What happens if someone dies before they became a believer, is it their fault?

JohnB445 said:

For example, a young man just starting college is murdered. He didn't get to live a long life, while someone else becomes a believer in their 40's.

The person in their 40's had more time to accept Jesus, yet the young man didn't. It seems unfair, but what does the Bible say?

Was the young man probably never would have been a believer anyway? Are we sometimes saved not only because we accepted Jesus, but by chance we survived long enough to accept Jesus as our God? Or does this not make any sense?

Click to expand...

Somehow that's how predestination works. Christians are somehow subject to the predestination, their fate will not end that way. Somehow names have been written in the Book of Life before creation.

BobRyan said:

babies have a sinful nature that they need to be delivered from , so then they need a Savior. And as we see in 1 John 2:2 they have a Savior. He has them covered, thank God, and they have no need to "make a decision" to be covered by Christ. Babies do not make decisions

Click to expand...

Did Adam and Eve have a sinful "nature" before they sinned?
Did Christ have a sinful "nature" while here on earth?
Maybe the reason they do not need "to make a decision", is because they are in a safe condition, but are you saying as is said in 1 John 2:2 " He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." the baby has sinned"?

Mark Quayle said:

Free will is either free or not free. There is no "sorta free". If the will is indeed free to do as it will, whether within bounds and limitations, then it operates independent of causes—and THAT is the problem. We do not operate independent of causes. Therefore, our choices are not entirely free, entirely spontaneous.

Click to expand...

That is just your definition of free will, making it only totally free in every and all situations. Each choice can stand on its own, being a free will choice or not a free will choice. Humans are not God, having total free will.

Mark Quayle said:

Calvinists (again, I don't claim to be one) often say that a person is free to do what they want, but that is a different use of the word, "free". It doesn't imply causelessness. "Somewhat causeless"? What would that even mean? Yet that is what you seem to want us to agree to.

Click to expand...

A man can lust in his heart for a woman of his own free will, but not have the free will ability to physically satisfy that lust, so man’s free will actions are very limited. The same person might keep from lusting after that same woman by lusting after another woman, avoid seeing the woman, and/or be busy doing some spirit filled work and not take the time to lust after the woman.

JohnB445 said:

It seems unfair, but what does the Bible say?

Click to expand...

"6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.” 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11 For God does not show favoritism.

12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." Romans 2 NIV

God's actual judgement is perfectly fair, life on earth is not, but that is is the fault of sin and will be so until the end of time.

​

bling said:

Did Adam and Eve have a sinful "nature" before they sinned?

Click to expand...

nope

bling said:

Did Christ have a sinful "nature" while here on earth?

Click to expand...

nope

bling said:

Maybe the reason they do not need "to make a decision", is because they are in a safe condition, but are you saying as is said in 1 John 2:2 " He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." the baby has sinned"?

Click to expand...

I am saying that having a sinful nature (which the baby has) is having a nature that has a bent toward rebellion, evil. Even if we die too early to have ever sinned, we need that sinful nature removed.

Hawkins said:

Somehow that's how predestination works. Christians are somehow subject to the predestination, their fate will not end that way. Somehow names have been written in the Book of Life before creation.

Click to expand...

Names get removed from the book of life at the judgment.

Jesus promises the saints "I will not remove your name from the book of life" Rev 3:5

Zceptre said:

Well, I didn't ask for your opinion to judge you, but you were kind of hiding in the shade brush so I figured I would whistle you out of there. lol

I can read between the lines, even if there are more than three there, and knew the stance but wasn't going to "speak for you." I definitely disagree and to say I have experienced God differently would be an understatement. I think every single case before God, souls that is, is judged individually by an absolutely perfect Judge. I think, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, you believe that also. At least that is what I'm gathering from what you have stated so far.

To posit my particular stance on this, I claim God to be a perfect and righteous Judge who is full of mercy and being more merciful than any of us would incline one to believe Him as a God who is love (1 John 4:7 - 1 John 4:8) to be merciful to children who have never committed any deeds physically, let alone sins, even though being born in sin, and that the blood of Jesus would give God the right to remove that sinful nature they are born with even more easily than He does ours who have committed many thousands upon thousands of sins over the course of our life.

