Even the elect still sin, so I do not see how your argument has any support.

Jesus was right. Everyone needs to be born again. We are not speaking off people who have sinned; we are speaking of those who have yet to sin. You err and run into left field when mixing the two.

Jesus himself used children to represent those that inherit eternal life. He chose them because of their innocence, otherwise you will have Jesus teaching that heaven is composed of a bunch of sinners.

The Bible states that the wages of sin is death NOT the wages of a sin nature is death.

You want to penalize babies for sins they have not committed.

Don't you think that's kind of ridiculous notion?

There is no just judge on this earth that would commit such a travesty, and I doubt the more Holier Judge woud do any different.

I think I am ready now, since, the alternative is nothing but ridiculous then it makes my answer even more glorious.

Answer:

The Bible states that the "wages of sin is death." The punishment for sin is death. Since babies have not commited sin yet, then that punishment is not applied.

Your requirement states that they must be born again. How is is that an elect can be born again without being born the first time?

conception is not birth. Silly. Are we going to play that equivocation game again?

Allan wrote:
For the record, I have no ill will towards Dr. Luciano. I agree with what he has said about how we should not change the Word to suit our theology.

I am glad that you have no ill-will towards me and I assure you that I do not have any towards you.

Nevertheless, I would like to ask you to put your money where your mouth is (sort of speak).

You stated that you agree with me that we should not change God's Word to suit our theology.

Now, I have given you one(I can give you more if you like) passage of scripture that if TAKEN LITERALLY it states that God loves all of humankind and desires to save them.

Can you give me a passage of Scripture that if TAKEN LITERALLY it would mean that GOd chose some to hell and others to heaven?

The key phrase is "taken literally."

I would think that if I and you would agree in such a basic principle that there should be at least ONE verse that you can demonstrate that if TAKEN LITERALLY will STATE the truth of unconditional election.

Discerning Believer wrote:
If children were born sinless and innocent as JD supposes, then why do some infants die in infancy?

Discerning Believer wrote:
This is soley an act of God, and therefore He regenerates and justifies infants who He elected that will die in infaancy. Non elect infants will not die in infancy.

You would think DB would have more respect when he approaches the Scripture.

Discerning Believer wrote:
Tell me then, how does an infant dying in infance get to heaven without being born again of the Spirit.

Counterintuitive. I like that word. Very good description of Calvinism.

I happen to believe that God is sovereign enough to do what he pleases, even if it is conditional election.

The real question is what does he state in His word?

ie.

I gave you a certain amount of money for groceries.

How much?

Enough?

....

Allan wrote:
Who are those that believe? Where in that verse does it say that they who believe were able to believe on their own unbiased will?

Allan wrote:
Where does it say that God did not choose to enable them to be able to choose to believe?

Allan wrote:
That which it does not say is important as it does NOT exclude what we think it means in favor of what you think it means.

It states, "For God so loved the world.."

jago wrote:
Yamil you asked "How much?"
Scripture says "the measure of faith" - enough

Don't worry, you will get use to it. There is plenty more where that came from.

It probably is hard for you to reconcile since your hermeneutics is perverted.

The text does not speak of salvation, let alone giving one faith.