- Mar 12, 2007
- 4,205
- 518
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- AU-Labor
I am not bound to the early church fathers particular interpretations of the Bible. I doubt the need for infant baptism, as also the RCC has. They disbanded the idea of Limbo.
Salvation is at it's simplest with regards to infant mortality. They are not corrupted or deceived.
Many if not all today do not agree with the early fathers on everything, like the analogies or allegories they made out of parables...
The main historical teachers on predestiny were based in early father errors. Including the need for infant baptism or simply baptism.
Names like Augustine, Calvin, Arminius and Molin.
Looking at an infant who passes away before or after birth, the goodness of God and His sovereignty should mean the child is in Heaven shortly after. But some suggest God predestined some of them to Hell. Complications arise as children grow to adults, when it comes to their salvation. I would say these things are not God's will or doing.
It blasphemes God's goodness to suggest He will reject an infant He made. It also blasphemes His omnipotence.
God first loves us then we can return it. We know it.
There are three things about God to point out. His love or goodness, His awesome impressive nature, for reverence and His wisdom. These things lead us to praise Him and have a relationship with Him.
If however, one saw God throw out a baby from the body after death, who could love Him in return, praise Him, revere Him rather than be terrified, and see Him as wise rather than shrewd?
This is where life, and salvation and predestiny begins.
Look at the hypothesis of an infant Adolf Hitler passing away before birth. Would God look ahead to His life that could have been and reject him? Or would God preserve him from psychopathy with grace and clean his heart...? Save him from what could have been?
Salvation can be prevention as well as cure.
John the Baptist accepted many sinners, but not the Pharisees. Paul wrote to Timothy that God is the saviour of all, especially those who believe. Believe in Jesus. That if God gave us the Christ, how much more all other things and that whatever is missing in the salvation of disciples, will be filled in in the twinkling of an eye on Christ's return. God had the power to see Abram's life, and by faith and obedience, he became Abraham whose destiny God altered, by His omnipotence and omniscience and presence.
Romans 8:32, 1 Timothy 4:10, 1 Corinthians 15:51-53. Abraham is in Genesis 15:12
From the present day we can hear testimonies of people, like established mothers, who die in accidents, and enter the light of life, the waves of unconditional love and the healing and peace and beauty of paradise, who don't want to be revived by the Dr and leave. But reluctantly they are and live to tell. So I am sure babies who die enter life.
The light, the love, the peace, the joy, the beauty is irresistible even with free choice persisting.
So have stated why I disagree with medieval and ancient predestiny teachings and present my view.
Salvation is at it's simplest with regards to infant mortality. They are not corrupted or deceived.
Many if not all today do not agree with the early fathers on everything, like the analogies or allegories they made out of parables...
The main historical teachers on predestiny were based in early father errors. Including the need for infant baptism or simply baptism.
Names like Augustine, Calvin, Arminius and Molin.
Looking at an infant who passes away before or after birth, the goodness of God and His sovereignty should mean the child is in Heaven shortly after. But some suggest God predestined some of them to Hell. Complications arise as children grow to adults, when it comes to their salvation. I would say these things are not God's will or doing.
It blasphemes God's goodness to suggest He will reject an infant He made. It also blasphemes His omnipotence.
God first loves us then we can return it. We know it.
There are three things about God to point out. His love or goodness, His awesome impressive nature, for reverence and His wisdom. These things lead us to praise Him and have a relationship with Him.
If however, one saw God throw out a baby from the body after death, who could love Him in return, praise Him, revere Him rather than be terrified, and see Him as wise rather than shrewd?
This is where life, and salvation and predestiny begins.
Look at the hypothesis of an infant Adolf Hitler passing away before birth. Would God look ahead to His life that could have been and reject him? Or would God preserve him from psychopathy with grace and clean his heart...? Save him from what could have been?
Salvation can be prevention as well as cure.
John the Baptist accepted many sinners, but not the Pharisees. Paul wrote to Timothy that God is the saviour of all, especially those who believe. Believe in Jesus. That if God gave us the Christ, how much more all other things and that whatever is missing in the salvation of disciples, will be filled in in the twinkling of an eye on Christ's return. God had the power to see Abram's life, and by faith and obedience, he became Abraham whose destiny God altered, by His omnipotence and omniscience and presence.
Romans 8:32, 1 Timothy 4:10, 1 Corinthians 15:51-53. Abraham is in Genesis 15:12
From the present day we can hear testimonies of people, like established mothers, who die in accidents, and enter the light of life, the waves of unconditional love and the healing and peace and beauty of paradise, who don't want to be revived by the Dr and leave. But reluctantly they are and live to tell. So I am sure babies who die enter life.
The light, the love, the peace, the joy, the beauty is irresistible even with free choice persisting.
So have stated why I disagree with medieval and ancient predestiny teachings and present my view.
Last edited:
