Children are innocent, not guilty of any sin

It's a Calvinistic tactic to hide what they really believe.
  1. I am a BAPTIST (a Particular Baptist, but a Baptist), so I am NOT a Calvinist. We are ananbaptists, contrarians, separatists, many names indicating an embracing of Credobaptism and a rejection of Rome for which we were martyred for 1200 years before the Council of Trent. Modern Baptists only came into being in the 1600’s (long after the Reformation) with our current Baptist Distinctives of Credobaptism, Local Autonomy, Separation of Church and State, Soul Liberty and Bible as the only authority.
  2. What I really believe is “hidden” in my signature! Deny scripture at your own peril.
 
Sure, just quote any other poster that says “babies are despicable devils”.

HERE is the only post and poster that I know that made that claim:
Good morning Atpollard.
I do believe @civic was using hyperbole.
I think you're intelligent enough to have known this.

I look forward to your presenting someone else posting that claim. If you cannot, then you have your answer why I claim @civic is the only one saying that about babies.
You want I should go back 10 years and post members on at least 3 different forums that stated that children are mean and VIOLENT and have no manners and do not want to learn...and who knows what else.
No A.....I will not be doing that.

However...I will get to the meat of this thread.

So, you've stated that babies are born IN SIN.
I mean IN SIN....as though they have already committed a PERSONAL SIN.
Which, I understand to be different than being born with the sin nature -which is biblical.

I asked that you post some scripture but I haven't seen any -- but I don't read entire threads so sorry if I missed it.
Could you direct me to the post number if you have?

Babies are NOT born with sin already on their soul.

Here's why:

Every person is responsible ONLY for their own sins.
Romans 2:4
4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?

Can an infant repent?


Hebrews 11:6
6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

Can an infant truly know that God exists and WHO God is?



Acts 16:31
31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved,


Can a baby or infant or young child BELIEVE (the biblical meaning) in Jesus?

On what scripture do you base your belief that babies are born with sin on their soul?
 
Does that mean YOU know why Adam and Eve BOTH chose to disobey God and Sin? I would love to hear your explanation.
(Otherwise, you agree with Mr Sproul and your post is pointless).
No one can know why A and E sinned. I agree with RC if he said this.

It could be plain disobedience.
The fruit looked good...the lust of the eyes.
Maybe the devil convinced them that God was tricking them so they wouldn't become like Him.
Eve thought it would make her wise.
She added DO NOT TOUCH to DO NOT EAT....which is very interesting but I've never looked into this.

Most believe it was just disobedience.
To God it was much more if He had to plan (yes, to predestinate) to send His Son to atonement for our sins.
His Son is God...is Himself....
In the OT we're told that God HIMSELF will shepherd and save His people.
 
Does that mean YOU know why Adam and Eve BOTH chose to disobey God and Sin? I would love to hear your explanation.
(Otherwise, you agree with Mr Sproul and your post is pointless).
No one can know why A and E sinned. I agree with RC if he said this.

It could be plain disobedience.
The fruit looked good...the lust of the eyes.
Maybe the devil convinced them that God was tricking them so they wouldn't become like Him.
Eve thought it would make her wise.
She added DO NOT TOUCH to DO NOT EAT....which is very interesting but I've never looked into this.

Most believe it was just disobedience.
To God it was much more if He had to plan (yes, to predestinate) to send His Son to atone for our sins.
His Son is God...is Himself....
In the OT we're told that God HIMSELF will shepherd and save His people.
 
Good morning Atpollard.
I do believe @civic was using hyperbole.
I think you're intelligent enough to have known this.
I think @civic was deliberately using slander to demonize the position of the people with whom he disagreed as a cheap debate tactic to score points with those that already agreed and poison the well of any honest conversation.

As someone that claims those that disagree with YOU believe “heresy”, a term that makes them “heretics” and unsaved (by the very definition of the terms), that is something that YOU should be fully aware of and familiar with.

I pointed out that NOBODY was claiming what he said we were claiming … that is the definition of a “strawman” argument. I claimed that babies and infants do not have sinless perfection. The Bible says GOD ALONE IS PERFECT, not GOD AND INFANTS are PERFECT.

