Hi John, I do hope that you will read J. MacArthur's book because I don't think this discussion is doing it justice. I know I am not. Mac neither denies original sin, and he does say that God is GRACIOUS in bringing all infants who die in infancy into heaven. Having said that, he does go to great lengths to show how God looks upon babies and children. There are a number of scriptures he looks at in making these conclusions, and I don't see how he is mishandling any of them. JM only uses the term "innocent" because God's Word does. It has to do with how GOD sees them. He believes that babies and infants who die go to heaven because God is gracious. He also spends a good deal of time showing how every time the Bible speaks of those who will not inherit heaven, it is because of SINS they have committed. Are babies born in Adam? Yes. Do they have a sin nature? Of course. I don't think anyone is denying that. Further, I had hoped I made it clear that John does not present an "age of accountability." In fact, I said that he contrasts his position of a "condition of accountability" with an "age of accountability" which he does not support. Blessings, Nancy >From: "John Reisinger" <jreisinger@...> >Reply-To: soundofgrace@... >To: <soundofgrace@...> >Subject: [soundofgrace] Are infants really "innocent?" >Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:10:18 -0500 > >From: "Nancy Newcomb" <nan_new39@...> >Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] RE: pagan children called 'innocents'??? > > > > Having read the book, I understood John MacArthur mostly to be saying >that > > babies, regardless of who they are born to, are referred to by God as > > "innocents." > >JGR: No child of Adam was every "innocent." A child does not become a >guilty sinner worthy of death when he supposedly commits his first sin at >the mythical "age of accountability." The infant is already, at the moment >of his birth, a guilty sinner worthy of death OR ELSE HE COULD NOT POSSIBLY >DIE! This is Paul's argument in Romans 5:12-19. > Not one single child of Adam was ever "inncoent" for a single >second. We simply must understand Romans 5:12-19 and start the discussion >at that point. Paul is specifically dealing with the subject of "Why do all >men, including infants die?" And he does not give one answer for an adult's >death and another answer for the infant's death. An infant and and an adult >both die for the same reason. They are both guilty sinners who DESERVE to >die or else they would not die! Job 4:7 "Remember now, who ever perished >being innocent? Or where were the upright ever cut off?" (NKJ) Nobody, >inclding infants, dies who is not a guilty sinner that deserves to die! >That >is a Biblcal fact. > To attempt to get infants into heaven on the ground that they are >inncoent is a clear denial of Romans 5:12-19 and the doctrine of the >imputation of both Adam's sin and guilt as well as denial of Adam's >universal, representative headship. > This does not mean that an infant cannot be saved but it does mean >he a guilty sinner the day he is born and therefore must have the benifits >of the atonement applied to him in order to be saved. If infants are in >heaven, and I believe they are even though I cannot positively without >question prove it, they are "saved and blood washed" infants and not >"innocent" infants who somehow escaped unscathed from their heritage in >Adam. > >JGR. > >-- >Read the Sound of Grace pages at >http://www.soundofgrace.com > >To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... > >To view our online archive go to our web page at >http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace > > > _________________________________________________________________ Let the new MSN Premium Internet Software make the most of your high-speed experience. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1