Abraham calls God the Judge of all the Earth in Genesis 18:25, and cries out for Lot who is obviously (if we read Scripture later in Genesis of him upon the angels visit in Sodom) not the most righteous man in the Bible, and far from it if I'm to be blunt on the subject. Yet the righteous Judge had mercy on this man, living in the most sinful and one of the worst judged (if not the worst) cities to ever exist on this Earth.

We know that God forgave Lot because he is recorded in the New Testament differently than we read in the records of the Old Testament. In Hebrews 11 we find all of the saints / patriarchs of the Old Testament recorded as righteous and full of faith. Abraham was not always full of faith! Having doubted enough to try on his own through an alternative method of producing a son by means of Sarah's handmaid. Yet in Hebrews 11 Abraham is recorded as faithful and an example to follow. Lot in 2 Peter 2:7 is recorded the same way and is called a "righteous man" or "righteous Lot."

So then my own opinion on this is the character of God, who is love according to 1 John 4:8, who says we are nothing without love in 1 Corinthians 13:2, and who makes it clear the entire purpose of God's instructions to us is to bring us to the fullness of love itself in 1 Timothy 1:5, and finalizing it with Matthew 22:37 Matthew 22:38 Matthew 22:39 Matthew 22:40 Christ tells us that the entirety of the Law (Bible) hangs on these two commandments meaning God's Law is a Law of love.

So then, to say God would send a child (an infant) who even the secular world considers precious an innocent to Hell, how is He then more merciful than humans? If horrid sinners are appalled at the atrocity of children and babies being murdered, how could we ever make sense of God putting one in Hell? For His glory? In what sense? How does an infant in Hell bring glory to God and reveal His character and person of love? His infinite kindness and forgiveness and gentleness?

Maybe you have some answer to this, but I would certainly be curious as to how such a thing could even remotely be possible to bring glory to a God who is love. For a God who is willing to put His own Son on a cross (Romans 8:32), what rational reason would a person with that kind of love and sacrifice to save us who have sinned (not just been born in sin because of someone else's choices), why would someone that unimaginably kind and merciful ever send a child to literally be punished for an eternity but save Lot?

To throw one more out there for arguments sake, we are saying here (from your stance) that Paul who murdered men by his own testimony, and king David who did the same for personal reasons, and Moses also trying to save his brothers with his own strength and be a hero murdered a man are forgiven, but a little tiny baby who can't speak a word, think a clear thought, isn't fully conscious and can't even care for themselves somehow, in the most loving Person's eyes who has or will ever exist, deserves by His judgment to go to Hell?

In my view, that is exactly why Christ died on the cross, to free those born in sin, but who do not choose to accept it but repent. If no opportunity for repentance is available and sins have not been committed by these infants, why would a Judge who states His entire being, essence, and Law is based on love ever not cleanse them with His precious blood when He can forgive anyone He wants?

Oh I think they are forgiven for being "born in sin" for sure, and cleansed, and much faster and without a second thought by Christ.

With all respect intended, I think maybe some people are confusing an idea of Christ with the real Christ Jesus who said this about children:

Matthew 19:14
But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

Click to expand...

Nicely written, non-contentious, and I appreciate both.

You say you have experienced God differently. I'm curious how you think I have "experienced him", or what you mean by it. Try to believe me when I say that my experience of God is of overwhelming love and mercy that does not bow to my perverse and rebellious 'old man' nature, that is still constantly pushing me to take over the direction of "my own" life (as if it were mine). Just to try to describe this brings more emotion up than I can handle, and I have to turn away from the attempt—not regret, but sorrow and pain all the same ...and joy at his sovereign driven-yet-tender purpose and at his magnificent own joy in it.

Not that I don't write and think the same way, but your post mixes fact with reasoning —reasoning based on certain assumptions, among which is a kind of confidence in the status of "sentient sapient" as though we humans are (to exaggerate the point) the "purveyors of fact" (if we could only get it right). We are not. God's point-of-view is the only point-of-truth. You draw conclusions as to the status of the unborn or "before they knew enough to do right or wrong" according to your categories—hellbound and heavenbound, and according to whether they deserved it or not. It sounds to me, for example, that you consider an [apparently] innocent child to undergo hell would be unfair. But we have no valid notion of what hell would be like for that child, compared, for example, to hell for Hitler, or for me. Truth is, we don't know what even ourselves deserve—we are that ignorant of the depth of sin and quite what it means to be at enmity with God, before whose burning purity none of us could live. (It is that God who endures my never-ending drive to self-determine my own ends. I don't want to need him, which is one of things for which I desperately need him. Thank God that he doesn't take me as seriously as I take myself.)

