User Tag List

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 310111213
Results 181 to 188 of 188

Thread: Are babies going to populate "hell"?

  1. #181
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    8,903
    Thanks
    1,085
    Thanked 1,301 Times in 980 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    499558
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    That admittedly does look somewhat confusing. It might be that the "even as" is not fully literal, speaking of us approaching the oneness that God Above and God Below shared, and/or it might be hint to an overlay/integration of the Holy Spirit with ourselves. If Jesus was fully filled with the Holy Spirit and that is something he ultimately desired for us that might make sense. Do you have any other ideas for that passage? I'm all ears, I'm interesting in hearing some other ideas here.
    It might be best to start a new thread for that discussion.
    God will not give His glory to another or will He?
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  2. #182
    Over 3000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    3,825
    Thanks
    739
    Thanked 1,373 Times in 1,075 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    204372
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    It might be best to start a new thread for that discussion.
    God will not give His glory to another or will He?
    Back to topic, the question was whether Jesus was innately sinful, as a counter to the concept of "original sin" (that all men are innately sinful) which was because of the claim that infants and children are sinless and perfect, and that therefore God would send all babies to heaven.

    Aside from distractions, infants are not perfect, they are just as of yet untried. Every infant that has grown up has proven that they are sinful, the exception being God, and for reason being that He was God with the holy character of God. We can get into why later but that is another thread. Put an infant in "heaven" for twenty years and they wouldn't be an infant anymore, they'd be a sinful twenty-year old in a spirit realm. You'd be fooling yourself that "this one will be different" compared to the trillions of contrary proofs existing.

    So what do we make of this? Trust what God has given us, in the hope of the resurrection of the dead. We don't need to try to make up something "better" when God who is far much wiser already has this covered.

  3. #183
    Over 6000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    6,142
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked 974 Times in 720 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    293608
    Hi and check Rom 9:11 !!

    dan p

  4. #184
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    8,903
    Thanks
    1,085
    Thanked 1,301 Times in 980 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    499558
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Back to topic, the question was whether Jesus was innately sinful, as a counter to the concept of "original sin" (that all men are innately sinful) which was because of the claim that infants and children are sinless and perfect, and that therefore God would send all babies to heaven.
    That sounds a lot like trying to use an exception to prove a rule when it hasn't been established whether the rule is true or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Aside from distractions, infants are not perfect, they are just as of yet untried. Every infant that has grown up has proven that they are sinful, the exception being God, and for reason being that He was God with the holy character of God. We can get into why later but that is another thread. Put an infant in "heaven" for twenty years and they wouldn't be an infant anymore, they'd be a sinful twenty-year old in a spirit realm. You'd be fooling yourself that "this one will be different" compared to the trillions of contrary proofs existing.

    So what do we make of this? Trust what God has given us, in the hope of the resurrection of the dead. We don't need to try to make up something "better" when God who is far much wiser already has this covered.
    There is a difference between being "sinful" and being "wicked", both in this life and in the Judgment.
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  5. #185
    Over 3000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    3,825
    Thanks
    739
    Thanked 1,373 Times in 1,075 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    204372
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    That sounds a lot like trying to use an exception to prove a rule when it hasn't been established whether the rule is true or not.


    There is a difference between being "sinful" and being "wicked", both in this life and in the Judgment.
    Jeremiah 17:9-10 KJV
    (9) The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
    (10) I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

    Not a baby salvation passage directly, but it does indicate the standard God has set up: he has his method to search the heart.
    Last edited by Rosenritter; September 14th, 2018 at 07:24 PM.

  6. #186
    Over 500 post club ttruscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    541
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 28 Times in 23 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    17876
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    Gen. 25:22 And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the Lord. 23 And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.
    The plain meaning of the Hebrew word reduced to struggle here is Strong's H7533 - ratsats, meaning to crush, oppress
    • (Qal)
    • to crush, get crushed, be crushed

    • to crush, oppress (fig)

    • crushed (participle passive)

    • (Niphal) to be crushed, be broken
    • (Piel)
    • to crush in pieces

    • to grievously oppress (fig)

    • (Poel) to oppress (fig)
    • (Hiphil) to crush
    • (Hithpoel) to crush each other...the actual form of the verb used in this verse that show that they were BOTH being murderous

    And when she asked the LORD why are they trying to crush each other and fighting so hard HE replied with the news that they were fighting over who was to be the first born, not knowing the elder would serve the younger. If this is not the gist of HIS answer to Rebecca's inquiry then HE did not answer her at all but ignored her plight of murderous twins to talk about the future.
    I Champion GOD’s holiness:
    - GOD did not need evil so did not create evil for any reason.
    - All evil is creature-created.

    I Champion Our Free will:
    - All spirits created in HIS image had an equal ability and opportunity to choose either heaven or hell by their free will.

  7. #187
    Over 3000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    3,825
    Thanks
    739
    Thanked 1,373 Times in 1,075 Posts

    Mentioned
    20 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    204372
    Quote Originally Posted by ttruscott View Post
    The plain meaning of the Hebrew word reduced to struggle here is Strong's H7533 - ratsats, meaning to crush, oppress
    • (Qal)
    • to crush, get crushed, be crushed

    • to crush, oppress (fig)

    • crushed (participle passive)

    • (Niphal) to be crushed, be broken
    • (Piel)
    • to crush in pieces

    • to grievously oppress (fig)

    • (Poel) to oppress (fig)
    • (Hiphil) to crush
    • (Hithpoel) to crush each other...the actual form of the verb used in this verse that show that they were BOTH being murderous

    And when she asked the LORD why are they trying to crush each other and fighting so hard HE replied with the news that they were fighting over who was to be the first born, not knowing the elder would serve the younger. If this is not the gist of HIS answer to Rebecca's inquiry then HE did not answer her at all but ignored her plight of murderous twins to talk about the future.
    I'm not saying infants are holy but I don't think that's the meaning of the passage. Unborn children kick and punch and headbutt naturally, and they can also interact with each other, and the struggling of two children is going to be more than double of a single child. It would also make sense that God chose to use this as an opportunity to explain that these would be two nations in conflict one another. They didn't have to be trying to kill each other. How would a child that young even comprehend what is at the other end of its hand or foot?

  8. #188
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    22,600
    Thanks
    13,393
    Thanked 35,323 Times in 17,749 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147792
    Quote Originally Posted by DAN P View Post
    Hi and check Rom 9:11 !!

    dan p
    Shucks....I'd missed this one. Thanks Dan.

    Not having done any good or evil. It really does matter.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us