What is the Age of Accountability?

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

98cwitr said:
Such a translation sows the mother in dishonor, which would be against the commandments. This may be a reason the NIV translated the verse the way it did.

Psalm 51:5 Commentary - The Treasury of David

The NIV translator put it that way for they were trying to force OS into the bible when it's not there.

In the context Psalms 51:1-4 David repeatedly speaks of "mine iniquity" and "my sin" that he committed with Bathsheba so it is David's sin under consideration and not Adam's. This leads some commentators to say in verse 5 David is speaking from the view point of the child Bathsheba gave birth to. David is using very figurative poetic language in the passage.

Stating one's parents have committed sins is stating a simple fact, not showing dishonor. Would it be dishonor to parents quote Paul is saying "all have sinned" knowing that includes one's parents, grandparents, etc?

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

98cwitr said:
In reference to "being guilty" of sin, Jesus says the following:

41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

I fail to see how John 9:41 proves original sin.

sdowney717 · Jul 17, 2017

A clue from the OT
Deuteronomy 1:38-40New King James Version (NKJV)
38 Joshua the son of Nun, who stands before you, he shall go in there. Encourage him, for he shall cause Israel to inherit it.

39 ‘Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. 40 But as for you, turn and take your journey into the wilderness by the Way of the Red Sea.’

v39 are those who God did not hold accountable

v40 God held those accountable, and the judgement was they would DIE in the wilderness, their bones would be scattered there as God was not pleased with them.

the understanding is those who have no knowledge of good and evil went on to inherit the promise of God.
And not all Calvinists think infants and little children go to hell. Jesus in truth blessed them and prayed for them, and said unless you receive the kingdom as a little child, you shall by no means enter in. I see a commonality between what Jesus said in the NT and what Jesus said in the OT.

Tangible · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
There is NO VERSE that says man is born a sinner. The NIV perverts Psalms 51:5 by adding their own theological bias to the verse and not giving a word for word translation. They admit this in the preface of the NIV..." This has moved the translators to go beyond a formal word-for-word rendering of the original texts."

Reaching. If you don't like the NIV, then what about all the other translations, or the original language for that matter, that also clearly read that man is conceived in a state of sin?

John said sin is transgression of the law, this verse alone makes OS impossible for OS tries and create sin when no transgression took place on part of the newly conceived.

Paul says that everything not done through faith in Christ is sin. Which one is wrong in your theology? My theology says they're both right.

Ecclesiastes 7:29; Ezekiel 18:5-20; Matthew 18:3; Romans 7:8-9; 1 Corinthians 14:20 are just a few other verses that refute OS.

If you interpret these the way you do, what do you do with all the verses that clearly teach that fallen man is conceived in a sinful state? Are you saying that scripture contradicts itself?

Also, Christ would have been born with OS if it were true.

Except that scripture clearly states that he was not. He was like us in every way, yet without sin.

Paul of Eugene OR · Jul 17, 2017

jimmyjimmy said:
How old is a person who is "accountable", if you believe there is such an age.

Also, if a person dies one hour after he reaches this age, whatever it may be, and he is not a Christian, is he condemned?

It will vary according to the person. Some profoundly retarded people probably never reach that age.

Tangible · Jul 17, 2017

sdowney717 said:
A clue from the OT
Deuteronomy 1:38-40New King James Version (NKJV)
38 Joshua the son of Nun, who stands before you, he shall go in there. Encourage him, for he shall cause Israel to inherit it.

39 ‘Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. 40 But as for you, turn and take your journey into the wilderness by the Way of the Red Sea.’

v39 are those who God did not hold accountable

v40 God held those accountable, and the judgement was they would DIE in the wilderness, their bones would be scattered there as God was not pleased with them.

the understanding is those who have no knowledge of good and evil went on to inherit the promise of God.
And not all Calvinists think infants and little children go to hell. Jesus in truth blessed them and prayed for them, and said unless you receive the kingdom as a little child, you shall by no means enter in. I see a commonality between what Jesus said in the NT and what Jesus said in the OT.

Nice eisegetical glasses you have there. Try taking them off and actually reading what that passage actually says in context.

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

sdowney717 said:
A clue from the OT
Deuteronomy 1:38-40New King James Version (NKJV)
38 Joshua the son of Nun, who stands before you, he shall go in there. Encourage him, for he shall cause Israel to inherit it.

