Is Baptism Necessary For Salvation

[FullMontyM1 0]

This is actually wrong. God is bound by the fact that He cannot commit sin. And to go back on your word would be sin wouldnt you think?

If God is omnipotent, God cannot be bound. If God can be bound, God is not omnipotent. This logical construction must be true.

all sin is equal in the eyes of God is it not? The analogy fits for a person who steals, lies, takes Gods name in vain, lusts, and so forth. Are all still sins and all are not forgiven b/c of ignorance

You have misundersood why your counter-argument is not valid. Go back and re-read that portion of my post and try again.

YOu have misquoted John 14:6 and that was only after it was quoted to you. Otherwise you have not provided any verse that supports the idea that somebody who doesnt know God can be saved. SO unless you can show me somebody who is righteous, I would say you are wrong...imagine that

This is not true. I have quoted John 14 IN FULL, whereas you quoted a single sentence from that passage. I have also quoted at least (ballpark guess) one dozen other verses, also providing one verse's alternate translations in both English and Greek. You are either not reading my posts, or not understanding them, or lying, or practicing hyperbole.Monty

[copernicus 0]

You are either not reading my posts, or not understanding them, or lying, or practicing hyperbole.Monty

Or has the intellect of a single celled organism, which is my vote, since he still doesnt understand the simplest of logical concepts, continuing to maintain he's right about the "sign up for the team" logic.I had decided about 274 Matt posts ago to ignore him, but I cant help myself. Its human nature to have to look at a train wreck.

[Mattnxtc 0]

If God is omnipotent, God cannot be bound. If God can be bound, God is not omnipotent. This logical construction must be true.

No see you are the one who is again making an unjustified response. If God sinned --->not righteousnot righteous---> not in kingdom of Godsince this would make no sense we have to make the assumption that God cannot sin. So again you are wrong. please actually learn logic. dont make it up as you go.

You have misundersood why your counter-argument is not valid. Go back and re-read that portion of my post and try again.

No you are trying to avoid the situation again. I used my example of muder and you said, "I never claimed that God would save and protect murderers or people with no moral code, or a total disregard for morality." Your wordsI then merely widened the scope to show that if you do all those things also, you cannot claim ignorance can you? Of course not.

This is not true. I have quoted John 14 IN FULL, whereas you quoted a single sentence from that passage. I have also quoted at least (ballpark guess) one dozen other verses, also providing one verse's alternate translations in both English and Greek. You are either not reading my posts, or not understanding them, or lying, or practicing hyperbole.

Ah yes, your interpretation of John 14. I forgot (see I can admit when I am wrong). I was groupin your intrepetation around John 14:6 since that is what you were focused on. If i recall I was the one who actually defined in greek as I showed that "many rooms" was referring to a mansion and so Jesus was merely saying that there is enough room in heaven for all believers. Not the nonsense you have said. Or has the intellect of a single celled organism, which is my vote, since he still doesnt understand the simplest of logical concepts, continuing to maintain he's right about the "sign up for the team" logic.

funny you havent shown anything i have posted to be incorrect. Whats even stranger is you WANT to side with a guy who cannot justify his OWN beliefs. Comin from somebody who claims to be so smart that is a questionable decision on your part.

[FullMontyM1 0]

No see you are the one who is again making an unjustified response. If God sinned --->not righteousnot righteous---> not in kingdom of Godsince this would make no sense we have to make the assumption that God cannot sin. So again you are wrong. please actually learn logic. dont make it up as you go.

I have refrained from making any direct negative statements about you for the duration of our debate. The bolded portion of your quote strains my self-restraint so extremely that I am forced to chew on my own mouse cord.Your logic is completely flawed regarding God and it displays a complete lack of understanding, at least from my perspective, regarding the concept of God.If God is omnipotent, God cannot be bound by any rules. This includes any requirements for "being in the kingdom of God."Before I go further, do you need omnipotent defined? Let me know in your next post, we can define some key terms, and then proceed.

No you are trying to avoid the situation again. I used my example of muder and you said, "I never claimed that God would save and protect murderers or people with no moral code, or a total disregard for morality." Your wordsI then merely widened the scope to show that if you do all those things also, you cannot claim ignorance can you? Of course not.

