Posts: 15,025
Joined: April 2001
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,348
Posts56,543
Members992
| |
Most Online2,383 Jan 12th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274 |
Ehud said: I am not in anyway suggesting that these folks were infallibly saved because it is obvious from myriads of scriptures that they are not. What I am suggesting is that there are throughout scriptures the participation and partaking (JEdwards categories) of spiritual things by non-infallibly saved persons because of the covenant membership. You would have to define "spiritual things" before I could respond to your proposition. From my reading of Scripture, which is in accord with the Reformed heritage, "spiritual things" connotes that which pertains to salvation. Thus non-elect individuals, whether in the womb or in their latter years participate nor partake of "spiritual things". That the non-elect benefit from the spiritual blessings bestowed upon the elect is true. But that is a decidedly different thing altogether. Ehud said: I am also fully aware that not all Israel is Israel, but those who are "not Israel" are still referred to as God's people in some sense. Again, you seem to be wanting to equate being part of a covenant community to possessing some degree of God's favor/acceptance and thus those within the community are all to be considered "God's people" or in N.T. terminology, "Christian". There is no warrant to do this. Those who are saved by the grace of God have no need to be told to repent of their sins and believe upon Christ unto salvation for they already possess it. To put it another way, you are diminishing or even denying a distinction between the Visible and Invisible Church. Ehud said: Some of these folks would die at the manufacturing of the golden calf, would they not?
Does God say leave behind those who are not infallibly saved? Could there have been infants among "my people" who were not infallibly saved? Absolutely. It seems under your definitions that we must presume none of the infants who came out of Egypt to be infallibly saved and at the same time they are referred to by God as "My people." I understand that there is some cognative tension here, but if the Bible speaks this way, why can't we speak this way? YOU are the one who is wanting to bring in this idea of "infallible salvation" or an "infallible knowledge" of salvation. I have repeatedly said that there is only One who has infallible knowledge about anything and everything; the Lord God. In the Church we possess only a fallible and finite knowledge, but nonetheless we can and do possess knowledge of the truth upon which we are to determine who belongs to Christ. Without evidence of regeneration, there is no warrant to presume another's salvation. (Rom 6; Jam 2:17ff) A child of believing parents may be entitled to an "associate membership" in the covenant community but it has no "voting rights" since it has not passed the initiation rights of giving a valid profession of faith, etc. Ehud said:I would love to know what is going on in the WSC question 94 What is baptism? A: Baptism is a sacrament, wherein the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, doth signify and seal our engrafting into Christ, and partaking of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our engagement to be the Lord's Not only that. The scripture reference given for this question is none other than our beloved Romans 6:3. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death. Please clarify for my sake. Are you going up against Augustine, Calvin, and the WSC on baptism? Let me answer your last question last... "NO! I am in full accord with Augustine, Calvin and the WSC on the matter of baptism" in all that they say that is in accord with Scripture. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Secondly, re: WSC Q:94 and the passages quoted . . . CONTEXT, CONTEXT and again I say, CONTEXT! A text out of context is nothing more than pretext. Just who is Paul addressing in those passages? Hint:... believers and them only. A baptized unbeliever is not "baptized into Christ", i.e., he/she is not united to Christ and thus a recipient of all the benefits merited for the elect. To even suggest such a thing is preposterous. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> Ehud said:I'd like to know what you think of Rich Lusk's thoughts: Hogwash!! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> Unbelievers do NOT partake of ANY "grace", i.e., salvific blessings directly. As I have already noted, unbelievers do benefit from that which is given to believers but only indirectly. This is benevolence and nothing more. In His grace,
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:50 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:39 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:39 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
J_Edwards
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:50 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:58 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
J_Edwards
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:13 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 8:51 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:24 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:03 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
J_Edwards
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:04 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:29 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:17 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Mon Jan 29, 2007 2:08 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:35 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:44 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:48 PM
|
asking for clarification
|
Ehud
|
Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:56 AM
|
Re: asking for clarification
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:11 PM
|
Re: asking for clarification
|
Ehud
|
Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:43 PM
|
Re: asking for clarification
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:30 AM
|
Again, I request more clarification
|
Ehud
|
Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:41 AM
|
Re: Again, I request more clarification
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:32 AM
|
Fair enough
|
Ehud
|
Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:16 AM
|
Re: Fair enough
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:04 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
J_Edwards
|
Mon Jan 29, 2007 2:34 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:44 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:39 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:57 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
J_Edwards
|
Sun Jan 28, 2007 1:00 AM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
CovenantInBlood
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 8:17 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:12 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Jan 26, 2007 11:57 PM
|
Re: Paedocommunion
|
Ehud
|
Sat Jan 27, 2007 5:08 AM
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
178
guests, and
41
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|