The ONLY Biblical answer to The Age of Accountability

[JudgeRightly]

They do die, all the time. Abortion is a case where babies have no time to sin, yet they die.

People are alive to God when they are born. When they sin, they die, and the only thing that will restore that "alive-ness" is a relationship with God.

That's why Paul contrasts "death" being "wages" against "life" being "the gift of God." He's not talking about physical death, the death of the body. He's talking about separation from God.

This is mostly my personal belief, but it's conjecture based in scripture: When an innocent baby dies, he goes to heaven, and because God is merciful, He allows the child to grow up until he reaches his age of accountability, at which point God presents him with a choice, to live with Him forever, or to live apart from Him forever. As for how many choose to live with Him versus not live with Him, I don't know, but I would imagine the number is much higher than it is here on Earth.

 

[Derf]

People are alive to God when they are born. When they sin, they die, and the only thing that will restore that "alive-ness" is a relationship with God.

I thought Jesus' death on the cross, paying the penalty for sin, was what restored the "alive-ness".

That's why Paul contrasts "death" being "wages" against "life" being "the gift of God." He's not talking about physical death, the death of the body. He's talking about separation from God.

If separation is the problem, then we can't fix the problem just by not being separated anymore (i.e., just suddenly having a relationship with God).

This is mostly my personal belief, but it's conjecture based in scripture: When an innocent baby dies, he goes to heaven, and because God is merciful, He allows the child to grow up until he reaches his age of accountability, at which point God presents him with a choice, to live with Him forever, or to live apart from Him forever. As for how many choose to live with Him versus not live with Him, I don't know, but I would imagine the number is much higher than it is here on Earth.

If this is true, then it suggests that there are Some that might be older than infants, say 20 or 30 years old, that have never heard the gospel before they die, and they also might be presented with it after death.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I thought Jesus' death on the cross, paying the penalty for sin, was what restored the "alive-ness".

No. God reconciled the world though Christ's death. But that's not the end of the verse, is it?

For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. - Romans 5:10 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans5:10&version=NKJV

"Having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.For he who has died has been freed from sin.Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 6:3-11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans6:3-11&version=NKJV

If separation is the problem, then we can't fix the problem just by not being separated anymore (i.e., just suddenly having a relationship with God).

Do you not know what the word reconcile means? And why it's used by Paul?

If this is true, then it suggests that there are Some that might be older than infants, say 20 or 30 years old, that have never heard the gospel before they die, and they also might be presented with it after death.

See my posts #7 and #13.

 

[Derf]

No. God reconciled the world though Christ's death. But that's not the end of the verse, is it?

For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. - Romans 5:10 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans5:10&version=NKJV

"Having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

Exactly. We are reconciled to God by Christ's death. Even the infants! How do we know they are reconciled to God by Christ's death? Because they also will be resurrected. Death shall be conquered for them.

We aren't saved yet, according to Rom 5:10--"We SHALL be saved..." Thus, they die, just like we die. We, because we deserve it. They, well, because Adam sinned--"As in Adam all die."

Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.For he who has died has been freed from sin.Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 6:3-11 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans6:3-11&version=NKJV

But because Jesus died, and we died in Him, we should act as though we are already saved--we should walk in newness of life--"For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection"

Do you not know what the word reconcile means? And why it's used by Paul?

Reconcile: 1. To conciliate anew; to call back into union and friendship the affections which have been alienated; to restore to friendship or favor after estrangement; as, to reconcile men or parties that have been at variance.

Why do you ask? It isn't enough that Jesus died, even if it reconciles us to God. Separation isn't the main problem--death is the main problem. And that's fixed by the resurrection, after which, death has no more dominion over us.

Of course we are reconciled to God through the death of Christ. He paid our penalty--death--promised by God to Adam for his sin in the Garden and executed on all the offspring of Adam, including infants, if they don't remain alive until adult-hood.

See my posts #7 and #13.