39 ‘Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. 40 But as for you, turn and take your journey into the wilderness by the Way of the Red Sea.’

v39 are those who God did not hold accountable

v40 God held those accountable, and the judgement was they would DIE in the wilderness, their bones would be scattered there as God was not pleased with them.

the understanding is those who have no knowledge of good and evil went on to inherit the promise of God.
And not all Calvinists think infants and little children go to hell. Jesus in truth blessed them and prayed for them, and said unless you receive the kingdom as a little child, you shall by no means enter in. I see a commonality between what Jesus said in the NT and what Jesus said in the OT.

This shows the 'age of accountability' for as long as a child does not know between good and evil he is not accountable to God's law and sin has no power over him.... as with Paul in Romans 7:8-9 when he was a child.

" For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once:..."

No law = sin is dead, has no power. So when Paul says he was once alive "without the law" means once in his life sin was dead to him, it had no power over him. This was when he was a child not knowing the difference between good and evil. Yet when Paul matured and learned good from evil (when the commandment came) , then sin sprang up in Paul. Sin sprang up later in his life not when he was conceived or born.

Tangible · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
There is NO VERSE that says man is born a sinner.

Of course you are right. If you ignore all the verses that say that natural man is sinful by nature.

Romans 11
As regards the gospel [the Jews] are enemies of God for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved, for the sake of their ancestors; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Just as you were once disobedient to God but have now received mercy because of their disobedience, so they have now been disobedient in order that, by the mercy shown to you, they too may now receive mercy. For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all. O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

Romans 7
Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Romans 8
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

sdowney717 · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
This shows the 'age of accountability' for as long as a child does not know between good and evil he is not accountable to God's law and sin has no power over him.... as with Paul in Romans 7:8-9 when he was a child.

" For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once:..."

No law = sin is dead, has no power. So when Paul says he was once alive "without the law" means once in his life sin was dead to him, it had no power over him. This was when he was a child not knowing the difference between good and evil. Yet when Paul matured and learned good from evil (when the commandment came) , then sin sprang up in Paul. Sin sprang up later in his life not when he was conceived or born.

God says something similar about Adam and Eve, after they knew good and evil.

Genesis 3:21-23New King James Version (NKJV)
21 Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

22 Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken.

writewords · Jul 17, 2017

jimmyjimmy said:
How old is a person who is "accountable", if you believe there is such an age.

Also, if a person dies one hour after he reaches this age, whatever it may be, and he is not a Christian, is he condemned?

I don't subscribe to the concept "age" of accountability. There is A "point" of accountability which is different for everyone.

98cwitr · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
I fail to see how John 9:41 proves original sin.

Do you find a difference, in the context of sin, between "accountability" and "guilt?"

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

Tangible said:
Reaching. If you don't like the NIV, then what about all the other translations, or the original language for that matter, that also clearly read that man is conceived in a state of sin?
Paul says that everything not done through faith in Christ is sin. Which one is wrong in your theology? My theology says they're both right.

If you interpret these the way you do, what do you do with all the verses that clearly teach that fallen man is conceived in a sinful state? Are you saying that scripture contradicts itself? Except that scripture clearly states that he was not. He was like us in every way, yet without sin.

The NIV authors admit they did not use a word for word translation method. Meaning then they must have added their own ideas which included their theological bias. Just as the made the Greek word 'sarx' mean sinful nature when it does not mean that nor the bible teaches it:

Equally horrendous is the arbitrary translation of sarx in the New Testament as "sinful nature." Of the 151 times sarx is used in the New Testament, the King James Version translates it as "flesh" 148 times and "carnal" or "carnally" the other three times (Rom. 8:6-7 and Heb. 9:10). According to Vine, Kittel, and others, sarx does have different shades of meaning, depending on the context. "Sinful nature," however, does not appear among the definitions, although some may seen close to it. But even if some lexicographer did define the word as "sinful nature," would that prove that it is so? No! No more than the NIV's using such a definition proves them correct.

How do we know that "sinful nature" is an incorrect translation? One reason is that the other major translations never chose to use that phrase. The KJV, NKJV, ASV, NAS, and the RSV all use "flesh." Some of these are as literal as they can be; only "dynamic equivalence" could produce such a mis-concept, which underscores what has been pointed out throughout this chapter: the translating committee has complete liberty to use what they "think, feel, or imagine" are equivalents to the words in the Greek text.

