Why Are 8 Year Olds Banished From God'S Presence?

[Log]

Wrong Small children are a special case. Those without the law are a different case from small children and from those with the law. Its three different groups of people.

Three groups of people who cannot repent because they're not under condemnation and therefore do not need baptism. We're making progress.

[Log]

So, children who reach the age of accountability are universally commanded, by God, to repent, and be baptized.

Therefore, children who reach the age of accountability are not in any of those three groups who cannot repent because they're not under condemnation and therefore do not need baptism.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Log

[CASteinman]

Three groups of people who cannot repent because they're not under condemnation and therefore do not need baptism. We're making progress.

Wrong again. Small Children are commanded to repent and be baptized while still not under condemnation. This is the whole thing about the Charity and Mercy of Christ that Moroni talks about.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Log]

Small Children are commanded to repent and be baptized while still not under condemnation.

Mormon says those who are not under condemnation cannot repent.

Children who are commanded to repent and be baptized must be able to repent.

Therefore, children who are commanded to repent and be baptized must be under condemnation.

[CASteinman]

Mormon says those who are not under condemnation cannot repent.

Children who are commanded to repent and be baptized must be able to repent.

Therefore, children who are commanded to repent and be baptized must be under condemnation.

No. Wrong. Little Children are not under condemnation. They are alive in Christ. They are "not capable of sin". You are preaching directly against the words of Moroni/Mormon.

You are misapplying words meant for people who are not under the law.. to small children... a different group.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Log]

No. Wrong. Little Children are not under condemnation. They are alive in Christ. They are "not capable of sin". You are preaching directly against the words of Moroni/Mormon.

Does God command those who are unable to sin to repent? If so, please cite the verses.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Log

[CASteinman]

Does God command those who are unable to sin to repent? If so, please cite the verses.

Yes. Obviously. He commands little children to repent and be baptized when they are 8. But he also says that they are unable to sin.

Its not formal logic dude. its the Gospel. He also told Adam and Eve to do things that they could not do -- and we have learned that in that way they are *exactly* like little children.

Here is a real world example of how this is not formal logic. Jesus says little children cannot sin. But there have been children very small who with malice have killed other children. Malice, viciousness and coldness.

Yet Jesus says that they cannot sin.

I am not going to argue with Him. But its obviously not formal or even Aristotelian logic. Its something else. Its the Gospel.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Log]

Yes. Obviously. He commands little children to repent and be baptized when they are 8. But he also says that they are unable to sin.

He does not, in fact, say that children who reach the age of accountability are unable to sin. If you believe I am in error in this, please produce the verse which says children who reach the age of accountability are unable to sin. To support my position, I will cite D&C 29:47 - please note, this is speaking of children which have not yet reached the full age of accountability: if they are able to be tempted, they are able to yield to temptation, and therefore are able to sin. The knowledge spoken of in verse 49 should probably be interpreted in light of the temple.

Its not formal logic dude. its the Gospel. He also told Adam and Eve to do things that they could not do -- and we have learned that in that way they are *exactly* like little children.

He never told Adam and Eve to repent, neither did he command them to be baptized, *until after they sinned*.

See, that's the whole point. If you haven't sinned, you cannot repent, and need no baptism. That's the upshot of Moroni 8.

So, the question I'm asking is "how is it guaranteed that all children (presuming accountability) in fact do sin by the time they reach the age of accountability?" For surely God does not command us to perform dead works - works which have no effect, such as baptizing them who are not under condemnation and cannot repent.

It's an interesting question. One that I have not yet heard a full answer to.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Log

[CASteinman]

He does not, in fact, say that children who reach the age of accountability are unable to sin. If you believe I am in error in this, please produce the verse which says children who reach the age of accountability are unable to sin.

He doesn't say that they are able to sin. As far as I am concerned, his ruling that little children are unable to sin holds. I think it would be up to you to show the expiration date on that -- if you want to put yourself in that kind of Christ position.

He never told Adam and Eve to repent, neither did he command them to be baptized, *until after they sinned*.

Are you intentionally missing the point? He commanded them to do things that they could not do. Obviously He does that sort of thing sometimes. And when He does, He does not hold them under Condemnation.

