Calvinism needs to be Redefined

[icthus]

How can you maintain doctrines of "Election" and "Limited Atonement", and believe that all infants, not just those who are "elect", who die will go to heaven? That this is the view of heavy-weight Calvinists, like, Charles Hodge, W. G. T. Shedd, and B. B. Warfield, can be seen from this link, http://www.reformed.org/calvinism/boettner/infants_boettner.html

This, of course raises the question, when does a person become "elect"? If both the infants who are elect and non-elect go to heaven when they die, then, we can only conclude from this that Christ died for the non-elect as well? We read of David's son by Bathsheba, that when David heard that he had died, how he celebrated by a feast, and said, that, "Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me" (2 Samuel 12:23). There is no evidence that David's son was part of the "elect", yet we read of David's confidence that his son had gone to heaven, where he would join him. Clearly showing that all who die in infancy will be saved.

 

[Monergist]

The question of whether infants are 'saved' if they die is not an easy one one to answer. I have yet to be convinced that scripture gives a clear answer. We may safely state that elect infants who die in infancy go to heaven; beyond that we may not make dogmatic assertions one way or the other, as scripture simply does not tell us.

But this question in no way stands Calvinism on its head. Its ironic that non-calvinists will vehemently oppose Unconditional Election, and yet just as vehemently argue that God 'elects' some infants to salvation by taking their life before some assumed 'age of accountability.'

I think that the only thing that needs to be 'redefined' is your understanding of Calvinism.

 

[Wes Outwest]

And indeed, David's son was conceived in a sinful act!

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by Monergist:
The question of whether infants are 'saved' if they die is not an easy one one to answer. I have yet to be convinced that scripture gives a clear answer. We may safely state that elect infants who die in infancy go to heaven; beyond that we may not make dogmatic assertions one way or the other, as scripture simply does not tell us.

But this question in no way stands Calvinism on its head. Its ironic that non-calvinists will vehemently oppose Unconditional Election, and yet just as vehemently argue that God 'elects' some infants to salvation by taking their life before some assumed 'age of accountability.'

I think that the only thing that needs to be 'redefined' is your understanding of Calvinism.

You don't seem to understand Calvinism yourself. There is no doubt that they belief that all infants that die, and go to heaven, can only do so if Jesus had died for them in the first place. No one can be saved without the cross. The fact that even some of the best known Calvinistic theologians, admit that the death of Jesus was for all infants. Since it cannot be held that all infants are elect, then we have to conclude that Christ also died for the non-elect. This much has to be the only option.

The problem with you is, that you cannot, like most Calvinists I know, admit when they have been proven wrong, and accept what the Bible says. I note that you did not respond to my reference to David's son.

 

[Pastor Larry]

when does a person become "elect"?

Regardless of how you answer the first, the Bible answers this one. It says that we were elect from the beginning (2 Thess 2:13), from before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4).

You say that there is no evidence that David's son was part of the elect. But you must also admit that there is no evidence that he was not. The fact that he was where David would go indicates he was part of the elect. But either way, that is an argument from silence.

But none of this has anything to do with redefining Calvinism. As Monergist said, the thing that needs redefining is your understanding of Calvinism.

I personally would argue that all infants who die are elect infants. Some differ on that. The Bible is not explicit on where infants go when they die. A few years ago when we lost a baby, I read and studied it. I found great comfort in God's grace and sovereignty. I found books by Nash and MacArthur to be helpful books.

 

[FrankBetz]

OK, Larry define world?

Then tell us all how that Isaiah 59 is somehow done away and how we are dead in tresspasses and sins and yet as you say, we are elect and precious, "in Him", before the foundations of the world and yet still DEAD????

Hint: Calvinism is a false doctrine.

I thought the Bible still says "in Him is life" and "He came to give life, and that more abundantly"? And since anyone "in Him" has life, then praytell, how are they also dead and living?

Calvinism: the trap for the unlearned and unsuspecting. Those who listen to self acclaimed scholars. Brings death to missions and is in direct contradiction to the Great Commission and is therefore sin of disobedience. It's for all of you who refuse to READ your Bible!!

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />when does a person become "elect"?

Regardless of how you answer the first, the Bible answers this one. It says that we were elect from the beginning (2 Thess 2:13), from before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4).

You say that there is no evidence that David's son was part of the elect. But you must also admit that there is no evidence that he was not. The fact that he was where David would go indicates he was part of the elect. But either way, that is an argument from silence.

But none of this has anything to do with redefining Calvinism. As Monergist said, the thing that needs redefining is your understanding of Calvinism.

I personally would argue that all infants who die are elect infants. Some differ on that. The Bible is not explicit on where infants go when they die. A few years ago when we lost a baby, I read and studied it. I found great comfort in God's grace and sovereignty. I found books by Nash and MacArthur to be helpful books. </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry to hear about you loss, Larry.