Ignorance of the law is irrelevant to our discussion. Ignorance of the Christian law is the matter we are discussing. For your presumptions to be correct, the Christian law must be the only law from God in existence. If there are other formulations of God's law, then people can be ignorant of the Christian law and NOT ignorant of God's law. This is the case I am arguing for. Since this is the case I am talking about, ignorance of the law is totally irrelevant.

Ah yes, your interpretation of John 14. I forgot (see I can admit when I am wrong). I was groupin your intrepetation around John 14:6 since that is what you were focused on. If i recall I was the one who actually defined in greek as I showed that "many rooms" was referring to a mansion and so Jesus was merely saying that there is enough room in heaven for all believers. Not the nonsense you have said.

I never disputed that the "dwelling" quote from John 14 was Jesus saying there was enough room in Heaven for all believers. We can return to logic again (though it will be painful, I am certain).IF[Enough room in Heaven for all believers] -----> THEN[All believers will find enough room in Heaven]There being enough room in Heaven for all believers MAKES NO COMMENT and PRODUCES NO CONCLUSION on whether there is more room for anyone else.

Whats even stranger is you WANT to side with a guy who cannot justify his OWN beliefs. Comin from somebody who claims to be so smart that is a questionable decision on your part.

You can disagree with my beliefs, and you can dispute the validity of my justifications. But you are being dishonest when you say that I "cannot justify" my own beliefs. I have provided ample justification. You disagree. But you cannot claim justification has not been provided. You are simply ignoring the justification, or you are dissastisfied with the justification. Dishonesty or willful ignorance are not convincing debating tactics.Monty

[copernicus 0]

On the last one he was respongding to me, Monty. And I suggest a wireless mouse, otherwise the frustration of dealing with such ignorance could lead to self-asphyxiation.

Or has the intellect of a single celled organism, which is my vote, since he still doesnt understand the simplest of logical concepts, continuing to maintain he's right about the "sign up for the team" logic.

"funny you havent shown anything i have posted to be incorrect. Whats even stranger is you WANT to side with a guy who cannot justify his OWN beliefs. Comin from somebody who claims to be so smart that is a questionable decision on your part. "1-I have shown many things you have posted to be incorrect. Ignoring those demonstrations doesnt make you right.2-I dont need to side with Monty, he is doing a fine job for himself. For a theist he argues with sound logical foundation, and (if I remember correctly) acknowledges that ultimately his beliefs are a matter of faith.3-I have never claimed any level of intelligence for myself or for anyone else other than you, and especially not myself.

[Mattnxtc 0]

I have refrained from making any direct negative statements about you for the duration of our debate. The bolded portion of your quote strains my self-restraint so extremely that I am forced to chew on my own mouse cord.Your logic is completely flawed regarding God and it displays a complete lack of understanding, at least from my perspective, regarding the concept of God.If God is omnipotent, God cannot be bound by any rules. This includes any requirements for "being in the kingdom of God."Before I go further, do you need omnipotent defined? Let me know in your next post, we can define some key terms, and then proceed.

and so you completely ignore the fact that God is bound by the fact that He cannot sin. Who woudl have thought you woulda disagreed with the bible

Ignorance of the law is irrelevant to our discussion. Ignorance of the Christian law is the matter we are discussing. For your presumptions to be correct, the Christian law must be the only law from God in existence. If there are other formulations of God's law, then people can be ignorant of the Christian law and NOT ignorant of God's law. This is the case I am arguing for. Since this is the case I am talking about, ignorance of the law is totally irrelevant.

wrong wrong wrong wrong. We are not talkin about "Christians Law" WE ARE TALKIN ABOUT GOD'S LAW. Where do we find God's Law? IN THE BIBLE. You want to try to pull im some outside source that doesnt exist and that is wrong. When we want to look for a federal law where do we look? The place designated for federal laws. The Bible is Gods word to man. If there were alternative ways dont you think God would have let us know? Its not meant to be a guessing game like you try to make it.

