|
 Infants
and Sin
"Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as
little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven."
(Matt. 18:3).
This writer's first efforts at debating denominational error was
with a Lutheran preacher. The issues were total hereditary depravity
and infant baptism. We expected our opponent to argue that little
children were only guilty of inborn or inherited sin — not personal
sins of their own. So, we were surprised, indeed, when he said that
infants were guilty of actual transgressions of their own. He was
very insistent that infants needed baptism to remove both kinds of
sins—inherited and actual.
He was the first one that we had heard attempt to specify acts of
sin that infants and small children commit. I remember his using
temper tantrums as one example. We insisted that if those little
fellows were sinners, then Jesus would be saying that, "unless you
are converted and become as little sinners, you cannot enter the
kingdom of heaven." If not, why not?
In all the years, since then, we have only heard one or two others
openly argue that little children actually commit sin. If they are
right, then surely God has some plan for saving infants from their
sins. If the wages of sin is death, then they would be lost without
some means of pardon. The Lutheran preacher solved the problem by
baptizing the little sinners for remission of their sins. A brother,
whom we have been reading after lately, has solved the problem by
having God continuously forgiving the sinners even as they sin.
We believe that the basic error of the Lutheran preacher and the
other one mentioned is their unwarranted supposition that little
children sin. It is a conjecture, in both cases, that accompanies
other doctrinal positions that they hold. The Lutheran preacher's
assumption accompanies his position that infants should be baptized.
The other person's assumption goes along with his position that God
forgives some people even as they sin.
We believe that to teach that little children sin is, not only
without Scriptural foundation, but is contrary to what the
Scriptures teach.
There are certain principles taught in the Bible that preclude an
infant's being guilty of any sin.
1. The parable of the talents clearly teaches that responsibility
before God is contingent upon one's ability. Since infants are
incapable of understanding the law of God, they have no
responsibility to the law. Not being held accountable to the law,
they can have no sin, since sin is lawlessness. (1 John 3:4).
2. Isaiah recognizes that there is a period in a child's life before
he is capable of choosing between good and evil: "For before the
Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land
that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings." (Isa. 7:16).
3. Paul refers to a time in his life when he was alive (spiritually)
and without the law (commandment). "I was alive once without the
law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died." (Rom.
7:9). Since the law had existed all of Paul's life, the only
possible time for him to have been personally without the law and
alive was during that period of innocent childhood before he was
held accountable to the law. The time before he transgressed the law
and sin entered his life, bringing death.
4. James comments on the nature of sin: "But each one is tempted
when he is drawn away by his own desires (lusts — KJV) and enticed.
Then, when desire (lust — KJV) has conceived, it gives birth to sin;
and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death." (James
1:14,15).
Unless an infant can be drawn away by lust and enticed, then he
cannot sin. It would be interesting to know the specific lusts that
infants are capable of producing. Just what there is to entice an
infant to lust and thus give birth to sin.
This should suffice to show that infants or little children are
without either law or lust, thus without sin. They are, as we have
taught over the years, innocent and safe. If infants have no sins to
be washed away, then there is no need to baptize them. If they have
no sins, then there is no need for any cleansing of their sins —
continuous or otherwise. ~
By Edward 0. Bragwell, Sr.
|
|
What About Pot?
Question: How can it be wrong to
smoke pot, since God gave us every seed producing plant to do with
as we see fit.
Answer:
It is true that God made the earth and all things therein for man.
This is for man's proper USE, not for his ABUSE.
To illustrate, God gave us the grape for man's good and enjoyment,
but this does not mean it was right for Noah to plant a vineyard,
and drink of the wine and become drunk (see Genesis 9:20-21). The
grapes were not given by God "to do with as we see fit."
In the New Testament, Paul dealt with those that would use a similar
argument to justify fornication. We gather from the context of 1
Cor. 6:13 that some were contending that as food is for the stomach,
that the body is for fornication. In other words, food is intended
to be eaten and enjoyed by the stomach, and the body is made to be
used for every kind of sexual pleasure. Paul responded, "Now the
body is not for fornication, but for the Lord" (1 Cor. 6:13). He did
not give us our body to "do with as we see fit." (see also Heb.
13:4).
So it is with all God has made. There is a legitimate and proper
usage, and then there is distortion and misuse of what God has
given. When you stop and think about it, so much of temptation is a
matter of the devil taking some God-given desire but to find an
outlet that God has forbidden, and is out of harmony with God's
will.
So far as passages that would address the matter of marijuana: The
use of marijuana is a form of drunkenness. Therefore passages that
condemn drunkenness would apply (Rom. 13:13; Gal. 5:21; Prov.
23:29-35).
Also in Gal. 5:20 notice the word "witchcraft" (KJV) "sorcery"
(NKJV). This is from the Greek work PHARMAKEIA, from which you can
see our word pharmacy. The word in this context has to do with the
abuse of drugs, which was often used by the sorcerer to bring others
under his spell. But my point is that this is a specific passage
that condemns the abuse of drugs. The text says that they that
practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
One's attitude is so important: why would one want to smoke
marijuana? Often it is done in a spirit of rebellion.
Many times a question regarding whether something is right can
easily be answered by asking "Would Jesus do it?" If anyone can
imagine Jesus smoking marijuana, and/or encouraging others to do so,
he knows nothing about the Jesus of the Bible.
What should our attitude be? Do we will to do His will? (John 7:17).
Is our attitude "Speak, Lord, Thy servant heareth?" (1 Sam. 3:9).
When this attitude wins over so that one is not sitting in the seat
of the scornful, there will be no trouble determining whether it is
right to smoke marijuana or misuse other drugs. ~
Leon Mauldin
Quick Answers to Tough Bible Questions
Now the works of the flesh are
evident, which are:
adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness,
idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of
wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies,
envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell
you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who
practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5.19-21
|