Are babies unrighteousness?

[GirdYourLoins]

All flesh is sinful, whether that of a sinful adult or of an unborn baby. Even in believers the flesh is sinful which is why called it the body of death. But we have a God who gives everyone a chance to come into relationship with Him.

 

[GreatistheLord]

It means what it says, there are no God seekers. Everyone, everyone, is conceived in sin, with a sin nature. It is not hyperbole, there is no reason to think it is.

The goal posts are moving here, are foetus unrighteousness? Do they sin from the moment they exist? No, we all know that.

Having a sin nature is no more sinful than being tempted to sin.

 

[GreatistheLord]

First define righteous. We are justified by faith. How could a baby have faith?
Furthermore we are all born in sin, came to the world speaking lies.

He is talking about our human nature which incidentally, a baby has the same even though not expressed yet. However, this does not mean babies go to hell when they die. And going to heaven will not be on their own merits but merely because Christ died to save the world, and them not being on the age of accountability yet. But Christ is the One Who made the way. We are accountable for our sins and can and should repent of our sins.

Born in sin = sinful nature which isn't a sin of itself

Foetuses cannot sin, and even if they could, there is some time before their first baby sin, making a blanket statement about all sinning fanciful.

Babies don't need justification as they are innocent of sin.

 

[GreatistheLord]

As it is written:

Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

David wrote that, in a book of poetry, about himself during a time of grief of his own sin of murder and adultery.

Why would that apply to all mankind?

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

You can't get an acorn from an acorn, therefore it's not a tree. I see most of your point, except that God will be the judge

Technically, an acorn is a tree by definition, but it's not in the life stage that people think of when they think of a tree. As for my point, I wasn't really trying to make a point. I just wanted to see how far you had resolved your position. I don't think that any position I've seen is very much based on scripture, so I'm looking for the one that seems the best thought-out, at least.

 

[devin553344]

Technically, an acorn is a tree by definition, but it's not in the life stage that people think of when they think of a tree. As for my point, I wasn't really trying to make a point. I just wanted to see how far you had resolved your position. I don't think that any position I've seen is very much based on scripture, so I'm looking for the one that seems the best thought-out, at least.

I agree, the doctrine should be understandable so we can be part of it.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

How could a baby have faith?

In Luke 1:41, John the Baptist leaped in the presence of Christ, though he was only a fetus. It was a response to the Holy Spirit. It seems to me like an adult's response to the Holy Spirit in coming to faith, except without hearing the word. I have my doubts that faith is a strictly cognitive process.

 

[RDKirk]

David wrote that, in a book of poetry, about himself during a time of grief of his own sin of murder and adultery.

Why would that apply to all mankind?

Do any Psalms apply to anyone today? If so, why?

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me,it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck,and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

I notice he said "which believe in me," and he did not leave it as a reference to all children, everywhere, which seems to be the way you take it, here:

So childen are "innocent" therefore they upon death that have not partaken of sin....

Going back to the verse you quoted, above, I'd be curious to know why you think he prefaced his statement with "which believe in me." Otherwise, most of the verses you quoted do seem to support your point, generally.

2. However they have until the age of accountability to become saved. Why? Because they are innocent indeed, but the evil seed is still there also. So once they are of age and die and are not saved, they go to hell.

As someone else once asked, how swift is that transition? There's no middle ground between Heaven and Hell, so there's no gradual change in outcomes. It seems that one instant a child is going to Heaven, regardless, and the next instant he's on his way to Hell. It's such a critical point in the life of a soul that is only gradually developing. The Bible also seems not to make any mention of this critical point.

I got mistreated by a lot of kids on my way to the age of accountability. I have a really hard time seeing them as innocent.

 

[pius463]

romans 3:10 quotes "None is righteousness, no not one" but that would have to include the 5 minute old foetus as well as the murder. What does this mean, or is it a bad translation?

No one seeks God, no one understands. It just sounds like hyperbole.

Are babies unrighteousness?


1 Thessalonians 5:23, a human is spirit, soul and body;

1 Peter 1:9, "for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls." The target of salvation is soul;

Matthew 11:14, John the Baptist is Elijah;

John 3:18, "but whoever does not believe stands condemned already".
I think my body is a new one and the result of a physical act. What is about my soul?

As Christians, many of us "reject the bold meaning of" Jesus' saying in John 3:7 "You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.'"

While John 3:5 is understood as baptism, Matthew 4:17 says about the kingdom that was still to come “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”

How could our ancestors come into the kingdom of heaven that "had not yet come" at their time? As Jesus said, they (their souls that are to be saved) must be born again ( John 3:7 ).

Basically, we follow the rule of John 3:18, we bring ourselves through the path of John 14:6, to come to John 17:3.

Now, think of souls.
Our souls will be born again (and again, "stands condemned" John 3:18 ) till we come to John 17:3. The soul who is joining a 5 minutes old fetus is bringing with it the "main sin" "the sin of not knowing the only true God ( John 17:3 )".

 

[GingerBeer]

romans 3:10 quotes "None is righteousness, no not one" but that would have to include the 5 minute old foetus as well as the murder. What does this mean, or is it a bad translation?