I never disputed that the "dwelling" quote from John 14 was Jesus saying there was enough room in Heaven for all believers. We can return to logic again (though it will be painful, I am certain).IF[Enough room in Heaven for all believers] -----> THEN[All believers will find enough room in Heaven]There being enough room in Heaven for all believers MAKES NO COMMENT and PRODUCES NO CONCLUSION on whether there is more room for anyone else.

except that we know only the righteous can get to the kingdom of God. Unrighteous will not be there and you cannot make any claim that an unrighteous person will ever see the kingdom of God. And more so yes there is a place for the unrighteous. Its call Hell.

You can disagree with my beliefs, and you can dispute the validity of my justifications. But you are being dishonest when you say that I "cannot justify" my own beliefs. I have provided ample justification. You disagree. But you cannot claim justification has not been provided. You are simply ignoring the justification, or you are dissastisfied with the justification. Dishonesty or willful ignorance are not convincing debating tactics.

When did you justify your beliefs? I am still waiting for you to show me anything that allows for even teh opportunity that an unrighteous man will see heaven. Just one verse is all i have asked for. Otherwise admit you only want to believe but have no justification

[FullMontyM1 0]

On the last one he was respongding to me, Monty. And I suggest a wireless mouse, otherwise the frustration of dealing with such ignorance could lead to self-asphyxiation.

Rgr that, I was just replying to the small portion that referenced me.

2-I dont need to side with Monty, he is doing a fine job for himself. For a theist he argues with sound logical foundation, and (if I remember correctly) acknowledges that ultimately his beliefs are a matter of faith.

You do remember correctly. I commented on that at some point during the discussion on whether one can "prove God." My position being that Faith and Proof are two completely distinct and mutually-exclusive concepts.Monty

[Mattnxtc 0]

1-I have shown many things you have posted to be incorrect. Ignoring those demonstrations doesnt make you right.where? I dont seem to recall anything you have said that proves I was wrong. Disagreeing with me is not proving me wrong. Please provide a place where i was wrong and you showed me to be wrong. 2-I dont need to side with Monty, he is doing a fine job for himself. For a theist he argues with sound logical foundation, and (if I remember correctly) acknowledges that ultimately his beliefs are a matter of faith.are you serious? He may know the steps but he cant apply it correct. If I remember correctly it "sound logic" to break up one idea into 3 different defintions is it? B/c he has broken belief into 3 different things in order to make his "logic" work. If thats sound logic then philosophy has changed a lot lately

[copernicus 0]

1-I have shown many things you have posted to be incorrect. Ignoring those demonstrations doesnt make you right.where? I dont seem to recall anything you have said that proves I was wrong. Disagreeing with me is not proving me wrong. Please provide a place where i was wrong and you showed me to be wrong.

You can start with your "signup" post. I was the first to point out your fallacy of denial of the antecedent.Then go to the evolution/not evolution thread.

[Farnan 0]

You're wrong!No, YOU'RE wrong!But i proved you wrong before!No, you didn't!Yes, i did, re-read my prior postProve it, show me where! You're wrong!Here. You're wrong.No, i'm not, you missed my other point! YOU"RE WRONG!This is getting to be a bit like banging your head against a cement wall. If this doesn't reinforce my agnostic beliefs, i don't know what will.

[FullMontyM1 0]

and so you completely ignore the fact that God is bound by the fact that He cannot sin. Who woudl have thought you woulda disagreed with the bible

Round and round we go.om·nip·o·tent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-np-tnt)adj. Having unlimited or universal powerIf God is omnipotent, God can not be bound. If God can be bound, God is not omnipotent. The Bible does NOT say that "God is bound by the fact that God cannot sin." I will now ask you for a verse from the Bible that says this. You will respond with a verse that does NOT say this. I will respond with an analysis of the verse showing WHY it DOES NOT say this. You will respond with the blanket assertion that I am trying to "change the Bible."

wrong wrong wrong wrong. We are not talkin about "Christians Law" WE ARE TALKIN ABOUT GOD'S LAW. Where do we find God's Law? IN THE BIBLE. You want to try to pull im some outside source that doesnt exist and that is wrong. When we want to look for a federal law where do we look? The place designated for federal laws. The Bible is Gods word to man. If there were alternative ways dont you think God would have let us know? Its not meant to be a guessing game like you try to make it.

