SITE NOTICE | MORE..WordPress Widget v1.6! New, CSS-friendly version of the Sermon Browser is now available with further customization. Please note that updating from the previous version will reset all of the saved widget settings. .. click for more info!
Islamic extremists from Somalia’s rebel Al-Shabaab militants on Friday (Nov. 16) killed a Christian in Somalia’s coastal city of Barawa, accusing him of being a spy and leaving Islam, Christian and Muslim witnesses said.
The extremists beheaded 25-year-old Farhan Haji Mose after monitoring his movements for six months, Christian sources said. Mose drew suspicion when he returned to Barawa, in Somalia’s Lower Shebelle Region, in December 2011 after spending time in Kenya, underground Christians in Somalia told Morning Star News....
Frank wrote: Just because I believe in election doesn't mean I will take all things and force them in my theology. Why not simply say that when a baby dies, God allowed it and accepts them because they have not actively or passivly sinned against Him?
Frank, I am glad to see that you also will not force everything into the structure. You may be interested to see what the Baptists had to say about the salvation of infants and also others who have no human means of hearing and responding.
Chapter 10: Effectual Calling: 3. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. (John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8)
Christopher000 wrote: Sounds like I have some research to do.
You may in fact be more correct than our learned brothers on this issue. Christ will not look at someone at the judgment and say "you are condemned" because you were conceived. All in Adam have sinful natures and will indeed sin and be subject to God's wrath, but there is no instance in scripture where someone is condemned if they weren't sinners. Now if someone wants to postulate how a baby in the womb can sin, or a new born baby can contemplate and decide on a sinful act, then I will reconsider my thoughts. Just because I believe in election doesn't mean I will take all things and force them in my theology. Why not simply say that when a baby dies, God allowed it and accepts them because they have not actively or passivly sinned against Him? Show me a judgment scenario where Christ says someone is condemned because they were born or conceived? There are a few noted in scripture so if I'm wrong it should be easy to prove.
God will do right and God is just therefore the one and only way that I can see him condemning a baby is if by his foreknowledge he knew that they would never turn to him.
Abel wrote: it was the childlike faith of the little children that was used ..rather than their innocence. Let us therefore ..put our faith and our trust in he who is wiser than us..
Christopher000 wrote: Sounds like I have some research to do. I don't understand why Jesus, in the Gospels would not have spoken out directly or alluded to something so important. When he sat the child on his lap I would have thought he would have commanded the child to repent, or else, rather than using the child's innocense as an example to the adults.
Friend, it was the childlike faith of the little children that was used as an example to adults, rather than their innocence.
Let us therefore apply the lesson of the passage and avoid the "adult" practice of unfaithful, idle and sinful speculation. We may safely put our faith and our trust in he who is wiser than us, just as little children safely trust in their parents today and came to the Lord of Glory when he was incarnate on earth.
On issues that God is silent on, it is NOT an oversight, it IS as God wants it. God does not need to consult with you, nor does He owe you an explanation!
"Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" Gen18:25 We know that God has perfect knowledge. He has complete knowledge. That He is Just, Rightheous, Mercifull, ... That God is God. I have children, I cannot trust them in safer arms!
So we KNOW what happens to babies!! God says, "Do you beleive that I am God?"
But God aside, we want to know what happens to babies.
Where God has called us to trust, we are ingenius at peeking over God to see if we can unearth some hidden secrets.
Babies aren't sinless, nor are they more sinfull as they grow. Otherwise, evengelism would be a race to abort as many, and as quikly, to get them into heaven. The virgin birth of Christ protected his sinlessness. The Pope declared the Babylonian Diana, sorry, Marry, sinless and Savior. And Adam, that's it!
Pastors in counselling capacity will have to share who Christ is. There is no better place to be then to be under the care of Christ.
Christopher000 wrote: Sounds like I have some research to do.
An explanatory passage, Christopher:
Romans 5:12-15 KJV 12 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: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless DEATH reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had NOT SINNED after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Sounds like I have some research to do. I don't understand why Jesus, in the Gospels would not have spoken out directly or alluded to something so important. When he sat the child on his lap I would have thought he would have commanded the child to repent, or else, rather than using the child's innocense as an example to the adults. Like I said though, I don't know much if anything and need to do a study.
Mike, I was wondering when someone would become curious enough to ask. My secret: Sermon Audio's mobile app. I usually post from my phone and the app allows for consecutive posting which is a bug or oversight, I'm sure.
Remit at gate wrote: Snowballing sin requires more punishment to 'pay' for your iniquity when you're older than if you're an unborn child? How would a fetus 'pay' for their sins?
They sinned in Adam, which is why they are born dying.