You and he ignore the fact that your verses do not say “sinless”, so you are engaging in esigesis to add that meaning to verses that say we need to be humble like children.
 
On what scripture do you base your belief that babies are born with sin on their soul?
Romans 3:10-12 [ESV]
as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."

According to God, HOW MANY ARE RIGHTEOUS? NONE.
So how many sinless (righteous) infants are there?

Psalm 51:5 [ESV] Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Setting aside the issue of CONCEPTION (I don’t want to waste time arguing about David’s mother’s sin … you are wrong, but it is irrelevant) … BROUGHT FORTH means “born”, so in what state was David BORN? “Sinless” or “in iniquity”?
 
“But Adam and Eve were not created fallen.
AGREED!!
Nobody was ever created fallen. God is light and light destroys dark.

Light cannot create darkness:
To be created fallen means that light CAN create darkness....that there is a power from GOD that when employed can stand in opposition to HIMself! GOD is not a house divided, GOD is light and light cannot create darkness which is created only if something else blocks the light. This is akin to believing that there is a match or source of darkness which when employed shoots our darkness and fills the room with dark!!

A good tree cannot put forth rotten fruit.
Berean Literal Bible
Matt 7:18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruits...the theology that we are created fallen says a good, even perfect, tree CAN produce bad fruit.

A stream of life giving water cannot put forth salt or brackish water.
Berean Standard Bible
My brothers, can a fig tree grow olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water. The created fallen theology says a fig tree CAN grow olives, that a grapevine CAN bear figs and that a salt spring CAN produce fresh water!

GOODNESS cannot bring forth evil.
Inherent evil cannot have been a part of our creation. We must have been created as perfectly able to choose by our free will to enter HIS righteous perfection or to repudiate HIS righteousness and become HIS eternal enemy.

They were good creatures with a free will.
YES!
GOD created people to be a Bride for HIM in a true marriage. A true marriage can only occur when the prospective Bride agrees to the marriage by their free will. Iow, a forced marriage is not a real marriage at all and without true love.

But a free will must have an equal ability and opportunity to choose to accept YHWH's claims to be our GOD and Saviour from sin OR to decide HE was lying, making HIM a false god...

Yet they chose to sin. Why?
Since proof of HIS divinity and eternal power would force everyone to bow to HIM, the fall must have happened by our free will decisions before the proof was given. We are told that the proof of HIS divinity and power was the creation of the physical universe which must have happened after the fall or no one would ever have gone against HIM in HIS glory!

Therefore I contend that we made our decisions by faith, ie, without proof, and that we choose our positions of faith after HE proclaimed HIS Divinity and the gospel of salvation to be found only in the Son, the proclamation that I think was referred to in Col 1:23... I believe this first proclamation of the gospel included the promise of election, of being chosen for salvation by redemption, free from the pain of hell, for any who put their faith in HIM as their Saviour if they should ever go astray into sinfulness as mention in Jn 3:18 Whoever believes in Him is not condemned...

The response to this proclamation separated all of creation into three groups: the holy elect, the eternally sinful reprobate who never believed HIS proclamation was the truth and the sinful elect, who believed but then fell into idolatry, Jn 3:18. The fall of some of the elect came about because some only accepted HIM so they could be free from the dangers of hell but were planning to then go their own way no matter what HE wanted from them.

Since HE is a GOD who cannot abide evil and must destroy it as soon as possible, HIS first command was to set up the judgement day to come about. HE commanded all HIS elect to “come out from among the reprobate,” that is, to repudiate their friendships or even love for these who were condemned already because HE knew some were harbouring idolatrous thoughts about the reprobate that the judgement was too harsh, too unloving and too unnecessary to be accepted. Most complied, some didn’t, becoming enslaved to sin themselves, HIS prodigal sheep gone astray into sin, needing redemption. The next command was for HIS elect to then come out from among their now sinful elect friends and to leave them to HIS mercy...which most accepted but some did not.

