Babies who die

[Philonephius]

Edwards was not a psychic.

It was a joke,

JohnEdward.net | The ONLY Official Worldwide Website for Psychic Medium John Edward

 

[CalledOutOne]

No, I was making a point. Of course I don't believe that we become robots. Part of our path to salvation requires that we repent of our sins and ask for forgiveness. But even when we have accepted Christ as our savior we are still supposed to be aware of our sin, since we are still able to, and repent when we do. This does not suddenly mean we are required to do "works" in order to be saved, we just need to remember that we are still fallible and able to sin, thus needing to ask for forgiveness.

Where did I say different?

Also, on an unrelated topic, why do you say "accept Christ"? Christ doesn't need our acceptance, but we need His. I understand if you say "accept the truth," but not "accept Christ". We are accepted by Christ when we repent.

Anyway, the reason I reject covenantalism is that it basically teaches that you can save your children. It's a works-based covenant.

Also, based on your arguments I'm assuming that either you didn't understand my initial argument or you didn't read the entire post (including the quotation from the confession).

 

[Erinwilcox]

Anyway, the reason I reject covenantalism is that it basically teaches that you can save your children. It's a works-based covenant.

.

Obviously you are the one not reading posts since it has been laid out that covenentalism does NOT teach that you can save your own children. You clearly do not understand the doctrine.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Obviously you are the one not reading posts since it has been laid out that covenentalism does NOT teach that you can save your own children. You clearly do not understand the doctrine.

How does it not? You say that Baptism is the "seal" of the New Covenant. You baptize your children why? Because you believe they are in the New Covenant. Non-believers have no place in the New Covenant. Only those who have faith on the Lord Jesus Christ are in it. This is why the Baptist Confession denies these things. Unless of course, you believe some in the New Covenant aren't saved.

But I mean no offense to you personally. I recognize that I have brothers and sisters in the Presbyterian church .

 

[Erinwilcox]

How does it not? You say that Baptism is the "seal" of the New Covenant. You baptize your children why? Because you believe they are in the New Covenant. Non-believers have no place in the New Covenant. Only those who have faith on the Lord Jesus Christ are in it. This is why the Baptist Confession denies these things. Unless of course, you believe some in the New Covenant aren't saved.

But I mean no offense to you personally. I recognize that I have brothers and sisters in the Presbyterian church .

Honestly, believing that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever helped me transition from being staunchly Reformed Baptist to being loosely Presbyterian (yet still thoroughly Reformed). His Old Covenant was for families--and it included sacrifice, obedience to the law, etc.--but it did not guarantee that all in each family would be saved despite being a part of that covenant. The covenant now is based on Christ: His work on the cross as a propitiation for our sins. The need for animal blood and obedience to the old ceremonial laws no longer apply. That being said, I believe that His New Covenant still applies to families in the same way as the old. NOTHING in that guarantees salvation for children in the Covenant, but God has always worked through families and I believe that He still does today.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Honestly, believing that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever helped me transition from being staunchly Reformed Baptist to being loosely Presbyterian (yet still thoroughly Reformed). His Old Covenant was for families--and it included sacrifice, obedience to the law, etc.--but it did not guarantee that all in each family would be saved despite being a part of that covenant. The covenant now is based on Christ: His work on the cross as a propitiation for our sins. The need for animal blood and obedience to the old ceremonial laws no longer apply. That being said, I believe that His New Covenant still applies to families in the same way as the old. NOTHING in that guarantees salvation for children in the Covenant, but God has always worked through families and I believe that He still does today.

Thank you for clearing that up.

I still object to covenantalism because I cannot see in Scripture that there is only one Covenant in scripture, that is revealed in dispensations, that people are saved by making a covenant with God, or accepting God's covenant with them.