II am talking about God's law as it is proclaimed by Christian's. You are ignoring the possibility of God's law being proclaimed in other manners. You are ignoring this possibility, because you have misinterpreted the Bible to read that the Christian proclamation of God's law is the only proclamation of God's law. The Bible does not say this. The Bible says: "Here is God's law, believe in it." Whether there are other, equally valid, proclamations of God's law is a matter open to debate. I say yes. You, however, don't just say no. You ignore the possibility of the question even existing. Thus, whenever you respond, you are responding OFF-TOPIC.

except that we know only the righteous can get to the kingdom of God. Unrighteous will not be there and you cannot make any claim that an unrighteous person will ever see the kingdom of God. And more so yes there is a place for the unrighteous. Its call Hell.

I never made the claim that an unrighteous person will see the kingdom of God. I made the claim that IT IS POSSIBLE that there are alternate paths to becoming righteous. You say there is only ONE way to become righteous. Your claim is more restrictive, therefore, the burden of proof is on you. I do not suffer under the burden of proof, because my claim is less restrictive. Despite not suffering under the greater burden of proof, I have opted to offer a greater level of proof than you have.

When did you justify your beliefs? I am still waiting for you to show me anything that allows for even teh opportunity that an unrighteous man will see heaven. Just one verse is all i have asked for. Otherwise admit you only want to believe but have no justification

Again, you are misreading or misrepresenting my claims. I never claimed that an unrighteous man will see Heaven. Try again.Monty

[Mattnxtc 0]

You can start with your "signup" post. I was the first to point out your fallacy of denial of the antecedent.Then go to the evolution/not evolution thread.

I believe I already fixed this. so no you didnt "prove" anything...merely showed me that i needed to clarify it better as yall were makin assumptions that werent valid. I corrected it and now it stands fine.

[copernicus 0]

I believe I already fixed this. so no you didnt "prove" anything...merely showed me that i needed to clarify it better as yall were makin assumptions that werent valid. I corrected it and now it stands fine.

now you are quite simply a liar, and you are ignored.

[Mattnxtc 0]

If God is omnipotent, God can not be bound. If God can be bound, God is not omnipotent. The Bible does NOT say that "God is bound by the fact that God cannot sin." I will now ask you for a verse from the Bible that says this. You will respond with a verse that does NOT say this. I will respond with an analysis of the verse showing WHY it DOES NOT say this. You will respond with the blanket assertion that I am trying to "change the Bible."

so God can sin?

II am talking about God's law as it is proclaimed by Christian's. You are ignoring the possibility of God's law being proclaimed in other manners. You are ignoring this possibility, because you have misinterpreted the Bible to read that the Christian proclamation of God's law is the only proclamation of God's law. The Bible does not say this. The Bible says: "Here is God's law, believe in it." Whether there are other, equally valid, proclamations of God's law is a matter open to debate. I say yes. You, however, don't just say no. You ignore the possibility of the question even existing. Thus, whenever you respond, you are responding OFF-TOPIC.

I love how you mix and match to get what you want. I am ignoring the possibilty that God's law is different for something else? No Do you know why? B/c God laid down The Law. So if you dont choose to follow Jesus you are bound by the Law. So if they dont believe in Jesus they must fulfill THE LAW that God gave to us. I guarantee only one person has ever fulfilled it. The Bible is God's words to us.

II am talking about God's law as it is proclaimed by Christian's. You are ignoring the possibility of God's law being proclaimed in other manners.

So you think we must add to the bible? That it isnt good enough or completely. Hmm interesting

I never made the claim that an unrighteous person will see the kingdom of God. I made the claim that IT IS POSSIBLE that there are alternate paths to becoming righteous. You say there is only ONE way to become righteous. Your claim is more restrictive, therefore, the burden of proof is on you. I do not suffer under the burden of proof, because my claim is less restrictive. Despite not suffering under the greater burden of proof, I have opted to offer a greater level of proof than you have.