Eve, whom I personally believe was a real person, is also the type for those elect who sinned for love of a Satanic reprobate as seen by how she treated the serpent in the garden, as a mentor or pastor.

Adam, whom I personally believe was a real person, is also the type for those elect who idolized their elect but sinful friends over the call of GOD to leave them. He chose Eve over GOD though he had no truck with the serpent.

By repeated calls for those not yet sinful to come out for among the sinners HE found the level of willingness to sin (ie, their lack of willingness to be holy) in every person in creation from Satan to the least sinful person in existence including the holy elect angels who never sinned.

Then the physical universe was created which proof of HIS divinity and power ended everyone’s free will decisions about these choices, setting our self chosen fates into motion.

Satan with his demonic angels and the fallen elect were all flung to the earth, Rev 12:4-9, to live together in the world as the best method of bringing the sinful elect, the sinful people of the kingdom, to holiness, Matt 13:29-30, the parable of the sower, especially considering Jesus’ explanation of the parable, Matt 13:36-39.

This is the short summation of our Pre-Conception Existence (PCE) theology about the mechanics of the fall of the Satanic and some of the elect, why they fell, when they fell and how some became elect to salvation even before the foundation of the world, not by a fiat from GOD but as HIS promise to any and all who put their faith in HIM without proof, that they would be saved from all legal and natural consequences for choosing to be sinful in HIS sight.
 
I think @civic was deliberately using slander to demonize the position of the people with whom he disagreed as a cheap debate tactic to score points with those that already agreed and poison the well of any honest conversation.

As someone that claims those that disagree with YOU believe “heresy”, a term that makes them “heretics” and unsaved (by the very definition of the terms), that is something that YOU should be fully aware of and familiar with.

I pointed out that NOBODY was claiming what he said we were claiming … that is the definition of a “strawman” argument. I claimed that babies and infants do not have sinless perfection. The Bible says GOD ALONE IS PERFECT, not GOD AND INFANTS are PERFECT.

You and he ignore the fact that your verses do not say “sinless”, so you are engaging in esigesis to add that meaning to verses that say we need to be humble like children.
I'm sorry A....
could you please clarify.
Can we say a baby is born in sinless perfection?
If by that we mean that he has no sin,,,then YES,,,a baby is born in sinless perfection.

Let me also state that if you believe that a baby is born already saved or lost (as it SEEMS you're stating)
then let's look at the outcome of this belief.

@civic stated some negative attitudes of children. Indeed we can say that children could be mean to each other and maybe even violent.

So....since every child exhibits the same charachteristics...
HOW would we distinguish between the saved and unsaved?

There is NO WAY to distinguish.
Because all children are born with a clean slate.

I do believe you take GOD ALONE IS BORN PERFECT to an extreme .

JESUS stated that we must be like a child if we want to get into heaven.
That sounds like children get into heaven....He made no distinction.

Again...could we have some scripture that supports your point of view=?
 
I'm sorry A....
could you please clarify.
Can we say a baby is born in sinless perfection?
If by that we mean that he has no sin,,,then YES,,,a baby is born in sinless perfection.

Let me also state that if you believe that a baby is born already saved or lost (as it SEEMS you're stating)
then let's look at the outcome of this belief.

@civic stated some negative attitudes of children. Indeed we can say that children could be mean to each other and maybe even violent.

So....since every child exhibits the same charachteristics...
HOW would we distinguish between the saved and unsaved?

There is NO WAY to distinguish.
Because all children are born with a clean slate.

I do believe you take GOD ALONE IS BORN PERFECT to an extreme .

JESUS stated that we must be like a child if we want to get into heaven.
That sounds like children get into heaven....He made no distinction.

Again...could we have some scripture that supports your point of view=?
Here is what I spelled out biblically regarding children/infants and what I believe about them. They are blessings not cursed little sinners in need of a Savior.

 
Amen but we know some think they are filthy rotten little despicable sinful devils
In comparison to the law of God, they are! In comparison to adults they are humble little creature, but let them keep growing and as they do, so does lust begin to abound in their members where it lay there just waiting for the opportunity to show who they truly are apart from the grace of Almighty God being given to them.