Good thoughts. I'm just saying that if there's a second chance for infants, why not for others, too, with special circumstances. You gave the special circumstances of someone who's mentally retarded and 40 years old. That's valid. Why not mentally ignorant of the law and the gospel and 40 years old?

On the other hand, why can't the infants be held accountable for the law they have written on their hearts? Maybe if they covet their brother's position, like Jacob did, holding on to his brother's heel when delivered.

It's just an idea, and I don't know that it needs to be debated here.

 

[Clete]

Yet, children still die. If the wages of sin is death, why do they receive those wages?

Because our flesh has not yet been redeemed and thus bad thing, injury, disease, death, etc still happen.

Be careful not to conflate life with existence or physical death with spiritual death. They aren't the same thing. One's soul will exist forever. If your soul departs from your body, this is physical death. If your soul is separated from God, Who is Life itself, this is spiritual death. When Adam rebelled the result was a curse upon all mankind in that we, as a race, were separated from God (i.e. spiritually dead) but Christ's work at Calvary undid that curse and so all are reckoned by God to be alive (spiritually) on that basis until such time as they purposely sin against God.

Romans 5:18 Therefore, as through [h]one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one[i] Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.​

​

Romans 7:9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.​

 

[Clete]

Good thoughts. I'm just saying that if there's a second chance for infants, why not for others, too, with special circumstances. You gave the special circumstances of someone who's mentally retarded and 40 years old. That's valid. Why not mentally ignorant of the law and the gospel and 40 years old?

Many have asked such questions throughout the ages. Virtually all the answers are speculation, at best. There are two things that we know for certain....

1. God is not obligated to save anyone at all.
2. God is just. Whatever someone gets, he'll get it because he deserves it and, moreover, he'll agree that he deserves it.

In other words, it's salvation isn't about justice, it's mercy and that by grace. Meaning simply that God is not morally required to save anyone at all. If there were no gospel, no offer of salvation whatsoever, and every last human being ended up in Hell, that would be justice. It is not unjust, nor any other sort of unrighteousness on God's part if His mercy does not extend to every person. Having said that, God is neither dull nor incompetent. Whatever course of action He takes, you can rest assured that it the wisest possible course.

Note that nothing I've said here precludes God deciding to deal with certain individuals differently than most - the "special circumstances" folks you refer to. However, it should be pointed out that there are no such persons who have a normally functioning mind who are ignorant of either God or of His law.

Romans 1:20 & 32 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,... who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.​

Clete

 

[marke]

Many have asked such questions throughout the ages. Virtually all the answers are speculation, at best. There are two things that we know for certain....

1. God is not obligated to save anyone at all.
2. God is just. Whatever someone gets, he'll get it because he deserves it and, moreover, he'll agree that he deserves it.

In other words, it's salvation isn't about justice, it's mercy and that by grace. Meaning simply that God is not morally required to save anyone at all. If there were no gospel, no offer of salvation whatsoever, and every last human being ended up in Hell, that would be justice. It is not unjust, nor any other sort of unrighteousness on God's part if His mercy does not extend to every person. Having said that, God is neither dull nor incompetent. Whatever course of action He takes, you can rest assured that it the wisest possible course.

Note that nothing I've said here precludes God deciding to deal with certain individuals differently than most - the "special circumstances" folks you refer too. However, it should be pointed out that there are no such persons who have a normally functioning mind who are ignorant of either God or of His law.

Romans 1:20 & 32 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,... who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.​

Clete

Accountability does not fall on humans as soon as they turn 20. Accountability is awakened in sinners who are exposed to the Word of God and understand what God shows them, regardless of age. I got my Texas driver's license before I turned 14, and these little children offended God well before they turned 20 and suffered the consequences.

2 Kings 2:23-25
King James Version

23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.​

 

[Right Divider]

Accountability does not fall on humans as soon as they turn 20. Accountability is awakened in sinners who are exposed to the Word of God and understand what God shows them, regardless of age. I got my Texas driver's license before I turned 14, and these little children offended God well before they turned 20 and suffered the consequences.

