Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Inherited Sin Nature | John 3:16 | Searcher56 | 219780 | ||
God's day to you, Val, David said, "But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me" (2Sa 12:23). That doesn't mean that David thought he would see him in heaven or Abraham's bosom (Luk 16:22). I believe David is saying that he would join him is death, as Samuel said to Saul (1Sa 11:23). For more on my view of the unborn and babies who die do to post 138120. Searcher |
||||||
2 | Inherited Sin Nature | John 3:16 | DocTrinsograce | 219787 | ||
Dear Searcher, Citing Samuel on this topic is helpful in that it, at least, is a single instance of infant salvation. It is an example of inductive reasoning (going from the specific case to a general principle) rather than deductive reasoning (going from the general principle to the specific case). That doesn't mean it is an invalid argument, only that it is a weaker one. You see, it is possible -- not certain, of course -- that David's son was a unique situation, similar to the prenatal salvation of John the Baptist (Luke 1:15). The only reason I mention this is that we do not want people to use an exegetical method of this sort to carry too much doctrinal weight. Narrative is helpful, but it is generally not very helpful for building doctrine. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Inherited Sin Nature | John 3:16 | Searcher56 | 219788 | ||
God's day to you, Doc, David's statement about his baby dieing DOES NOT prove infant salvation. Read my post 138120. I even have added another verse (1Sa 11:23), to show David wasn't talking about his thinking his baby was saved. Bottom line - I took another view on infant motality. I don't know what God does. No one does. We know what He does about those who never heard and even are good people (Rom 1:17ff), so I am hard pressed to think He saves babies and not these, I think they could be "innocent". Searcher |
||||||
4 | Inherited Sin Nature | John 3:16 | DocTrinsograce | 219791 | ||
Dear Searcher, As I find the teaching of inclusivism Scripturally untenable, at best (see Westminster Confession of Faith, X.IV, the Larger Catechism, question 60, and the 1689 LBCF chapter 10, paragraph 4). Therefore, extrapolation to other doctrines with inclusivism as a presupposition would be unpersuasive. In Him, Doc |
||||||