Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And as a universalist, I sure wouldn't suggest those little ones are in hell or in a bad place. I personally don't believe in consciousness after death until the resurrection, but if a parent hangs onto the hope that their child is with God,I would not try to tell him/her differently.
A time like that is not a time for teaching. It is the Holy Spirit who teaches anyway. No matter the vessel that He might use.
I don't think that anyone is argueing the fact that universalists believe babies go to hell or any other bad place, but the difference in beliefs is what bothers believers like myself. My belief, and many others is that if you die a sinner your soul will be a lost soul, Hence death!! So even though your beliefs are that of everyone makes it to heaven because we are all sinners (babies included). It irritates people like us because if babies are sinners then according to our beliefs their souls are lost, Hence death for them. As someone who lost a child, I assure you I would never believe that she died a sinner!!! It's just the difference in opinion.
If I inherit diabetes from my parent, I am a diabetic through no fault of my own, but I am still a diabetic.. I didn't DO anything to have it passed onto me. Some diseases do not manifest visibly in the offspring till later in their life. But it is there, and WILL present itself at some point. I think this is similar to what this thread is about. Paul said that through ONE man's disobedience, all were deemed as being guilty by virtue of being IN Adam. Conversely, that is HOW God can then count us as righteous because of ONE man's (Christ's) righteousness. No, babies can not do anything but what his nature prompts him to do. Eat, eliminate waste, sleep and observe to the extent his developing senses allows him. He cannot understand words, concepts, etc. so he is definitely NOT a practicing sinner. YET, at the same time, he is condemned along with all of Adam's offspring because of Adam's sin (with the ONE exception of Jesus who did not have an earthly father). But he will be declared righteous because of Christ's obedience. How this child experientially becomes a child of God is quite another matter for we know that just declaring someone righteous does not cause him to behave righteously. But that is something that is out of the scope of this discussion.
I don't think anyone on this thread has said that it is ok to be insensitive to those whose babies, children, even adult children have died. I believe it is the OP's intent to get to the reason that death occurs at all Perhaps I am wrong.
Part of the reason we do suffer is to sympathize and empathize and provide comfort to those who are suffering. And of course who would suggest that at that critical time that it's a good thing? Those words aren't comfort to a parent's ears, ever.
And as a universalist, I sure wouldn't suggest those little ones are in hell or in a bad place. I personally don't believe in consciousness after death until the resurrection, but if a parent hangs onto the hope that their child is with God,I would not try to tell him/her differently.
A time like that is not a time for teaching. It is the Holy Spirit who teaches anyway. No matter the vessel that He might use.
It's about the only problem i have with the teaching of the universalist.
All i will say is,when ever this is taught and it's not done in the spirit it will end up being destructive.
I believe God is in all , i will not go has far to say He is behind the evil of the world.
I think this is the thread were i quoted Jesus accrediting the woman being bound for 18 long years to satan . Why did He not just say God had bound her because this would be the truth if God was behind all evil.
I can't believe i am writing God was behind evil (i do not believe it), which ever way you want to justify it.
If I inherit diabetes from my parent, I am a diabetic through no fault of my own, but I am still a diabetic.. I didn't DO anything to have it passed onto me. Some diseases do not manifest visibly in the offspring till later in their life. But it is there, and WILL present itself at some point. I think this is similar to what this thread is about.
No it is not similar . . . sin is not a disease . . . it is a "state of mind" accompanying behavior. Our nature predisposes us to have a completely selfish "state of mind" as we develop . . . that is sinful when it is indulged and disregards our effect on others. There is no "sin germ" that can be passed from one to another.
If I inherit diabetes from my parent, I am a diabetic through no fault of my own, but I am still a diabetic.. I didn't DO anything to have it passed onto me. Some diseases do not manifest visibly in the offspring till later in their life. But it is there, and WILL present itself at some point. I think this is similar to what this thread is about. Paul said that through ONE man's disobedience, all were deemed as being guilty by virtue of being IN Adam. Conversely, that is HOW God can then count us as righteous because of ONE man's (Christ's) righteousness. No, babies can not do anything but what his nature prompts him to do. Eat, eliminate waste, sleep and observe to the extent his developing senses allows him. He cannot understand words, concepts, etc. so he is definitely NOT a practicing sinner. YET, at the same time, he is condemned along with all of Adam's offspring because of Adam's sin (with the ONE exception of Jesus who did not have an earthly father). But he will be declared righteous because of Christ's obedience. How this child experientially becomes a child of God is quite another matter for we know that just declaring someone righteous does not cause him to behave righteously. But that is something that is out of the scope of this discussion.
Diabetes is something you cant choose!! To commit or not commit a sin is a choice!!!
[quote=MysticPhD;10357762]No it is not similar . . . sin is not a disease . . . it is a "state of mind" accompanying behavior. Our nature predisposes us to have a completely selfish "state of mind" as we develop . . . that is sinful when it is indulged and disregards our effect on others. There is no "sin germ" that can be passed from one to another.[/QUOTE
yes, the Bible definitely states that in ADAM (one man's sin) all die and in CHRIST (ONE man's righteousness) all are made alive. This is a fact. Sin is a SPIRITUAL disease. And Christ is the cure. You are mistaking individual sins with the sin nature.
That Adam could not help himself and had to choose to be disobedient because of his nature to explore. That is saying that Adams nature made the choice for him and he is but a puppet to his earthy nature. Therefore, no choice is really given to Adam to choose between life and death.