But back to the argument, I really don't care much what secular view anyone has concerning the innocence of children, in this matter. Truth is, we all die, whether horribly or after a long drawn out suffering, or any other way—no way compares to what is to come. Be hopeful that the sufferer who ends up in Hell has received already that for which he will not be punished further. God takes my sin (not me) far more seriously than I do.

For whatever it may be worth for me to say it, I, who am constantly amazed by the loving mercy of our God, can hardly stomach the notion of unborn children in Hell. I'm almost (emotionally) at the point of rejection of the horror of one like Hitler or PolPot, or even Satan, who apparently is unable to repent even now of his unspeakable atrocities, but rather delights in them—the unimaginable horror of what awaits the enemies of God is more than I can deal with, and I gratefully leave it up to God. You are right that I believe (and thank him) that he is altogether just, and will reward to each precisely what, and no more than, they deserve. To the degree that those children do not deserve hell, they will not be punished.

But we are here for his purposes and not ours. We are not an end unto ourselves.

bling said:

That is just your definition of free will, making it only totally free in every and all situations. Each choice can stand on its own, being a free will choice or not a free will choice. Humans are not God, having total free will.

Click to expand...

Then, by that statement, free will is not 'libertarian' (uncaused) choice.

The will need not be uncaused, nor the inclination of the will uncaused, nor the decisions uncaused, for the choices to indeed be genuine.

bling said:

A man can lust in his heart for a woman of his own free will, but not have the free will ability to physically satisfy that lust, so man’s free will actions are very limited. The same person might keep from lusting after that same woman by lusting after another woman, avoid seeing the woman, and/or be busy doing some spirit filled work and not take the time to lust after the woman.

Click to expand...

Now what would cause that man to want to lust after that woman?

Nothing happens in a void.

Zceptre said:

but a little tiny baby who can't speak a word, think a clear thought, isn't fully conscious and can't even care for themselves somehow, in the most loving Person's eyes who has or will ever exist, deserves by His judgment to go to Hell?

Click to expand...

I agree with you entire post, except, and I am being pedantic over the word "deserves". It is entirely because I believe Jesus saves everyone that He can save, and that no one gets what they deserve. Those who live to repent of their sins do not deserve the forgiveness that they are granted, and those who dies before any possibility of commiting a wilful act of sin certainly are going to heaven, but it is because they can be saved by His gracious nature and desire to save all. To me, what anyone deserves is nothing to do with it.

I absolutely agree with you about God's judgements being infallible, He sees every detail of our minds, brains and souls, He knows exactly who is freely choosing wrongly, and who is willing to let His truth in. His judgements are coming from someone we know has these characteristics - "9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9 NIV and "3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." 1 Timothy 2:3-4 NIV .

So I believe He saves everyone He can save, and He can save those who die before they had any chance of acting of their own free will in rebellion. I am not a universalist, He wants to save all, no He does not always get what He wants, He respects the choices we make.

BobRyan said:

Names get removed from the book of life at the judgment.

Jesus promises the saints "I will not remove your name from the book of life" Rev 3:5

Click to expand...

God reserves that right, yet you can reconcile when in Heaven that 99.99% are there, the removal is more of a warning. That is, without this warning someone may truly need to be removed. To put another way, with this warning few actually need to be removed (not absolutely though). This is not what the OP would like to discuss though.

BobRyan said:

nope

nope

Click to expand...

If Adam and Eve sinned without a "sinful nature", why would a sinful nature be a provided and/or requirement for all other humans to sin?
Yes, all mature adults do sin, but having a ton of ways to sin (knowledge from the tree of knowledge) compared to Adam and Eve's one way to sin, would result in all mature adults sinning.
What is this "nature" that is so different from the nature Adam and Eve had prior to sinning?
Was Jesus tempted in all the ways we are temped?

BobRyan said:

I am saying that having a sinful nature (which the baby has) is having a nature that has a bent toward rebellion, evil. Even if we die too early to have ever sinned, we need that sinful nature removed.

Click to expand...

How is this "sinful nature" different from the "Nature" Adam and Eve had before sinning since they went on to sin?
How do you remove selfishness, without removing free will?

