This isn’t rage-bait, this isn’t a gotcha moment. This is a question that has crippled my faith.
Why didn’t he do something? Anything? Those where children who had the worst possible experience happen to them. God is all knowing so he knows it was happening. God is all powerful so he could have stopped it. So why didn’t he?
“hE LeT It HaPpen duE tO frEe wILL.”
If this is your response, which has been the most common response I’ve received, then what about Sodom and Gomorrah? They had free will did they not? And God intervened, did he not? Did God not strike the wicked down? Why not in this situation? Why didn’t he send a thousand angels down to save the children?
“He WAs gIvINg ThEM tIME tO rePenT!”
This is the second most common argument I hear and it’s the weakest. These people ate babies, they weren’t going to repent. They were rich and powerful and indulged in anything they wanted regardless of how depraved it was. God is also all knowing, God would know these creatures weren’t going to repent. They would carry on in their filth and never have any real consequences given to them. Why did he not smite them down? Why did he not turn them to salt? Was he busy with something else?
“Tragedy’s happen all the time, this isn’t any different.”
If this was your response, I hope you never breed your worthless sack of skin.
I’ve been given this answer a few times, I hate it.
This wasn’t the sugar and medicine that they wanted me to have. It just made me more angry at God. Why didn’t he save the kids at the school shootings or the holocaust? Did children not beg for their life to the all mighty during the Rowanden Genocide? Did God think the children rotting to death with cancer deserved it? Was the petty sins they committed truly worth their death?
I want to believe, however, I will not worship a cruel God. I will not bow to a God that won’t lift a finger to save the smallest of lives.
The answer is a simple one, yet one that most do not want to hear. The primary Biblical explanation for human-inflicted evil is free will. Scripture suggests that God created humans with the capacity to choose between good and evil Deuteronomy 30:19-20
“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.”
For love and morality to be genuine, the choice to reject them must also be possible. When individuals choose to commit heinous acts, the Bible views this as a profound violation of God’s will, yet God often allows the choice to stand to maintain the integrity of human agency. Look here, how Jesus described it.
**"He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds also appeared. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ **
**> ** > He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.” Matthew 13:24–30
Now, if you need this explained further, Jesus did that also.
"The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels.
Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
The Bible describes the current state of the world as “fallen” or under the temporary influence of evil John 5:19. Romans 8:22 describes the entire creation “groaning” under the weight of corruption. The existence of such horrors is not an expression of God’s desire, but evidence of how far humanity has drifted from the original design of justice and protection for the vulnerable.
While human justice may fail or be bypassed on earth, divine justice is inevitable. Matthew 18:5-6 contains one of the most severe warnings in the New Testament regarding the abuse of children:
“Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Every hidden act will be brought to light and judged, Luke 12:2-3. We have to look to the “Crucified God” as an answer. Remember, God does not remain distant from suffering, but He entered into it through Christ, who was himself a victim of state-sanctioned injustice and abuse.
God is “with” the victims in their pain, Psalm 34:18, even when He does not physically intervene to stop the perpetrator’s hand in the moment. This remains a deeply painful topic. Why did He allow the Holocaust? 9/11? Cancer? Anything we see as bad. He did not cause them. We did. He is simply being patient.
“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” 2 Peter 3:9
If God eliminated all sin, we would all be dead. If God eliminated all who were worse sinners than me, I would be the most evil person on earth. God allows the evil in the world to get a harvest of any that would seek truth and trust in Jesus.
If you are unhappy with this system try to get God to change his mind or get everyone to trust in Jesus.
@Thinwhiteduke
Welcome to the Forum. I see this is your first post.
I hear your complaint, and I sympathize with your frustration. Your anger is noble, but seems misdirected to me; your ire may be righteous, but your approach is self-defeating (IMHO). Allow me to explain a little.
First, if your complaint is with God, why not vent it on Him directly, instead of implicating others for not supplying you with a satisfactory reason for the injustice you witness. I don’t mean this unkindly; I offer it as a beginning of the help you are asking for. The injustice you speak of is real, and people of this forum are just as upset and bewildered at the horrors we witness in our world as you are. Why unleash your invectives at the un-guilty? If you believe God is guilty, charge Him! He is more than capable of defending Himself.
Second, you (or anyone) will never come to any kind of understanding of why wickedness continues while at the same time condemning the righteous in the same breath. You may not see it, but in so doing you are actually committing the same kind of sin you are condemning; you are trying to condemn evil by engaging in evil. That is a self-defeating approach. There are better tactics.