First, there is no doctrine such as the age of accountability, that's heresy. We all were accountable in Adam our head, what we inherited from Adam was a sinful, wicked nature that is at enmity against the God of heaven. When Adam sinned he took on the image of Satan his new master, who held him captive the very second he sinned. That image is corrupt, exceedingly wicked, and to the degree God dos not restrain man, we will see just how wicked he truly is, some men he restrains, but still their heart is wicked, until God takes that stony heart out and gives them another heart.

Question: Why did God command certain kings in Israel to destroy everything when they destroyed certain nations? They even were commanded to destroyed infants ~ if they are without sin as some vainly imagine? God would have been unrighteous if they were not accounted wicked in Adam for Him destroy them, if again, they were not so by nature.

1st Samuel 15:3
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.”

Many in our day, have the same theology that Saul believed in:

1st Samuel 15:9​

“But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.”

He thought the little, cute, innocent infants and suckling were too good to destroyed, but God thought otherwise! Does anyone think there were no infants and suckling's destroyed at the flood in Noah's days, you better believe there were, many under the so-called age of accountability.

I'm sure I will be saying more on the truth that we all were in Adam and guilty of his sin and inherited his sinful wicked nature, as the result of his sin. So. I'll stop for now. I may post a post just on the the age of accountability to show just how corrupt that thinking is, that even God's children's have fallen for its lies.
 
Romans 3:10-12 [ESV]
as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."
Does Total Depravity have no other verses??

Romans 3:10-12
9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;
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."


Paul is stating that all are under the sin of Adam.
He says AS IT IS WRITTEN....which refers to the OT.

It is referring to:
PSALM 14:1-3
53:1-3
5:9
140:3
10:7
36:1

If we do a small study on the Psalms that Paul mentions, we find that they speak of:
Fools
Unbelievers
Rebellious persons
Evil men who devise evil
Wickedness

The writer of psalms, in PSALM 5:11 asks God to let ALL WHO TAKE REFUGE IN GOD be glad.

So, apparently, some are taking refuge in God and t he psalmist is speaking of other persons that ARE NOT.

The writer of Psalm 14:1-3 is NOT speaking of everyone and is using hyperbole because
NOAH, ABRAHAM, JACOB, etc....were RIGHTEOUS....
So THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS cannot be taken literally.

Also, the Psalmist says that none seek after God.
I can post 10's of verses that state that WE ARE TO SEEK God..
so, again. hyperbole is being used and the language is not to be taken literally...
if it is there is a great discrepancy in the bible.


According to God, HOW MANY ARE RIGHTEOUS? NONE.
So how many sinless (righteous) infants are there?
Addressed above.

Psalm 51:5 [ESV] Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Setting aside the issue of CONCEPTION (I don’t want to waste time arguing about David’s mother’s sin …
Why is it a waste of time?
Psalm 51:5 is speaking of David's MOTHER'S SIN.....
It is NOT speaking about being born with sin on the baby's soul.

The baby was brought forth in iniquiety.....
He was brought forth in sin...NOT HIS SIN.

Since these two verses are so vague...
perhaps you could find a better one?

Do you believe in infant baptism?
you are wrong, but it is irrelevant) … BROUGHT FORTH means “born”, so in what state was David BORN? “Sinless” or “in iniquity”?
 
Here is what I spelled out biblically regarding children/infants and what I believe about them. They are blessings not cursed little sinners in need of a Savior.

Of course they're a blessing!
In the OT times women that could not bear children were considered to be cursed.

What we have to concentrate on here is BIBLICAL evidence that a baby, infant, child could sin.

God set up certain rules and regulations, which Paul spoke of, and we have to use these rules to decide if children can be
responsible for sinning or not.

I don't see any such evidence, but see the opposite.
A child cannot sin because he doesn't know what a sin is.
God will hold us responsible only for the light we have....
 
In comparison to the law of God, they are! In comparison to adults they are humble little creature, but let them keep growing and as they do, so does lust begin to abound in their members where it lay there just waiting for the opportunity to show who they truly are apart from the grace of Almighty God being given to them.

First, there is no doctrine such as the age of accountability, that's heresy. We all were accountable in Adam our head, what we inherited from Adam was a sinful, wicked nature that is at enmity against the God of heaven. When Adam sinned he took on the image of Satan his new master, who held him captive the very second he sinned. That image is corrupt, exceedingly wicked, and to the degree God dos not restrain man, we will see just how wicked he truly is, some men he restrains, but still their heart is wicked, until God takes that stony heart out and gives them another heart.

Question: Why did God command certain kings in Israel to destroy everything when they destroyed certain nations? They even were commanded to destroyed infants ~ if they are without sin as some vainly imagine? God would have been unrighteous if they were not accounted wicked in Adam for Him destroy them, if again, they were not so by nature.

1st Samuel 15:3
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.”

Many in our day, have the same theology that Saul believed in:

1st Samuel 15:9​

“But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.”

He thought the little, cute, innocent infants and suckling were too good to destroyed, but God thought otherwise! Does anyone think there were no infants and suckling's destroyed at the flood in Noah's days, you better believe there were, many under the so-called age of accountability.

I'm sure I will be saying more on the truth that we all were in Adam and guilty of his sin and inherited his sinful wicked nature, as the result of his sin. So. I'll stop for now. I may post a post just on the the age of accountability to show just how corrupt that thinking is, that even God's children's have fallen for its lies.
RB
We're discussing this right now in the Catholics thread.

Here's my question to you:
Is there a difference between being born with the sin nature
and
being born with sin on the soul?
 
Of course they're a blessing!
In the OT times women that could not bear children were considered to be cursed.

What we have to concentrate on here is BIBLICAL evidence that a baby, infant, child could sin.

God set up certain rules and regulations, which Paul spoke of, and we have to use these rules to decide if children can be
responsible for sinning or not.

I don't see any such evidence, but see the opposite.
A child cannot sin because he doesn't know what a sin is.
God will hold us responsible only for the light we have....
agreed they are not considered sinful until they commit a sin. Thats the biblical principle. Many passages say children are not guilt of the sins of their fathers/parents.

ts appalling to condemn innocent children- Even the calvinst Gill agree's from Jer 2:34- they are INNOCENT not guilty of sin,

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Also in thy skirts is found the blood of the souls of the poor innocents,.... Either of the innocent infants of poor persons, who were sacrificed to Moloch; or of the poor prophets of the Lord, whom they slew,

and here from Jeremiah

Jeremiah 19:2 and go out to the Valley of the Son of Hinnom at the entry of the Potsherd Gate, and proclaim there the words that I tell you…4 Because the people have forsaken me and have profaned this place by making offerings in it to other gods whom neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah have known; and because they have filled this place with THE BLOOD OF INNOCENTS…6 therefore, behold, days are coming, declares the Lord, when this place shall no more be called Topheth, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

God judged them by having the Babylonians doing to them what they did to their children. The Jews Slaughtering their innocent children and God had them slaughtered by the Babylonians.

Psalm 106:34 They (the Israelites) did not destroy the peoples (the Canaanites), as the Lord commanded them, 35 but they mixed with the nations and learned to do as they did. 36 They served their idols, which became a snare to them. 37 They SACRIFICED THEIR SONS AND THEIR DAUGHTERS TO THE DEMONS; 38 they poured out INNOCENT BLOOD, THE BLOOD OF THEIR SONS AND DAUGHTERS, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood.

conclusion: how many time does God/Jesus have to say children are INNOCENT not guilty before you will believe ?

Jesus affirms the above in the N.T. Woe to those who cause any little ones to stumble.

And more scripture from Jesus

Matthew 18:2-5

And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven

Matthew 18:10
“See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven.

Matthew 18:14
So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones perish.

Matthew 19:13-14

Then some children were brought to Him so that He might lay His hands on them and pray; and the disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.

Mark 9:36-37

Taking a child, He set him before them, and taking him in His arms, He said to them, “Whoever receives one child like this in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me does not receive Me, but Him who sent Me.”

