The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

AP ^ | 3/24/01

[restornu]

JL cindy is a lot of fun so are many others just watch you will see those who has bone density!:)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

LOL. Now you're really gonna get us in trouble.

[CindyDawg]

ping me rest. the thread is buried too deep.

[RnMomof7]

So the sacrifice is complete BEFORE (in our time frame) it is applied or found acceptable?

What does the bible say ?

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Act 15:18   Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

[RnMomof7]

I'm just a Predestinarian interloper. 8~)

You are a nut Lady:>)) but then it was predestined to be so

[RnMomof7]

Do you really believe that if God wants your message to go out from this thread that anyone can shut you down?

Nope

[CindyDawg]

skulldawgery

What is that????????????

[RnMomof7]

I bet your kids turned out great.

Well I will tell you this..they never have to wonder what I am thinking :>)

[CindyDawg]

I figured but explain lol

[restornu]

I have NOT a clue what just came swarmed over this thread!

It is Easter Sunday but this is dissimilar!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I didn't refer to Scripture in that post, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

But I chuckled at your first line; we're making progress.

[IMRight]

Mom mom mom. You're dodging the question. My point is that I don't think "IT is finished" refers to what you think it does. You previously stated that it referred to the sacrifice, then said that the sacrifice was accepted on Easter morning. I'm just trying to clarify. Whatever "it" is should be "finished" at the cross (preferably right before He said it), not three days later.

[IMRight]

I didn't refer to Scripture in that post, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I guess I didn't explain well enough. I got what LOOKED like a blank post from you (nothing but the "to" and "from" fields).

So, before you had a chance to correct it, I jumped in to raz you on the mistake. Wen I refreshed, your post came through fine. I ended up embarrassing only myself.

Thanks for rubbing salt in it.

[the808bass]

The non scriptural belief in the age of "accountability " makes God the debtor of the child.He owes them salvation based on something other than His mercy .

This is not the case. It is precisely God's mercy that those who believe in the age of accountability have in mind when they discuss this doctrine. They don't believe God breeds puppies to kill them if they potty on the rug (This may be a harsh analogy, but I thought it fit).

That is God created the men He knew would deny him , and that would be judged guilty and sent to hell on the day of Judgment .

No, we do not have the same problem. To know that someone would deny God and to cause them to deny God are two completely different things. You can argue that they are not, but it is obvious that they are or all of us Arminians would be Calvinists.

[the808bass]

If infants are saved it is because God has mercy on them , not because they are "not accountable" . The bible is full of the judgment of God on the sin of infants.

A) What sins do infants commit? A couple of examples would be fine. B) If God can have mercy on those who have not received the gift of grace, is He acting "outside of His nature" (as you Calvinists like to term it)? Or is "mercy" part of his nature? And if "mercy" is part of his nature, what is to prevent this mercy from acting over and above his righteousness in other instances?

It seems you have just created a way to deal with the problem of infant salvation, etc., with a workaround rather than cogently dealing with the issue. Just my opinion.