Third, I’m glad to read that “you want to believe”. This is no small first step. However, if you are under the misunderstanding that God is somehow needy of your belief, your worship, or that God gains some advantage by your willing devotion, you have been misled. You are the needy one (we all are), you are the one who lacks understanding, you are the broken one who need fixing (we all are), you are the blind who needs your sight restored (we all are), you are the one who needs to seek life from the giver of life. Seek healing through repentance, and understanding will follow.
Fourth, you decry:
How do you know He didn’t? Physical death under the merciful hand of God is no punishment, but rather promotion. Dying under the Grace of God is actually being removed from the terror of a sinful environment and brought into the beauty and peace of paradise. How do you know Righteous God didn’t “SAVE” some or all of them from more terror? Just because death is the ultimate evil to you, that does not mean it is the same to our Righteous Creator God. You seem to have a different perspective and sense of righteousness than God does. This is a subject you should address directly with Him. (You may want to reference Job Chapters 38 through 42 to see what a confrontation like that looks like, and remember, Job was a Righteous man who worshiped God.)
I would be happy to provide you a path to understanding, a path to healing, a path to peace, a path to gain insights into the things that so severely frustrate you if you wish. If you are truly looking for peace and purpose in a violent, chaotic world, I can point you in the right direction; a different direction than the one you are heading now. I would be delighted to engage in a meaningful, respectful discussion with you on this subject, if understanding is your goal. We may both learn something. But, if your quest is something sanctimonious, I fear you will remain frustrated.
Do not fret because of evildoers,
Nor be envious of the workers of iniquity.
For they shall soon be cut down like the grass,
And wither as the green herb….
The wicked plots against the just,
And gnashes at him with his teeth. The Lord laughs at him,
For He sees that his day is coming.
The wicked have drawn the sword
And have bent their bow,
To cast down the poor and needy,
To slay those who are of upright conduct.
Their sword shall enter their own heart,
And their bows shall be broken.
makes me think of babies who died in the great flood. by biblical standards they were innocent, not to the age yet of accountability. to my meager understanding, He knew theyd become evil, people were just too far gone at that point. but destined-to-be-evil or not, surely God saved their souls to a satisfying degree; those poor little ones whose parents were dripping with malice and evil, is my opinrin. guess ill see when im “dead”
I can’t answer the question, but I believe that children or anyone who has the mind of a child, goes to heaven if they died. I take this from Romans 7:8-10
But sin, finding an opportunity through the commandment [to express itself] produced in me every kind of coveting and selfish desire. For without the Law sin is dead [the recognition of sin is inactive]. 9 I was once alive without [knowledge of] the Law; but when the commandment came [and I understood its meaning], sin became alive and I died [since the Law sentenced me to death]. 10 And the very commandment which was intended to bring life, actually proved to bring death for me. AMP
Paul is saying that there was a time when his sin was not held against him or he was once alive. When the age of understanding or accountability came, he became responsible for his sin. I think this age of accountability is not the same for everyone, but God knows at what age a person understands.
I also think the soul is given by God at the time of conception. Aborted babies, are in heaven. Young children who’ve died are in heaven. When God commanded the Israelites to kill every single person, young and old of their enemies, those children are in heaven.
Life is good and a gift, but heaven is our destiny and far better. Jesus said in Matthew 18, “Unless you become like little children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
It’s only through our faith in Jesus that our sin is taken away and we are not held responsible for it. In this way we become like children. They sin, but they’re not held accountable to their sin. Perhaps this is what Jesus meant.
While all human beings are born with a fallen nature (Original Sin), God’s mercy covers those who die before they are capable of a conscious act of faith or rebellion. This is the idea that God does not hold individuals eternally responsible until they possess the cognitive and moral capacity to understand sin and the need for a Savior.
“He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.” Isaiah 7:15-16
Look here in Deuteronomy 1:39
“And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.”
Even as David spoke of his newborn son, who died.
“But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” 2 Samuel 12:23
Jesus’ interactions with children are often seen as the strongest evidence of their security in God’s kingdom.
“Jesus said, 'Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Matthew 19:14
“He told His disciples, 'Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 18:3
If the kingdom “belongs” to them, the implication is that they are its citizens by God’s decree. Since infants lack the mental faculty to process this revelation or to consciously “suppress the truth,” they cannot be held to the same standard of judgment.
Peter
David writes, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me”(Psa. 51:5; cf. Job 14:4). Proverbs 22:15 teaches us a child’s heart has a tendency to do wrong. But why?
Jeremiah tells us “the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9).
Jesus says “from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery” (Mark 7:21). And Paul says there are none who are without fault (Rom. 3:10).