Burden of proof is on me? Romans 3:23 "All men have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Theres my proof. Therefore every person on this earth HAS SINNED. Therefore no matter if they believe in God or not they have sinned. No exceptions. Name one group that is righteous. Name one group that doesnt believe in God that deserves to be in heaven. Ignorance is your only "proof" and ignorance isnt an excuse.

Again, you are misreading or misrepresenting my claims. I never claimed that an unrighteous man will see Heaven. Try again.

Actually I widened your own group for you. If you would like we can narrow it down to the Buddhists and Muslims which is what i believe you had earlier...Let me know if it was not this group. Even so...they both worship false Gods/idols. Hmm I think we find those as sins dont we? So they arent righteous are they? Hmmm where does an unrighteous person not get to go?

[FullMontyM1 0]

so God can sin?

If God is omnipotent and omnipresent, God cannot sin OR be bound.You are misunderstanding the full ramifications of something being "omnipotent and omnipresent."

I love how you mix and match to get what you want. I am ignoring the possibilty that God's law is different for something else? No Do you know why? B/c God laid down The Law. So if you dont choose to follow Jesus you are bound by the Law. So if they dont believe in Jesus they must fulfill THE LAW that God gave to us. I guarantee only one person has ever fulfilled it. The Bible is God's words to us.

I am not saying that God's law is ever different. I am saying God has infinite power, which is more than enough power to lay down God's law in ways we cannot possibly begin to fathom. We cannot fathom the infinite and all-powerful. We take it on faith.

So you think we must add to the bible? That it isnt good enough or completely. Hmm interesting?

How you get this from what I said, I have no idea.

Burden of proof is on me? Romans 3:23 "All men have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Theres my proof. Therefore every person on this earth HAS SINNED. Therefore no matter if they believe in God or not they have sinned. No exceptions. Name one group that is righteous. Name one group that doesnt believe in God that deserves to be in heaven. Ignorance is your only "proof" and ignorance isnt an excuse.

I'm not in the business of naming groups that are righteous. As for one group that doesn't believe in God that deserves to be in Heaven...Hmmm...Let's create a hyptothetical situation. This will illustrate my point AND be more fun than the mindless back-and-forth.A child is born deaf, dumb and blind.Before the child can learn to communicate via touch, but after the child is old enough to possibly survive on her own, AND while the child is still a child, the child is somehow stranded on a deserted island.There is no chance of rescue. Over the course of her entire life, NO ONE ever comes to the island.The child is lucky, in that the child finds fruited-trees, and there are no predators on the island.The child lives for many years, before dying of natural causes.The child has no concept of God, save whatever concept of God the child has created in the child's own mind.Does this child deserve to go to Hell?

Actually I widened your own group for you. If you would like we can narrow it down to the Buddhists and Muslims which is what i believe you had earlier...Let me know if it was not this group. Even so...they both worship false Gods/idols. Hmm I think we find those as sins dont we? So they arent righteous are they? Hmmm where does an unrighteous person not get to go?

Hate to burst your bubble here, but the Muslim God, Allah is the same God as the Christian God, God, and the Jewish God, YHWH.Monty

[Mattnxtc 0]

Hate to burst your bubble here, but the Muslim God, Allah is the same God as the Christian God, God, and the Jewish God, YHWH.

Hmm might wanna do some research on this. Youll find that that Allah is quite different than YHWH

If God is omnipotent and omnipresent, God cannot sin OR be bound.You are misunderstanding the full ramifications of something being "omnipotent and omnipresent."

So now your saying God cannot sin?

How you get this from what I said, I have no idea.

well according to you:There is another way to get to heaven BUTit isnt in the bible BUTthere is another way.so the only conclusion is that the bible is missing something correct? The bible must not be complete

[Farnan 0]

so the only conclusion is that the bible is missing something correct? The bible must not be complete

I didn't see any merger/integration clause at the end of the bible. FYI, here is a sample merger clause

This Agreement and the other documents and instruments referred to herein (the “Other Agreements”) embody the entire agreement and understanding of the parties hereto in respect of the subject matter contained herein or therein. There are no agreements, representations, warranties or covenants other than those expressly set forth or referred to herein or therein. This Agreement and the Other Agreements supersede all prior agreements and understandings between the parties hereto, whether written or oral, express or implied, with respect to such subject matter herein and therein.