2 Kings 2:23-25​

King James Version​

​

23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.​

24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.​

I don't think that you understand the topic.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Accountability does not fall on humans as soon as they turn 20.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Accountability is awakened in sinners who are exposed to the Word of God and understand what God shows them, regardless of age. I got my Texas driver's license before I turned 14,

And?

and these little children offended God well before they turned 20 and suffered the consequences.

2 Kings 2:23-25
King James Version

23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.​

This passage is often cited by atheists who want to accuse those who love God of cursing "little children."

The Hebrew doesn't support the idea, though.

Please read this article so that you don't make the same mistake again:

Why did the Prophet Elisha curse the “youths” for making fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24)? | GotQuestions.org

Why did the Prophet Elisha curse the “youths” for making fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24)? Is making fun of a man’s baldness a good enough reason to be mauled by a bear?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Clete]

What's interesting about this is that I recently (within the last few years) came across a scientific article that says that the "rational" part of the brain doesn't reach full development until 25, and the brain takes another few years for the brain to reach full maturity, around age 30.

Understanding the Teen Brain - Health Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center

www.urmc.rochester.edu

Adolescent Maturity and the Brain: The Promise and Pitfalls of Neuroscience Research in Adolescent Health Policy - PMC

Longitudinal neuroimaging studies demonstrate that the adolescent brain continues to mature well into the 20s. This has prompted intense interest in linking neuromaturation to maturity of judgment. Public policy is struggling to keep up with ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I've always felt like Lion could have put a finer point on this part of his argument. I don't think, and I suspect that Lion would agree, that "full maturity" isn't necessary. The point is that, because we don't come out of the womb with fully mature brains, it would stand to reason that....

1. Very young children do not bear the same responsibility at fully mature adults, and...
2 The age of accountability, if there is one, would occur nearer the end of that process than the beginning.

I agree that Lion's essay would seem to suggest that full maturity and accountability coincide with one another, but I don't believe that it has to do so. It would seem that by the age of 20, ones brain has matured SUFFICIENTLY to make you culpable for your own immoral action.

I'm going to acknowledge all of these verses as being support for his position, but also for my position.

Why?

Because my position, as stated above, is that the 20 years of age being the age of accountability, applies only to Israel.

Clete, you and I both know that Israel had a "corporate" relationship with God as part of their covenant with Him, as opposed to the "individual" relationships that believers in the Body of Christ have with Him.

Specifically with Israel, God, throughout the Old Testament, deals with Israel as a singular entity, rather than a group of individuals, and as such, it would make sense that He would, especially in the case of Israel crossing over into the promised land, have a "corporate" standard for those whom he would allow to enter, that being 20 years old, since, as I would argue, it's the upper bounds for when humans acquire "the knowledge of good and evil," which is supported by ALL of the evidence this person gives, and as such, I claim the evidence for my position.

I believe that God using 20 years old as the age of accountability (for Israel) is simply a matter of God being merciful to those who are younger who might or might not know better.

I see no biblical evidence that 20 years of age was used as a special case for the nation of Israel nor does it seem possible that there could be any such evidence. The things that pertained to Israel were about religious rituals, human government and various other things that had to do with bringing the Messiah into the world. The age at which one becomes morally culpable for his actions is not a religious issue, its a moral one, is it not? If it is unjust to hold a child responsible for his actions in Israel, is it somehow just to do so in Rome? Were Gentile children who died, doomed? I very much doubt it.

While I agree that an appeal to common sense is a fallacy (for common sense isn't always right), I will point out that this begs the question that people are incapable of making decisions before they are deemed capable by some arbitrarily set age limit.

It isn't arbitrary, so says the very evidence that you claimed as evidence for your own side.

True, in most modern societies, people have to jump through legal hoops in order to show that they are capable (in this case, capable simply means "able to make legally binding choices) individuals who can make decisions for themselves, though I will point out that even the US allows for special circumstances (which are rare, of course) where people under the age of 18 (let alone 20) are able to act as adults.