The NIV enjoys using about any word but "flesh" to define sarx. In fact, they must have considered it the most versatile word in the New Testament. They translate it "flesh" 33 time, "body" 25, "sinful nature" 25 times, "one" five times, "man" four times, "mankind" (Luke 3:6), "people" (John 17:2; Acts 2:17), "human standards" (John 8:15), "physical" (Rom. 2:28), "in this matter" (Rom. 4:1), "natural selves" (Rom. 6:19), "natural descent" (John 1:13), "external" (Heb. 9:10), "worldly point of view" (2 Cor. 5:16), "worldly manner" (2 Cor. 1:7), "life" (1 Cor. 7:28), "natural" (Rom. 9:8), "race" (Rom. 9:3), "life on earth" (Heb. 5:7), "nature" (Rom. 8:5; Gal. 6:8), "sinful mind" (Rom. 8:7), "sinful man" (Rom. 8:3,6), "outwardly" (Heb. 9:13), "personally" (Col. 2:1), "unspiritual mind" (Col. 2:18), "ordinary way" (Gal. 4:23,29), "another" (1 Cor. 15:29), "human ancestry" (Rom. 9:5), "in this matter" (Rom 4:1), "standards of the world" (2 Cor. 10:2), "good impression outwardly" (Gal. 6:12), "birth" (Eph. 2:11), "evil human desires" (1 Pet. 4:2), "illness" (Gal. 4:13-14), and about a dozen other ways.

When "sinful nature" is used, the translators do add a footnote which provides the alternative "flesh," but such is not exceedingly helpful. First of all, when a text is read publicly as a Scripture reading or as part of the text of a sermon, nobody bothers to say "or flesh." Secondly, when young people memorize a passage of Scripture (and Rom. 8:1 is a good one), they will not likely add "or flesh" when quoting the verse. Even if they did, however, it would still not be helpful because they are not equivalents, dynamic or otherwise!
A REVIEW OF THE NIV

The NIV authors took the liberty upon themselves to make sarx mean whatever they wanted to.

NO VERSE says man is born a sinner. David said "in sin did my mother conceive me."

There is a night and day difference between "born a sinner" and being conceived in sin.

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

98cwitr said:
Do you find a difference, in the context of sin, between "accountability" and "guilt?"

"Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."

This context is about the Pharisees who thought they were of God and thought they knew the scriptures yet were really ignorant and prideful and lost.

When Jesus says "If ye were blind, ye should have no sins" meaning if they admitted they were ignorant of the scripture and admitted they were not of God then they could have seen salvation (have no sin).

"but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth" yet the Pharisees, in their self-righteousness, said 'we see' leaving them lost in their sins.

Nowhere do I see then that the Pharisees had the guilt of Adam's sin but Christ holding them accountable for their own sins in rejecting Him for their own self-righteousness.

JacksBratt · Jul 17, 2017

98cwitr said:
Do you find a difference, in the context of sin, between "accountability" and "guilt?"

If you are unaware of your sin, for whatever reason, how can you be held accountable for your guilt?
If you are blocking someones view of something they want to see and you are ignorant of this.... how are you accountable?

If they point it out to you, and you do nothing.... then you are guilty.

Albion · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
It says specifically says from YOUTH not from BIRTH.

Right...and it doesn't define youth.

sdowney717 · Jul 17, 2017

JacksBratt said:
If you are unaware of your sin, for whatever reason, how can you be held accountable for your guilt?
If you are blocking someones view of something they want to see and you are ignorant of this.... how are you accountable?

If they point it out to you, and you do nothing.... then you are guilty.

Its more about knowing good and evil that your then held accountable of which God says little children are unaware of the difference.

JacksBratt · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
I am certain there is no such thing as original sin and verses as Mark 16:16 prohibits baptizing infants further proving there is no original sin that infants have to have remitted by being baptized.

The baptizing of children is totally unnecessary for many reasons...

One is that they probably have not sinned yet, although they will, for sure, someday.

The other is that they have no concept of what sin is or being guilty or the need to be forgiven or even the act of repentance.... So what good is baptizing a totally oblivious human.