[CASteinman]

So, the question I'm asking is "how is it guaranteed that all children (presuming accountability) in fact do sin by the time they reach the age of accountability?"

It is guaranteed that they are unable to sin. Guaranteed by Christ... a pretty good agent on the matter. And that is, if He makes no exceptions (He is, after all, the Judge and can do what He wants) even including this kid:

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/03/05/loc_kentucky_6-year-old.html

He did not sin if we insist on every bit of the scripture being right. But truth is, we are not in charge of that. Jesus is. And its not perfect logic.. its the Gospel.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Log]

He doesn't say that they are able to sin.

It is guaranteed that they are unable to sin.

Did you miss my citation to D&C 29:47? If they can be tempted by the devil, they can sin.

Are you intentionally missing the point?

I am focusing on the point: God nowhere commands anyone who cannot repent to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.

The commandment to Adam and Eve to multiply and replenish the earth when they were in the Garden does not establish a general principle which is applicable to this topic. Neither does the fact that no physical priesthood holder apparently baptized Adam establish a general principle that we can all baptize ourselves.

As I already noted, God did not give the command to repent and be baptized until after they sinned and were able to repent. That's the point of the Adam and Eve account with respect to this topic.

[Log]

I remember running into a man around 18 or so years ago who had shot and killed his brother when he was six years old. He was extremely troubled by this, and it undoubtedly contributed to his alcoholism. I assured him that he was not accountable for his actions at that age (because I thought, at the time, that 8 was the magical "I am able to sin" age, and anything below that meant one couldn't sin). Today, I wouldn't say that automatically. *Normal* children begin to become accountable before God prior to 8.

Anyways, I don't have a personal stake in the outcome of the argument. I can understand that some, like the man I spoke to, might believe he had a stake in it.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Log

[CASteinman]

Did you miss my citation to D&C 29:47? If they can be tempted by the devil, they can sin.

Maybe they can't be tempted by the Devil. Whatever the reason is, they are guaranteed by Christ not to be able to sin.

I am focusing on the point: God nowhere commands anyone who cannot repent to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.

But he does command small children who are not able to sin to repent and be baptized when they turn 8. (Technically he mostly commands the parents to have them baptized -- but when they are accountable they should accept it).

The commandment to Adam and Eve to multiply and replenish the earth when they were in the Garden does not establish a general principle

Sure it does. It establishes that God may give commandments to some people that they are not able to fulfill. Moreover, He wont be upset about it.

As I already noted, God did not give the command to repent and be baptized until after they sinned

Yeah. You say that... but its your own teaching. Its not in the scriptures. You do not have to have sinned to be baptized.. or even to have it required of you.*

In modern times, the specific requirement for baptism in the Church is that you must be of an age of accountability and that you must be able to repent. There is no requirement for you to have sinned to be baptized.

*This was an error. I misread and responded to the wrong thing.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Log]

Maybe they can't be tempted by the Devil.

D&C 29:47 says they can.

Whatever the reason is, they are guaranteed by Christ not to be able to sin.

If they cannot be tempted by the devil, then they cannot sin. Children, again, begin to become accountable prior to the age of 8.

But he does command small children who are not able to sin to repent and be baptized when they turn 8. (Technically he mostly commands the parents to have them baptized).

Technically, he does not - he commands the parents to instruct the children in the doctrine of repentance and baptism and so forth by the time they are 8 or the sin be upon the parents' heads. However, he *nowhere* says children younger than 8 cannot sin. That flies in the face, once again, of D&C 29:47.

Sure it does. It establishes that God may give commandments to some people that they are not able to fulfill. Moreover, He wont be upset about it.

I guess we can all baptize ourselves, now. The exception has become the rule!

Yeah. You say that... but its your own teaching. Its not in the scriptures.

6 And after many days an aangel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer bsacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save the Lord commanded me.

7 And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a asimilitude of the bsacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of cgrace and dtruth.

8 Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the aname of the Son, and thou shalt brepent and ccall upon God in the name of the Son forevermore.

You do not have to have sinned to be baptized.. or even to require it.

Then you disagree, in reality, with Mormon, who says that those who are not under condemnation cannot repent, and baptism does them no good.