It is heresy for the main reason that the New Covenant (there are many covenants, but they can all be basically summarized in Old or New, or conditional (old) or unconditional (new)) is between the Father and the Son, not sinners and men, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out." (John 6:37)

It is also heresy because it takes the sign and seal of the New Covenant, which the Bible says is the Holy Spirit, and turn it into baptism. This results in people thinking they are saved by their baptism, and only need to grow into their faith.

The Old Covenant said, "If you do good, God will bless you." The New Covenant says that Jesus will save everyone whom the Father has chosen. Men have no place in the New Covenant except to be saved.

At it's logical end it denies the depravity of man, that there is only one mediator between God and men (they are mediating for a child in administering baptism), and especially that it rejects faith and the Holy Spirit as coming exclusively from God.

 

[Eddie L]

How does it not? You say that Baptism is the "seal" of the New Covenant. You baptize your children why? Because you believe they are in the New Covenant. Non-believers have no place in the New Covenant. Only those who have faith on the Lord Jesus Christ are in it. This is why the Baptist Confession denies these things. Unless of course, you believe some in the New Covenant aren't saved.

But I mean no offense to you personally. I recognize that I have brothers and sisters in the Presbyterian church .

The baptism of infants works much like communion, in that both are outward signs of an inward truth. We don't believe that baptism guarantees anything, any more than you believe communion does.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Thank you for clearing that up.

I still object to covenantalism because I cannot see in Scripture that there is only one Covenant in scripture, that is revealed in dispensations, that people are saved by making a covenant with God, or accepting God's covenant with them.

It is heresy for the main reason that the New Covenant (there are many covenants, but they can all be basically summarized in Old or New, or conditional (old) or unconditional (new)) is between the Father and the Son, not sinners and men, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out." (John 6:37)

It is also heresy because it takes the sign and seal of the New Covenant, which the Bible says is the Holy Spirit, and turn it into baptism. This results in people thinking they are saved by their baptism, and only need to grow into their faith.

The Old Covenant said, "If you do good, God will bless you." The New Covenant says that Jesus will save everyone whom the Father has chosen. Men have no place in the New Covenant except to be saved.

At it's logical end it denies the depravity of man, that there is only one mediator between God and men (they are mediating for a child in administering baptism), and especially that it rejects faith and the Holy Spirit as coming exclusively from God.

Just sayin . . . if it's "heresy," how can you consider Presbyterians to be Christians? Heresy is a pretty strong word.

You forget that ONLY those whom God had chosen in the OT were saved--it was NOT "if you do good God will bless you with salvation." Were that so, the rich young ruler would have technically "been saved" before Christ died because HE was obedient to the law, but clearly he went away from Jesus sad. Salvation in the Old Testament was NOT based on works. True God did bless those who obeyed Him and cursed those who did not, but He still does that today.

 

[CalledOutOne]

The baptism of infants works much like communion, in that both are outward signs of an inward truth. We don't believe that baptism guarantees anything, any more than you believe communion does.

There is no inward truth though. These babies are not saved, therefore, they are not in the New Covenant.

That is why the Scriptures say that we baptize the disciples. Our children are not disciples until they have faith.

Of course when I say "disciple" I mean:

"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:26

"Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:27

"So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions." ~Luke 14:33

 

[CalledOutOne]

Just sayin . . . if it's "heresy," how can you consider Presbyterians to be Christians? Heresy is a pretty strong word.

You forget that ONLY those whom God had chosen in the OT were saved--it was NOT "if you do good God will bless you with salvation." Were that so, the rich young ruler would have technically "been saved" before Christ died because HE was obedient to the law, but clearly he went away from Jesus sad. Salvation in the Old Testament was NOT based on works. True God did bless those who obeyed Him and cursed those who did not, but He still does that today.

When I say "heresy" I mean error. It's not all damnable.

And when I said those things about the Old Covenant, I was saying that no one could be saved under the Old Covenant. That is why God made a new one. The OT saints were saved under the New Covenant and not the old because they couldn't obey perfectly.

 

[athenken]

When I say "heresy" I mean error. It's not all damnable.