I could be wrong tho...

[Mattnxtc 0]

I didn't see any merger/integration clause at the end of the bible. FYI, here is a sample merger clause I could be wrong tho...

I assume this is what your lookin for? Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Revelations 22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; Revelations 22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

I'm not in the business of naming groups that are righteous.As for one group that doesn't believe in God that deserves to be in Heaven...Hmmm...Let's create a hyptothetical situation. This will illustrate my point AND be more fun than the mindless back-and-forth.A child is born deaf, dumb and blind.Before the child can learn to communicate via touch, but after the child is old enough to possibly survive on her own, AND while the child is still a child, the child is somehow stranded on a deserted island.There is no chance of rescue. Over the course of her entire life, NO ONE ever comes to the island.The child is lucky, in that the child finds fruited-trees, and there are no predators on the island.The child lives for many years, before dying of natural causes.The child has no concept of God, save whatever concept of God the child has created in the child's own mind.Does this child deserve to go to Hell?

Huge problems with this hypothetical. 1. We know from the bible that there is a period where sin will not be held against a person who cannot understand it. Its the common theory on babies being saved2. Your hypothetical contradicts itself, This person is dumb (mentally handicapped?) but able to survive on its own? Doesnt seem to logical a scenerio3. This person who cannot learn to communicate is able to survive on his own? either he can or cant learn

[FullMontyM1 0]

I assume this is what your lookin for? Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Revelations 22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; Revelations 22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Matt, you are providing quotes from the Bible that support MY CLAIMS not yours. You are the one adding to the Bible. You are the one quoting Bible verses, claiming that they state A+B, when all they state is A.

Huge problems with this hypothetical.

There are no problems with my hypo.

1. We know from the bible that there is a period where sin will not be held against a person who cannot understand it. Its the common theory on babies being saved

Yes. But, as I stated, this child grows into an adult and exits the period where sin will not be held against them.

2. Your hypothetical contradicts itself, This person is dumb (mentally handicapped?) but able to survive on its own? Doesnt seem to logical a scenerio

Dumb means unable to speak. Speaking is not a survival skill on an island where you are the only resident.

3. This person who cannot learn to communicate is able to survive on his own? either he can or cant learn

Communication is not a survival skill when you are stranded by yourself on an island.Since my hypothetical is not flawed, please provide a response.Does this person deserve to go to Hell? Monty

[Mattnxtc 0]

Matt, you are providing quotes from the Bible that support MY CLAIMS not yours. You are the one adding to the Bible. You are the one quoting Bible verses, claiming that they state A+B, when all they state is A. There are no problems with my hypo.Yes. But, as I stated, this child grows into an adult and exits the period where sin will not be held against them.Dumb means unable to speak. Speaking is not a survival skill on an island where you are the only resident.Communication is not a survival skill when you are stranded by yourself on an island.Since my hypothetical is not flawed, please provide a response.Does this person deserve to go to Hell? Monty

assuming that this child has the mental capacity, then yes he will be held accountable for his actions.

[Farnan 0]

I assume this is what your lookin for? Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Revelations 22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; Revelations 22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

No, those quotes say you cannot add to it---not that it is complete. Understand the difference? Technically, by jumping to conclusions (as i stated in the other thread) requires YOU to add to the bible.If you don't agree, well, to quote Duderonomy 4:20 "well, thats, just like, your opinion, man"Have a great weekend everyone!

[FullMontyM1 0]

assuming that this child has the mental capacity, then yes he will be held accountable for his actions.