Being aware of your sin, admitting that you are a sinner, having the desire to be forgiven, repenting of these sins and consciously turning from doing sinful things..,,, These are the qualities of not only an accountable person but one with a heart to be saved.

Once you have taken the steps by admitting and repenting, asking for forgiveness... accepting Christ as your only hope of salvation by what He did at Calvary.... then you are baptized in obedience to Christ.

Baptizing an infant only makes the parents and the church members happy. The child is not even aware of what is going on.

98cwitr · Jul 17, 2017

TheSeabass said:
"Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."

This context is about the Pharisees who thought they were of God and thought they knew the scriptures yet were really ignorant and prideful and lost.

When Jesus says "If ye were blind, ye should have no sins" meaning if they admitted they were ignorant of the scripture and admitted they were not of God then they could have seen salvation (have no sin).

"but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth" yet the Pharisees, in their self-righteousness, said 'we see' leaving them lost in their sins.

Nowhere do I see then that the Pharisees had the guilt of Adam's sin but Christ holding them accountable for their own sins in rejecting Him for their own self-righteousness.

Couldn't this be so true of us today as well? That we are now reading Scripture for ourselves, or allowing appointed people do it for us and either mistakenly or willfully misinterpreting it?

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

Tangible said:
Of course you are right. If you ignore all the verses that say that natural man is sinful by nature.

Romans 11
As regards the gospel [the Jews] are enemies of God for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved, for the sake of their ancestors; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Just as you were once disobedient to God but have now received mercy because of their disobedience, so they have now been disobedient in order that, by the mercy shown to you, they too may now receive mercy. For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all. O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

Romans 7
Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

Romans 8
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

I see nothing in any of these passages that even remotely speaks of original sin / sinful nature.

Rom 11 speaks of those who were disobedient but it does not say they were BORN that way, disobedient was what they chose to become.

Rom 7, Paul was speaking of himself, and the Jew under the OT law. Under the OT law of Moses, the only way under that law one could stand before God totally completely justified was by flawlessly perfectly keeping all of those 613 or so laws. If one did not transgress any of the OT law then he would have no sin and could stand before God sinless, justified.
What Paul is talking about in the latter part of Rom 7 is the frustration and impossibility of keeping the law sinless. Paul describes as wanting to do good verse 19, he knows the law is good verse and consents unto the law 16, he delights in God's law verse 22, so Paul is NOT describing a totally depraved person but is describing one who knows the law, consents to the law, loves the law, desires to keep the law perfectly as the OT law required but there is deep frustration in falling short of keeping it flawlessly by giving into the influence of sin. Before Paul converted to Christianity, Saul was a devout Jew who earnestly desired to be justified before God and not one who continued to live in sin. Paul/Saul was not a totally depraved person only able to choose to sin and disobey God. Paul was simply telling his Jewish readier in Rome that converted to Christianity that the OT law cannot jsutify you by its requirement for flawless, perfect law keeping. Yet one can be "in Christ" where there is "no condemnation" where all one needs is a simple obedient faith and not flawless law keeping Rom 8:1

TheSeabass · Jul 17, 2017

JacksBratt said:
The baptizing of children is totally unnecessary for many reasons...

One is that they probably have not sinned yet, although they will, for sure, someday.

The other is that they have no concept of what sin is or being guilty or the need to be forgiven or even the act of repentance.... So what good is baptizing a totally oblivious human.

Being aware of your sin, admitting that you are a sinner, having the desire to be forgiven, repenting of these sins and consciously turning from doing sinful things..,,, These are the qualities of not only an accountable person but one with a heart to be saved.

Once you have taken the steps by admitting and repenting, asking for forgiveness... accepting Christ as your only hope of salvation by what He did at Calvary.... then you are baptized in obedience to Christ.

Baptizing an infant only makes the parents and the church members happy. The child is not even aware of what is going on.

True. But if original sin were true then infants would need forgiveness of that sin else die as an infant and be lost.

What is the Age of Accountability?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato

Finally Old Enough

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato

Well-Known Member

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato

Newbie

Meant for ministry. Gloria in excelsis Deo.

Lord forgive me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Searching for Truth

Facilitator

Newbie

Searching for Truth

Lord forgive me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads