Aeliana
Well-known member
Sounds good to me. I'm always willing to learn new things and to get a better understanding of why I believe what I believe.
Will Babies that die go to Heaven?
- Thread starter Aeliana
- Start date
It is logically implied by many many verses and the revelation of HIS character:
Unconditional election means unconditional non-election, people being damned before they sin.
1 Timothy 5:21 I charge thee before GOD and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the ELECT angels. Since there are elect angels we can assume that the demonic angels were passed over for election or not considered for election. Angels do not presumably have any racial solidarity, ie, they all are holy or sinful by their own choice, not by anyone else's choice. So now we have to answer the question: were some elected before or after the fall of the Satanic rebellion?
IF they were elected / chosen before the fall then there is no stated reason for the non-election of the others. Unconditional, unmerited, election then also means unconditional unmerited non-election, that is, for no lack of merit or sinful condition at all some were passed over for salvation and NOT chosen to be saved if they should ever sin.
What can we make of such a supposition? Can we say it is loving? Righteous? Just? The best we can say is HE is sovereign and if HE chose this way then who are you to argue, which is not a real answer at all. Why teach us HE is loving, righteous and just if it has no meaning in the biggest question in their existence: Why were some passed over for election!!!
This is what unconditional and 'without merit' implies. It implies 'no reason', not just an 'unknown reason' because if there was a reason although unknown there would be merit to being on the side of the (unknown) reason. Unconditional election means everyone was just as acceptable for election as everyone else but some did not receive it... That does NOT sound like GOD at all.
MERITED ELECTION / MERITED REPROBATION
IF they were passed over for an evil they did then there is a righteous reason to their being passed over. The election of those that were not passed over but who got the promise of election was because they did not do that evil!!
IF election was a response to the Satanic rebellion to reward those spirits who did not rebel and to pass over those spirits who did rebel and condemn them on the spot, then election by merit makes sense. Their eternal, unforgivable, rebellion to the command to put their faith in the Son and to love one another which they heard in the beginning* is then the reason they were passed over to be HIS Bride. The choice by some to accept HIM as their GOD and to put their faith in HIS Son was the reason they were elected based upon the merit of this choice by faith to obey this call.
*the beginning:
1 John 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. I believe that John is referring to the loving purpose GOD has for each of us: 1 John 3:23 And this is His commandment, That we should believe on the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment.
Thus we probably have a precedent in the angels for election being based upon merit and proper free will decisions being the condition of being elected.
And since unconditional election is apparently false in the first people elected, I strongly suggest that it is also wrongly used for sinful men who were also elected in the beginning before the foundation of the world, Ephesians 1:4.
[ASIDE: IF UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION IS TRUE, it is entirely possible that the decision for some to receive unconditional unmerited election and others to receive unmerited rejection for election (reprobation) with no indication that this decision was loving, righteous or just could have precipitated the Satanic war in heaven when the non-elect were subject to a decision that was NOT loving, righteous or just so they committed themselves to war, putting their faith in the belief that YHWH was therefore a false god and a liar, unworthy of being their GOD.]
Last edited:
jeremiah1five
Well-known member
If a child gains heaven by virtue of his being a child, then this denies the grace of God in placing a condition upon His grace and it is no more grace.
God doesn't regard man the way men regard themselves. The doctrine of sin is universal, and we all die because of sin. Thus, in order for it to be grace it must rest solely upon the good pleasure of God's will and no condition is set upon His grace by men in the vanity of their minds.
It matters not whether we can grasp the distinction between good and evil, or the age of our person, we are all born with a sin nature and that is the only thing God looks at.
Death is the judgment for sin.
This Scripture can be seen to go the other way, that 'faith is given only to those that believe' are saved and that since a baby in the womb or any child that doesn't know the distinction of good and evil cannot believe and is not given faith then without faith it is impossible to be saved, but that is not the conclusion of the matter either.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Gal. 3:22.
In order for it to be grace it must be free of conditions man would seek to place on it for his own selfish reasons, be it an adult or baby in the womb. Ultimately, it is God's Sovereign choice as to who He will save among men.
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth,
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Rom. 9:11–16.
