|
|
Post by John on Oct 5, 2020 18:18:31 GMT -5
I will tell you what got me thinking about this particular verse of scripture, as well as it's implications. There was a guest speaker at an Assemblies of God Church I was a member of many years back, and he was teaching on it. He said that the Bible in no place mentions an age of accountability, and that children of Christians are saved because of a covering from their believing parents. He used this scripture to back that up. He said that the children of unbelievers have no covering, and are lost if they die. He mentioned the first born of Egypt and the children that were slain in Canaan as examples. I had no valid way to dispute what he was saying, no matter how difficult it was to hear. That is why I posted the verse, and was interested in different opinions about it. I do appreciate the input so far. It has given me much to consider, and I am interested in anything anyone else can add, preferably using Bible based arguments.
frienduff mentioned how that in the time of Moses, that those who were 20 and under were not held responsible for the actions of their parents, and got to enter Canaan. Does that mean 20 is the age of accountability? Is that where the idea comes from? I think it is a stretch to say that, based on that situation, but I certainly will consider it. The idea that there is this mythical age of accountability based on when a child is old enough to understand the plan of salvation appears no place I am aware of in scripture, but it is taught like it is a fact. Perhaps I am overlooking something? Maybe it is just something that is supposed to be understood, but I would think that something so important would be mentioned in the Bible. Regardless, I sincerely desire all opinions. It may just be one of those things where we have no absolutely clear answers. I will tell you that with any uncertainty, it should give anyone with children another reason to be right with God.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on Oct 5, 2020 18:53:09 GMT -5
Jews do Bar Mitzvah at age 13. That's what they call the age of accountability. It's not explicit in the OT, but Jewish rabbis found a few places that led them to believe it's 13. One example is how Levi was called a man in Genesis 34 when he was 13. Also since puberty starts around that time, it's naturally assumed that this is the age of adulthood.
Since Jews with unclean conditions could still be righteous before God, and Pharisees blameless in the law were not righteous, there's not enough to go on that the unclean in 1 Corinthians 7 means doomed to hell. Neither that the clean in 1 Corinthians 7 means saved. Clean and unclean was not the same as saved or unsaved. Otherwise, Paul would have said the sanctified husband was already saved. If he can be sanctified but not saved, then the clean/unclean issue is not about salvation. If an unsaved person is "clean" to the church, then the clean thing isn't salvation.
And even back when the Canaanite populations were destroyed from Israel, God didn't say the babies went to hell.
So you have to wedge something into 1 Corinthians 7 to force unclean to mean doomed to hell, despite clear evidence they're two separate concepts, and then make an assumption about events in Joshua, to hold this theory together. Meanwhile there's no Bible teaching anywhere that says babies go to hell because of Adam. Huge dishonest extrapolations are not enough to prove it.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on Oct 5, 2020 18:58:36 GMT -5
And even supposing this guy was correct, we all agree that the sanctified unsaved husband won't enter heaven. So if the sanctified unsaved husband dies that way he's lost, but if the unsaved children die that way they go to heaven? What's the difference? How does the cleanliness help the babies but not the husband? No matter how you slice it there's an age of accountability, even by his own theory.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 5, 2020 19:56:52 GMT -5
And even supposing this guy was correct, we all agree that the sanctified unsaved husband won't enter heaven. So if the sanctified unsaved husband dies that way he's lost, but if the unsaved children die that way they go to heaven? What's the difference? How does the cleanliness help the babies but not the husband? No matter how you slice it there's an age of accountability, even by his own theory.
I think it is good to talk things like this through, but sadly, most of the time, people tend to just shrug things like this off because they cannot even consider the meaning. I was on the fence about the spouse being saved because their spouse was saved coming into this discussion, but after considering what Frienduff said, I could clearly see they were not. Saved in this passage literally had to mean saved, and not just because they were still dwelling together. You gave me new things to consider about clean and unclean in light of this passage. To me, this is the way a Christian Message Board should be. It should not be about just fighting to win an argument, even if you are wrong, but it should be about trying to come to the correct meaning of a passage. That should always be our desired goal, even if it leads us somewhere that differs from what we though going in, or that makes us uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Oct 5, 2020 19:58:31 GMT -5
AND PRAISING THE LORD TOO MY FRIEND . A christain message board must be full fat of praises to the GLORIOUS KING . And fat full of wonderful sound doctrine too .
Put those hands up and let the Glorious Lord be praised my friends .
|
|
|
|
Post by 2fw8212a on Oct 5, 2020 20:10:41 GMT -5
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 1 Corinthians 7:14
...What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Oct 5, 2020 20:19:01 GMT -5
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 1 Corinthians 7:14
...What are your thoughts?