Proverbs goes further saying, “Even a child makes himself known by his acts, by whether his conduct is pure and upright” (Prov. 20:11).
Clearly, children do in fact sin. And all sin must be judged (Matt. 16:27; Acts 10:42; Rom. 2:16; 14:10, 12; 2 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:27).
Some people will often cite Matthew 19:14, Mark 10:14, and Luke 18:16 saying God is compassionate with children and therefore does not account their sin to them.
Yes, God loves children, but he also loves adults. And these oft cited verses aren’t saying that all children are absolutely holy and righteous before a holy God.
Paul even calls them unclean and unholy, stating they must be sanctified by a believing parent (cf. 1 Cor. 7:14). Notice the phrase “for to such” in the texts. Also notice the phrase “like a child” in Mark 10:15 and Luke 18:17. Jesus is using children as an illustration of all genuine Christians, an analogy exemplifying the God-given humility of believers (cf. Luke 18:14).
Arguing from a position of God’s love doesn’t help those who ascribe to an age of accountability. While God is good (Jas. 1:17) and his very nature is love (1 John 4:8), he sovereignly rules the universe he created in such a way as to bring himself maximum glory — his very name (cf. Psa. 106:8; 1 Sam. 12:22; Isa. 43:6-7; 48:9-11; 49:3; Ezek. 20:14; Rom. 9:17; Eph. 1:4-6). God is also holy (1 Sam. 2:2) and just (Psa. 89:14; Col. 3:25), so it stands to reason that God’s love for his glory motivates his wrath and justice against sin. While he receives no pleasure from it (Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11; cf. Isa. 55:6-7), as the just judge (Gen. 18:25) and the only sovereign, he must judge all sin (Prov. 24:12).
Otherwise, he’s not truly God. His wrath in eternal judgment is part and parcel of his divine love in its final working against sin, and for his very name’s sake (Rom. 9:17; 11:33-36).
Others refer to Deuteronomy 1:39 which says, "And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. They say, “See there? Children have no knowledge of good or evil.”
However, for the proper interpretation of the verse, I suggest reading its entire context. This text is saying that the children in question had no knowledge of the sins of their fathers, meaning they had no literal part in the previous rebellion of their fathers in the wilderness. God is not saying these children were sinless! That would be unbiblical (cf. 1 John 1:8-10). What’s more, if children are completely innocent, why did God command the death of infants in Scripture? (Deut. 20:13-18; Josh. 6:17ff.; etc.).
Dr. Joseph R. Nally, Jr.
for of such is the kingdom of heaven; that is, as the Syriac renders it, “who are as these” or as the Persic version, rather paraphrasing than translating, renders it, “who have been humble as these little children”: and it is as if our Lord should say, do not drive away these children from my person and presence; they are lively emblems of the proper subjects of a Gospel church state, and of such that shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: by these I may instruct and point out to you, what converted persons should be, who have a place in my church below, and expect to enter into my kingdom and glory above; that they are, or ought to be, like such children, harmless and inoffensive; free from rancour and malice, meek, modest, and humble; without pride, self-conceit, and ambitious views, and desires of grandeur and superiority. Christ’s entire silence about the baptism of infants at this time, when he had such an opportunity of speaking of it to his disciples, had it been his will, has no favourable aspect on such a practice. It is not denied that little children, whether born of believers or unbelievers, which matters not, may be chosen of God, redeemed by the blood of Christ, and have the passive work of the Spirit on their souls, and so enter into heaven; but this is not the sense of this text.
It was indeed a controversy among the Jews, whether the little children of the wicked of Israel, באין לעולם הבא, “go into the world to come”:
Some affirmed, and others denied; but all agreed, that the little children of the wicked of the nations of the world, do not. They dispute about the time of entrance of a child into the world to come; some say, as soon as it is born, according to Psa_22:31
Others, as soon as it can speak, or count, according to Psa_22:30
Others as soon as it is sown, as the gloss says, as soon as the seed is received in its mother’s womb, though it becomes an abortion; according to the same words, “a seed shall serve thee”:
Others, as soon as he is circumcised, according to Psa_88:15
Others, as soon as he can say “Amen”, according (z) to Isa_26:2 All weak, frivolous, and impertinent.
Gill.
The Bible does not explicitly define the eternal fate of all infants, though it provides theological grounds for hope without giving exhaustive detail.
Woah! Hey. It is Sunday, and I really don’t (sigh). Do you really believe this legalistic approach to the question of children being in hell? Seriously. Can you make the statement, “Babies are in hell?” Are children in hell? Are you willing to state that plainly?
