Wm,
I apologize if I missed some point in a previous post. I do not get to read
all of them carefully and sometimes a fuzzy brain just doesn't grasp it all.
That is why I am going one small step at a time in this.
I will make but one quick observation, for it is late. Redemption assumes a
debt, not a debt nature. There can be no redemption unless there is a real
debt. One cannot redeem someone from a debt nature. If a person is
redeemed it must be true that, legally speaking, he has incurred a debt.
Having a nature or tendency to incur debt does not activate the need for
redemption. If I were of a nature to spend without restraint and beyond my
means, no-one could demand a penny of payment from me unless I actually went
out and overspent. If my nature in my mother's womb were that of a
shop-aholic, no one could redeem me for, despite my debt-producing nature, I
would still have no debt. So redemption cannot be applied to me.
I think you can see how this would be applied to the question of the
sinfulness of infants: if they are in need of redemption, then they have a
debt which must be paid, actual sin that is on their account in some way or
another. Since infants have not done anything, either good or bad, it must
be their debt (sin) arises from another source. They inherit it: not just a
nature or tendency to produce debt (sin), but actual debt (debt) is imputed
to them, and they are not debtless (sinless). It is for this reason that
they must be redeemed if they are to be saved.
A couple of Scriptures:
The announcement of the Lord's birth said that His name would be "Jesus, for
He shall save His people from their sins." It does not say sin nature.
Romans 5.12 says 'for that all sinned.' Adam's sin did more than make us of
a sinful nature: it charged actual sin to the account of every human. When
Adam sinned, we all sinned; just like when Abraham paid tithes to
Melchizedek, Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek. Levi did not merely posses
the nature of a tithes-payer, he actually paid tithes in Abraham. The child
in the womb sinned in Adam and needs redemption as much, and for exactly the
same reason, as the worst criminal needs it.
Joe T
----- Original Message -----
From: "William and Dorothy Oosterman" <tulip01@...>
To: <soundofgrace@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 10:04 AM
Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Re:age of accountability
> Joe,
>
> I made it quite clear in an earlier post that the blood of Christ must
> redeem the infant from the sin nature. But God makes it clear the infant
> does not need to be redeemed from actual sins, having none. They will be
> singing "Worthy..." The position I hold does justice to BOTH sides of the
> issue - both types of texts.
> Wm.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph R. Terrell [mailto:pastor@...]
> Sent: 04 December 2004 16:01
> To: soundofgrace@...
> Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Re:age of accountability
>
>
> Wm.
>
> If what you say is true, then the child is in heaven, not because of the
> redemptive work of Christ, but because of his personal innocence.
> According
> to your argument (if I understand it correctly) only the child's physical
> resurection at the last day can be attributed to Christ's death. If this
> is
> so, then not everyone in heaven will be singing, "Worthy art thou for
> thout
> hast refeemed us by the blood..." Instead, it will be appropriate for
> those
> dying in infancy (or the womb) to sing, "Worthy are we, for we never
> sinned."
>
> Once again, let me emphasize that I am not arguing for or against the
> salvation of infants, just whether or not they be sinners worthy of
> everlasting judgment. If I am wrong in my analysis and use of your
> belief,
> let me know.
>
> Joe T
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William and Dorothy Oosterman" <tulip01@...>
> To: <soundofgrace@...>
> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 3:39 AM
> Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] Re:age of accountability
>
>
>> John,
>> I understand what you are saying. As in Adam all die, so in Christ are
>> all
>> made alive. So, is not the first death of the infant (physical - not
>> spiritual- as in hell, the second death) a result of Adam's sin, not the
>> Childs, as the child has not sinned. The child dies because
>> i) it does have a sin nature
>> ii) it has sinned vicariously - not actually - in that Adam sinned
>>
>> thus all (except Christ) are mortal because in Adam all die.
>> The child can die, while not being actually guilty of sin, as it has a
>> sin
>> nature and is a descendant of Adam.
>>
>> Wm.
>
> --
> 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
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>