Mark Quayle said:

Then, by that statement, free will is not 'libertarian' (uncaused) choice.

The will need not be uncaused, nor the inclination of the will uncaused, nor the decisions uncaused, for the choices to indeed be genuine.

Click to expand...

No! we are talking about the same person making some "autonomous free will" (uncaused by outside influences) choices and that same person making choices that are the result of outside influences.
Are you not defining a "genuine" choice as being a God caused choice which individual is responsible for making?
Humans are certainly set up to make mental choices which they personally can be held responsible for making, without physically being able to carry the actions of their choice out.

Mark Quayle said:

Now what would cause that man to want to lust after that woman?

Nothing happens in a void.

Click to expand...

All mature adults have a God given needed survival instinct, which results in some degree of selfishness, that selfishness is the motivation behind the lust.
A Christian having eternal life has their survival instinct satisfied, and they have been showed unbelievable wonderful gifts including Godly type Love, so no need to lust.

bling said:

No! we are talking about the same person making some "autonomous free will" (uncaused by outside influences) choices and that same person making choices that are the result of outside influences.
Are you not defining a "genuine" choice as being a God caused choice which individual is responsible for making?
Humans are certainly set up to make mental choices which they personally can be held responsible for making, without physically being able to carry the actions of their choice out.

All mature adults have a God given needed survival instinct, which results in some degree of selfishness, that selfishness is the motivation behind the lust.
A Christian having eternal life has their survival instinct satisfied, and they have been showed unbelievable wonderful gifts including Godly type Love, so no need to lust.

Click to expand...

Can you demonstrate that anything can happen besides what does happen? Can you demonstrate the actual possibility of other options? Or is that only in our thinking? When God demands that we choose, do we not always only choose the one option? Was God not aware of those decisions before creating, but went ahead and created anyway? Well, then! He INTENDED it to be decided the way it was.

Otherwise, you need to demonstrate that {actual "chance" can determine outcomes}. The notion is by definition self-contradictory. But your whole construction depends on it.

You are defining justice according to the creature's ability to do what he is commanded to do. Sorry, but the command does not imply the ability to obey— it only implies the responsibility to obey. God is not unjust to create beings who will pay for their rebellion, as intended. He is making use of them for his Glory, to demonstrate his love and mercy to the objects of his mercy—us.

bling said:

Was Jesus tempted in all the ways we are temped?

Click to expand...

Everyone, from A&E to us today, has been tempted simply to put our will ahead of the Will of the Father. This includes Jesus who successfully followed the will of the Father over His own. People seem to think it is impossible not to be selfish.

Mark Quayle said:

Nicely written, non-contentious, and I appreciate both.

Click to expand...

It isn't me for sure, I'll pass that on to Christ since I'm just following His lead. His heart and way of making other people's wrongs, right, and His compassion on me is all you are seeing, because I was a train wreck. I am glad you see I intend well, I will say that.

Mark Quayle said:

You say you have experienced God differently. I'm curious how you think I have "experienced him", or what you mean by it. Try to believe me when I say that my experience of God is of overwhelming love and mercy that does not bow to my perverse and rebellious 'old man' nature, that is still constantly pushing me to take over the direction of "my own" life (as if it were mine). Just to try to describe this brings more emotion up than I can handle, and I have to turn away from the attempt—not regret, but sorrow and pain all the same ...and joy at his sovereign driven-yet-tender purpose and at his magnificent own joy in it.

Click to expand...

With incredibly manifest bluntness I can say it sounds as though you have experienced the Christ I quoted in the bottom of my first response to you, the one who has unending kindness and never turned away children, who forgives the worst sinners, who told the adulteress "neither do I condemn you," who said those who are forgiven much.. love much, and even while being outright murdered on a cross cried genuine pleas of mercy and forgiveness for those responsible for Him being brutally tortured for six hours on that cross to His death. That is unimaginable to me the more I contemplate and the longer I know Him, and the emotion you are mentioning sounds like it aligns with knowing this character trait of the Savior who is Christ the King of mercy and the Prince of peace.