Yes, I believe the Bible teaches the “Age of Accountability.” While the phrase “Age of Accountability” isn’t in the Bible, the concept of a period of life where one is not held morally responsible for sin is present.
During the wilderness wanderings, God barred the adults from entering the Promised Land due to their rebellion, but specifically excepted the children:
" And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it." Deuteronomy 1:39
This suggests that God views children as lacking the moral capacity to “know” or “reject” His law in a way that warrants judgment.
“He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.” Isaiah 7:15-16
This passage refers to a time before a child “knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right.”
Jesus’ interactions with children provide the strongest New Testament foundation for their innocence or special status in the eyes of God.
" Jesus said, ‘Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.’ Matthew 19:14
Jesus does not say they might enter heaven; He states the kingdom already belongs to them.
At that time, the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes! And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire
See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven." Matthew 18:3-10
He uses children as the very model of who is “greatest” in the kingdom, which would be a contradiction if they were subjects of condemnation .
One of the most cited examples for the salvation of infants comes from the life of King David. When his infant son died, David’s reaction shifted from mourning to hope. 2 Samuel 12:23: David says,
“But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”
David, who expressed confidence in his own eternal dwelling with God (Psalm 23), clearly expected to be reunited with his child in the afterlife.
As we have also discussed, the Bible consistently describes “Hell” (or the Final Judgment) as a response to conscious actions and the rejection of light. As in Revelation 20:12, which states that the dead are judged " according to what they had done."
In John 15:22, Jesus says,
“If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin.”
The logic here is that guilt is tied to the rejection of revealed truth. Since infants and very young children cannot comprehend the law, process the Gospel, or consciously choose to rebel, they lack the “deeds” upon which judgment is based.
Ultimately, I would argue from the character of God.
“Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Genesis 18:25
Or how about Ezekiel 18:20:
“The child will not share the guilt of the parent.”
This suggests that while a child may inherit a “fallen nature” from Adam, God does not punish them for the guilt of that nature until they personally act upon it.
While we are all born into a fallen world, God’s Word shows that He does not attribute ‘guilt’ to those who cannot yet ‘discern good from evil’ (Deuteronomy 1:39). Jesus explicitly stated that the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to children (Matthew 19:14), and King David held a firm biblical hope that he would be reunited with his departed child in the presence of God (2 Samuel 12:23). Because God is a just judge who weighs our conscious deeds and the intent of the heart, those who die before they can choose or reject Him are safely held in His grace.
Seriously. Can you make the statement, “Babies are in hell?” “Children are in hell?” Are you willing to state that plainly? Little Suzy was created for no purpose, only to live a life and be sent to hell because of, not “according to one’s own deeds,” but the whim of God?
Peter
I did. And the question remains. If not for me, could you please explain to the readers, if you do not believe in the age of accountability, and or free will, then WHERE do the non-elect, or people on their way to hell, come from?
Saying re-read my post is no answer. Explain why I am wrong in interpreting your stance on this. Or how do you believe I’m wrong about the age of accountability?
Peter
You’re putting words in my mouth and asking me to defend a statement I never made. That’s a straw man argument combined with emotionally loaded framing.
I never stated, “Babies are in hell” or “Children are in hell.” You’re taking my actual position, reducing it to the harshest possible wording, and then demanding I affirm your phrasing instead of addressing what I actually said.
If you want a fair discussion, respond to my real argument rather than an emotionally charged version of it.
Peter, the question itself assumes that Reformed theology teaches that God “creates” people as non-elect in the same way He regenerates the elect. Scripture never speaks that way. The Bible teaches that all men come into the world fallen in Adam (Rom. 5:12–19), already under condemnation because of sin, not because God injects evil into them.
The real question is not, “Where do the non-elect come from?” but rather, “Why does God save any sinners at all?”
Reformed theology does not deny human will; it denies libertarian “free will” in the fallen state. Man still chooses according to his nature, but apart from grace his nature is enslaved to sin. Jesus said, “everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin” (John 8:34), and Paul says, “the mind set on the flesh is hostile to God” and “cannot submit to God’s law” (Rom. 8:7–8). The issue is moral inability, not the absence of a will.
As for the non-elect, they are simply fallen sons of Adam left in their sin and justly judged for their own rebellion. God is never the author of sin. Scripture consistently places blame upon man, while salvation is entirely attributed to the mercy and grace of God (Eph. 2:1–9).
And regarding the “age of accountability,” I do not see that doctrine explicitly taught in Scripture as it is commonly presented today. Salvation has always been by grace through faith, not by reaching some undefined age threshold.
