Do Babies go to Heaven?

[Salty]

I just added a poll!
I know I just stated Babies 1 year and under - I could have made that 2, 3, or 4 years old - but I just went with age 1.

If a newborn baby dies - will he go to Heaven?
Why or why not - or do we even know?
This would include babies who have been aborted

Some talk about the age of accountability
Granted that is not a solid Bible doctrine -
but does Scripture allude to it?

In addition - lets consider those who are
mentally retarded - specifically those whose mental
age is less than 10 years of age. Would such an individual
be on his way to Heaven - if he never understood about
salvation and repentance?

Lets keep this discussion very civil
AND THIS IS "A C vs A FREE DISCUSSION!"
(c vs a is subject to immediate deletion!)
(if you want to go in that direction - feel free to start a new thread)

IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND C vs A - that specifically means for this thread that
we will not bring up the doctrine of election. --- If you want to go in that direction - start a new thread.

This thread is now open for discussion

 

[Reformed]

If a newborn baby dies - will he go to Heaven?

I am glad that you chose a simple topic to discuss.

You ask a question that is not as easy as pointing to a specific verse and saying "There!"

The framers of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith addressed this question based on what scripture reveals about the nature of God and His revealed will regarding the effectual call. They wrote:

10.3. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who works when, and where, and how He pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

They maintained that:

1.(snip)
2. Infants, and those "who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word" must be "elect persons" in order to be saved.
3. The framers of the Confession throw their lack of definite understanding on the mercy of God.

In the end, with a lack of clear biblical revelation on this matter, all any of us can do is mimic the framers of the 1689 LBC. We must admit that we do not know, and trust in the goodness and mercy of God.

 

[Cathode]

If a newborn baby dies - will he go to Heaven?
Why or why not - or do we even know?
This would include babies who have been aborted

Some talk about the age of accountability
Granted that is not a solid Bible doctrine -
but does Scripture allude to it?

In addition - lets consider those who are
mentally retarded - specifically those whose mental
age is less than 10 years of age. Would such an individual
be on his way to Heaven - if he never understood about
salvation and repentance?

Lets keep this discussion very civil
AND THIS IS "A C vs A FREE DISCUSSION!"
(c vs a is subject to immediate deletion!)
(if you want to go in that direction - feel free to start a new thread)

This thread is now open for discussion

What’s a C vs A free discussion ?

 

[kyredneck]

If a newborn baby dies - will he go to Heaven?

...or:

Are people born 'hellbound' due to Adam's transgression?

 

[kyredneck]

the age of accountability

9 And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; Ro 7

 

[kyredneck]

If a newborn baby dies - will he go to Heaven?

Ultimately the question lies here, with the Atonement:

"The Atonement of Christ: What did it REALLY Achieve ?" @Brightfame52

 

[MrW]

God allowed those 20 and below to enter the Promised Land, as the young didn’t know their “left hand from their right hand”.

I have no doubt babies and mentally infirm all go to Heaven.

 

[Salty]

What’s a C vs A free discussion ?

I have added to my op (post # 1) that should clear up any misunderstanding

 

[Cathode]

I have added to my op (post # 1) that should clear up any misunderstanding

Thanks mate.

 

[Brightfame52]

God allowed those 20 and below to enter the Promised Land, as the young didn’t know their “left hand from their right hand”.

I have no doubt babies and mentally infirm all go to Heaven.

So they dont need to be Justified by the Blood of Christ, their merit is infancy and mental deficiency ?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Genesis 18:25. Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

 

[Marooncat79]

Can God give infants the faith He requires to inherit eternal life?
Yes, He can

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Yes, they go to heaven. They are innocent until they are given the law, and disobey the law. Like everybody else throughout history.

1Jo 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Jas 4:17
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
Isa 7:16
For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

If we define sin and guilt as the Bible does, as disobedience of known law, this question is self-evidently simple.
If we define guilt as some abstract disease that is genetically passed down or inherited we find ourselves spinning around in circles wondering why the Bible isn't very clear about it.

 

[Brightfame52]

Can God give infants the faith He requires to inherit eternal life?
Yes, He can

Sure but those are gifts in and through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus

 

[Brightfame52]

Yes, they go to heaven. They are innocent until they are given the law, and disobey the law. Like everybody else throughout history.

1Jo 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Jas 4:17
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
Isa 7:16
For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

If we define sin and guilt as the Bible does, as disobedience of known law, this question is self-evidently simple.
If we define guilt as some abstract disease that is genetically passed down or inherited we find ourselves spinning around in circles wondering why the Bible isn't very clear about it.

So seems here some folk go to eternal glory through their innocence ! Thats for their own righteousness !

 

[HeirofSalvation]

So seems here some folk go to eternal glory through their innocence ! Thats for their own righteousness !

Righteousness is not defined by being an infant.
Sin is defined by being aware of the law and breaking it.
We all become guilty when we knowingly disobey the law. Babies aren't "righteous" they are simply babies. Don't let Theological hang-ups cause you to over-look the simplicity of concepts like sin, guilt etc.
Otherwise, in order to avoid God sending babies to hell, we have to hallucinate God simply giving faith and righteousness to an infant incapable of exercising faith; something never hinted at alluded to, or spoken of, in the Bible whatsoever.
Alternatively, we just accept God sending infants to hell because they inherited guilt somehow, and had no opportunity to hear the gospel, understand it and repent.
Neither is a palatable option for good reasons, and neither fits any meaningful definition of justice or love.

