Question on Justification

[Reformationist]

I guess I just don't understand the mindset that thinks it is a just act to send a 3 month old baby to Hell for the "sins he commits."

If I am being "emotional" in this sentiment, perhaps others are being legalistic, ignoring the spirit of the law in favor of the letter of the law?

Ok...so maybe a three month old is evil...how about a newborn?

Is a newborn also worthy of Hell?

D0F, I'm not going to justify this with a response other than to say that you efforts here are misdirected. I don't think that babies are any worse than any other person. I think we are all inherently sinful and, by nature, children of wrath. I think babies are beautiful and a gift from God. You need not paint me to be some sadistic child hater.

I do not think that a baby is guilty before God by virtue of the sins they commit. I think they're guilty before God because the Bible says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is no provision made to exclude any of created humanity from this all inclusive statement because all of created humanity are the subject of that verse. Despite the problem I have with this emotionally I must acknowledge that all are sinful in the eyes of the Lord and thus all are in need of a Savior. If there is anyone who is born sinless then there are people that don't need a Savior and that is a direct violation of too much Scripture to ignore.

God bless

 

[orthedoxy]

Reformationist does all mean all in 1tim 2:6 "he gave himself a ransom for all.
why does all mean all only when you want it?
2thes3:10 "For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat"
how would you explain 2thes3:10 do we starve our kids because they can't work?

psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
this doesn't say the infants are sinful only in the niv which is wrong.
Lotar my child is holy because the bible says so.
Icor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

Are the only verses for infants being sinful rom 3:23 and psalm 51:5?

If you believe children are going to hell you should at least baptize them to wash away their original sin.
Matthew 19:13-14
Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
How could the kingdom of God belong to infants when they are born with the guilt of original sin?

 

[danceforjoy]

Catholic view is we become holy or righteous it's not we are only declared righteous. When referring to God's word it uses words such as "cleansed" 1john1:7,9 "purged" Heb 1:3, "blotted out" Act 3:19, "washed away"Act 22:16,and "new creature"2cor 5:17.
Also Rom 2:13 the doer of the law shall be justified. so justification is ongoing like salvation(not a one time action).
Would you agree with the Catholic view that man becomes righteous not merely declared righteous?

Reformationist i don’t think infants has committed any sins deserving eternal fire. What sin has a three-month-old infant done deserving hell? What commandment have they broke ?I look at my Boy being holy, protected by God, he is pure

Since when are we owners of Christ's righteousness? We have become servants of it because of our love response to the Gospel, the sufferings of Christ in our behalf. (see Romans 6:18) Servants are not Masters!

Here is another phase of Justification to think about:
1.Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

For the one who truly seeks God through Christ Jesus, they are already sanctified and there is no judgment to confirm a persons worthiness, Investigative or other wise.

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Ro 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
Ro 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
Please tell me what you see wrong with my quoting because I built two errors into it
Rolf

 

[Reformationist]

Reformationist does all mean all in 1tim 2:6 "he gave himself a ransom for all.

There are a number of different ways in which "all" can be interpreted in that verse. One of them is all people ever created. Another is men of every tribe and nation but not every tribe and nation as a whole.

why does all mean all only when you want it?

Wow. That's mature.

2thes3:10 "For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat"
how would you explain 2thes3:10 do we starve our kids because they can't work?

orthodoxy, since you seem to be so keen on arguing against my understandings of the contextual applications of these seemingly universal words, why don't you explain how you understand these words when you come accross them.

psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
this doesn't say the infants are sinful only in the niv which is wrong.

Hey, well, that works. I hereby label everything that disagrees with me...wrong. That will help you always be right, at least in your own mind.

Lotar my child is holy because the bible says so.
Icor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

Um...what is Icor 7:14

Are the only verses for infants being sinful rom 3:23 and psalm 51:5?

If you believe children are going to hell you should at least baptize them to wash away their original sin.
Matthew 19:13-14
Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
How could the kingdom of God belong to infants when they are born with the guilt of original sin?

Are you asking me or Lotar?

 

[orthedoxy]

orthodoxy, since you seem to be so keen on arguing against my understandings of the contextual applications of these seemingly universal words, why don't you explain how you understand these words when you come accross them.

all i'm saying the all have sined in rom 3:23 doesn't include infants just like when the bible says "If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat" doesn't apply to infants.

 

[Lotar]

Lotar my child is holy because the bible says so.
Icor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

It says because of your faith they are holy. If you or your spouse had no faith, and did not baptized their child, they would be unclean. That is why this verse says, "Otherwise your children would be unclean."

Are the only verses for infants being sinful rom 3:23 and psalm 51:5?
psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
this doesn't say the infants are sinful only in the niv which is wrong.

The KJV:
Psalms 51:5
Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

The NAS:
Psalms 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.