Very true mi amigo of many letters . Let us rejoice in the glorious LORD . |
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on Oct 6, 2020 12:10:16 GMT -5
Here is further Bible evidence for bar mitzvah:
Jairus' daughter at age 12 was called a little girl, but Mary at 13 or 14 was called a young lady.
When Jesus went to the temple at age 12, He said He was ready for His Father's business. But Luke 2 literally says He was a child at the time. Mary made Him come back home, and He was subject to her for a while after. That's what Luke 2 says. This only makes sense if Jesus was expecting bar mitzvah at 13.
Scripture consistently says the Lord will judge each man according to his deeds.
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. -- Deuteronomy 24:16
Children who are subject to their parents are naturally expected to imitate their parents until they're old enough to think for themselves. They are often powerless to do otherwise. This is why the Hebrews' unbelief in Exodus was not held against the children. This is why a father's bad choices can manifest in the children to the third generation, yet Ezekiel also says children don't share in the father's guilt. Children are affected by the sins of their parents without being held responsible for them.
Also consider David's dead baby with Bathsheeba:
But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me. -- 2 Samuel 12:23
David had already repented, prayed, and fasted by this time. David is obviously expecting to meet the boy in Abraham's bosom. And we can't say the baby born to David is what saved him, unless we're prepared to say all of David's children were saved.
So basically to sum up: the Bible says you're a child until 13, children aren't blamed for the sins of their ancestors, and men are judged for their deeds not their nature. I believe the saving blood of Jesus is enough to cover unintentional sinful lifestyles children endure under the parents. Paul even said he was forgiven for blasphemy because he did it in ignorance. The children are still saved by the blood of Jesus, but the blood can easily be offered to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Giller on Oct 6, 2020 12:31:50 GMT -5
Mat 19:14
(14) But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Oct 6, 2020 14:42:42 GMT -5
Here is further Bible evidence for bar mitzvah: Jairus' daughter at age 12 was called a little girl, but Mary at 13 or 14 was called a young lady. When Jesus went to the temple at age 12, He said He was ready for His Father's business. But Luke 2 literally says He was a child at the time. Mary made Him come back home, and He was subject to her for a while after. That's what Luke 2 says. This only makes sense if Jesus was expecting bar mitzvah at 13. Scripture consistently says the Lord will judge each man according to his deeds. The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. -- Deuteronomy 24:16Children who are subject to their parents are naturally expected to imitate their parents until they're old enough to think for themselves. They are often powerless to do otherwise. This is why the Hebrews' unbelief in Exodus was not held against the children. This is why a father's bad choices can manifest in the children to the third generation, yet Ezekiel also says children don't share in the father's guilt. Children are affected by the sins of their parents without being held responsible for them. Also consider David's dead baby with Bathsheeba: But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me. -- 2 Samuel 12:23David had already repented, prayed, and fasted by this time. David is obviously expecting to meet the boy in Abraham's bosom. And we can't say the baby born to David is what saved him, unless we're prepared to say all of David's children were saved. So basically to sum up: the Bible says you're a child until 13, children aren't blamed for the sins of their ancestors, and men are judged for their deeds not their nature. I believe the saving blood of Jesus is enough to cover unintentional sinful lifestyles children endure under the parents. Paul even said he was forgiven for blasphemy because he did it in ignorance. The children are still saved by the blood of Jesus, but the blood can easily be offered to them. U I dont know if its thirteen or not . But this i do know . Their is a time when folks , aka young ones , come to enough knowledge to be judged . Maybe it is thirteen , maybe its ten , or twelve . But this i truly do know . LET us raise our children from the womb to the tomb in the way that they should GO . Yep . And i do beleive the babies do go to heaven . I just do not know the age . So the safe thing is , TEACH THEM from womb to tomb , from cradle or the end might be very well be fatal . You are LOOOOOVED sister . MARCH ON IN THE KING . |
|
Cletus
Senior Member
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by Cletus on Oct 6, 2020 19:16:46 GMT -5
I believe the age of accountability is what ever age it is whenever you know better. not a number.
there is a huge difference between blatant disregard and unknowingly.
Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 6, 2020 19:24:50 GMT -5
Here is further Bible evidence for bar mitzvah: Jairus' daughter at age 12 was called a little girl, but Mary at 13 or 14 was called a young lady. When Jesus went to the temple at age 12, He said He was ready for His Father's business. But Luke 2 literally says He was a child at the time. Mary made Him come back home, and He was subject to her for a while after. That's what Luke 2 says. This only makes sense if Jesus was expecting bar mitzvah at 13. Scripture consistently says the Lord will judge each man according to his deeds. The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. -- Deuteronomy 24:16Children who are subject to their parents are naturally expected to imitate their parents until they're old enough to think for themselves. They are often powerless to do otherwise. This is why the Hebrews' unbelief in Exodus was not held against the children. This is why a father's bad choices can manifest in the children to the third generation, yet Ezekiel also says children don't share in the father's guilt. Children are affected by the sins of their parents without being held responsible for them. Also consider David's dead baby with Bathsheeba: But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me. -- 2 Samuel 12:23David had already repented, prayed, and fasted by this time. David is obviously expecting to meet the boy in Abraham's bosom. And we can't say the baby born to David is what saved him, unless we're prepared to say all of David's children were saved. So basically to sum up: the Bible says you're a child until 13, children aren't blamed for the sins of their ancestors, and men are judged for their deeds not their nature. I believe the saving blood of Jesus is enough to cover unintentional sinful lifestyles children endure under the parents. Paul even said he was forgiven for blasphemy because he did it in ignorance. The children are still saved by the blood of Jesus, but the blood can easily be offered to them.
You provided evidence that points to someone being a child till age 13, but I would not go so far as to say the Bible actually says that is the case. It never comes out and says that at 13, you instantly become a man or a woman who is now accountable for your sins, where you were not accountable at the age of 12 and 364 days. Still, you made a good argument for that. Were all of David's children saved? Only the baby died before being an adult. We know that all of David's other children were fully grown men when they died. There is clearly a time where they would not be under the parent's covering, even if you believe that is what saves them. I am just not sure what age that is. In the example Frienduff used, 20 was the age mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 6, 2020 19:34:51 GMT -5
One thing I do need to add here is that based on just common sense, there does have to be some age of accountability. The idea that children are clean because their parents are sanctified would only apply to a child, so there must be an age where God says you are no longer a child anymore. An adult child would not be saved in that manner, even if you believe like that.
Then you come down to the idea that all children are saved, even if they are unclean, till they reach adulthood, when they are not accountable. If that is true, you would also have some age of accountability, so I do think there must be one. Is that age 13? Is that age 20? Is that age when you come to a place where you understand right from wrong? I never understood the plan of salvation till age 17, but knew who God was. Was that when I was accountable? I am not sure we can be 100 percent certain from scripture, but as a result of this conversation, I think the fact there is a certain age where God considers you an adult has been proven.
Not wanting to open up a hornet's nest again, but if you are right about 13, and what you said about Mary PG4Him , then when establishing a minimum age to wed, even with parent's permission, it should be age 13, nothing lower than that. We may have accidentally stumbled on an answer to that question as well.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on Oct 6, 2020 19:55:25 GMT -5
I wasn’t trying to argue that bar Mitzva should be the age for Christian salvation. I only meant to show that age 13 in Jewish law was honored even in the NT. In the old law, everything was outward, and standard rules applied. But we Christians are Jews inwardly circumcised of the heart. So I’d say it’s a matter of when a child has the mental/emotional capability of a young adult.
As for age of accountability, it doesn’t seem to mean the age when you grasp the gospel. It seems to mean the age when you’re making independent choices. When you know right from wrong yet you choose to do wrong. That’s what the Jews used it for. Being accountable for your own decisions. Whether or not a young man grasped the nature of God, he could be put to death under the law for doing bad deeds.
So it isn’t a question of when you’re old enough to get saved, it’s a question of when you have to answer for your choices. I have other thoughts I could share but they are long and complicated.
As for marriage age, teenagers used to get married all the time and they turned out okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Oct 6, 2020 20:07:32 GMT -5
I wasn’t trying to argue that bar Mitzva should be the age for Christian salvation. I only meant to show that age 13 in Jewish law was honored even in the NT. In the old law, everything was outward, and standard rules applied. But we Christians are Jews inwardly circumcised of the heart. So I’d say it’s a matter of when a child has the mental/emotional capability of a young adult. As for age of accountability, it doesn’t seem to mean the age when you grasp the gospel. It seems to mean the age when you’re making independent choices. When you know right from wrong yet you choose to do wrong. That’s what the Jews used it for. Being accountable for your own decisions. Whether or not a young man grasped the nature of God, he could be put to death under the law for doing bad deeds. So it isn’t a question of when you’re old enough to get saved, it’s a question of when you have to answer for your choices. I have other thoughts I could share but they are long and complicated. As for marriage age, teenagers used to get married all the time and they turned out okay.
When you have time, I would love to hear your other thoughts, complicated or not. I enjoy reading things that are complicated as well as things that are simple.  Thank you for all of your input. Like I said earlier, we need to be free to have conversations like this if we are to learn. Coming to the truth should always be our objective.
I agree about teenagers getting married. Many that are in arranged marriages are happy as well, where you have people that wait till they are much older to marry, and made their own choices, and their marriages fall apart. There are so many factors that determine the success of a marriage.
|
|
Thank you for all of your input. Like I said earlier, we need to be free to have conversations like this if we are to learn. Coming to the truth should always be our objective. 