Are we born Spiritually "alive" or "dead"?

But pay attention,,reclaim is not a prior ownership..Read the whole definition.

How is an infant born sin free?

Cheers,

Jim

 

Because they haven't sinned.

 

Disown

Jesus came into His own and His own received Him not.

All souls belong to God, but God also said if you disown me I will disown you. Not a Peter denial, but a complete disowning.

But cheers and praise be to God through Jesus that those who are in Christ will never be disowned, because God cannot disown Himself

 

Amy, we've been through this before, and according to the Scriptures, you are incorrect.

You are drawing a doctrinal distinction where none exists, which is why I said above that your question does not match two propositions correctly. In order for a propositional statement to be true, all part of the proposition need to be true. In your case, you are deciding that infants are born "innocent" which is not a valid proposition in the Christian realm because no human beings are in that class. We are all sinners and sinners are not innocent, even if the distinction is one of time, i.e., that we have not yet sinned. To be a sinner is a matter of position not of action and that is your error.

If we hold to your proposition, we need to determine at what point or what action a baby is no longer "innocent." I would submit (in your form of reckoning) that happens the moment they cry in anger, i.e., birth, which means that you do not gain anything by making the distinct class "innocent," for it does not exist.

 

All are born spiritually dead (Romans 3:23; 5:12, 19) Since infants have no KNOWLEDGE of the law, sin has not been imputed to infants (Romans 3:20)...therefore infants are considered INNOCENT...not SINLESS.

 

I said they were born "not guilty". That means they are not held accountable. I think we're saying the same thing here. The problem is that you are saying that infants are spiritually dead. This means they are born separated from God and there is no remedy for that apart from faith in Christ. Since an infant cannot have faith or lack of it, according to your theology, they are bound for hell and will go there if they die before they put faith in Christ.

They must be alive in spirit at birth, but die at some point (accountability) because of their own sin (Rom 7:9), just as Adam did. It's at this point they can be redeemed or bought back by Christ through their faith in Him.

 

Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.

How is knowledge of sin the same as innocent? Ignorance is never an excuse. See Romans 1... Also, leaning on the Law, or lack thereof still does not justify the individual. That is exactly Paul's argument!

Saying that no "sin is imputed" to infants places them in a special class that does not exist. Earlier I asked about when does the infant first sin? I notice that issue gets skipped by.

Another issue that comes to mind is that IF God chooses to save some or all babies who die, then it was His will that caused their death and His plan will either see them alive forever in eternity to come, or not. "It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgment..."

No death is before its time, except to US. We think that babies die before their time. God doesn't!

God ordains the time, place, circumstances, and yes, age. IF God deems to take an infant home to be with Him, then so be it. HE is King and can do what HE wants. IF God, in His perfect judgment decides that that infant is destined for hell, then (in tears!) so be it. That is His perfect judgment. When we can see "clearly" (from His perspective) we will agree. Anything else is rebellion against God, thinking that we know something or are more capable of God to make the right decision.


Now, back to the larger issue here (which is not a theological or doctrinal issue). Amy and others argue for the innocence of babies. Why? Simply because the though of babies dying in their sin is hard to take? Or perhaps because a baby was lost and Amy or others wish for some hope?

I say that this is the larger issue because doctrine says that we need to love each other and care for each other -- not beat each other up with points of doctrine. That does not mean that we set doctrines aside -- heavens no -- but that we place ministry to people above our debates.

I've said it before in the other thread we had on infant salvation; My wife and I lost our second son, and have another son (age 30 with his own wife and kids) who I am likely to loose "early" because of a rare nerve disorder. Before we had our first son my wife had a mid-term miscarriage. I (we) well know the pain that comes from placing a baby into the grave. It hurts. It changes your life. It may be one of the most difficult things that any human being has to deal with in this life! And, because of that, I would rather minister to people who've lost children than beat them up.

I wish for the same hope as others. I desperately hope to see my newborn son (In whatever state he happens to be, infant? Grown adult? God knows!) and have every expectation of running with him into the arms of Jesus. But I cannot make a case for a surety of his salvation based on my feelings, or on the Scriptures, or based on his innocence, for I know that he, along with all other human beings was born spiritually dead. My faith is not based on ANY condition of my very human baby. Not at all. Rather, it is based on the GOODNESS, GRACE, and MERCY of our PERFECT GOD and KING who will do the RIGHT THING according to His divine wisdom and love.

 

You don't read too well. I already stated on this very thread they are not born "innocent". I have spiritual life and I"m not innocent.

 

There was atonement made in the OT for unintentional sin, which is sin of ignorance...Paul never taught contrary to this.

No, it places the guilt of the sinner exactly where it needs to be...on the sinner. An infant does not sin, so that question is like "when did you stop beating your wife."

You said it...it has been appointed unto man ONCE to die. If a human is created "dead", and Scripture refers to this as the second death, that Scripture is wrong as it is appointed unto man TWICE to die.
G

His perfect judgement would not destine an infant to Hell, as we learn from His perspective (His Word). It is NOT rebellion to God to use His standards of justice He has given us to model.