How can you say that, "all infants who die are elect infants"? This is an impossibility. How can it be said that all who are born, but who die in infancy, are the elect of God? If God elects all infants, then why does He not elect all humans? Why does He not allow for everyone without exception the possibility of bring saved? Surely, if His love is for the dying infants to be saved, then He must also desire that all come to salvation through Jesus Christ? This causes difficulties with the mercy, grace, love and justice of God.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by FrankBetz:
OK, Larry define world?

In what context? World can mean a number of things. It can mean the material universe, the philosophy/worldview of the unbelievers, the realm of Satan, humankind, etc. Without a context, I can offer a proper definition.

Then tell us all how that Isaiah 59 is somehow done away

I don't think is has been done away. Nor does this have any relevance here. This is about babies. If you want to discuss Isa 59, start a thread.

and how we are dead in tresspasses and sins and yet as you say, we are elect and precious, "in Him", before the foundations of the world and yet still DEAD????

What is there to explain? God declares that his choice of us took place in eternity past. God declares that when we are born we are dead in trespasses and sins. I am not sure what the confusion is. But again, that is off topic. Take it somewhere else.

Hint: Calvinism is a false doctrine.

No it's not.

I thought the Bible still says "in Him is life" and "He came to give life, and that more abundantly"?

Yes it does. THat is what Calvinism teaches.

And since anyone "in Him" has life, then praytell, how are they also dead and living?

They aren't dead. Eph 2:1 tells us that the have been made alive, as does 2:5. But agian, off topic. Keep on topic or start your own thread.

Calvinism: the trap for the unlearned and unsuspecting. Those who listen to self acclaimed scholars. Brings death to missions and is in direct contradiction to the Great Commission and is therefore sin of disobedience. It's for all of you who refuse to READ your Bible!!

Several problems. 1) Calvinism is not for the unlearned and unsuspecting. As we have shown here, those without learning routinely misrepresent it. Secondly, it doesn't bring death to missions. In fact, every major modern missions movement in history was spawned out of Calvinism. Third, it isn't in direct contradiction to the Great Commission. It is the only tying that gives hope to the great commission. Fourth, it isn't the sin of disobedience. It is the doctrine that God has revealed. Fifth, I became a calvinist solely by reading my Bible. I realized how plain it was.

But all that is off topic. Keep this thread on topic, or start your own thread.

[ June 07, 2005, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

[Pastor Larry]

How can you say that, "all infants who die are elect infants"? This is an impossibility.

How is it impossible? I believe the testimony of Scripture is that infants who die go to heaven. That is the result of election, as I see it. I know you disagree about election, and that is fine. I was giving my perspective, and the perspective of hte majority of Calvinists that I know.

How can it be said that all who are born, but who die in infancy, are the elect of God?

Because the elect go to heaven. The non-elect don;t.

If God elects all infants, then why does He not elect all humans?

Ask him. I don't know. He hasn't told us.

Why does He not allow for everyone without exception the possibility of bring saved?

He does. All who will believe can be saved. Those who won't believe will not be saved.

This causes difficulties with the mercy, grace, love and justice of God.

Only because our minds are too small. With God, it causes no problems.

This is a difficult subject, and just for the record there is a very difficult question you aren't asking on which you can trap every Calvinist (and most arminians). I won't tell you what it is because I don't have an answer for it. I end up being very inconsistent, but that is due to my loyalty to Scripture in this matter.

But in the end, this really doesn't seem to have anything to do with redefining Calvinism.

 

[icthus]

Larry, you know full well that you are not being honest with your answers. Take my point and your response:

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does He not allow for everyone without exception the possibility of bring saved?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He does. All who will believe can be saved. Those who won't believe will not be saved."

How can you say this? According to Calvinism, Ephesians 2:8-9 shows that "faith is a gift" (actually Paul is saying that salvation is a gift, not faith), which God only gives to the elect, so that they can believe in Jesus as their Saviour and Lord. So, the "all" you are speaking of, really means "all the elect". You don't believe because you do not have this gift of faith. So, the offer cannot be sincerely to all. And there is a clear barrier that God has placed in the way of those who do not believe, since He does not give them this special faith.

 

[Pastor Larry]

How can I say that? Because that is what Scripture teaches. God isn't forcing men to reject him. The fact that I don't give you something doesn't mean you prevented from having it. If you don't have it, it is your own fault.

God hasn't placed any barrier. The only barrier to salvation is sin, and man's sin is his own fault, not God's.

So don't accuse me of being honest just becuase you don't understand the ramifications of your statement.

 

[Scott J]

Isn't the better question concerning infants how non-calvinists can think any of them go to heaven?

They believe that election is a result of a conscious, free will, human choice. Babies lack the capacity to make those kinds of willful choices therefore a baby has no ability to do his part.

They do willfully engage in deceit very early however- maybe even in the womb. So they are sinners, and willfully so, long before they have the mental maturity to understand the gospel and make the good choices necessary to secure salvation for themselves.

 

[icthus]

Originally posted by Scott J:
Isn't the better question concerning infants how non-calvinists can think any of them go to heaven?

They believe that election is a result of a conscious, free will, human choice. Babies lack the capacity to make those kinds of willful choices therefore a baby has no ability to do his part.