The exception proves the rule. In other words, if the rule was fundamentally invalid then there couldn't be valid grounds for making exceptions to it. The fact that there are valid exceptions, presupposes that the rule is valid generally.

And let's not forget that even these laws in place we have today were not always in place. For example, Joseph was as young as 17 years old (typical ages was late teens, 17-19 years old) when he married Jesus' earthly mother, Mary (who was likely 13-16 years old), which was common at the time. David was about 10-15 years old when God determined that He would be king through Samuel, and he wasn't serving in the army when he defeated Goliath, which is evidence that he hadn't yet reached the age of... yup, you guessed it... 20 years old.

Once again, the exception proves the rule. Otherwise, what you'd be doing here is providing a counter example as a means of invalidating the concept of ANY age of accountability whatsoever.

In any case, I would argue that some people are mature enough to make such decisions, and even if they don't fully comprehend the consequences of their decisions, they can still make them. I will support this with scripture later in this post.

I agree that there would be exceptions to the general rule.

First of all, I believe, based on the arguments in this post, that Kebold and Harris (the Columbine shooters, in case anyone reading this wasn't aware), are in hell.

The only reason this wouldn't be the case is if they repented of their sins before God before they killed themselves.

Oh, I wouldn't be so quick to make that judgment. Not only were those boys pubescent teenagers, which is mind-bending enough by itself, but they were on mind altering drugs (anti-depressants) that their own parents put them on and which have been shown to cause suicidal (and worse) thoughts in teenagers. Their crime was unspeakably horrible, and they were pretty obviously hostile toward Christians and toward God Himself and so I'd be rather surprised to find them in Heaven, but God's grace is sufficient to cover even the worst of sin and so if God chooses to not hold their sin against them due to their age, who am I to argue?

Also agreed.

In fact, this lends support to my position, more than it does to the argument that 20 years old is the standard for everyone.

How so?

I do not make this argument, however...



It doesn't prove the point. It certainly doesn't argue against it, though.

While it may not prove it, it certainly presupposes/concedes it.

Alright. So, what is my evidence and argument from the Scriptures that supports the position I hold, that the age of responsibility is different per person? The whole chapter of Romans 2.

Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things.And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God?Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,who “will render to each one according to his deeds”:eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek;but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.For there is no partiality with God.For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law(for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified;for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves,who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them )in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God,and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law,and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness,an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law.You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law?For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written.For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law?For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. - Romans 2:1-29 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans2:1-29&version=NKJV

I remember Bob explaining this passage, and the explanation he gave is what informed my position on this particular topic. I'm listening to his Bible study on Romans 2 as I type this out to see if I'm remembering correctly that he explained it there (and 15:20 in, I'm becoming more and more sure of it).

Paul was not speaking of those in the Body, and he's not speaking of those who have rejected the gospel.

He's speaking of those who have never heard any gospel message, from the time of Adam to this very day.

He's speaking of those without law who have never heard of Moses, Jesus, or Paul, of those without law who only know the law written on their hearts.

If you have the Romans Bible study, I recommend listening to it before continuing to read, at least from about 14 minutes in or so.

Bob quotes Luke 12:48, which says:

But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more. - Luke 12:48 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke12:48&version=NKJV

Hmm, that doesn't sound like an age restriction of 20 years old and older to me, even given the context, which was the parable of the faithful servant and the evil servant.

But it's an important principle that I think Lion, the person you're quoting, completely missed.

"To whom much is given, much will be required." Meaning that if someone is given a responsibility, and they do not maintain their responsibility, then they are accountable for their actions. And if they are not given something, then they are not accountable for it. Maybe you can see where I'm going with this.

I didn't see your point at first but it became clear later on.
I will indeed listen to Bob's Romans bible study though. It's one of my favorites and this is as good an excuse to listen to it again as I can think of! I'll be paying very close attention to the section on chapter 2. I'll definitely let you know if what he says changes my mind at all.