Mark 10:13-16
And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.

Luke 9:47-48
But Jesus, knowing what they were thinking in their heart, took a child and stood him by His side, and said to them, “Whoever receives this child in My name receives Me, and whoever receives Me receives Him who sent Me; for the one who is least among all of you, this is the one who is great.”

Luke 18:15-17
And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. But Jesus called for them, saying, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.”

conclusion :There is no transmission of a fallen nature, a sin nature that originated with augustine. Lets see what God declares about sin.

Ezekiel 18:4
For everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child—both alike belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die

Ezekiel 18:20
“The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.”

Deuteronomy 24:16
Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.

2 Kings 14:6
Yet he did not put the sons of the murderers to death, but acted according to what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses, where the LORD commanded: "Fathers must not be put to death for their children, and children must not be put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."

Jeremiah 31:30
Instead, each will die for his own iniquity. If anyone eats the sour grapes, his own teeth will be set on edge.

And we have the wisdom of Job below who knew had he died as a child he would be at peace with the Lord as an innocent and not condemned in hell as guilty as some falsely teach/believe. Job knew there was no torment and suffering if he had died as a child.

Job 3:11 “Why did I not die at birth, come out from the womb and expire?…13 For then I would have lain DOWN AND BEEN QUIET; I WOULD HAVE SLEPT; THEN I WOULD HAVE BEEN AT REST.

The Bible is in one accord on the innocence of children and that there is no guilt of sin.


1 John 3:4 " Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness."

Ezekiel 18:20, "The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”

Matthew 18:3, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 19:14, "But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

If children are born sinners as TD and original sin teaches then Jesus teaches that to be His disciples we must be corrupt like the little children which is an oxymoron.

The teaching above by Jesus, Ezekiel and John confirms I’m correct and original sin is not. One becomes a sinner when they sin and become guilty of that sin not before. Babies are born innocent, not guilty. There is no DNA gene making one a sinner that is folklore.


The errors of the Gnostics were continually rejected by the Early Church, but the Gnostics continued to try to penetrate the Church with their views. The Gnostics even wrote their own gospels, known as the Gnostic Gospels today, where they stole credible names like Mary and Thomas to try to give validity to their teachings.

While many of the attempts of the Gnostics to infiltrate the Church failed, and many of their views are widely rejected today, it seems that their particular view of human nature, free will, and the nature of sin has found wide acceptance in the Church today.

On Free will

Regarding the term “free will,” John Calvin admitted “As to the Fathers, (if their authority weighs with us,) they have the term constantly in their mouths…”[31]He said, “The Greek fathers above others” have taught “the power of the human will”[32] and “they have not been ashamed to make use of a much more arrogant expression calling man ‘free agent or self-manager,’ just as if man had a power to govern himself…”[33] He also said, “The Latin fathers have always retained the word ‘free will’ as if man stood yet upright.”[34] It is a fact that cannot be denied even by those who most ardently oppose the doctrine of free will, that the doctrine of free will and not that of inability was held by all of the Early Church.

Walter Arthur Copinger said, “All the Fathers are unanimous on the freedom of the human will…”[35]Lyman Beecher said, “the free will and natural ability of man were held by the whole church…”[36] And Dr Wiggers said, “All the fathers…agreed with the Pelagians, in attributing freedom of will to man in his present state.”[37] This is a very important point because whenever a person today holds to the belief that all men have the natural ability to obey God or not to obey Him, or that man’s nature still retains the faculty of free will and can choose between these two alternatives and possibilities, he is almost immediately accused of being a heretical “Pelagian” by the Calvinists. This accusation is being unfair to the position of free will since all of the Early Church Fathers held to free will long before Pelagius even existed.