They do willfully engage in deceit very early however- maybe even in the womb. So they are sinners, and willfully so, long before they have the mental maturity to understand the gospel and make the good choices necessary to secure salvation for themselves.

Are you for real? Babies in the womb are engaging in deceit? I have shown that there are Scripture passages that teach that there is a time (of which only God knows), that an infant doe not know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. This was also clearly mentioned by God Himself:

"and should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons, who cannot descern between their right and their left..." (Jonah 4:11)

Why do you think that God mentions this? Why the special reference to the infants in this city, who had no knowledge of right or wrong? What do you make of what the Lord means here?

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by icthus:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:
Isn't the better question concerning infants how non-calvinists can think any of them go to heaven?

They believe that election is a result of a conscious, free will, human choice. Babies lack the capacity to make those kinds of willful choices therefore a baby has no ability to do his part.

They do willfully engage in deceit very early however- maybe even in the womb. So they are sinners, and willfully so, long before they have the mental maturity to understand the gospel and make the good choices necessary to secure salvation for themselves.

Are you for real? Babies in the womb are engaging in deceit?</font>[/QUOTE] Not me saying it. It was part of a news article about research on the unborn. They move willfully and may do things that cause the mother discomfort without being uncomfortable themselves.

Note that I did say maybe.

It is a long established fact that babies lie by crying when nothing is wrong. They do it because they are completely selfish and want attention. We are born self-centered and self-willed.

I have shown that there are Scripture passages that teach that there is a time (of which only God knows), that an infant doe not know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. This was also clearly mentioned by God Himself:

"and should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons, who cannot descern between their right and their left..." (Jonah 4:11)

Why do you think that God mentions this? Why the special reference to the infants in this city, who had no knowledge of right or wrong? What do you make of what the Lord means here?

You are reading your bias into the text and then claiming the text to establish a belief (ie. circular reasoning).

First, the text does not actually say anything about age or youth.

Second, physical death is being talked about. Your interpretation that this has anything to do with spiritual salvation is further undermined by the fact that God's pity on animals is attached to his pity for these 120,000 people.

All that aside, ignorance is nowhere in scripture established as a means of salvation.

 

[Bob Krajcik]

David, it seems, was regenerate while still upon his mother’s breast (Ps 22:9). John Baptist showed evidence of having been born again while still in his mothers womb (Luke 1:41; Gal 5:22). Of Jeremiah, it is said before he came out of the womb he was sanctified (Jer 1:5; 1Cor 1:30; 6:11; Rom 15:16). Then there is the infant son of David (2Sam 12:23). David seems to have had witness that the infant was saved. While there is some reason for questioning if these things are so or not, there is nevertheless reason for accepting these things as being so. God need not make these things open and clear now, but there is some reason for thinking they are so, unless you are inclined to be of the mind man must do the right things to gain salvation. Deal with the Scriptures while considering these things.

By grace,
Bob Krajcik
Mansfield, Ohio
June 7, 2005

 

[Bob Krajcik]

Matthew 21:16 (KJV) And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by FrankBetz:
Calvinism: the trap for the unlearned and unsuspecting. Those who listen to self acclaimed scholars. Brings death to missions and is in direct contradiction to the Great Commission and is therefore sin of disobedience. It's for all of you who refuse to READ your Bible!!

Uh... I am a missionary and I am moderatly calvinistic because I think it is biblical. In fact if I did not believe that God sovereingly works to save men, I would be greatly discouarged!!

Almost all of the great Baptist missionaries of the past were Calvinists- William Carrey, Judson. Charles Spurgeon was a dynamic soul winner and a strong Calvinist so don't beleive that bunk that Calvinism kills missions. The opposite is true- if fules it.

 

[Bob Krajcik]

Originally posted by icthus:
Are you for real? Babies in the womb are engaging in deceit?

As God reveals the heart to sinful man, pride vanishes. There is no room for self promotion when the contents of ones own heart is discovered. Much that is advanced by religion as gospel is no more than the promotion of self-adulation, merit mongering. God being subject to man in salvation is the height of folly in my opinion but is advanced as gospel to much of the religious world. It has not been shown me that men gain the fallen nature as they age, but instead they start with it. Men are told, flee youthful lusts (2Tim 2:22). All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Psalms 58:3 (KJV) The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Genesis 6:5 (KJV) And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Proverbs 22:15 (KJV) Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Isaiah 48:8 (KJV) Yea, thou heardest not; yea, thou knewest not; yea, from that time that thine ear was not opened: for I knew that thou wouldest deal very treacherously, and wast called a transgressor from the womb.

Matthew 15:18 (KJV) But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:

Luke 6:45 (KJV) A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

Mark 7:20 (KJV) And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

By grace,
Bob Krajcik
Mansfield, Ohio
June 7, 2005

 

[rc]

Praise God for you Bob K.! !!! (Even thogh your a buckeye!)

 

[Bob Krajcik]

Originally posted by rc:
Praise God for you Bob K.! !!! (Even thogh your a buckeye!)

Well, yes, I'm not refered to especially as a buckeye, but there are those that refer to me as a nut but I'm sure that is just short for buckeye