Do You preach infants in Hell ?

[Earth Wind and Fire]

BLANKET STATEMENT:

If infants, the feeble minded, and the heathen must hear the gospel preached by man and actively repent and believe the truth, then there is no hope for them.

If this is your belief system, please embellish & clarify it via scripture.

Is this your belief or do you hold to something different?

I will tell you that after a sit down discussion with a Lutheran Church by me this Sunday that they do....so do Baptists hold to this doctrine also?

 

[Winman]

I personally do not believe in Original Sin (I used to) and do not believe any young child or person without understanding would go to hell if they died. I base this upon many scriptures, especially Ecc 7:29, Ezekiel chapter 18, Deu 1:39, Isa 7:16, Jon 4:11, all of Luke chapter 15, Rom 7:9-11, Rom 9:11, 1 Pet 2:25 just to name a few.

I do believe we are born flesh that greatly tempts us to sin, but no man is actually guilty of sin until he knowingly and willfully sins. Little babies or children, or the severely mentally handicapped do not understand sin and therefore are not held accountable.

What others in my church might believe I cannot say, but many are aware of my personal view and are OK with it.

 

[Revmitchell]

BLANKET STATEMENT:

If infants, the feeble minded, and the heathen must hear the gospel preached by man and actively repent and believe the truth, then there is no hope for them.

If this is your belief system, please embellish & clarify it via scripture.

Is this your belief or do you hold to something different?

I will tell you that after a sit down discussion with a Lutheran Church by me this Sunday that they do....so do Baptists hold to this doctrine also?

No such an idea is imposed on scripture. Scripture is silent on this issue.

 

[Greektim]

BLANKET STATEMENT:

If infants, the feeble minded, and the heathen must hear the gospel preached by man and actively repent and believe the truth, then there is no hope for them.

If this is your belief system, please embellish & clarify it via scripture.

Is this your belief or do you hold to something different?

I will tell you that after a sit down discussion with a Lutheran Church by me this Sunday that they do....so do Baptists hold to this doctrine also?

I am unsure why some calvinist (not accusing any here at the moment) use a different criteria for election for adults than with infants. Salvation and God's election is not dependent on one's ability to believe OR understand OR reach some moral capacity, otherwise it would be meritorious. Well... if we take that same logic and apply it to babies, then the reality is, we don't know b/c God's election is his to preordain. We can just rest assured in Gen. 18:25, "Will not the judge of the universe do right?" My answer is, "I don't know. The Bible doesn't say." My head tells me that the criteria of election for adults and infants are the same, some for honor and some for destruction. My heart (deceptive and wicked as it is) tells me God's grace will be applied to them for certain. But in the end, I just have a big fat ?

 

[annsni]

As RevMitchell says, Scripture is silent on the matter. So what I believe is this:

* We have a God who is good.
* We have a God who is just.
* We have a God that is right.
* God will dispense with each soul as is right.
* I trust God and His actions.
* So if a child or "feeble minded" person goes to hell, it is where they should be and it is because of sin.

 

[Revmitchell]

Salvation and God's election is not dependent on one's ability to believe or understand otherwise it would be meritorious. ?

This is false and is no where found in scripture.

 

[Greektim]

This is false and is no where found in scripture.

Don't want to derail the thread into a calvinism debate. My post was directed at calvinists who are inconsistent and wishy-washy on this issue (in my opinion). I just read an article by my seminary president who, also in my opinion, is being inconsistent: http://betweenthetimes.com/index.php/2012/10/02/why-we-believe-children-who-die-go-to-heaven-3/

It was not a post directed toward you. So no sweat.

 

[Revmitchell]

Don't want to derail the thread into a calvinism debate. My post was directed at calvinists who are inconsistent and wishy-washy on this issue (in my opinion). I just read an article by my seminary president who, also in my opinion, is being inconsistent: http://betweenthetimes.com/index.php/2012/10/02/why-we-believe-children-who-die-go-to-heaven-3/

It was not a post directed toward you. So no sweat.

It goes to the heart of the op.

 

[Revmitchell]

I just read an article by my seminary president who, also in my opinion, is being inconsistent: http://betweenthetimes.com/index.php/2012/10/02/why-we-believe-children-who-die-go-to-heaven-3/

Yes he is:

First, the grace, goodness and mercy of God would support the position that God saves all infants who die. This is the strongest argument and perhaps the decisive one. God is love (1 John 4:8) and desires that all be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). God is love and His concern for children is evident in Matthew 18:14 where Jesus says, “Your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost.” People go to hell because they choose in willful rebellion and unbelief to reject God and His grace. Children are incapable of this kind of conscious rejection of God. Where such rebellion and willful disobedience is absent, God is gracious to receive.