Mark Quayle said:

Not that I don't write and think the same way, but your post mixes fact with reasoning —reasoning based on certain assumptions, among which is a kind of confidence in the status of "sentient sapient" as though we humans are (to exaggerate the point) the "purveyors of fact" (if we could only get it right). We are not. God's point-of-view is the only point-of-truth. You draw conclusions as to the status of the unborn or "before they knew enough to do right or wrong" according to your categories—hellbound and heavenbound, and according to whether they deserved it or not. It sounds to me, for example, that you consider an [apparently] innocent child to undergo hell would be unfair. But we have no valid notion of what hell would be like for that child, compared, for example, to hell for Hitler, or for me. Truth is, we don't know what even ourselves deserve—we are that ignorant of the depth of sin and quite what it means to be at enmity with God, before whose burning purity none of us could live. (It is that God who endures my never-ending drive to self-determine my own ends. I don't want to need him, which is one of things for which I desperately need him. Thank God that he doesn't take me as seriously as I take myself.)

Click to expand...

This is going to be a doozy, but I'll knuckle under and oblige you since you do seem sincere and well intended in trying to follow what you feel is true, even if you don't like it (I'm assuming here you don't like the idea of babies in Hell). With this assumption in mind, let us consider what kind of person the great Judge, God Almighty, might consider you to be and what the condition of your heart was in if you considered someone who committed no deeds as worthy of Hell as someone who committed many evil deeds. Let's also keep in mind, while undergoing this exercise that no person great or small deserves to go to Heaven and be forgiven, which is why it is a "gift" and gifts cannot be earned (Ephesians 2:8 - Ephesians 2:9).

Facts and reason are not opposed to each other, or logic, or God's ways even. The Lord Himself tells us to "reason together" with Him (Isaiah 1:16), and I don't think it is a mild suggestion or that God speaks without purpose using empty or poetic words. Rather, I think He means what He says and expects us to use our heads and follow Him with our hearts both, not be thoughtless and emotionally driven or blind followers of whatever is written in any "holy book" (of which they have many acclaimed these days). God also says to "test Him" (Malachi 3:10)as He can stand up to doubt and prove He is true, and He doesn't have to or need to but He does so like for Gideon, for example, simply because He is (VERY) kind. This is God telling us to be reasonable, and logical, and sensible and to use the faculties He gave us for His will, which is that everyone be saved and that no one perish in Hell (2 Peter 3:9 - John 3:16 - John 3:17[this one is critical, it declares blatantly and bluntly the purpose is not to condemn or destroy but to save anyone and everyone, that is the mission of Christ stated by Him here in John 3:17])

Not only this, but God does not intend for us to be ignorant and serve blindly, rather He stated Himself that He tells us what He is doing and why (John 15:15 - Genesis 18:17-18) so we can know and work with the Lord (Mark 16:20) according to His heart and His will and accomplish His wishes without doubting what He desires.

So now, with all that established here we go on the next ride, which would be the reason God says literally anyone goes to Hell at all. Christ stated with His own mouth in the flesh and not through a prophet or saint that the only reason anyone is sent to Hell at all has nothing to do with their sins. It has to do with blaspheming the Holy Spirit, which is quite literally ignoring God and telling Him to buzz off and searing one's conscience to the point of having no ability to be corrected by God because they have rejected God outright and chosen rebellion (Matthew 12:31). If this is the reasoning God has said is His reason for not forgiving someone, or anyone, and we apply this to the current subject we are on we can see that unborn children and infants haven't even had the opportunity to reject God.. therefore they quite literally have never committed this sin. If God also desires that no one perish and genuinely wishes so strongly to save us all that He would send His only Son to die on a cross (Romans 8:32), then His hearts desire in this particular situation is to save these little ones just like He desires to save me and you. His character is on full display and there is no question that God is good, and at that yes... "all the time."

Mark Quayle said:

But back to the argument, I really don't care much what secular view anyone has concerning the innocence of children, in this matter. Truth is, we all die, whether horribly or after a long drawn out suffering, or any other way—no way compares to what is to come. Be hopeful that the sufferer who ends up in Hell has received already that for which he will not be punished further. God takes my sin (not me) far more seriously than I do.

Click to expand...

I am not saying children are born without sin, but that they are born "IN SIN," just like Romans 11:32 states clearly, but in that statement He boldly proclaims the reason for that as well, "that he might have mercy upon all." "All" in this thought from God is easily understood as "all of the humans born in sin", and that would include the unborn, infants, children, and adults as all of those categories fall under "all."