God accepted one and God rejected the other. God loved the one and God hated the other.
If anyone wants a baby to be saved fight abortion. Start there and let us pray for our children.
Start there.
Last edited:
jeremiah1five
Well-known member
The age of accountability is in Jewish culture and religion. It's called bar mitzvah for the boy, and bat mitzvah for the girl. It is their passage of rites to them to be accountable in the Jewish culture and religion as adults and no longer children. It has nothing to do with good and evil or sin. Gentiles have taken that term to make it mean something else.
In the US the age of accountability in which a minor is treated as an adult in most states is 18 years old.
IF this is true, then why does HE not kill us all in the womb? Why does HE make some of us live many years and struggle with temptation, some to their destruction if HE could save everyone by an early death???
Job 14:5 A man’s days are numbered. You know the number of his months. He cannot live longer than the time You have set.
Psalm 139:16 Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.
HE is obviously in charge of the day we die so why fill hell with the late bloomers when HE could save us all by an early death?
Why do the vast majority of us miss out on the joys of the saved by an early death club when it is clear HE wants everyone to be saved,
Berean Standard Bible 1 Tim 2:4 who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. and by this simple means can keep everyone in all the world out of hell!
civic
Well-known member
He gives everyone the choice to love Him in return by placing their faith in the Son.
John 3
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.
Are you referring to every person that is enslaved to sin? Or just the ones HE calls and give the gift of faith?
The choice is meaningless if we have no choice as enslaved to sin but if we were given the choice before we were judged as sinful then I agree,
civic
Well-known member
All without exceptionAre you referring to every person that is enslaved to sin? Or just the ones HE calls and give the gift of faith?
The choice is meaningless if we have no choice as enslaved to sin but if we were given the choice before we were judged as sinful then I agree,
Whosoever
Member
And all the whosoevers, we're not getting left behind.
civic
Well-known member
Yes everyone it’s an all inclusive club anyone can join
Indeed - I totally agree...
but I just can't apply it to anyone enslaved to sin since their free will is destroyed by their enslavement. But before they chose to be sinful in HIS sight, they certainly had the choice to answer HIS call to put their faith in HIM.
jeremiah1five
Well-known member
Since Paul is writing to Jews the term "to call upon the Lord" means worship and no one can worship God unless that person is in relationship with God. Paul is writing to a people already saved.
Hosanna
Well-known member
The sin nature refers to the tendency of every human being to rebel against God's ways. It is a natural inclination, and it is not optional. Sin is the quality of any human action that fails to glorify the Lord fully, which was first present in the disobedience of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. It has corrupted all people except for Christ and leads to death, both bodily and spiritually. The Bible teaches that we have a sin nature, and it is our nature to do so. I understand this teaching is in contrast to many religious movements that deny original sin.
Bob Carabbio
Well-known member
The same works for ANY "Control issue". The natural human tendency whenever a LAW exists, is to desire to "Break it".
Actually the Bible doesn't teach any such thing. "Sin Nature" is just another "human theological construct".
We've all got a HUMAN NATURE, and the mechanism of TEMPTATION is detailed in James 1:14,15. We, of our OWN FREE WILL (aided and abetted by satanic enticement), choose whether or not to allow our "lust" (Strong personal desire) to "Conceive", and lead to SINFUL ACTIVITIES.
SOMETIMES we decide NOT to follow our LUST, and remain sinless, and sometimes we allow our LUST to conceive, and birth SIN.
ONE SIN results in falling short of God's Glory. FAITH in the SIN OFFERING of Jesus on the Cross, cleanses us from all SIN as soon as we CONFESS our SIN, and repent of it.
Bronson
Active member
Romans 7:7
4Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. 5For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. 7What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. 9For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.Seems like you have to be aware of the law to be held accountable for sin. That's something unborn babies and little children are incapable of. they don't have a sin nature
I believe that hell is done and over with, but God rewards justly, and babies while they may be sinful have already had their sins taken care of. There is the inside of the Kingdom where God resides, and the outside of the Kingdom. That is all that is known. Praise be to the victorious Messiah!