A choice was given and made. The purpose of my analogy was to show that your highlighted conclusion does not follow, but you just keep restating that conclusion rather than legitimately discussing my analogy.
Quote:
Your trying to skirt the issue brother...
No Scott. The issue is that I disagree with your bolded conclusion. My analogy was intended to show why. But rather than discussing the analogy, you keep changing it around.
Quote:
was Adam given the choice of life or death or not?
Yes, Adam was given the choice and made a choice. He was probably did not believe he was making a life & death choice, but he did choose between what God told him to do and not do.
Quote:
Could Adam have obeyed and not eaten from the tree OKOGE?
No, not indefinitely.
Quote:
You say no Adam could not have chosen to obey; therefore, Adam was not really given a choice to obey.
Once again, I disagree with the bolded conclusion. Once again, examples why:
Example 1
God can not lie or do evil
Yet God can and does choose to do good rather than do evil
God is not a puppet to His nature. God's nature is part of who God is.
Example 2
A normal child can not perpertually choose to not explore.
Yet a normal child does choose to explore and not explore.
A child is not a puppet to his curiousity, it is part of who he is.
Quote:
You can disagree if you like Bob, but Adam was given the breath of LIFE, placed into a heavenly sphere(the garden), had access to the tree of LIFE, the WORD walked daily with him, he had direct communion with God.
Quote:
So explain how Adam had all these things if he is only a son of God in the sense that Acts says we are all offspring of God? Do all people have the breath of life? Are all people placed into a heavenly sphere? Do all people have access to the tree of life? Does the WORD walk daily with all people? And do all people have direct communion with God?
None of the things you listed makes one an inward Jew, circumcized of heart. Dogs and cats have breath life. Satan talks to God. Satan appears before God in the heavenly realm.
Quote:
When scripture gave forth Jesus’ generations it traced it through the spiritual line not the carnal line.
Quote:
Adam was a SON OF GOD not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
Every person was a child of wrath before becoming a child of God through faith in Christ. Same with the spiritual line. Same with Adam.
Quote:
Bob if I use that analogy of “this day” than when scripture states.
Quote:
Are we than to assume “to day” is only speaking of the past?
It speaks in the present. All scripture speaks to all generations in the "now".
Quote:
Does not verses 14-15 state that even though some are partakers of Christ that they can still HARDEN their hearts?
Yes, I don't say that we can not harden our hearts. As I said, the circumcizing our heats, is an on-going life-long process.[/quote]
But nothing will change what Ezekiel says:
a) God takes away the stony heart
b) God gives a new heart
c) God causes His people to obey Him
This is God circumsizing our hearts and God writing His law on our hearts. None of that means we stop choosing.
Quote:
So where is Adam choice than if he could not have chosen obedience?
See my two examples above.
Quote:
Yet you believe Adam could not freely eat from it. A
Quote:
dam was told by God he could not eat from the tree of KOGE. Yet you believe God planned for Adam to eat contrary to His words not to eat. Your belief is that God planned for Adam to eat from the tree of KOGE all along and therefore Adam could not choose to eat from the tree of life. Thus making God a liar (because He told Adam he could freely eat) and planner of disobedience and death. (because you believe God planned Adams disobedience all along and Adam could not but be disobedient).
God said Adam may eat the TOL and may not eat the TOKOGE. God said nothing about what Adam's heart were capable of doing or not doing, otherwise Adam proved God wrong when Adam ate what God said he "could not" eat.
Last edited by Thy Kingdom Come; 08-19-2009 at 07:15 PM..
yes, the Bible definitely states that in ADAM (one man's sin) all die and in CHRIST (ONE man's righteousness) all are made alive. This is a fact. Sin is a SPIRITUAL disease. And Christ is the cure. You are mistaking individual sins with the sin nature.
Literal reading of primitive undertsanding as if it were equivalent to modern understanding is the bane of spiritual maturity. Adam was a physicial being into which was breathed a liviing soul . . . physical beings die . . . that's all. But by learning about good and evil ("eating" of the tree of KOGE) . . . we have the means to produce a strong soul by overcoming our indiscriminate animal nature and choosing only good responses("eating" of the TOL). Jesus is the epitome of a strong soul (having one identical to God) in a human body and when He dies he is reborn as Spirit making it possible for all of us to do the same . . . if we resonate our spirits with His in "love of God and each other."
It's about the only problem i have with the teaching of the universalist.
All i will say is,when ever this is taught and it's not done in the spirit it will end up being destructive.
I believe God is in all , i will not go has far to say He is behind the evil of the world.
I think this is the thread were i quoted Jesus accrediting the woman being bound for 18 long years to satan . Why did He not just say God had bound her because this would be the truth if God was behind all evil. I can't believe i am writing God was behind evil (i do not believe it), which ever way you want to justify it.
ya my spirit rebels also from that thought camps, it is the first step that will take you on another journey, hope you enjoy bumpy rides
It's about the only problem i have with the teaching of the universalist.
I can't believe i am writing God was behind evil (i do not believe it), which ever way you want to justify it.
Well, evil is a reality, so I'm left with
a) God is behind it but for some good purpose that I can not see
b) Satan is behind it and God could stop it but does not
c) Satan is behind it and God can not stop it
Not much diff between (a) and (b). Given the choice (a) seems a little more comforting than (c) since at least I'm in God's hands.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
