Featured A question only for the reformed, please.

Do you imagine that all Reformed believers agree on this subject?
How do you interpret 1 Corinthians 7:13-14?

If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

Reformed believers have different opinions here. For Reformed Lutherans and Presbyterians, these verses encourage infant baptism so that the children are in covenant until their faith can be confirmed. For Reformed Baptists these verses mean God may graciously use the believing spouse to show the children his saving grace. So...it should not surprise you that Reformed believers would hold differing opinions on the death of infants

 

I see that all aborted babies and dying infants all will get to heaven!

 

Reformed has not been defined on this thread, but pardon me if I missed it.
Weren't we all reformed when we were born again?

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
2 Corinthians 5:17

I guess 'cause it is in scripture, that you have to be an adult before you can get reborn and then go to heaven a bit later.
See? It's right there above.
No messing around with that old Old Testament where David says he'll see his boy again in glory.
2 Samuel 12:23 "I shall go to him."
No, it does not state "in glory" but scientific exegesis infers that it means he will go visit the boy's grave.

 

Indeed, as there are as many opinions regarding this issue as any about we baptists disagree over!

 

Sure am. Proud Particular Baptist and a 5 point TULIP Doctrine of Grace supporter ... saved by the predestined will of a sovereign God. Just like scripture actually says without needing to add what King David was "really feeling" or what "seems fair".

 

Yep, The Apostles and Spurgeon agreed with us!

 

Spurgeon may have believed that David meant he would see his son in heaven.
While I cannot disagree that David may see his son in heaven, I do not think that is what the verse in Samuel is saying.

 

ScarlettO in post #1 said non-Cal views were not wanted. Thus I assumed the posters making arguments for or against the premise (aborted babies burn in Hell forever) were Calvinists or leaned that way.

Posters by the numbers:
1) Reformed 1689
2) DaveG
3) Iconoclast
4) Canadyjd
5) AustinC
6) Reynolds
7) Scott Downey
8) Kyredneck
9) SGO
10) 1689 Dave
11) Yeshua1
12) Aaron
13) Batt4Christ
14) Martin Marprelate
15) Jerome
16) Tyndale1946
17) Apollard

Now it is perfectly possible some non-Cal's ignored the OP and posted anyway. But that is the list for what it is worth...

 

A loaded question, asked from self-righteous attitude, but I will answer anyway.

There are no babies in hell. There are no babies in heaven either.

 

Defarge's knitting.

 

You mean biblical don’t you

 

you do talk much nonsense!

 

explains much of the nonsense that you write on BB!

 

What amazes me is that many of our "so-called 'Doctrines'" were not as completely reveal in OT times. OTOH, I tend to marvel at how David's two sons in some ways present a 'Type' of our fallen but then redeemed nature through the working of Our Lord Jesus Christ. (1) David, who was said to be "A man after God's own heart, when he should have been leading the army against the enemy of God's people (a/k/a Satan) chose rather to retreat to his "Comfort Zone." Isn't that just like us today at times,,,"I'll relax & take it easy for a change...After all, I'm #1 in the kingdom, so I'll just lay off fighting Satan....for a little while!! (2) Instead of doing what he knew what to do, David sees a rather attractive, already married women (cf. Proverbs). " I'm the king & what the king wants, HE Gets!!" (3) Nathan (Like John the Baptist did) tells a little "object lesson" to the king & concludes: "THOU art the MAN!!" (4) Finally recognizing his sin , David is "Put under conviction." Yes, his soul is saved, but his reputation is marred, beyond any other human. (5) "BUT GOD"----See Romans 5:6-8 ---- Forgives David & David "Starts anew," but David also realized "The wages of sin is DEATH"; however David did NOT die. but was received into the hands & heart of a God who forgave the penalty of David's sin, but OTOH the unity of God's Kingdom was in peril. (6) David had another son, Solomon. While David did gather the materials for God's house, David would not be THE one to finish God's dwelling place for His people. Solomon built that magnificent temple & it became the focal point of worship for His people. (7) As time passed however, man's desire to worship his God waned to the extent that he even placed false gods where the I AM was once praised & honored & worshipped. (8) "BUT GOD" didn't immediately destroy that temple. Instead He sent prophet after prophet to urge His people to return, & by so doing, experience times of refreshing & restored fellowship with his Creator. Although God would have been fully justified in destroying the Jerusalem temple, how many years His patience lasted (9) Finally, God DID act & let His dwelling place be leveled. (10) "BUT GOD" ....."sent His Only Begotten Son" to take our place on the cross, i.e., Jesus paid a debt He didn't owe for us, who owed a debt we COULDN'T pay. CLIMAX... (11) We who've trusted Jesus are given life everlasting!!! That's MORE than we should rightfully expect, "BUT GOD" showed His great love for us in that, while we were yet sinners, CHRIST DID FOR US!!! Doesn't that say something about God's true nature? (12) Yet how many times do I act just like the Prodigal Son's self-righteous brother?? (13) "Father, forgive me, for I know not what I should be doing!!"

 

this is the twaddle that one expects from the "reformed" who have deulded themselves into thinking that they are the "elite"! Much like the JW's Mormons, etc, etc.

 

Ok, you have said all of this to me, so what exactly is your point, if you have one?

 

I had to post here because you just cannot allow these "reformed/calvinists" to respond unchallanged, as the majority of them on BB are way off what the Bible says on this important teaching!

 

This is like calling the Apostle Paul deluded, or Peter or John. Did they think they were elite because God chose them? Paul called himself the chief of sinners.

Now be honest, it is you who perceive the Reformed as elitist because they call out your contradictions and you are too bullheaded to actually look at scripture and consider that it is you who is in err.

 

Another Calvinist for the list, oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
ScarlettO in post #1 said non-Cal views were not wanted. Thus I assumed the posters making arguments for or against the premise (aborted babies burn in Hell forever) were Calvinists or leaned that way.

Posters by the numbers:
1) Reformed 1689
2) DaveG
3) Iconoclast
4) Canadyjd
5) AustinC
6) Reynolds
7) Scott Downey
8) Kyredneck
9) SGO
10) 1689 Dave
11) Yeshua1
12) Aaron
13) Batt4Christ
14) Martin Marprelate
15) Jerome
16) Tyndale1946
17) Apollard

Now it is perfectly possible some non-Cal's ignored the OP and posted anyway. But that is the list for what it is worth...