Members heartstrings Posted December 24, 2010 Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 I will clear up that it is Ezek 28:11ff. I will also clear up that I am not taking scriptures out of context. You have to take every passage together. Not one passage teaches that we are born in sin. Beyond that I will simply point you to the previous mentioned passages. The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Psalm 58:3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bro Jim Posted December 24, 2010 Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 Back and forth, here is a great article of which I greatly agree!! http://ministry127.com/christian-living/do-babies-go-to-heaven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted December 24, 2010 Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 What verse of Scripture is this from, "...he died while he was morally and spiritually safe."? What verses indicate there is a time, or there are certain people, who, if they die, are "morally and spiritually safe" and will be rewarded with heaven without having Christ as their Saviour even though elsewhere in Scripture we are told that no one goes to heaven except through Christ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted December 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 What verse of Scripture is this from, "...he died while he was morally and spiritually safe."? What verses indicate there is a time, or there are certain people, who, if they die, are "morally and spiritually safe" and will be rewarded with heaven without having Christ as their Saviour even though elsewhere in Scripture we are told that no one goes to heaven except through Christ?That verse can be found in II Opinions 3:7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted December 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 (edited) Question: Is it possible that we may be looking at David's statement concerning the dead child all wrong? People have been looking at it to mean either one of two things: 1. The child was now in heaven 2. The child was now in the grave. Now, while both of these statements are interesting, they may not be the correct answer. The second can't be correct, for the child had just died... there is no indication that the child had been buried yet. The first, is plauible, for, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. But, could there be a possible third explanation for David's statement? Maybe. Could he have meant, 'The child is dead. He cannot walk into this room to see me. I must needs go to the room where his body lies to see him"? Maybe theologians have been looking at David's statement all wrong. Had David meant "The child is in heaven, I will go to heaven to be with him,' I would think David would have continued to refuse to eat awaiting the moment that he died so he could be with the child. Edited December 24, 2010 by Standing Firm In Christ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members coc333 Posted December 24, 2010 Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 Question: Is it possible that we may be looking at David's statement concerning the dead child all wrong? People have been looking at it to mean either one of two things: 1. The child was now in heaven 2. The child was now in the grave. Now, while both of these statements are interesting, they may not be the correct answer. The second can't be correct, for the child had just died... there is no indication that the child had been buried yet. The first, is plauible, for, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. But, could there be a possible third explanation for David's statement? Maybe. Could he have meant, 'The child is dead. He cannot walk into this room to see me. I must needs go to the room where his body lies to see him"? Maybe theologians have been looking at David's statement all wrong. Had David meant "The child is in heaven, I will go to heaven to be with him,' I would think David would have continued to refuse to eat awaiting the moment that he died so he could be with the child. Amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted December 24, 2010 Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 Question: Is it possible that we may be looking at David's statement concerning the dead child all wrong? People have been looking at it to mean either one of two things: 1. The child was now in heaven 2. The child was now in the grave. Now, while both of these statements are interesting, they may not be the correct answer. The second can't be correct, for the child had just died... there is no indication that the child had been buried yet. The first, is plauible, for, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. But, could there be a possible third explanation for David's statement? Maybe. Could he have meant, 'The child is dead. He cannot walk into this room to see me. I must needs go to the room where his body lies to see him"? Maybe theologians have been looking at David's statement all wrong. Had David meant "The child is in heaven, I will go to heaven to be with him,' I would think David would have continued to refuse to eat awaiting the moment that he died so he could be with the child. I would venture that David either meant he would join the child in heaven or that he would join the child in death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted December 24, 2010 Author Members Share Posted December 24, 2010 I would venture that David either meant he would join the child in heaven or that he would join the child in death. I would think if he meant either of those choices, he would have continued to refuse to eat and allowed himself to die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted December 25, 2010 Members Share Posted December 25, 2010 I would think if he meant either of those choices, he would have continued to refuse to eat and allowed himself to die. Why would David want to die? He fasted in the hope perhaps his son would be spared and he could raise him in this life. Once he was dead, David was content knowing that one day he would follow his son and there was no more he could do about the matter; so he got on with life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JerryNumbers Posted December 26, 2010 Members Share Posted December 26, 2010 I don't suppose I even know a theologian to ask about such a thing, yet I know the meaning of what David said, and its clear, David would see his son again, and he was not talking about the grave. And that is the reason David could go on after his babies death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.