To give a bit of personal testimony:

I got saved when I was in fifth grade. I will stand by that until I can be shown to be wrong, or until Jesus Himself tells me when I meet Him, whichever comes first. For context, and I believe this is important, I grew up going to a Lutheran school from 1st through 4th grade. We attended one of two different churches, one was Christ's Church of Joplin (5200 E 32nd Street Joplin, MO 64804), and the other one was Calvary Chapel, which used to be at the end of the road that our street (which was a dead end) connected to, but has since moved, it seems. Either way, as a child, I had a good Christian upbringing, but I definitely wouldn't consider myself to have been saved, despite me being somewhat enthusiastic in Sunday school sometimes (though, I hated the singing and the loud music, and couldn't have cared less for the dancing and "speaking in tongues" that some of the other members did, but it was church). I the more important part though was that I went to a Lutheran school, and we even had chapel services during school hours on Wednesdays, if I remember correctly. Needless to say, I wasn't taught "the gospel proper" while I lived in Joplin.

That changed in fifth grade, after we moved from Joplin, MO, to Independence, MO. I was enrolled in Tri City Christian School (which I just found out was apparently permanently closed three years ago... https://www.thepitchkc.com/once-led...ity-baptist-church-in-independence-downsizes/), which was a large Baptist church with a K-12 school program. I was in fifth grade at the time, and one day the teacher told us to put our heads down, and told us about how we were in danger of going to hell. I don't remember exactly what she said, but it was convincing enough that I decided to accept Christ as my savior right there in class.

So what does my testimony have to do with this subject?

I think it demonstrates the point Jesus, Paul, and Bob made, that someone is accountable the moment they hear the gospel presented to them.

Much like pain is simply awareness that something is wrong with our bodies, when the gospel is preached, be that of the Heavens declaring the glory of God, or the Law of Moses, or the Gospel of the Grace of God, it is making the person to whom it is preached aware of their situation. I was made aware of the fact, in fifth grade, that I needed a Savior, that I was destined for Hell unless I turned to Him.

This is why I think that the "age of accountability" differs from person to person, as it's not just a matter of maturity, but also of when someone is presented with the gospel, if they're able to understand it.

Okay, so I'm going to try to tip-toe through this point because I don't want to come off as trying to down play the importance of your childhood faith.

There's a difference between making a decision to follow Christ and to place your allegiance with God vs. being saved from the consequences of sins you've committed against Him. The person telling you that you were in danger of going to Hell was only correct in the sense that everyone, if they live long enough, is going to consciously rebel against God and place themselves on the path of a deserved damnation and so, yes, as a human being in a sin fallen world, you were indeed in danger of going to Hell. Not only that, but your decision to accept Christ as your savior put you on a path that was very likely to lead to exactly that, your salvation. As such, it was a good and proper thing for you to do as a child - very good. It was, however, a pro-active salvation, if you'll allow the phrase. In other words, it was about sins you would commit in the future, not ones that were already being held against you because there weren't any that were being held against you.

Now, having said that, I have to point out that what I just did was a classic begging the question fallacy. It only follows if my side of this debate is true. My point, however, is that your having told the story does the same thing in that your point only follows IF your side of the debate is true and so your personal experience doesn't actually argue the point that I think you intended it to argue. A person on either side of the issue would simply interpret what was happening in a different way.

For example: A mentally retarded person may live to be 40 years old, but never reach his age of accountability, due to the fact that he may simply just not be able to comprehend the difference between right and wrong, whereas someone who's a genius at 10 years old (not talking about me in fifth grade, by the way, haha) may recognize that there is a difference between what is good and evil, and choose to do either, intentionally.

To whom much is given, much will be required. And to whom much more is given, all the more will be required.

Thus, the age of accountability is the point in someone's life when they are presented with the choice between right and wrong, and they knowingly choose to do wrong.

I agree that there can be exception to the general rule but if simply choosing to do wrong is where the bar is set then almost all three year olds can be lost.