On Original sin

Harry Conn said, “Augustine, after studying the philosophy of Manes, the Persian philosopher, brought into the church from Manichaeism the doctrine of original sin.”[51]

The corruption of our nature, or the loss of our free will, Augustine credited to the original sin of Adam. Augustine said that the “free choice of the will was present in that man who was the first to be formed… But after he sinned by that free will, we who have descended from his progeny have been plunged into necessity.”[52] “By Adam’s transgression, the freedom of’ the human will has been completely lost.”[53] “By the greatness of the first sin, we have lost the freewill to love God.” And finally he said, “by subverting the rectitude in which he was created, he is followed with the punishment of not being able to do right” and “the freedom to abstain from sin has been lost as a punishment of sin.”[54]

Consider the following facts:

  • All of the Early Christians, before Augustine, believed in man’s free will and denied man’s natural inability.
  • The Gnostics in the days of the Early Church believed in man’s natural inability and denied man’s free will.
  • Augustine was a Gnostic for many years, in the Manichaeism sect, and converted to the Church out of Gnosticism.
  • After joining the Church and being appointed a Bishop, Augustine began to deny the free will of man and to affirm the natural inability of man
  • The Church, under Augustine’s influence, began to believe in the natural inability of man, which it never before held to, but which it formerly would refute.

The reason that John Calvin rejected all ancient theologians and dismissed all of their writings on this matter, except for Augustine, is because all ancient theologians affirmed the freedom of the will in their writings, except for Augustine. Gregory Boyd said, “This in part explains why Calvin cannot cite ante-Nicene fathers against his libertarian opponents…. Hence, when Calvin debates Pighuis on the freedom of the will, he cites Augustine abundantly, but no early church fathers are cited.”[80] That is why George Pretyman said, “…the peculiar tenets of Calvinism are in direct opposition to the Doctrines maintained in the primitive Church of Christ…” This we have clearly seen, but he also said, “…there is a great similarity between the Calvinistic system and the earliest [Gnostic] heresies…”[81]

The Reformers sought to return the Church to early Christianity, but actually brought it back to early heresies, because it stopped short at Augustine. The Reformers did not go far back enough. Rather than returning the Church to early Christianity, the Reformation resurrected Augustinian and Gnostic doctrines. The Methodist Quarterly Review said, “At the Reformation Augustinianism received an emphatic re-enforcement among the Protestant Churches.”[82] The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics said, “…it is Augustine who gave us the Reformation. For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine… the Reformation came, seeing that it was, on its theological side, a revival of Augustinianism…”[83] The Reformation was to a great extent a resurrection or revival of Augustinian theology and a further departure and falling away from Early Christianity.

Gnosticism, Augustinianism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism have much in common. Augustinianism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism teach Gnostic views of human nature and free will but under a different name. It’s the same old Gnosticism in a new wrapper. Other doctrines also seem to have originated in Gnosticism, from Basilianism, Valentianism, Marcionism, and Manichaeism, such as the doctrines of easy believism, individual predestination, constitutional regeneration, a sinful nature or a sinful flesh, eternal security or once saved always saved, and others. But no Gnostic doctrine has spread so widely throughout the Church, with such great acceptance as the doctrine of man’s natural inability to obey God. https://crosstheology.wordpress.com/augustine-gnostic-heretic-and-corruptor-of-the-church/

hope this helps !!!
 
This fits

FEBRUARY 21

PRAY FOR YOUR CHILDREN

JAMES 5:16
The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.


If I had to reduce it to just one thing, I would pray for my child’s personal relationship with the Lord Jesus, because if that’s solid, most of the other stuff will settle in.

Some days I have felt so burdened for my family that I have spent my whole prayer time praying for my children, either out loud or in writing, making sure I said everything I wanted to say. And God has answered my prayers in a way that would take ten books to describe.

Perhaps your children are (or will be) scattered around the country or the world. Remember this: though you are separated by hundreds of miles, you can feel a sense of oneness in the presence of God, a sense of security that God will do what He’s promised. Or your children may still live with or near you, but through prayer you can draw even closer to them than physical proximity allows.

Through prayer, righteous parents can change the course and direction of their family. The prayer of a righteous parent can put a child’s heart into the hand of the Lord, who then directs it like a watercourse wherever He pleases.


