comes close to the ridiculous mess of what you posted above.

 

I missed that verse Allan.

Please post it again, where it say man is not accountable unless they understand.

You seem upset.. Sorry about that.

Pelagian did believe man became a sinner and was thereby guilty when he took part in sin. In his own words..."

As you can see, according to Pelagius there are three features in human action.
1) Power (posse),
2) will (velle)
3) realization (esse).

The first comes exclusively from God;(grace comes to all men that they may be ABLE to believe).
The other two belong to man...the will of man to choose and the realization of man to understand.

So...when man choose to DO...what comes from that action is guilt in the eyes of God or praise. The guilt came from the action...which is what I said Pelagius had said.


However...If I understand you right, you say a person can sin, but is not guilty till after they know of sin as God sees sin. This is the same view nearly word for word of Theodore of Mopsuestia while he was under the teachings of Julian of Eclanum and other Pelagians. Theodore did go beyond Pelagius. Theodore called it "original guilt" and denied man had original guilt till he was told of Gods law. Of course Theodore later recanted of this belief.

If I do not show your view, please tell me what it is.

I do not understand how you can place guilt aside from sin. Maybe a person does not fill guilt when they lie, but God says they are guilty even if they do not know.

This applies to all of mankind...."God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." "There is none righteous,no,not one." "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us"

To me, this would deny this verse...

(Psalm 58:3) "The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth.

Two types of sin...

Willful sin..
Sin of ignorance

Both are sins. Both need forgiven. Christ died for all of those sins of his people once and for all of time.


In Christ...James