Also, I would disagree wholeheartedly about God taking your sin more seriously than you. He showed up on Earth for 33 years, was beaten ridiculed and mocked (something UNTHINKABLE for a Holy God) and murdered indescribably to spare you an eternity in Hell. In all of that process He was crushing sin like He stated He would do in Genesis 3:15 and displayed His immense power over sin and His enemies (Colossians 2:15) and He quickly and without a second thought easily forgave people because it is His heart and who He is (to be good and wanting to forgive - 2 Corinthians 5:19).

Was He taking the sin more seriously, when His purpose was to destroy it? Or was He taking YOU more seriously, when His entire purpose was to save you? I think it be the latter my dear friend, and I could not emphasize this enough. We are lost Sons and Daughters Christ came to redeem to the Father (Galatians 3:26 - Luke 15:20), with Christ being the first.. the "first fruits" who we are meant to become (Romans 8:29) like in Spirit and this Spirit is a nature of goodness that emanates from the Father who is all good and no evil, all light and no dark (1 John 1:5). No no, I think He is taking you very seriously, and as seriously as any parent takes their child at the edge of the water (Hell) where the crocodiles are (demons) and who jumps in to save their child and gets nearly torn apart and covered in scars (Christ) because He takes that child far more seriously than that crocodile that He will kill without a second thought.

Mark Quayle said:

For whatever it may be worth for me to say it, I, who am constantly amazed by the loving mercy of our God, can hardly stomach the notion of unborn children in Hell. I'm almost (emotionally) at the point of rejection of the horror of one like Hitler or PolPot, or even Satan, who apparently is unable to repent even now of his unspeakable atrocities, but rather delights in them—the unimaginable horror of what awaits the enemies of God is more than I can deal with, and I gratefully leave it up to God. You are right that I believe (and thank him) that he is altogether just, and will reward to each precisely what, and no more than, they deserve. To the degree that those children do not deserve hell, they will not be punished.

Click to expand...

It isn't so much the "facts" themselves, or the reasoning, or thinking, or logic, that ultimately sails my ship to the shore I'm on right now with this conclusion I hold so tightly to. Instead, it is the fact that (as you have also) I have known Him and tasted (experienced) His goodness and His heart and WHO HE REALLY IS and just like I know when I was a child my parents would have taken on a crocodile, or a strange man attacking me, or whatever deathly situation may have been facing them and put their own life in the way of a bullet or attacker, Christ has done that for us, and not just me, but all of us who would repent. If God put us all under sin so that He could have mercy on us all (Romans 11:32), then the infant and unborn are by His own words more safe and secure than we who have WILLFULLY and deliberately sinned multiples of times even after hearing the commandments and understanding (somewhat) right and wrong, good and evil, loving and unloving.

If His Spirit lives in me, in you, in us believers and we know God would not want us to allow a child to die, or be tortured, or for us to withhold forgiveness from them.. why would we think God would put His justice before His mercy (Hosea 6:6 - Matthew 9:13 - 1 Corinthians 6:19)? Mercy always triumphs over judgment with God brother (James 2:13), and God said this and showed this in action throughout the four Gospels in the life of Christ more than anywhere.

Mark Quayle said:

But we are here for his purposes and not ours. We are not an end unto ourselves.

Click to expand...

We are here for His purpose, and His purpose is and was to save the lost (John 3:16-17). These are His words, not mine.

If God says in John 3:17 He did not come here to condemn but to save, then His entire mission and objective is to save, and if Romans 11:32 says that He put us all under sin so that He could save "all" then infants and unborn and "all" are in that category. These are all His declarations and His plans and His goals and His love and His mercies.

The pattern here is so profound toward mercy that to think such evil of Christ is something Satan loves to giggle about. While Satan is demanding child sacrifice in the OT (2 Kings 17:17), He is accusing God of everything evil in the world and trying to defame God's Holy character and unparalleled kindness, and selflessness, and overwhelming love.

There are not infants burning in Hell my brother. God is the one who had to stop His own people from offering their children (born in sin!) to Molech (Leviticus 18:21)in the fire, and does not tell them to offer their children to Him (Yahweh).

God is speaking through His behavior AND His words about this, not just one or the other. He doesn't condemn those He can save, He saves even those He could rightly condemn (that being all of us who are saved), how much more will He save those little ones who we sinful fallen people would die for to save ourselves?