My solution: Define sin, and by definition guilt the way Scripture and common sense do and the problem simply does not exist.

All eternal life is the gift of God in Christ regardless of whether one repented, or was never adjudicated guilty of sins they were not intellectually capable of committing. It isn't "righteous" any more than an animal is "righteous".

 

[Brightfame52]

Righteousness is not defined by being an infant.
Sin is defined by being aware of the law and breaking it.
We all become guilty when we knowingly disobey the law. Babies aren't "righteous" they are simply babies. Don't let Theological hang-ups cause you to over-look the simplicity of concepts like sin, guilt etc.
Otherwise, in order to avoid God sending babies to hell, we have to hallucinate God simply giving faith and righteousness to an infant incapable of exercising faith; something never hinted at alluded to, or spoken of, in the Bible whatsoever.
Alternatively, we just accept God sending infants to hell because they inherited guilt somehow, and had no opportunity to hear the gospel, understand it and repent.
Neither is a palatable option for good reasons, and neither fits any meaningful definition of justice or love.

My solution: Define sin, and by definition guilt the way Scripture and common sense do and the problem simply does not exist.

All eternal life is the gift of God in Christ regardless of whether one repented, or was never adjudicated guilty of sins they were not intellectually capable of committing. It isn't "righteous" any more than an animal is "righteous".

So babies bypass Christ for Eternal Life and gain it by their own innocence.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

So babies bypass Christ for Eternal Life and gain it by their own innocence.

No.
I already answered this in the post you qoted

All eternal life is the gift of God in Christ

That was me......already.

 

[Cathode]

Can tell I you something from my understanding in the spirit, what have seen, experienced and meditated on for many years. This is deeply personal, and an insight into Jesus and The Fathers heart that I haven’t shared with anyone. And as a Catholic, I have to leave final judgement to the Church’s ruling. So it’s not private interpretation in any way.

What I have experienced in the field visiting the sick, outside abortion clinics, street ministry, nursing homes and the behaviour of Angels is all I have. I don’t have any theological training, all I have is the scripture preached to my ears each day at church, and my experience doing handover to Jesus to recommend me. So I am holding out a bit of a pearl to people, but I’m among brothers who love Jesus and it has to be said.

So they dont need to be Justified by the Blood of Christ, their merit is infancy and mental deficiency ?

Their merit is their innocent victimhood “ Lambs to the slaughter “, who do they resemble when they leave this earth and appear in the Hands of The Eternal Father who formed them in the womb with unfathomable love.
What does a helpless, rejected, forgotten and misunderstood in pig ignorance, bloody mess resemble, what does The Eternal Father see when He fixes His gaze on these helpless victims.

The Father is Transfixed by The Son, He is The Most Loving of Fathers.

People think of The Father as hard and unyielding, like the God of the Old Testament. Totally, totally wrong. It is man that is hard and unyielding, stubborn and proud.

One drop of Jesus blood would have easily paid the price. But Jesus gave all to save all.
Nailed innocent and fixed helpless on the Cross to save the innocent and helpless. The voiceless nobodies. The drug addict, I saw Jesus Face. The spastic girl, I saw Jesus Face. What is done even to the least of these nobodies, is done to Jesus.

Jesus said that when He was lifted up, that He would draw all men unto Himself, the Aborted, rejected, defective, nobodies and losers, Jesus Loves, wants and claimed, ransomed them all in His soul rending cry out to The Father with all His might.

People forget that The Father sees a very long way off and goes out a great distance to meet His Son, I call it The Father’s prerogative.

With these innocent victims that never had a chance, I see The Father going much further to make up the distance to His Son.

We have sacraments in the Church to help save people in the ordinary way, but God is not bound by the Sacraments, He can act outside them. Man wants to impose rules, but don’t get between The Father and The Son.

The distance The Father runs to greet His limping or collapsed prodigal Son wherever he is, is His prerogative entirely.

Yes there are House Rules in The Fathers House, but a long way off from The House The Father will make fit what He recognises as His Son, with sandals, ring and Robe.

It was Jesus that made us recognisable to The Father. Love Him and thank Him forever.

 

[Salty]

... And as a Catholic, I have to leave final judgement to the Church’s ruling. So it’s not private interpretation in any way. ...

Cathode - that statement is so wrong while being so sad.
First - define the "Church" - is it one mans decision.- Over the past 17 centuries. the RCC has made many decisions - which has many exemptions: for example - a priest must not be married . From Wiki: the Vatican acknowledged that the policy has not always been enforced and that rules had been secretly established by the Vatican to protect non-celibate clergy who violated their vows of celibacy.[2][3][4] Some clergy have also been allowed to retain their clerical state after fathering children.[2][3][4]

Reminds me of Jim Baker - I was watching his TV show - and they showed a clip of a man stating he was sending $1`,000 to Jim and he said "I dont care what Jim Bakker does with this money...." at that moment I specifically remember thinking that someday that man would regret that statement. then not too much latter - it all came out as to what Jim had been doing with some of that money.

Granted, I often listen to men of God in regards to the interruption of Scripture, BUT before I fully accept such belief, I will do my own research!

People often know WHAT they Believe - they just don't know WHY they believe it.!
-Bobby Tutton