God and babies/children

Reverend G. R. Gaudreau errancy@infidels.org
Mon, 31 May 1999 12:58:25 -0400 (00928187905, 003701beab86$cd501ee0$bd8c6395@grgaud) 


> G.R.Gaud

> No, what I am stating is what I wrote above: YOU were begging the

> question "how do you know that babies/children are hell-deserving?"

> and you still haven't answered that question. How do you know this?

> Show us chapter and verse instead of trying to turn the tables on

me,

> as is your wont when you're cornered. The rest of what you wrote is

> superfluous and so won't get a reply.


Matthew Bell
If I recall correctly I admitted that I did beg the question and
corrected my post accordingly. Some of us aren't afraid to admit to
moments of carelessness.

RevGaud
Yes, some of us aren't. And some of us do not run from tough problems
by trying to trun the tabels on their opponents in a debate. You
haven't answered the question you begged Matt.



> Matthew Bell

> How do you know that the purification of their sinful nature is not

> covered

> by the atonement of Christ?

>

> G.R.gaud

> Up to your old tricks again, I see. Trying to turn the tables one by

> redirecting the question at me. Sorry, won't work. You haven't

replied

> to what I wrote above. Are you going to do that, or will you just

keep

> trying to evade the problem?


Matthew Bell
Well, if you can assume then why can't I? I assume it is the most
reasonable and logical position that the blood of Christ atones and
purifies those sinful infants/babies/children who die in their sin. Oh
and there isn't a problem except in your mind.

Revgaud
I didn't assume anything Matt, I gave scriptures that you still
haven't answered. If you don't want to answer just say so and we'll
end this thread. Are you going to answer the question and respond to
the verses I gave, yes or no? And please don't waste my time with your
evasions.


Reverend G. R. Gaudreau
grgaud@bigfoot.com
http://campus.fortunecity.com/defiant/666/