Please show where we have said they were innocent? Complete strawman.

I'm truly sorry for what you have been through, I really am. I cannot imagine what that is like. That being said, if you cannot make a case for your child's standing with God using Scripture...I don't know what else to say about that, I'm speechles. "Let us reason together" is what the Lord tells us. He uses our reason in reasoning with Him, He doesn't leave us guessing....His word is complete.

 

Amy G. and Fred's Wife are making that point, not you.

 

Reclaim means to bring back from (error, vice, etc) to right living. How can you be brought "back" if you were never there to begin with?

 

Webdog... Show me a convincing text from Scripture that demonstrates conclusively that all babies go to heaven.

Good luck with that... Not that I wish it were not true. As one who has lost a child, I've looked. I know every verse that has something to say about infants and dying. That is why I say what I do about the grace and mercy of God. He has shown us amply that He cares about babies (and children!). But what I cannot find is a special class of people who are born innocent.

Also, about the reading comprehension thing... Make sure that you are answering points that I'm asking you. When I quote another writer, I'm probably answering them. If you think that I've mistaken something that you have written then we have something to deal with, but I've not taken up any of your points until now.

 

I don't see where Amy said that...and Fred's Wife's post is all over the place and seems to be contradictory.

 

There are countless Scripture about those who pass from spiritual death to spiritual life being saved.
You need to show a convincing text that a baby is spiritually dead (and a couple Psalms and Paul telling adults who know what sin is all "have sinned" doesn't cut it)
You posted it has been appointed unto man ONCE to die. That is physically. If a baby is born spiritually dead, that contradicts Scripture as they were created to die twice from the start.
The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though[a] every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.

Surely the Holy Spirit could have inspired "from conception" instead of "from childhood (or youth depending on the translation)

 

I never used the word "innocent". I said not guilty. I stand before God not guilty because the blood of Christ has washed away my sin. But I still sin because I have not escaped this body of death my spirit resides in therefore I am not innocent.

 

Your point does not make because adults are "saved" to new life or "die" again as well. Get it?

If we are talking spiritual life or spiritual death, we have to admit that we are all spiritually dead. If we are spiritually alive (the Catholic position BTW) then we are merely "sin sick" and may take means to remedy that condition.

When Paul (who you discard out of hand) says that "all" have sinned, he means all. By context, in Romans where that is said, we have to start where Paul starts his argument, chapter 1 and move forward. In chapter 2, Paul's writes this:

Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

That means that all will perish, law or no law. The law just points out to us how sinful we are.
Earlier in the other thread, I pointed out that the doctrine that state that infants were innocent was Pelagian. Here is a quote that says the same thing.

At the end of the day, the logical extension of the doctrine that babies or infants are born innocent and go to heaven is to start killing all those innocent babies and sending them there <shudder>. OF COURSE that goes DIRECTLY AGAINST EVERY commandment of God concerning little children and babies. We are to take care of them, love them, teach them, train them, read the Scriptures that bring life to them, tell them of Christ, and pray for them. Why would God ask us to do all that if simply leaving them to die would be the surest way to send them to heaven? Simply does not play.


Question... Did God give Moses a law concerning a "sin offering" for the birth of a new child?


Edit: To add this...

I am not saying that babies go directly to hell, nor am I saying that babies go directly to heaven. I am saying that I don't know and that I am trusting in a PERFECT GOD to make the PERFECT CHOICE.

 

Okay... What has "washed" those babies? Is a sinner guilty? Is a baby born a sinner?

 

How does a baby sin???

God Himself set an age of accountability in the OT. Anyone under the age of 20 was allowed to go into the promise land.

Numbers 14:29 Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness; and all that were numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, who have murmured against me,
Numbers 14:30-31 Doubtless ye shall not come into the land, concerning which I sware to make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun. But your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, them will I bring in, and they shall know the land which ye have despised.




Deuteronomy 1:39 Moreover your little ones, who you said should be a prey, and your children, who in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in there, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.


Those who were the age of 20 or above could not go into the promised land because of their rebellion against God. It is clear from these scriptures that God did not and does not hold children of a certain age responsible for sin or rebellion against Him.



My reason for believing babies are not spiritually dead is not emotional as some think. It comes from the word of God, which does make me emotional.

 

So, up to the age of 20 these "children" can do as they please because they are saved. Why do we spend so much time in child evangelism? Why do we encourage young kids to "accept" Christ as Saviour?

According to your interpretation regarding a physical land, that even Moses was denied entry by his death.

Why has that so-called age of responsibility fluxuated in this century?

Then, does God implant evil suddenly at age 20. I shouldn't like to live out age 19 or 21 with this understanding.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Great point that is pretty convincing. These viewpoints are absurd. We are born into sin. We are born into a condition of sin. We are effected by it from the time of conception.

Happy 1000th post to me!