Okay, just so were clear. I'll reprint the hypo...Let's create a hyptothetical situation. This will illustrate my point AND be more fun than the mindless back-and-forth.A child is born deaf, dumb and blind.Before the child can learn to communicate via touch, but after the child is old enough to possibly survive on her own, AND while the child is still a child, the child is somehow stranded on a deserted island.There is no chance of rescue. Over the course of her entire life, NO ONE ever comes to the island.The child is lucky, in that the child finds fruited-trees, and there are no predators on the island.The child lives for many years, before dying of natural causes.The child has no concept of God, save whatever concept of God the child has created in the child's own mind.Does this child deserve to go to Hell?And you say:"assuming that this child has the mental capacity, then yes he will be held accountable for his actions."Since dumb refers to the inability to speak, the person in the hypothetical has mental capacity.Therefore, in your infinite wisdom, and according to your version of the Bible, this person "will be held accountable for his actions," which is, I understand, a euphemism for "deserves to go to Hell."Your callous attitude towards your fellow mortals is astonishing.I am stunned. I don't claim to be positive on much, but I am positive Jesus would not agree.Monty

[Mattnxtc 0]

Okay, just so were clear. I'll reprint the hypo...Let's create a hyptothetical situation. This will illustrate my point AND be more fun than the mindless back-and-forth.A child is born deaf, dumb and blind.Before the child can learn to communicate via touch, but after the child is old enough to possibly survive on her own, AND while the child is still a child, the child is somehow stranded on a deserted island.There is no chance of rescue. Over the course of her entire life, NO ONE ever comes to the island.The child is lucky, in that the child finds fruited-trees, and there are no predators on the island.The child lives for many years, before dying of natural causes.The child has no concept of God, save whatever concept of God the child has created in the child's own mind.Does this child deserve to go to Hell?And you say:"assuming that this child has the mental capacity, then yes he will be held accountable for his actions."Since dumb refers to the inability to speak, the person in the hypothetical has mental capacity.Therefore, in your infinite wisdom, and according to your version of the Bible, this person "will be held accountable for his actions," which is, I understand, a euphemism for "deserves to go to Hell."Your callous attitude towards your fellow mortals is astonishing.I am stunned. I don't claim to be positive on much, but I am positive Jesus would not agree.Monty

I am positive that all men will face judgement in front of God. I am positive that if you do not believe you will not be savedI am positive that all people will have a chance to experience GodI am positive that even this person will have a chance to experience GodOn a side note, while on a missionary trip in a remote jungle, a mission came upon a new tribe that nobody knew existed. Upon spending time with them he found that they had a religious history happened to be almost identical to that of the bible. Now this tribe lived in a remote villiage.There are so many reports like this. Where people in remote tribes started honestly seeking God and a week later a missionary would show up. If you seek God, He will come to you. Doesnt matter if you are on a remote island or in the middle of New York. If you seek Him, you will not be disappointed

[FullMontyM1 0]

I am positive that all men will face judgement in front of God. I am positive that if you do not believe you will not be savedI am positive that all people will have a chance to experience GodI am positive that even this person will have a chance to experience GodOn a side note, while on a missionary trip in a remote jungle, a mission came upon a new tribe that nobody knew existed. Upon spending time with them he found that they had a religious history happened to be almost identical to that of the bible. Now this tribe lived in a remote villiage.There are so many reports like this. Where people in remote tribes started honestly seeking God and a week later a missionary would show up. If you seek God, He will come to you. Doesnt matter if you are on a remote island or in the middle of New York. If you seek Him, you will not be disappointed

In our hypothetical which we are currently discussing, no one comes to the island.Therefore, for the person in question to experience God, they will have had to do it on their own, in their own mind, or by direct divine intervention by God.If either of these occur, and they become righteous through this process, and inherit the kingdom of God, then they have done so without ever being Christian (in your sense of the word) and without the Bible.You can not change the hypothetical and insert a missionary appearing at the last minute to save the day and your argument (deux ex machina). You must take the hypothetical, as it stands, and reconcile the hypothetical with your point of view (given the above clarifications and reiterrations).Monty

[copernicus 0]

In our hypothetical which we are currently discussing, no one comes to the island.Therefore, for the person in question to experience God, they will have had to do it on their own, in their own mind, or by direct divine intervention by God.If either of these occur, and they become righteous through this process, and inherit the kingdom of God, then they have done so without ever being Christian (in your sense of the word) and without the Bible.You can not change the hypothetical and insert a missionary appearing at the last minute to save the day and your argument (deux ex machina). You must take the hypothetical, as it stands, and reconcile the hypothetical with your point of view (given the above clarifications and reiterrations).Monty

Those are very big words Monty. I cant wait to not see his non-answer.