| Poster | Thread |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
1Cor7:13-14 Infant baptism isn't nessary but after the children reach an age of accountability they have a personal responsibility to know Jesus as messiah and Lord for them selves.Up until that point it can be argued that they are the benefactors of thier parent(s) committment to Christ.
The 1 Cor 7:13-14 are difficult verses to expound, but in that it follows the 'putting away verses' it seems to imply that the continued presence of the Christian in a mixed-union as a 'contagious' effect upon both the unbelieving spouse and the children. In each case it seems to be the presence of the believer in the home that causes the 'sanctifying', of the spouse or the children.
In this sense the whole family is 'benefactor' of the believing parent's faith and continuing presence in the family. It is an interesting reversion of the OT position where an unclean person would pollute a clean person. Here we seem to have a clean person whose 'believing' is impacting the whole family.
I still don't really know what this 'sanctifying' implies in this verse.
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
 2005/1/19 15:45 | Profile |
dohzman
Member
Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132
| | Re: | | I've never made that connection between the the OT and NT with the change in relation to clean and unclean. Ill need to look into that a little closer. I believe the santifying effect here could be something like what happened to Lot, he was spared because of Abraham , that might be a poor example but wouldn't it be somewhat accurate to say that in the same manner that the Bible says because of my servant David of for my servant David's sake ect.... I'll do this or that.?Or judgement was withheld because of the relationship between thoughs who should be judged and the servant of God?? Just a thought.
_________________
D.Miller
|
|
| 2005/1/19 22:46 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
I believe the santifying effect here could be something like what happened to Lot, he was spared because of Abraham , that might be a poor example but wouldn't it be somewhat accurate to say that in the same manner that the Bible says because of my servant David of for my servant David's sake ect....
I think both of these are excellent. I particularly like 'for David's sake'; one of my favourite thoughts. But what do you think the 'unbelieving spouse or child' is spared from? That is, what 'judgments' do other families come under that are spared to the family with a believer in its midst?
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2005/1/20 4:31 | Profile |
ZekeO
Member
Joined: 2004/7/4
Posts: 1014
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| | Re: | | Quote:
But what do you think the 'unbelieving spouse or child' is spared from? That is, what 'judgments' do other families come under that are spared to the family with a believer in its midst?
I think that its along the lines of how many gates are left open in the city through which the enemy can come.
_________________
Zeke Oosthuis
|
|
| 2005/1/20 11:25 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
[i]ZekeO posted:[/i] I think that its along the lines of how many gates are left open in the city through which the enemy can come.
Where does this leave us with [b]else were your children unclean; but now are they holy[/b]?
children, in this verse, are either 'not-clean' or 'holy'. How would a believer in the family transform 'not clean' children into 'holy' children?
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2005/1/21 10:18 | Profile |
Nasher
Member
Joined: 2003/7/28
Posts: 404
Watford, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
I think the root question is something along the lines of "Are the children of Christians members of the New Covenant?"
I once heard someone say "God has no grandchildren", I think that is true.
_________________
Mark Nash
|
|
| 2005/1/21 11:48 | Profile |
ZekeO
Member
Joined: 2004/7/4
Posts: 1014
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| | Re: | | Quote:
philologos wrote:
children, in this verse, are either 'not-clean' or 'holy'. How would a believer in the family transform 'not clean' children into 'holy' children?
Well seeing as we are into theological mathematics. One could logically deduce that one of the parents would have to be born again. ;-)
_________________
Zeke Oosthuis
|
|
| 2005/1/21 14:35 | Profile |
KeithLaMothe
Member
Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354
| | Re: | | Quote:
philologos wrote:
Quote:
I think the root question is something along the lines of "Are the children of Christians members of the New Covenant?"
Is there any other way into the New Covenant than by regeneration?
Allow me to respond with another pair of questions:
1) if a man and woman are married, and the man has sexual relations with another woman, is he an unfaithful husband, or not a husband at all? That is, is he an adulterer or merely a fornicator?
2) if a man publicly confesses faith in Christ and is baptized, but later turns "back to their vomit" and is in gross sin, is he a "spiritual adulterer" or merely a "spiritual fornicator"? That is, is he obligated to keep the New Covenant, or not? |
|
| 2005/1/21 15:12 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
Quote:
philologos wrote:
children, in this verse, are either 'not-clean' or 'holy'. How would a believer in the family transform 'not clean' children into 'holy' children?
[i]ZekeO posted:[/i] Well seeing as we are into theological mathematics. One could logically deduce that one of the parents would have to be born again.
What I meant was 'what actually happens to these children'. eg would an 'unclean' child become 'holy' when one parent was converted? If that parent left the family would the child become 'unclean' again?
I'm not trying to be clever with these questions, I am genuinely trying to understand what the scripture is saying. I believe it, but I want to understand it too.
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2005/1/21 16:42 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
Allow me to respond with another pair of questions:
Wow Keith, these are some questions! Are we still on the same topic?
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2005/1/21 16:44 | Profile |