Remit at gate wrote: Snowballing sin requires more punishment to 'pay' for your iniquity when you're older than if you're an unborn child? How would a fetus 'pay' for their sins?
I don't know the specifics, and will likely never know until it actually happens. All I know is (at least logically and Biblically) they must pay less since they sinned less.
If I'm on the right track here, it would mean God's 10 to 1 reduction in the pre-flood human lifespan was also an act of mercy, of sorts. Less time to accumulate sin.
The Bible does say something about some being beaten with "many strips" while others will be beaten with "few stripes".
Also the older men who wanted to stone the woman Jesus defended became convicted first, then the younger ones.
Best I can do for you now. Still learning about this difficult issue myself. Sorry.
San Jose John wrote: For what it's worth, and whatever comfort it may bring, people who perish as infants obviously have far, far less time and opportunity to accumulate the unbelievably huge amount of sin that all of us older folk acquire. Since the unregenerate are punished for their sins, these little ones who die unredeemed probably aren't going to have to "pay" very much for their corruption.
Snowballing sin requires more punishment to 'pay' for your iniquity when you're older than if you're an unborn child? How would a fetus 'pay' for their sins?
For what it's worth, and whatever comfort it may bring, people who perish as infants obviously have far, far less time and opportunity to accumulate the unbelievably huge amount of sin that all of us older folk acquire. Since the unregenerate are punished for their sins, these little ones who die unredeemed probably aren't going to have to "pay" very much for their corruption.
Not trying to sound Pelagian here, as I believe and know that ALL babies (save Christ Himself, of course) are born sinful and WILL sin so long as they continue to live.
I still struggle with the double-predest position too, but seeing how God is not above allowing "innocent" babies to suffer as much as many do on earth today, it's really not too much of a stretch to expect the same God to send even these to Hell if He so wishes.
I don't want to sound cruel, but I also don't want to be sentimental (which is incredibly easy when "kids" are involved) about this subject either.
Authors Ask: 'What If Jesus Really Meant What He Said?'
By Jeff Schapiro, Christian Post Reporter November 20, 2012 | 4:17 pm
""What we've seen is that we've focused a lot on the doctrines of our faith, and not as much on the lifestyles, so that the church has been really good at making believers but not as good at making disciples," Claiborne told The Christian Post on Monday."
This universally-understood 'better place' argument ignores the words of Jesus. How can you 'love thy neighbor as thyself' by killing your own unborn child? When hearing of pastors baptizing post-aborted children, this seems to overlook Jesus command to love one another, disciple all nations (even Somalia) and baptize them in the Trinity.
Christopher000 wrote: I don't understand the comments...are they sarcasm? I don't get it (them).
Ah Christopher, yes the sarcasm is designed to make you rethink your original thoughts on the subject. Talking about original thoughts reminds me: to gain a better grasp of the issue, it will be of help to you to study or listen to a good sermon on the topic of Original Sin. This is where Christianity really starts, and it pays to get it right on this issue. Christianity is God's remedy for man's problem. But if we get the problem wrong, the solution will be wrong.
p.s. I've never come across an "age of accountability" in the Bible.
Christopher000 wrote: I don't understand the comments...are they sarcasm? I don't get it (them).
Some folks believe in double predestination, Christopher. In their bent view, some babies were created for the sole purpose of condemning them to hell.
Curious: How do you post sequentially on the same topic?
I guess I probably came off too strong in my post...the tone was all wrong so please disregard. I'm just wondering where in the Bible I can read that this is how it really is. I've never heard such a thing and find it incredibly difficult to believe/comprehend. Is this why Catholics do infant baptism then?
Hi John...what do you mean? I'm not for the murder of babies so they end up in a better place. People are inferring that unrepentant babies, children, etc are awaiting judgement. I just want to know where the Bible teaches or implies such things. I don't understand how a child, who knows nothing about nothing can be held accountable and judged.
Did you misunderstand me because I do not understand the comment.
John UK wrote: Aye, as some would say, with only one in a thousand adults getting saved, better to kill all babies and ensure they get to heaven as Christopher says.
"The like figure whereunto, euen Baptisme, doth also now saue vs, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answere of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Iesus Christ." 1 Peter 3:21 KJV
Why fret and feud over this verse as have millions for hundreds of years debating: "Is this baptism of water or the Spirit?"
Living in the enlightened 21st century, all Christians know -- throw out the water -- abortion now saves.
east of eden wrote: The teen mother at the clinic knows in her heart of hearts that her child will, in a few moments, be in a better place.
Aye, as some strange people would say, with only one in a thousand adults getting saved, better to abort all babies and ensure they get to heaven as Christopher believes.
22
There are a total of 221 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Paul Fountain | 1/30/2009
COMMENTS | 