Edited June 10, 2012 by Log

[CASteinman]

D&C 29:47 says they can.

No. It says that satan has no power to tempt them. Despite the 3 year old who killed a neighbor with a hammer by smashing her head and then bit a 2 week old baby to death. It was not a sin and satan did not tempt the child either. According to the scriptures.

I don't pretend to understand such things.. but I accept it. If God says that they were not tempted and did not sin, then so be it. I am not going to argue.

Children, again, begin to become accountable prior to the age of 8.

Not according to any scripture. You have simply established that as your rule, contrary to the revelations.

However, he *nowhere* says children younger than 8 cannot sin. That flies in the face, once again, of D&C 29:47

Or would fly in the face of that scripture if that scripture said that they could sin before they were 8. But it doesn't. And we are definitely told that small children cannot sin. That is a definite. In fact D&C 29 says that they cannot even be tempted.

I guess we can all baptize ourselves, now. The exception has become the rule!

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Then you disagree, in reality, with Mormon, who says that those who are not under condemnation cannot repent, and baptism does them no good.

No. Because he was talking about those not under the law and we are talking about small children. Two different groups.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[CV75]

That's not what the scripture says. "... he that is not condemned, or he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such baptism availeth nothing..." This means, unless someone is condemned, they are not under the requirement to be baptized. Therefore, how is it possible that all are guaranteed to be under condemnation by age 8 or whatever age they actually hit accountability?

The same scriptures in my post above can be used to understand condemnation in terms of chidlren, baptism, the age of eight and accountability. They are condemned simply by not being baprised, whether it is by not fulfilling all righteousness, by not receiivng a remission of sins, or by not making a covenant. No accountable person is to lose out on the opportunity for baptism, which is why Christ waives the requirement for the unaccountable by virtue of His atonement and why we baptise for the dead. All accountable children are guaranteed to be condemned until they are baptised (even Jesus, which is why He was obedient to the Father in being baptised).

[Nominee]

I am going to spend a few minutes deleting most of my posts above because this has become an exceedingly pedantic, tedious conversation that will really annoy other people on this board. So I am going to try to make my posts become as small and unobtrusive as possible. Then I am going to see if you have gotten back on track.

Please, don't do this again. IMHO it degrades the purpose of the board and turns it into your personal plaything. You should let us other posters decide what annoys us and what doesn't. While I am catching up this morning, I find your "boring and deleted" posts to be boring and wish they had not been deleted because it is very annoying to be reading only one side of a conversation.

Thank you, Naomi

[CASteinman]

The same scriptures in my post above can be used to understand condemnation in terms of chidlren, baptism, the age of eight and accountability. They are condemned simply by not being baprised, whether it is by not fulfilling all righteousness, by not receiivng a remission of sins, or by not making a covenant. No accountable person is to lose out on the opportunity for baptism, which is why Christ waives the requirement for the unaccountable by virtue of His atonement and why we baptise for the dead. All accountable children are guaranteed to be condemned until they are baptised (even Jesus, which is why He was obedient to the Father in being baptised).

I think you are right. And it happens fairly quickly though exactly how quickly I am unable to say.

The way I see it though is -- and to me it is a wonderful thing -- small children are deemed sinless up until they are baptized and then once baptized they are in a covenant relationship with God -- which if they honor correctly -- has the *potential* that they could be sinless all their lives. Now it appears that this is not a practical reality, given our natures, but it is a possibility that the Lord has given us. If I am right in this, it means that God is extremely loving and merciful to us! It also harkens back to the Garden of Eden, which then brings in the Temple.

We have a brief window of time in which to make this transition. We may not be able to judge with perfection when that window closes, but it is given as "when they are 8 years old" At which point, we lie under condemnation if having been taught, we fail to be baptized.

There is an irony or a catch-22 situation. The person who has been deemed to not be capable of sin is supposed to repent. How do you repent if you have not sinned? Again, I think that this is a matter of our nature. I think that being :"unable to sin" is a declaration -- a fiat decree -- by God who is able to define such things. But small children can engage in conduct which otherwise is sinful. I believe that at baptism, we must show our first measure of formal obedience and sacrifice and start practicing for the life of a disciple. We are asked, at this point of accountability, to review things that would be sins, were we older and accountable for them, and commit to a life of abandoning those things. This is the repentance of the small child who is, in fact, not under condemnation for those acts.

