Infants, Imputed Guilt & Interpreting Romans 5:12

[RBerman]

There is much room for discussion on what the meaning of Jesus' words entails, but the one thing that Alan pointed out is that they CANNOT mean that little children are deserving of the eternal and unbearable torments of hell... This idea is a Calvinist ADD-ON to Holy Writ that Jesus words absolutely deny, for He blessed them, explaining that it is such as these that are the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Heaven.

That does not follow logically, George. "Everyone in the kingdom of heaven is like a child" (proposition) does not entail "Everyone like a child is in the kingdom of heaven" (the converse of the proposition). For instance, "All NBA players are men" does not entail "All men are NBA players."

[footwasher]

That does not follow logically, George. "Everyone in the kingdom of heaven is like a child" (proposition) does not entail "Everyone like a child is in the kingdom of heaven" (the converse of the proposition). For instance, "All NBA players are men" does not entail "All men are NBA players."

RB, your comparison is invalid because none of the statements are valid premises for a syllogism.

It should be like this:

Everyone accepted in the kingdom of God is innocent.
All children are accepted.

Conclusion
All children are innocent.

You can do the same correction for your NBA example using ”men” and ”stars”.

Good start in making logical argumentation. Hope that wasn't seen as patronizing...

[RBerman]

RB, your comparison is invalid because none of the statements are valid premises for a syllogism.

It should be like this:

Everyone accepted in the kingdom of God is innocent.
All children are accepted.

Conclusion
All children are innocent.

You can do the same correction for your NBA example using ”men” and ”stars”.

Good start in making logical argumentation. Hope that wasn't seen as patronizing...

I don't see you as patronizing, but I also don't recognize either your major premise or your minor premise in the statement of Jesus under discussion here.

[George Blaisdell]

That does not follow logically, George. "Everyone in the kingdom of heaven is like a child" (proposition) does not entail "Everyone like a child is in the kingdom of heaven" (the converse of the proposition). For instance, "All NBA players are men" does not entail "All men are NBA players."

OK - So are you arguing that when Jesus blesses little children calling them like those in the Kingdom of Heaven, that He is calling hopeless hell-bound sinners to be LIKE those in the Kingdom of Heaven? Calling a child morally evil is a morally evil thing to do... Jesus didn't do it...

Now many will BECOME morally evil, and God foreknows who these are, and He "hated Esau," foreknowing his future immoral conduct, but the child, before doing evil, is not yet evil, and very few children, if any, are actually evil... Very few adults as well... Most wander around a lot...

God does not bless the evil ones... And He only condemns the evil ones... I sometimes think that mis-carriage is the only way for a person who would otherwise become evil to be entered into the Kingdom of Heaven...

Arsenios

[George Blaisdell]

That does not follow logically, George.

Well, let's see what we can do with a syllogism here...

Christ: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are as little children...
RB - Some little children are bound for hell...
Conclusion: Some in the Kingdom of Heaven are bound for hell...

Perhaps we can try again:

Christ: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are as little children...
RB: All little children are sinful...
Therefore: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are sinful...

That won't do either...

Christ: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are as little children...
RB: Most little children are not the elect...
Therefore: Most in the Kingdom of Heaven are not the elect...

naaagh.... Let's see:

Christ: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are as little children...
Therefore: To be in the Kingdom of Heaven, one must become as a little child...

What is it about a little child then that one must become to enter the Kingdom?

DEPENDENCE on one's parents for all one's needs...
therefore:
Reliance on God for ALL one's needs...

This syllogism business is not all it's cracked up to be...

I prefer the FAITH of Christ given once for all to the Apostles...

Arsenios

[RBerman]

Well, let's see what we can do with a syllogism here...

Christ: All in the Kingdom of Heaven are as little children...
RB - Some little children are bound for hell...
Conclusion: Some in the Kingdom of Heaven are bound for hell...

That's not a valid syllogism, George. You can conclude from Jesus' statement that being like a child is a necessary condition for being in the Kingdom, but not that it's a sufficient condition. So the proper conclusion is that some may have "childlike faith" and yet not be in the Kingdom of Heaven. For instance, perhaps they have childlike faith in Pharisaical legalism, or in Hinduism, or in atheism. But Jesus is clear that we must have faith in him in particular, not just faith in general. And so on with your other syllogisms, which all have the same "assuming the converse" problem to which I alluded in my previous post. You're trying to say that all men are in the NBA, which is not the case just because everyone in the NBA is a man.

[marke]

John 17, even in the "dynamic translations", is a problem for your reasoning. So, what makes the difference between someone going to hell or heaven? Is it in them, or is it decided elsewhere? If "all" have had their sins paid for, why is anyone going to hell?

All sins with the exception of rejecting Christ or the Word of God are 'paid' for. Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2), and yet nobody goes to heaven without receiving the knowledge of the truth as given by the Holy Spirit Who enlightens every man that comes into the world (John 1:9) and Who draws all men to Christ (John 12:32). Those who reject the Word of God after having been clearly shown the truth (Romans 1) will go to hell without excuse. (vs 20).

[footwasher]

RB wrote:
You can conclude from Jesus' statement that being like a child is a necessary condition for being in the Kingdom, but not that it's a sufficient condition.

That's not what the text says:

Matthew 18
2 He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3 And he said: “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

.....
10 “See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven

.....
14 In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.


RB wrote:
You're trying to say that all men are in the NBA, which is not the case just because everyone in the NBA is a man.