You are conflating inherited corruption with merely “becoming guilty later,” but that is not how Paul argues in Romans 5. Scripture does not say death spreads to all men only once they consciously choose evil; it says “sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men” (Rom. 5:12). In fact, Paul explicitly says that condemnation came through Adam’s trespass (Rom. 5:16–18). The entire force of the parallel between Adam and Christ collapses if Adam’s guilt is not truly imputed, because Christ’s righteousness is likewise imputed to believers apart from their works.
Ezekiel 18 is also being misapplied. The prophet is addressing individual responsibility for personal sins within Israel’s civil covenant context, not denying original sin or federal headship in Adam. If Ezekiel 18 abolished Adamic guilt, then Paul contradicts Ezekiel in Romans 5, and Scripture cannot contradict itself.
As for Deuteronomy 1:39, the text does not say children are morally innocent before God. It simply says those children lacked discernment regarding Israel’s rebellion in that historical event. Likewise, Matthew 19:14 does not teach universal infant salvation; Jesus is using children as examples of humility and dependence. And David saying, “I shall go to him” (2 Sam. 12:23) is not a systematic doctrine on the eternal state of all infants.
The deeper issue here is that you are trying to make human emotion the interpretive lens for theology. The question is not, “Does this make us emotionally uncomfortable?” The question is, “What has God revealed?”
Nowhere does Scripture teach an “age of accountability” where a child is spiritually neutral until reaching moral awareness. Rather, David says, “Surely I was sinful at birth” (Ps. 51:5)…
Literally: “Behold, in iniquity I was brought forth, and in sin my mother conceived me.”
The point of the verse is not that David’s mother committed a sinful act in conception, but that David is confessing the reality of sinfulness from the very beginning of his existence. The prepositions בְּ (bə, “in”) and the parallel structure strongly emphasize condition/state, not merely later behavior.
… and Paul says we are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3). That is covenantal and ontological language, not merely behavioral language.
And no, Reformed theology does not gleefully declare, “babies are in hell.” Scripture simply does not give us warrant to make universal claims either way. Historically, many Reformed theologians have entrusted elect infants dying in infancy to the mercy of God, based upon God’s sovereign grace, not upon imagined innocence.
But the emotional framing about “Little Suzy” misses the biblical doctrine entirely. No human being deserves salvation. Election is not God withholding deserved mercy; mercy, by definition, is undeserved. The real scandal of grace is not that God saves some and not all, the real scandal is that a holy God saves any sinners at all.
This is why I am asking you. If there is no free will, and God solely chooses who will be saved, then? Where do you feel the no-elect come from? Logic would dictate that they would have to come from God as well, correct? I really am just trying to understand your POV on this.
Now, that is called a deflection. An avoidance of the question.
All true. As Roman 8:6-8
" For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God."
I see this as those who choose NOT to accept Jesus, and who live for the flesh. The unsaved. I do not believe this is saying what you think it may.
All try again. However, since we are ALL born into sin, and all are worthy of hell, then God swoops down and elects Bill Peter and Johann to be saved, but leaves Tom, John, and Rachel to perish, regardless of what they will do in their lives, just does not make any sense. If you are going to argue that before creation, God elected a certain group of people to be saved, then you are, like it or not, arguing that God chose a certain number of people to be created to be destroyed.
I will admit that the concept of an “age of accountability” is a theological deduction rather than an explicit biblical decree. You are correct that the phrase itself appears nowhere in the Bible, and there is no specific verse that defines a “threshold age” (like 12 or 13) where a child suddenly becomes responsible for their spiritual state.
While children are born with a sinful nature, God’s grace is applied to those who lack the cognitive or moral capacity to understand the Gospel, essentially “covering” them until they are capable of a response. As you said.“Salvation has always been by grace through faith.” If they are not old enough or mentally incapable of having faith, understanding the Word, or God, then they are saved by God’s grace. Once they can, whatever age, then they are responsible.
No, I’m pretty sure I understand. Just do not agree with your POV.
Peter
Sorry, I just saw this. No. It is not a strawman argument. Let me try to explain it this way. If I say, I drove a bus of 50 kids to the park, I let 25 off. That is the statement. So what is true? I did not let 25 off. Why? No idea. But the fact that 25 out of 50 got off 25 out of 50 must still be on.
If you say that there is no free will, then if God chooses the elect and not the lost, then God chooses people to be born to be destroyed. I’m not putting words in your mouth, brother, I’m simply following your logic.
If there is no age of accountability, and we are all under the original sin, then would this not indicate that no one is saved until they can have faith? Therefore, an aborted fetus, or a baby up to the reasoning age, or even the mentally handicapped, would be automatically sent to hell? Not putting words in your mouth at all.