That is how I see it. Little Children are given mercy and grace and are sinless before God and then they enter into the Covenant of Baptism -- the Path of discipleship that leads to exaltation. The "baptism for remission of sins" will come in as necessary, along with the sacrament in future years as we learn our way.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[CASteinman]

Please, don't do this again. IMHO it degrades the purpose of the board and turns it into your personal plaything. You should let us other posters decide what annoys us and what doesn't. While I am catching up this morning, I find your "boring and deleted" posts to be boring and wish they had not been deleted because it is very annoying to be reading only one side of a conversation.

Thank you, Naomi

I think you would have found the originals worse. They contained less than no value. I would delete the posts entirely and you would not have noticed. Unless the moderators insist that I not do that, I will do it again. (When I have done some things like this before the moderators were actually kind enough to remove some of the posts themselves). But, maybe next time, remembering your objection, I will choose something even less obtrusive. Like a period. Sorry it bothers you. But the discussion was not a very good one for a long time and the posts were merely carping at the process -- had no value at all.

[Nominee]

The "little children" in the scriptures are NOT the accountable 8 year olds and up! They are LITTLE children ~ newborns, one, two and three year olds that in some religions are baptized at this age because it is believed that they started sinning the moment they were born. This is what the scriptures are disagreeing with.

~ Naomi

[Nominee]

I think you would have found the originals worse. They contained less than no value. I would delete the posts entirely and you would not have noticed. Unless the moderators insist that I not do that, I will do it again. (When I have done some things like this before the moderators were actually kind enough to remove some of the posts themselves). But, maybe next time, remembering your objection, I will choose something even less obtrusive. Like a period. Sorry it bothers you. But the discussion was not a very good one for a long time and the posts were merely carping at the process -- had no value at all.

In your opinion.

I do understand where you're coming from. But there is a lot more to a post than just the words inside of it or the topic at hand.

Posts are telling expressions of the poster. I suppose the fact that you delete a lot of your posts tells us something about you.

Regards, Naomi

[CASteinman]

The "little children" in the scriptures are NOT the accountable 8 year olds and up! They are LITTLE children ~ newborns, one, two and three year olds that in some religions are baptized at this age because it is believed that they started sinning the moment they were born. This is what the scriptures are disagreeing with.

Really? I don't think the Scriptures say that it stops at 3 years of age. If it does it means that for 5 years, little children can sin and if they die before they are 8, they are dying in their sins. Isn't this exactly the sort of teaching that Moroni and Mormon are advocating against?

[CASteinman]

In your opinion.

I do understand where you're coming from. But there is a lot more to a post than just the words inside of it or the topic at hand.

Posts are telling expressions of the poster. I suppose the fact that you delete a lot of your posts tells us something about you.

Regards, Naomi

Absolutely! I agree with everything you said!

But let me make this promise to you -- maybe it will be a good thing -- I will not do it *too* often and will in the future attempt to stay out of discussions that look like they are heading that way, so that I will not be tempted to do something as useless as my post or perhaps uncivil as removing it.

I hope that will be an improvement you can agree with. I know that I absolutely want that to be the case.

Edited June 10, 2012 by CASteinman

[Nominee]

Really? I don't think the Scriptures say that it stops at 3 years of age. If it does it means that for 5 years, little children can sin and if they die before they are 8, they are dying in their sins. Isn't this exactly the sort of teaching that Moroni and Mormon are advocating against?

Sorry, I didn't realize the black and white of it was ness. here. I should have added an "etc." to the back of the 3.

Let me try again.

"Little children" are the children not yet at the age of accountability. And before it comes up again, I posted how I feel about the borderliners in a previous post #29.

~ Naomi

[Nominee]

Absolutely! I agree with everything you said!

But let me make this promise to you -- maybe it will be a good thing -- I will not do it *too* often and will in the future attempt to stay out of discussions that look like they are heading that way, so that I will not be tempted to do something as useless as my post or perhaps uncivil as removing it.

I hope that will be an improvement you can agree with. I know that I absolutely want that to be the case.