 

[12strings]

I have read Dr. Mohler & Akin's argicle on this, and while it is not perfect, it does give some good arguments for infant salvation...

John Piper argues the same thing, but interestingly uses mostly different arguments here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/ask-pastor-john/what-happens-to-infants-who-die--2

I believe God may have left his ambiguous so as to not give us all a reason to just kill all the babies to save them.

 

[Winman]

Scripture is not silent on this issue, we have the story of David's son through Bathsheba, we know when the child died that David said he would go to be with that child. David was a prophet, David KNEW he was saved.

We have the scriptures I posted, in Deu 1:39 God did not hold the children accountable for their parents sin because they did not know between good and evil.

Deu 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

When the Jews sinned in the wilderness, God decreed they would all die and not enter the promised land. But he allowed the children who had no knowledge between good and evil to go in. I personally believe the Promised Land was an OT figure of heaven.

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.

This verse shows that children are not born knowing between good and evil, but at some point they mature and do. This verse refutes Total Inability as Calvinism teaches it, showing that even a child can refuse evil and choose good.

Jon 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night:
11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?

In this scripture, God implies that he is the one who made little children, and argues that "should not I spare Nineveh". In other words, God is saying that it is JUST that he should spare Nineveh because there were 120,000 young children there who could not discern between their right and left hand and therefore cannot understand right from wrong. They were just as innocent as the cattle who also cannot understand between right and wrong and are therefore not responsible.

I could go on and show you much more scripture, but this issue is absolutely addressed in scripture. Those who say otherwise need to study.

 

[annsni]

Scripture is not silent on this issue, we have the story of David's son through Bathsheba, we know when the child died that David said he would go to be with that child. David was a prophet, David KNEW he was saved.

We have the scriptures I posted, in Deu 1:39 God did not hold the children accountable for their parents sin because they did not know between good and evil.

Deu 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

When the Jews sinned in the wilderness, God decreed they would all die and not enter the promised land. But he allowed the children who had no knowledge between good and evil to go in. I personally believe the Promised Land was an OT figure of heaven.

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.

This verse shows that children are not born knowing between good and evil, but at some point they mature and do. This verse refutes Total Inability as Calvinism teaches it, showing that even a child can refuse evil and choose good.

Jon 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night:
11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?

In this scripture, God implies that he is the one who made little children, and argues that "should not I spare Nineveh". In other words, God is saying that it is JUST that he should spare Nineveh because there were 120,000 young children there who could not discern between their right and left hand and therefore cannot understand right from wrong. They were just as innocent as the cattle who also cannot understand between right and wrong and are therefore not responsible.

I could go on and show you much more scripture, but this issue is absolutely addressed in scripture. Those who say otherwise need to study.

So those who don't know good or bad don't sin? Even if they do wrong, if they didn't know, they are OK?

Instead, I just see these Scriptures saying that children don't understand right and wrong and so when it speaks of those who cannot discern between right and wrong, it speaks of children. If children are innocent, why did God order them to be killed all through the Old Testament. If they are innocent, they would not have been killed.

 

[Winman]

So those who don't know good or bad don't sin? Even if they do wrong, if they didn't know, they are OK?

Instead, I just see these Scriptures saying that children don't understand right and wrong and so when it speaks of those who cannot discern between right and wrong, it speaks of children. If children are innocent, why did God order them to be killed all through the Old Testament. If they are innocent, they would not have been killed.

Yes, they are not held accountable. If a 3 year old child picks up his father's gun and shoots his sister, do we prosecute the child for murder? NO. Only when a child is old enough to understand their actions do we hold them accountable. This law is based on biblical principle.

Children die as a consequence of sin. I personally believe in some instances it was an act of mercy for God to command the children to be killed. They died innocent and went to heaven. If they would have been allowed to live, when they grew they would have reverted to the religion of their fathers and be lost.

We actually see this in our own country, many black Americans have rejected Christianity and reverted back to Islam because they believe that was the religion of their fathers. Is that good?

 

[annsni]

So in other words, there is a way to heaven on our own righteousness. I didn't know that.

 

[Winman]

So in other words, there is a way to heaven on our own righteousness. I didn't know that.

Absolutely not. Children who die are not righteous and are still dependent of the grace of God.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Paul shows here that Esau and Jacob had done no evil while in their mother's womb. They were not guilty of any sin. But Paul ALSO says they had done no good. They had no righteousness. They are dependent upon Jesus to have righteousness imputed to them.