I clearly remember the first time my oldest child intentionally lied to me. She got a vigorous spanking so as to teach her that lying wasn't going to be tolerated and that she'd rather not lie but she didn't need to be taught that it was wrong. She knew it was wrong when she did it.

In fact, I think you might be thinking of the age of accountability in the wrong way. If what you just said here is correct then there isn't any age of accountability at all because immoral actions cannot be performed in ignorance. If you take something that doesn't belong to you but you believed that you were permitted to do so, you are not guilty stealing (i.e. the sin). Acts that are immoral have to have been done with the intent of wrong doing or else its something other than a sin (i.e. an accident or whatever). So the age of accountability is precisely about whether one is held accountable for things done as a child that were immoral and therefore willfully wrong, not that were done in ignorance or by accident.

Harris and Klebold, even if they had never rejected the gospel, had the law written in their hearts, and knew that murder was wrong, yet they proceeded to murder 13 others and then kill themselves. They knowingly did wrong, and by the time of the mass murder, had already reached the age of accountability, despite never reaching 20 years of age.

Agreed but we're talking about the age of accountability, not the age of awareness of right vs wrong. Again, almost all three year olds know its wrong to lie to their father.

One more thing I'll add, because I'm starting to ramble and potentially repeat myself:

I will say that I recommitted my life to Christ around 2015 (I was 22 by the end of 2015), which was within a year after being introduced to Bob's radio ministry. I wasn't living the Christian life, and Bob's show forced me to realize that. I won't go into details, but I don't believe I lost my salvation at any point after fifth grade, or that I didn't get saved in fifth grade, but I recognized that if I wanted to be an example to others, I needed to get my life straightened out. One could argue that that is when I was truly saved, but I think my statements in this post show otherwise.

It really does depend on the semantics here. I would certainly agree that there was never a time when you lost your salvation but over the decades that I've had this discussion with other Christians (maybe a dozen or so times now) there has always been a point where they make this exact point. It was certainly true of me! In fact, your own story runs somewhat parallel to my own in terms of time line.
I was saved, for want of a better word, in the third grade and was baptized the Sunday before Easter in whatever year that was. I stayed in church throughout my childhood and always believed in God and in Christ and in Calvary and grace and all of that, but there was a time, in my early twenties when it was impressed upon me the fact that God didn't have to do any of what we refer to as the gospel. He didn't have to do any of it but chose to do it because He loves us. It was at that point that I believe that my faith sort of became my own and not something that I believed because my family believed it or whatever. Shortly after that, I became almost obsessed with the bible and the writings of Paul in particular. So much so, that I wrote out all of the Pauline epistles by hand. The point being that I think that this sort of "coming of age" happens with all those who came to Christ as a child and it seems to me that this is when we are truly saved in the sense of being sealed with the Holy Spirit. Not because our childhood faith was invalid but only that, as a child, there was nothing being held against us and thus no need for God to make an earnest payment against our salvation.

Clete

 

[Clete]

Accountability does not fall on humans as soon as they turn 20. Accountability is awakened in sinners who are exposed to the Word of God and understand what God shows them, regardless of age. I got my Texas driver's license before I turned 14, and these little children offended God well before they turned 20 and suffered the consequences.

2 Kings 2:23-25​

King James Version​

​

23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.​

24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.​

Great. Thanks for expressing your personal opinion and quoting a completely irrelevant and out of context verse of the bible.

Would you care to actually read the opening post and offer a substantial rebuttal to any of its arguments?

 

[DAN P]

In fact, I'm going to go so far as to claim the entire track of Bob's study of Romans 2 as evidence for my position. I'm still listening to it, and more and more I'm considering how what he says applies to this topic, and seeing it fit.