He's saying all children are in the Kingdom of God, which IS the case:
Matthew 19:14 Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

Your NBA example should be stated like this:

All the stars are in the NBA.
XYZ is in the NBA.

XYZ is a star.

An interesting question would be to ask how one can cause children to sin:

Matthew 18:6, 14 NET
“But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a huge millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the open sea.

Children are without sin. Training them the benefit of seeking God ensures that they transition from being innocent to sinless by being IN Christ, by believing in Him.

Proverbs 22:6 NET
Train a child in the way that he should go,
and when he is old he will not turn from it.

Hebrews 11:6 NET
Now without faith it is impossible to please him, for the one who approaches God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

Matthew 6:33 NET
But above all pursue his kingdom and righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

Romans 14:17 NET
For the kingdom of God does not consist of food and drink, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.

John 6:37 NET
Everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will never send away.

John 6:65 NET
So Jesus added, “Because of this I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has allowed him to come.”

Neglecting the training causes the child to sin and become ”lost”.

Matthew 18
14 In the same way, your Father in heaven is not willing that one of these little ones be lost.

[RBerman]

He's saying all children are in the Kingdom of God, which IS the case
Matthew 19:14 Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

That is not correct. "The kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these" is not equivalent to "all children are in the kingdom of God." The latter statement has a universality absent in the former.

[footwasher]

That is not correct. "The kin gdom of heaven belongs to such as these" is not equivalent to "all children are in the kingdom of God." The latter statement has a universality absent in the former.

C'mon RB. We've had this conversation before. All cultures, secular, religious, etc., recognise the inability of children to make balanced choices. It's a physiological state, reflecting the state of growth of the mental faculties.


Training the child with bare instructions accompanied by assurances that they are right acts requires trust from the child. The same state we aim for as adults in the Kingdom. Jews in the cellars, remember? Father knows better, yes?

[Alan McDougall]

RB, your comparison is invalid because none of the statements are valid premises for a syllogism.

It should be like this:

Everyone accepted in the kingdom of God is innocent.
All children are accepted.

Conclusion
All children are innocent.

You can do the same correction for your NBA example using ”men” and ”stars”.

Good start in making logical argumentation. Hope that wasn't seen as patronizing...

Of course not everyone that is accepted into the Kingdom of Heaven, those who go to heaven are forgiven sinners, blood d washed born again disciples of Jesus Christ the Lord.

Children are another case and let’s believe the very highest authority on the matter; namely the Lord Jesus who clearly told us all little children go to heaven if they die in early childhood.

Jesus said it, I believe it!

God Bless

Alan

[RBerman]

C'mon RB. We've had this conversation before. All cultures, secular, religious, etc., recognise the inability of children to make balanced choices. It's a physiological state, reflecting the state of growth of the mental faculties. Training the child with bare instructions accompanied by assurances that they are right acts requires trust from the child. The same state we aim for as adults in the Kingdom. Jews in the cellars, remember? Father knows better, yes?

As I've said repeatedly earlier in this thread, children do indeed grow in their moral accountability as both their knowledge and rational processes mature. So sure, children are relatively less accountable, just as Jesus said that to whom much is given, much is expected. But it's both artificial and unBiblical to suppose that children start from "zero accountability" rather than "very low accountability."

[RBerman]

let’s believe the very highest authority on the matter; namely the Lord Jesus who clearly told us all little children go to heaven if they die in early childhood.

I cannot think of anywhere in the Bible that Jesus says such a thing obliquely, let alone clearly. Do you claim personal revelation, direct from Jesus?

[footwasher]

As I've said repeatedly earlier in this thread, children do indeed grow in their moral accountability as both their knowledge and rational processes mature. So sure, children are relatively less accountable, just as Jesus said that to whom much is given, much is expected. But it's both artificial and unBiblical to suppose that children start from "zero accountability" rather than "very low accountability."

But science recognises that juveniles cannot be made culpable for crimes? Judaism sets 13 years as the age for asking for responsible action from children (bar/bat mizvah) and 30 before spiritual maturity allows kohanim to begin training during the temple era...

Besides, if you're proposing a graded system, when does the low accountabilty become sufficiently high to pin blame?

Conversely, when does it regress to immunity? Backward to the viable fetus? Forward to senility? Never ever? If more revelation means higher expectation, you could argue that infants have been given NOTHING.

[George Blaisdell]

"The kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these" is not equivalent to "all children are in the kingdom of God." The latter statement has a universality absent in the former.

This is why bouncing around in speculative and explorative syllogisms is a bad idea...

The literal translation is:
"For of such as these (little children) IS the Kingdom of Heaven."

The Greek double emphasizes the IS, first by putting it in the sentence at all, and second by placing it dead center in middle of the sentence... In ordinary Greek construction, the unemphasized IS would be implied, and it would literally say: "Of such as these, the Kingdom of Heaven."

So SOMETHING very important is being communicated by Jesus in this statement, for it is DEFINITIVE of the Kingdom of Heaven...

And children ARE caused to stumble, so that in the essentiality of the little child IS the Kingdom of Heaven, and Christ blesses them...

Now against this, you seem to be proposing that according to Calvinist Dogma, these children are evilly and totally depraved and headed into hell unless any of them happens to be one of the pre-determined Elect who has no choice but to go to heaven...

And THAT is just NOT a part of this passage whatsoever, and is, in fact, utterly contrary to the whole import of these words and blessings of our Lord...

Arsenios