Jesus said little children were believers.

Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Jesus told his disciples that they must be converted and become as little children to enter the kingdom of heaven. Was Jesus telling his disciples they need to become wicked little sinners? Nonsense.

Jesus also said little children believe in him (vs. 6), so righteousness is imputed to them just as righteousness is imputed to any other believer.

You Calvinists aren't HALF as smart as you think you are, the answers to these questions are all found in scripture. Put your Reformed authors down and study the bible and you will see.

 

[annsni]

Absolutely not. Children who die are not righteous and are still dependent of the grace of God.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Paul shows here that Esau and Jacob had done no evil while in their mother's womb. They were not guilty of any sin. But Paul ALSO says they had done no good. They had no righteousness. They are dependent upon Jesus to have righteousness imputed to them.

So you are saying that Jesus imputed righteousness to them apart from faith?

Jesus said little children were believers.

Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Jesus told his disciples that they must be converted and become as little children to enter the kingdom of heaven. Was Jesus telling his disciples they need to become wicked little sinners? Nonsense.

Those children believed in Jesus. I do not see in the context of the passage that He was speaking of children worldwide.

Jesus also said little children believe in him (vs. 6), so righteousness is imputed to them just as righteousness is imputed to any other believer.

You Calvinists aren't HALF as smart as you think you are, the answers to these questions are all found in scripture. Put your Reformed authors down and study the bible and you will see.

See, what you are saying is that there is salvation outside of faith - and then you scream that it can't happen. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Winman]

So you are saying that Jesus imputed righteousness to them apart from faith?

Where did I say that? Show me where I said that or else apologize for misrepresenting what I said.

Those children believed in Jesus. I do not see in the context of the passage that He was speaking of children worldwide.

Jesus told his disciples unless they be converted and become as little children they would not enter the kingdom of heaven. Jesus did not specify any certain children, so this is naturally understood to be all children. Then Jesus said whoever offends one of "these" little ones which believes in me, which in context is speaking of the very same children, so should be understood to mean all children.

See, what you are saying is that there is salvation outside of faith - and then you scream that it can't happen. You can't have it both ways.

Ann, for a Calvinist, you are usually one of the nicer and more honest ones. You know for a fact that I said these children have faith and therefore righteousness was imputed to them. Why are you deliberately misrepresenting what I clearly said and cannot be mistaken to mean otherwise?

You know very well I said these children have faith and therefore righteousness is imputed to them. It is not like you to misrepresent folks.

 

[Aaron]

BLANKET STATEMENT:

If infants, the feeble minded, and the heathen must hear the gospel preached by man and actively repent and believe the truth

Yes. The just shall live by faith.

, then there is no hope for them.

I don't believe that. A man with all his natural faculties intact is no more "able" to repent and believe than an infant.

I will counter your "infants in Hell" illusion by saying, there are no infants in heaven. There will be no infants in the Resurrection. Neither will there be elderly, or mamed.

 

[OldRegular]

For those interested Albert Mohler addresses this issue at:

http://www.covenantnews.com/mohler050117.htm

 

[Yeshua1]

BLANKET STATEMENT:

If infants, the feeble minded, and the heathen must hear the gospel preached by man and actively repent and believe the truth, then there is no hope for them.

If this is your belief system, please embellish & clarify it via scripture.

Is this your belief or do you hold to something different?

I will tell you that after a sit down discussion with a Lutheran Church by me this Sunday that they do....so do Baptists hold to this doctrine also?

ASll depends on what type of baptist you are in answering this OP!
IBF/Free Will/reformed/regular/Arm/Cal etc?

My position is that the secret things are reserved for the lord, and he is silent to a large extent on this issue, but would also say that the texts have some support that he indded saves the infants/children/'feeble"

base that upon david and his infant child passing away, and that he had expectation to meet him after death, that jesus referred to children as coming unto him, do not oush them away, and that the God who freely sent his own Son to die as the saviour for lost sinners would also have provided the means/way to have that death apply towards those cases...

the "Heathen" to me a serperate issue, as paul in Romans makes clear that NONE are without excuse, and being a calvinist, would see the lord getting some how/fashion the Good news to ALL those he has elected tobe saved in christ!

believe that Calvin held to hell being lined with unbaptized babies, but would say the reformer erred in that doctrine! Just shows us that while we have gifted teachers and pastors God gives to His church, NONE are Apostles and without error!