Anja
Member
Struggling together in the womb of their mother is completely different than what's in my post. And you certainly wouldn't be able to prove attempted murder in the womb. I'd give you anything to see you explain that one to a jury. How would you get by the fact that an undeveloped brain of an unborn infant could not possibly contemplate murder? Was it premeditated? Or a spontaneous fit of anger? Perhaps they were solicited to commit murder "The devil made them do it". Or they may have just been having a bad hair day. What's the Biblical Hebrew word for bad hair day? Inquiring minds want to know.
One more thing I'd like to know. That's how long could an unborn baby survive in the womb with a decomposing crushed carcass right beside him? It might create a toxic environment. Yeah those unborn babies just don't think these things through.
Here's what I posted and still stand by:
Gen 25:22
Berean Standard Bible
But the children inside her struggled with each other, and she said, “Why is this happening to me?” So Rebekah went to inquire of the LORD,
struggled - Strong's Concordance: H7533
way·yiṯ·rō·ṣă·ṣū [e]
The root word is ratsats, to crush, to crush to pieces
The actual word is in the reciprocal mode as per [e], means to crush each other to pieces.
The reason that the words are changed in the English to wrestle, jostle and struggle is obviously an eisegetical interpretation of ratsats to avoid the implications that an infant in the womb can be / is a murderous sinner, a theological no-no...just another case where GOD could not get the right word written down to express the truth, sigh....thank the Rabbis and the Church Fathers for helping out with this to get it right!
This story is certainly enough to believe that they were trying to murder each other without doing any damage to the words at all though it is destructive to ordinary theology.
Another thing about this story that is never explained is found in the reason that GOD gave to Rebecca about why they were fighting in the womb, that is, they were trying to be the first born and rule the family according to the laws of Hebrew primogeniture.
How could the newly created infants with no thoughts, ie, as tabula rasa, have been wrestling, jostling or struggling in the womb for this reason??? The first born rules the family is meaningless if you have no idea let alone thoughts about ideas so culturally derived!!? Without their prior existence before their conception as humans in which they learned about such arcane things and that they were to be first born twins in a very important family, this part of the story makes no sense at all!
So in a war of brothers to be the first born to rule the family, which words do you think are the most suitable, struggle, jostle or crushing to pieces? Doesn't really matter to me, one of them at least was maybe being murderous and the other fighting in self defence or they both were sinful with no faith in GOD.
Obadiah
Well-known member
They go to heaven.
God’s great judgment on His people was never voiced more clearly than through the prophet Ezekiel later in that same chapter. His indictment of the people of Jerusalem was extremely strong:
You took your sons and your daughters, whom you bore to Me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. (Abortion) Were your acts of harlotry a small matter, that you have slain My children and offered them up to them by causing them to pass through the fire? And in all your abominations and acts of harlotry you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, struggling in your blood. (Ezek. 16:20–22)
God lays full claim to these innocent sons and daughters who are sacrificed to false gods. He says these children were born to Him and they are His children. He exerts full ownership over the innocent ones. He even refers to them as “the innocents” in Jeremiah 2:34 and 19:4. Though fallen creatures like all Adam’s offspring, infants are not culpable in the same sense as those whose sins are willful and premeditated. Therefore God expresses serious displeasure over the people of Israel, who failed to treat their little ones the way God treated them.
God’s great judgment on His people was never voiced more clearly than through the prophet Ezekiel later in that same chapter. His indictment of the people of Jerusalem was extremely strong:
You took your sons and your daughters, whom you bore to Me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. (Abortion) Were your acts of harlotry a small matter, that you have slain My children and offered them up to them by causing them to pass through the fire? And in all your abominations and acts of harlotry you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, struggling in your blood. (Ezek. 16:20–22)
God lays full claim to these innocent sons and daughters who are sacrificed to false gods. He says these children were born to Him and they are His children. He exerts full ownership over the innocent ones. He even refers to them as “the innocents” in Jeremiah 2:34 and 19:4. Though fallen creatures like all Adam’s offspring, infants are not culpable in the same sense as those whose sins are willful and premeditated. Therefore God expresses serious displeasure over the people of Israel, who failed to treat their little ones the way God treated them.
Similar threads