David Jeremiah, Sanctuary: Finding Moments of Refuge in the Presence of God
 
Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Proverbs 22:6

Young’s Concordance defines the Hebrew word, chanak—train—by “To train, to dedicate, to give instructions to.” It enjoins the duty of dedicating a child to God, and thus so training and instructing him in his ways that he will not depart therefrom.

First, it is used in the sense of drilling soldiers. Second, breaking and training oxen. Third, to train a twig or tree in the form it is desired to grow. All these uses are in harmony with the illustrations by which Christ represents his disciples. They are soldiers in a holy war. They are compared to oxen where he said, “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me.”

And we are compared to trees, vine branches and grafts. To train up a child in the way it should go, is, therefore, to drill, and exercise him in righteousness, as a soldier is trained in military tactics. In the army every order is imperative. Moral suasion is not used in drilling soldiers. And some are even enlisted—drafted—without consulting their wish in the matter. While, it is true, others volunteer of their own free will.

When the great recruiting officer of the Lord Jesus enlisted the jailer at Philippi, he at once also counted his household on the sacred list. Acts 16:31. And when “Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord,” “all his house” were also mustered in by faith. Acts 18:8.
Baby baptisms in the jailer's household and also Crispus' not to forget Lydia has long been debated and those who hold such aversion to this idea will argue beyond reason that there were no babies present.

I am beyond trying to reason with such idiots, simply because they are certain they are correct...

But I was baby baptised some 77 years ago. In the Presbyterian Church. ( no idea if it was Usa or of America)

Most recently I have been observing the baby baptisms that still occure in my denomination. ( which is now an Evangelical) (and full confession... while it embraces the Westminster Confession of Faith... I do not hold with any portion on predestination or John Calvin )

That being said... When a baby is baptised in this church , after being baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit the minister turns to the parents and gives them a charge to bring up this child in the ways of God and the church and to see they grow with understanding. And asks them if they will and they say I do. Then he turns to the congregation and asks if they also will help with the child's growing up in the ways of God and the church.. and they respond I do.

This certainly fulfills the charge of Proverbs 22:6 "Train up a child in the way he should go;"

But in addition to this , we who were baptized as an infant in the Presbyterian church, as we grew at some point approaching 12 or 13 years of age undergo a class within the church (specifics I am not recalling at this time) but after completion then we are "Permitted" to join the church and have our VERY FIRST HOLY COMMUNION which is given to anyone in or out of the church because The Presbyterian Church upholds the principle that those who partake in Communion should have made a public profession of faith in Jesus Christ.

Which of course , those having just completing the class and joined the church absolutely do... or they are rejected.

But... In the Presbyterian tradition, baptism is closely linked to participation in Communion. The sacrament of baptism is viewed as the initiatory rite that marks an individual's incorporation into the body of Christ, the church. As such, those who partake in Communion are typically expected to have been baptized, signifying their inclusion in the community of faith and their identification with the death and resurrection of Christ.

Alrighty then... having bored you to pieces....

@Aeliana ~ Thank you for your comments
 

1st Samuel 15:9​

“But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.”

He thought the little, cute, innocent infants and suckling were too good to destroyed, but God thought otherwise!
Agreed.

My point is that their sin cannot have come from Adam as that is contrary to the love and righteousness of GOD who not only can't create sinners but who does not judge anyone for another's sin:
Jer 31:30 Berean Standard Bible Instead, each will die for his own iniquity.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul who sins is the one who will die.

Deuteronomy 24:16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin. Adam is our father so we don't die for his sin.

The only other (righteous) way a person can be born a sinner by their free will is if they sinned as a spirit in the heavenly world before their conception into mankind.
 
Agreed.

My point is that their sin cannot have come from Adam as that is contrary to the love and righteousness of GOD who not only can't create sinners but who does not judge anyone for another's sin:
Jer 31:30 Berean Standard Bible Instead, each will die for his own iniquity.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul who sins is the one who will die.

Deuteronomy 24:16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin. Adam is our father so we don't die for his sin.

The only other (righteous) way a person can be born a sinner by their free will is if they sinned as a spirit in the heavenly world before their conception into mankind.
I don't know what you mean by your last sentence...
but the rest is right on.
 
Back
Top Bottom