And when I said those things about the Old Covenant, I was saying that no one could be saved under the Old Covenant. That is why God made a new one. The OT saints were saved under the New Covenant and not the old because they couldn't obey perfectly.

"Heresy" is a very dangerous word to just throw around. Historically, anyone labelled a heretic was burned at the stake or otherwise killed. Just because you don't agree with someone else's interpretation does not necessarily mean what they believe is heresy.

 

[Eddie L]

There is no inward truth though. These babies are not saved, therefore, they are not in the New Covenant.

That is why the Scriptures say that we baptize the disciples. Our children are not disciples until they have faith.

Of course when I say "disciple" I mean:

"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:26

"Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:27

"So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions." ~Luke 14:33

You are making some fairly basic mistakes in your regarding Covenantalism. A few google searches or a decent read and you'd clear that right up.

 

[JM]

Predestinarian Network - Modified Covenant Theology : A Comparison between CT, NCT, and MCT




Paedobaptists, like Dispensationalists, believe the physical seed to be Israel.

 

[Erinwilcox]

There is no inward truth though. These babies are not saved, therefore, they are not in the New Covenant.

That is why the Scriptures say that we baptize the disciples. Our children are not disciples until they have faith.

Of course when I say "disciple" I mean:

"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:26

"Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple." ~Luke 14:27

"So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions." ~Luke 14:33

How do you KNOW for certain that the babies are not saved? Can you state it as fact? 100% truth? As I said before, I choose not to limit God by saying that He cannot somehow do a work of grace in the life of an unborn child that He knows will never be born. He did it for John the Baptist, who was born, so how can you be so sure that He damns every aborted or miscarried child?

 

[CalledOutOne]

How do you KNOW for certain that the babies are not saved? Can you state it as fact? 100% truth? As I said before, I choose not to limit God by saying that He cannot somehow do a work of grace in the life of an unborn child that He knows will never be born. He did it for John the Baptist, who was born, so how can you be so sure that He damns every aborted or miscarried child?

Did I say that it is impossible for babes to have faith? Did I say that I know for certain that babies are unsaved? No, but upon their profession they should be baptized. If they were falsely converted, then no law was broken. I'm not one of those Baptists who believe that you must show fruit first. If they are a false convert, then the judgement is on that person, not the administer of the Baptism (unless he is almost certain that the person is not saved).

You are saying that I've made arguments that I've not made.

 

[CalledOutOne]

"Heresy" is a very dangerous word to just throw around. Historically, anyone labelled a heretic was burned at the stake or otherwise killed. Just because you don't agree with someone else's interpretation does not necessarily mean what they believe is heresy.

To quote you: "This is, unfortunately, a false doctrine that is being taught by many denominations"

I'm pretty sure you originally used the word heresy.... You didn't go back and edit it, did you?

 

[athenken]

To quote you: "This is, unfortunately, a false doctrine that is being taught by many denominations"

I'm pretty sure you originally used the word heresy.... You didn't go back and edit it, did you?

Nope, haven't used that word at all.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Nope, haven't used that word at all.

Then I apologize. By this I only meant error.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Did I say that it is impossible for babes to have faith? Did I say that I know for certain that babies are unsaved? No, but upon their profession they should be baptized. If they were falsely converted, then no law was broken. I'm not one of those Baptists who believe that you must show fruit first. If they are a false convert, then the judgement is on that person, not the administer of the Baptism (unless he is almost certain that the person is not saved).

You are saying that I've made arguments that I've not made.

My bad, I'm sorry. I was on my phone in the car and misread what you wrote. I didn't realize at the time that you were referring to baptism for babies who are born and not the original topic.

Anyway, I'm going to back out of this thread now. As a pregnant mother who is once again experiencing problems with her pregnancy (thankfully the baby seems fine so far this time despite the issues with the pregnancy), this topic is very close to my heart. Regardless of what anyone says, I do not believe that the Bible firmly excludes unborn children from heaven and, this being the case, I have peace despite trials that God has seen fit to put in my path.