RamiC said:

I agree with you entire post, except, and I am being pedantic over the word "deserves". It is entirely because I believe Jesus saves everyone that He can save, and that no one gets what they deserve. Those who live to repent of their sins do not deserve the forgiveness that they are granted, and those who dies before any possibility of commiting a wilful act of sin certainly are going to heaven, but it is because they can be saved by His gracious nature and desire to save all. To me, what anyone deserves is nothing to do with it.

I absolutely agree with you about God's judgements being infallible, He sees every detail of our minds, brains and souls, He knows exactly who is freely choosing wrongly, and who is willing to let His truth in. His judgements are coming from someone we know has these characteristics - "9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9 NIV and "3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." 1 Timothy 2:3-4 NIV .

So I believe He saves everyone He can save, and He can save those who die before they had any chance of acting of their own free will in rebellion. I am not a universalist, He wants to save all, no He does not always get what He wants, He respects the choices we make.

Click to expand...

Spot on my man, spot on. This is exactly what I'm saying. It isn't that any of us deserves to know the Father through Christ and be saved, but that we who don't deserve it are saved and more so even the little children. This is the whole "abortion" fight going on right now, and people who know God's heart know God doesn't want us killing the unborn, or just as bad, the post-born! God is the Creator, not the destroyer, the Life-Giver not the life-taker, He is full of mercy, not wishing to punish anyone, and the Scripture is clear Hell is for punishment (Matthew 25:46).

People on Earth who punish an infant for crying are reprehensible and detestable and grotesque, even by our very low standards. Where did we even get such an idea? Our Father in Heaven who declares what is right and what is wrong, otherwise we would be calling the unborn a "clump of cells" and even ritual sacrifice starts to move into the realm of "no big deal" if they are simply "material that isn't alive yet." No, universalism isn't what God is, but saving everyone He can save is certainly His heart, and He definitely CAN save them because He PAID for it. (Isaiah 59:1)

"To me, what anyone deserves is nothing to do with it."

EXACTLY. It is who CHRIST is that has everything to do with it!

A question I had for a while, what’s the point of gaining wisdom, if in the end we’re just gonna grow old and die, never really having a chance to use that wisdom. But I think that whatever gain we earn here, such as coming to repentance, will be embedded in the energies of our soul and brought with us.

jonojim1337 said:

But I think that whatever gain we earn here, such as coming to repentance, will be embedded in the energies of our soul and brought with us.

Click to expand...

Certainly. By our fruits we show we are worthy to proceed to the next step with the understanding gained of how His will supersedes ours.

bling said:

If Adam and Eve sinned without a "sinful nature", why would a sinful nature be a provided and/or requirement for all other humans to sin?

Click to expand...

Neither Lucifer nor Adam "needed" a sinful nature to make a bad choice.

So if sinless beings without a sinful nature can make bad choices... how much more those WITH a sinful nature.

So much so that Rom 8 says

" For those who are according to the flesh (those who are not born again) set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, (those born again) the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

bling said:

Yes, all mature adults do sin, but having a ton of ways to sin (knowledge from the tree of knowledge) compared to Adam and Eve's one way to sin, would result in all mature adults sinning.

Click to expand...

Rom 3 "All have sinned and fallen short of God's righteous standard"

bling said:

What is this "nature" that is so different from the nature Adam and Eve had prior to sinning?

Click to expand...

It is a bent toward sin.
A predisposition to rebellion that Adam did not have.

bling said:

Was Jesus tempted in all the ways we are temped?

Click to expand...

Yes in terms of category, no in terms of the detail mechanism. In other words "Jesus was not a crack baby", Was not born addicted to Cocaine. Yet he was tempted as we are, in fact even beyond what we are.

bling said:

How is this "sinful nature" different from the "Nature" Adam and Eve had before sinning

Click to expand...

They had no "bent" toward rebellion against God, no bias in favor of sin or evil or rebellion

bling said:

since they went on to sin?
How do you remove selfishness, without removing free will?

Click to expand...

The New Creation of 2 Cor 5.

Adam and Eve were created with sinless and had free will

Hawkins said:

God reserves that right, yet you can reconcile when in Heaven that 99.99% are there, the removal is more of a warning.

Click to expand...

God says to the saints that in their case He will not blot out their names.

If one does not choose life, does not choose the gospel, there is no such promise for them.