Which version in your opinion is correct? They all say the same, that we are born sinful.

As for Romans, how could it mean anything different.

If you believe children are going to hell you should at least baptize them to wash away their original sin.

And we do, so what's your point?

Matthew 19:13-14
Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
How could the kingdom of God belong to infants when they are born with the guilt of original sin?

[size=-1]Mark 10:15
"Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all."[/size]


[size=-1]Because it is through the faith of a child that we are saved.



[/size]

 

[Reformationist]

all i'm saying the all have sined in rom 3:23 doesn't include infants just like when the bible says "If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat" doesn't apply to infants.

Okay. So, as I asked before, how do you determine the limitations of these "universal" words? Clearly you don't think that words like "all," and "world" always mean everyone yet you clearly do think they are all inclusive at other times. On top of all that, you castigate me when I seek to apply these "universal" words in a manner that you find offensive. So, in light of that, I'm curious how you determine when "all" means "every single person ever created" and when it means something else. The same goes for world. I'm not familiar with the beliefs of your faith but I would guess that you believe John 3:16 uses "world" in an all encompassing universal manner, right? If so, what is it that helps you define it that way? I'm sure you don't think "world" always means "every person ever created," right?

Also, you didn't answer my question. I asked what Icor 7:14 is. Did I just misread that verse reference?

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

And we do, so what's your point?

Do Lutherans believe that water baptism atones for/removes the stain of original sin?

[size=-1]

Mark 10:15
"Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all."

[/size]


[size=-1]Because it is through the faith of a child that we are saved.[/size]

Do you actually mean "it is through the faith of a child that we are saved" or are you just saying that saving faith is childlike in that it trusts implicitly?

God bless

 

[Lotar]

Do Lutherans believe that water baptism atones for/removes the stain of original sin?

Q. Why do Lutherans baptize infants?

A. Lutherans baptize infants because of what the Bible teaches regarding:

1.) God's command to baptize (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). There is not a single passage in Scripture which instructs us not to baptize for reasons of age, race, or gender. On the contrary, the divine commands to baptize in Scripture are all universal in nature. On the basis of these commands, the Christian church has baptized infants from the earliest days of its history. Since those baptized are also to be instructed in the Christian faith, (Matt. 28:20), the church baptizes infants only where there is the assurance that parents or spiritual guardians will nurture the faith of the one baptized through continued teaching of God's Word.

2.) Our need for baptism (Psalm 51; 5; John 3:5-7; Acts 2:38; Romans 3:23; Romans 6:3-4). According to the Bible, all people--including infants--are sinful and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). King David confesses, "I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. 51:5). Like adults, infants die--sure proof that they too are under the curse of sin and death. According to the Bible, baptism (somewhat like Old Testament circumcision, administered to 8-day-old-babies--see Col. 2:11-12) is God's gracious way of washing away our sins--even the sins of infants--without any help or cooperation on our part. It is a wonderful gift of a loving and gracious God.

3.) God's promises and power (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; John 3:5-7; Titus 3:5-6; Galatians 3:26-27; Romans 6:1-4; Colossians 2;11-12; Ephesians 5:25-26; 1 Corinthians 12:13). Those churches which deny baptism to infants usually do so because they have a wrong understanding of baptism. They see baptism as something we do (e.g., a public profession of faith, etc.) rather than seeing it as something that God does for us and in us. None of the passages listed above, nor any passage in Scripture, describes baptism as "our work" or as "our public confession of faith." Instead, these passages describe baptism as a gracious and powerful work of God through which He miraculously (though through very "ordinary" means) washes away our sins by applying to us the benefits of Christ's death and resurrection (Acts 2:38:39; Acts 22:16), gives us a new birth in which we "cooperate" just as little as we did in our first birth (John 3:5-7), clothes us in Christ's righteousness (Gal. 3:26-27), gives us the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-6), saves us (1 Peter 3:21), buries us and raises us up with Christ as new creatures (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12), makes us holy in God's sight (Eph. 5: 25-26) and incorporates us into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). All of this, according to the Bible, happens in baptism, and all of it is God's doing, not ours. The promises and power of baptism are extended to all in Scripture--including infants-and are available to all. Parents and sponsors then have the privilege and responsibility of nurturing the baptized child in God's love and in His Word so that he or she may know and continue to enjoy the wonderful blessings of baptism throughout his or her life.

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2611

Q. You teach, as did Martin Luther, that man is justified by grace alone, through faith alone. Yet I also read your position on baptism and it seems to me that you also teach baptismal regeneration. You clearly state that a person (infant) comes into the blessings of grace (salvation) through their baptism. How can this be if the scripture teaches that faith is the means of apprehending salvation? I may simply be misunderstanding what you are saying in the section on baptism, I hope I am. If not, then I must insist that there would then be no difference between the LCMS and the Roman Church on its view of justification and salvation. Please help me understand where I am misunderstanding you.

A. Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Baptism, we believe, is one of the miraculous means of grace (together with God's written and spoken Word) through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person's heart (see Matt. 28:18-20; Act. 2:38; John 3:5-7; Act. 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Titus 3:5-6; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:1-4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13).

Although we do not claim to understand how this happens or how it is possible, we believe (because of what the Bible says about baptism) that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant. This faith cannot yet, of course, be expressed or articulated, yet it is real and present all the same (see e.g., 1 Peter 2:21; Acts 2:38-39; Titus 3:5-6; Matt. 18:6; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim. 3:15; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13). This faith needs to be fed and nurtured by God's Word (Matt. 28:18-20), or it will die. Those who have been baptized, but who no longer believe, will not be saved. (By the same token, those who truly believe and yet have not had opportunity to be baptized [like, for example, the thief on the cross] will be saved.)

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2608

Do you actually mean "it is through the faith of a child that we are saved" or are you just saying that saving faith is childlike in that it trusts implicitly?

God bless

Yes.

 

[Reformationist]

Yes.

Umm....that was an either/or question. Did you just mean yes, that is what you meant to say?

 

[Lotar]

Umm....that was an either/or question. Did you just mean yes, that is what you meant to say?

Sorry, yes to the second half.


- Lotar, King of cryptic answers.

 

[Reformationist]

Sorry, yes to the second half.


- Lotar, King of cryptic answers.

LOL! Thanks for clarifying.

God bless,
Don

 

[orthedoxy]

Okay. So, as I asked before, how do you determine the limitations of these "universal" words? Clearly you don't think that words like "all," and "world" always mean everyone yet you clearly do think they are all inclusive at other times. On top of all that, you castigate me when I seek to apply these "universal" words in a manner that you find offensive. So, in light of that, I'm curious how you determine when "all" means "every single person ever created" and when it means something else. The same goes for world. I'm not familiar with the beliefs of your faith but I would guess that you believe John 3:16 uses "world" in an all encompassing universal manner, right? If so, what is it that helps you define it that way? I'm sure you don't think "world" always means "every person ever created," right?

Also, you didn't answer my question. I asked what Icor 7:14 is. Did I just misread that verse reference?

God bless

Don
I believe all means every person. Although you can have exceptions for example Jesus is not included in the all of Rom 3:23, infants are not included because they can’t sin.
I also assume when the bible says to preach it doesn’t mean to preach to infants, when it says one needs to confess Jesus with their mouth it’s not talking to infants.
I do believe “all” means all and in the case of john 3:16 the world is everyone in the world. This is how everyone believes it, Unless they have formed their theology before reading the verse.
Believers no longer belong to the world so when the bible uses the word “world’ it sometimes refers to the non believers.

As to 1cor 7:14 it says the infant are holy how can they be holy when they inherited the guilt of Adam?

 

[Reformationist]

Don
I believe all means every person.

So when you see "all" in the Bible it means "every person?" But, you do make exceptions, as you note here:

Although you can have exceptions for example Jesus is not included in the all of Rom 3:23, infants are not included because they can?t sin.

So, since Romans 3:23 doesn't say "all have sinned except infants" then it seems to me that you insert that piece of theology based on your presumptions. Romans 3:23 isn't saying that infants go around personally sinning. It says, "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Notice the tense and consider Romans 5:12.

I also assume when the bible says to preach it doesn?t mean to preach to infants, when it says one needs to confess Jesus with their mouth it?s not talking to infants.

I agree completely. What does that have to do with anything? Confessing Jesus with our mouth isn't what saves us, nor is our being preached to. What's your point?

I do believe ?all? means all and in the case of john 3:16 the world is everyone in the world. This is how everyone believes it, Unless they have formed their theology before reading the verse.

Here's an idea othedoxy, how about you stop acting so arrogant and talk about this with me in a joint desire to gain knowledge about God? This ISN'T how everyone believes it. The majority of the reformed community, which is a large number of believers, does not see it that way. Try to cut out the condescension in your posts or stop posting in this forum.

Believers no longer belong to the world so when the bible uses the word ?world? it sometimes refers to the non believers.

Actually, the word "world" is used in many different ways in the Bible.

World

As to 1cor 7:14 it says the infant are holy how can they be holy when they inherited the guilt of Adam?

What??!!! That's not what that verse says at all.

1 Corinthians 7:14
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.

This is speaking of the character of a home in which at least one parent is a believer. In Old Testament language the whole family is regarded as being in covenant with God. Even the spouse who refuses to believe comes under the influence of God's work - much more so the children who are not old enough to profess their faith.

Additionally, the verse clearly says that the child would be unclean were it not for the presence of at least one believing parent.