I said, for the life of me, I don't get it. I am sorry. You caught the brunt of my frustration. I have posted numerous times on the sufficiency of Christ's finished work to save babies the same way he has saved everyone else, "believers" included. We do not need a second "gospel" to get those who cannot believe into heaven. Our problems arise from a deficient view concerning WHO Christ is and what he has accomplished in our stead and on our behalf. It frustrates me when what I have said in regards to this is overlooked when the discussion comes up again. No, it is not your theology, and certainly not all of your theology from just one post. It is me through and through. Thanks for being gracious and making light of my comment.
Bill
Bill, I posted this yesterday and got (as usual) as resounding non-response. What say you???
Speaking of such, I am of the opinion (have I ever been taught this???) that we are born with a propensity to sinânot actually already condemned by sin (since we havenât yet). So, in that case, anyone who dies prior to actually sinning is not under Godâs judgment, and does not go to hell. Is there some scriptural reason for not believing this anyone?
Doesn't the Romans message give us a view that presents sin as that which is defined by law? Read 7: 7,8. Until one (a child or a special ed type) comes to the point of understanding sin as defined by law -- there is "no sin" in terms of accountability.
I know --------- spoken like a true legalist, but isn't there some truth to this?
John
