John, Thanks for posting that. You have so much wisdom! I don't think I disagree with anything you said, but I do have one question about this: The primary problem in the mind of many, including >myself, is NOT with the position he takes, namely, that all infants, >without >exception, who die are sure of going to heaven, but his insistence that his >position is the only position possible according to the Scripture I don't think I understand what you mean here in saying that the problem you and others have is with his insistence that his position is the only position possible according to Scripture. When we are convinced that Scripture says something (whether we're right or wrong), how can we also believe it says something contrary? I know that isn't what you mean, but I am not understanding what you do mean in this. It seems to me that if we believe Scripture says A, and A is in conflict with B, then of course we're going to think it says ONLY A and not B. I hope my question makes sense. Blessings, Nancy >From: "John Reisinger" <jreisinger@...> >Reply-To: soundofgrace@... >To: <soundofgrace@...> >Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Are infants really "innocent?" >Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 12:27:11 -0500 > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Nancy Newcomb" <nan_new39@...> >Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Are infants really "innocent?" > > > > Hi John, > > > > I do hope that you will read J. MacArthur's book because I don't think >this > > discussion is doing it justice. > >Hi Nancy, > I have read Macarthur's book. It is said, "Fools rush in where >angels fear to tread." (1) John Macarthur is a brilliant and godly man and >the fartherest thing possible from a fool. (2) He did not "rush into" >writing his book. His little book evidences a tremendous amount of research >and work. He is to be commended for openly and clearly trying to prove his >position with actual texts of Scripture. He apparently feels very strongly >about this subject. (3) The primary problem in the mind of many, including >myself, is NOT with the position he takes, namely, that all infants, >without >exception, who die are sure of going to heaven, but his insistence that his >position is the only position possible according to the Scripture > Macarthur's position is that the Bible clearly teaches all infants >go to heaven. I WANT to believe that and I DO BELIEVE that but I have very >little Biblical evidence to prove beyond question the salvation of all >infants is an article of faith beyond dispute. I cannot say, as Macarthur >does, that the death of every infant without exception is, according to the >clear teaching of Scripture, guaranteed "instant heaven." I am sorry but it >is not all that perfectly clear to me despite Macarthur's arguments. > You are very correct is asserting that no one has a right to judge >Macarthur's, or any one else's, motives for either believing or teaching a >given doctrine. I do not in the least believe that Macarthur holds, and put >into print, the position he does for any other reason than that he >sincerely believes that is what the Scripture teaches. All discussion and >comments must be only concerned with his exegesis of Scripture. > Two things must be remembered. First, when anyone, regardless who >he >is, puts a conviction into print it is "entombed in ink" and it is fair >game >for criticism. We have as much responsibility to sincerely criticize >something we do believe as we have to print what we do believe. Second, we >may only criticize a writer's exegesis of Scripture and not his motives. >This is especially true when the writer is a man of Macarthur's stature in >Christian circles. > One last personal opinion. John Macarthur is one of the few >internationally famous preachers I know of who does not hesitate to admit >he >was wrong when friends, or even enemies, prove him to be wrong. He has >publically done this on more than one occasion. That fact alone makes me >very reluctant to accuse his motives. Macarthur has been neither reluctant >to tackle very difficult and controversial subjects nor been unwilling to >suffer the consequences of his position. Those two things, plus his >willingness to admit when he knows he is wrong, is more than enough to keep >me from throwing stones at him even when I do not agree with either >position >or his exegesis. > >P.S. Glad to have you on our chat room. 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 > > > _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to choose, serve, and enjoy wine at Wine @ MSN. http://wine.msn.com/