And I believe that Rom 9:11 will be the answer you are LOOKING FOR the best answer available and that word is ELECTION >

I have to go , but will be back THURSDAY , the 9 and see if you disagree or agree ?

dan p

 

[JudgeRightly]

And I believe that Rom 9:11 will be the answer you are LOOKING FOR the best answer available and that word is ELECTION >

I have to go , but will be back THURSDAY , the 9 and see if you disagree or agree ?

dan p

Romans 9-11 (not just 9:11) is specifically dealing with Israel (who is known as "the Elect Lady," which fits with other figurative descriptions of Israel throughout the Bible...).

"Election" has very little to do with this topic at all.

 

[Derf]

Because our flesh has not yet been redeemed and thus bad thing, injury, disease, death, etc still happen.

Sounds like we are all under some kind of judgment due to Adam's sin.

Be careful not to conflate life with existence or physical death with spiritual death. They aren't the same thing.

Is this you talking, or is this biblical?

One's soul will exist forever. If your soul departs from your body, this is physical death. If your soul is separated from God, Who is Life itself, this is spiritual death.

Something that is never defined such in the bible.

When Adam rebelled the result was a curse upon all mankind in that we, as a race, were separated from God (i.e. spiritually dead)

What we were told would happen is that Adam was made from dust and would return to dust. Where did the spiritually dead stuff come from? Its an extrapolation from scripture.

but Christ's work at Calvary undid that curse and so all are reckoned by God to be alive (spiritually) on that basis until such time as they purposely sin against God.

Romans 5:18 Therefore, as through [h]one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one[i] Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.​

​

What's the free gift? Spiritual life, or life? Of its spiritual life only, then you won't be resurrected--you already got your free gift. If it's life, then you have the most significant part of the gift remaining--the resurrection. Right now you have God's spirit dwelling in you, but that's just a down payment, or earnest, of what you will get.
Ephesians 1:13-14 KJV — In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

You can see that the purchased possession is not yet redeemed, but we have the promise (of something future). The important thing is the resurrection, not of our flesh, but of us, and it hasn't happened to us yet--but we are assured of it! That's why we can give an answer for the hope that is within us--we have His promised, sealed by His Spirit. But you don't hope for something you already have.
Romans 8:24 KJV — For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?

Romans 7:9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.​

You refuted your own application in the next post. Ask yourself...When Paul was alive without the law? If before the age of accountability, then it wasn't the commandment that revived sin, was it? And if it was, then how could sin be revived if it never existed in him? I'm still thinking about this one--i could be wrong.

 

[marke]

I don't think that you understand the topic.

Perhaps.

1 Corinthians 8:2
And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

 

[marke]

Great. Thanks for expressing your personal opinion and quoting a completely irrelevant and out of context verse of the bible.

Would you care to actually read the opening post and offer a substantial rebuttal to any of its arguments?

I believe God holds those accountable who know and reject the truth but I do not believe He holds those who have not known and rejected the truth accountable.

Acts 17:30
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Romans 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

2 Peter 2:21
For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.

 

[marke]

Please read this article so that you don't make the same mistake again:

Why did the Prophet Elisha curse the “youths” for making fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24)? | GotQuestions.org

Why did the Prophet Elisha curse the “youths” for making fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24)? Is making fun of a man’s baldness a good enough reason to be mauled by a bear?

www.gotquestions.org

Job 32:16-18
King James Version

16 When I had waited, (for they spake not, but stood still, and answered no more
17 I said, I will answer also my part, I also will shew mine opinion.
18 For I am full of matter, the spirit within me constraineth me.​

 

[JudgeRightly]

Job 32:16-18
King James Version

16 When I had waited, (for they spake not, but stood still, and answered no more
17 I said, I will answer also my part, I also will shew mine opinion.
18 For I am full of matter, the spirit within me constraineth me.​

When someone tells you you've made a mistake, your first response shouldn't be to double down on it.

 

[Right Divider]

Perhaps.

1 Corinthians 8:2
And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

Another out of context, random Bible search.

 

[marke]

When someone tells you you've made a mistake, your first response shouldn't be to double down on it.

When someone convinces me I made a mistake I usually admit it.