No one seeks God, no one understands. It just sounds like hyperbole.

You asked "Are babies unrighteousness?"
The answer is not by any thought, word, or deed of their own. For their words and deeds they are innocent having done nothing at all. Yet because they are the natural descendants of Adam and Eve they have inherited corruption and death which (without grace) will inevitably lead to thoughts, words, and/or deeds that fall short of God's righteousness.

 

[RDKirk]

This thread is, frankly, what Paul was talking about:

For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.

Does this debate increase anyone's faith? Does it set anyone more firmly on the mission of making disciples from all nations?

Ultimately, God's judgments of all souls will be filled with surprises.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

No one seeks God, no one understands. It just sounds like hyperbole.

If it's hyperbole, please produce a righteous person.

 

[pius463]

This thread is, frankly, what Paul was talking about:

For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.

Does this debate increase anyone's faith? Does it set anyone more firmly on the mission of making disciples from all nations?

Ultimately, God's judgments of all souls will be filled with surprises.

More than 40 years ago I was at the same position with GreatistheLord. I did not stop to looking for the answer. My finding is as read in #90.

A big question for Christians:
The Bible is so thick. Some verses are likely contradictory to answer the whole questions of life.
What we have to do? Shall we follow Jesus or shall we follow Paul's or Peter's or the others'?
Based on John 16:12-15, the Spirit of truth is to hear Jesus' sayings, and so I follow Jesus sayings.

Are Paul's wrong? Are Peter's wrong? Are the others' wrong?
No.

Shall we avoid to debate this?
No. As far as our heart is pure and open for the Spirit of truth to open all the truth, let our debate illuminate one another.

Just to show how important is the debate, here is an edit from The only true God #17:

I see a staircase of acceptance of Jesus and of knowing the only true God; a staircase with many steps. A man might be at any one of the steps and the highest step of "acceptance" is to believe that Jesus is the Father and the only true God (John 17:3).

The very Christology passages of Paul's, Peter's, and the others', are at a step positioning lower in the staircase.
I did believe them long time back, as I move forward seeking for the truth (John 14:6), I find John 16:12-15.
This is important, on stepping up a staircase, one has to leave behind the lower step, otherwise he or she will always be in confusion, may be not in faith but in explaining.

Let see Matthew 16:16, "Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”"
The truth about Jesus (a higher step) is John 10:30; Matthew 16:16 is at a lower step in the staircase.

Jesus, God, knows all. He knows that Peter (and the Church?) at that time accepted Him not as God (yet) but as the "Messiah, the Son of the living God".

God does not dictate, God teaches humanity to come closer to knowing the truth, knowing Him the only true God ( John 17:3 ). I believe, then He gave John 16:12-13 "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. ...."

As to my opinion, we need to step up, through our debate.

 

[RDKirk]

More than 40 years ago I was at the same position with GreatistheLord. I did not stop to looking for the answer. My finding is as read in #90.

A big question for Christians:
The Bible is so thick. Some verses are likely contradictory to answer the whole questions of life.
What we have to do? Shall we follow Jesus or shall we follow Paul's or Peter's or the others'?
Based on John 16:12-15, the Spirit of truth is to hear Jesus' sayings, and so I follow Jesus sayings.

Are Paul's wrong? Are Peter's wrong? Are the others' wrong?
No.

Shall we avoid to debate this?
No. As far as our heart is pure and open for the Spirit of truth to open all the truth, let our debate illuminate one another..

And then do what with it? In the end, "Lord, I won plenty of debates."

Is that it?

 

[Small Fish]

In Luke 1:41, John the Baptist leaped in the presence of Christ, though he was only a fetus. It was a response to the Holy Spirit. It seems to me like an adult's response to the Holy Spirit in coming to faith, except without hearing the word. I have my doubts that faith is a strictly cognitive process.

Which is a very interesting and very unusual event and I would think that this would take more than just a superficial look to understand why and how this happened. I'm sure you would agree that this is out of the norm.

One thing is that John had a very specific work to do and was seperated from his mother's womb. This is not what I'm talking about. If you ever met or studied someone like him you will quickly learn that this is a very extraordinary person. We are talking babies in general. Or do you feel this is a common occurrence?

 

[Hank77]

Being born into this material world we carry the curse of Adam, the sins of our forefathers.

We do not carry the sins of our forefathers.

 

[Hank77]

Being selfish or self-centered to the detriment of those around you is not righteous behavior.
And infants are nothing but selfish and manipulative.
We forgive them their sins, by choice.
But do they treat others well?

Do you know the scripture that says before the youth knows to fix on good rather than evil?
They aren't capable of knowing what sin is or that sin displeases God.
Suffer the little children to come unto me for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.

 

[Hank77]

In fact, King David had something to say about the youngest among us that many find pretty provocative .. see Psalm 51:5.

King David also made this very provocative statement. (paraphrased)
My son cannot come back to me, but I shall go to him someday.

 

[Hank77]

I have found not one verse in the Bible that support an age of accountability. Moreover, following your logic, Christians should be the greatest supporters of abortion, since it is the greatest Heaven filling method. That, of course, is complete nonsense.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isa 7:15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.