Infant Salvation

[charles_creech78]

God bless you Brother Bob and Reformbaptist. I will pray for both of you.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Isn't there some mention of the souls of babies and toddlers residing in the main hall of heaven, right up close with God? I've been trying to find that verse all day. I could swear I read that somewhere. I just simply cannot believe in a God that would condemn infants to hell, when they are incapable of understanding faith. Also, how about those who are physically or mentally unable to accept the Lord? He is the God of Mercies, God is Love, after all.

love,

Sopranette

Amen, I agree. I don't recall a verse that tells us where the babies are in heaven. And I think you point about mentally handicapped people is a good one. I think the same principles I have been discussing here apply. When Spurgeon went to answer the reason why he thought infants are saved (after he described how) he said, "First, we ground our conviction very much upon the goodness of the nature of God. "

And that is exactly what you have done, and what I have done as well.

Your brother in Christ,
RB

 

[ReformedBaptist]

God bless you Brother Bob and Reformbaptist. I will pray for both of you.

Thanks, I need it!

 

[moondg]

Somehow your quote of Phil Johnson left "Hyper-" off before the word Calvinism. Phil said it is Hyper-Calvinism that emphasizes the Sovereignty of God to the exclusion of the responsibility of man. This is not historic/proper Calvinism.

.Why quote Phil Johnson? Who cares about calvinism? Are either of these in the Bible? I can not believe we are still talking about this. Who here would serve a God that sends small children to HELL.

.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Somehow your quote of Phil Johnson left "Hyper-" off before the word Calvinism. Phil said it is Hyper-Calvinism that emphasizes the Sovereignty of God to the exclusion of the responsibility of man. This is not historic/proper Calvinism.

.Why quote Phil Johnson? Who cares about calvinism? Are either of these in the Bible? I can not believe we are still talking about this. Who here would serve a God that sends small children to HELL.

.

Ummm...I think Phil Johnson is in the Bible as one of the elect of God. Or at least I include him under that section. lol As for the doctrines of grace/five points of calvinsim as they are commonly called, yes those are biblical doctrines. So IMO its a bit of a misnomer to call it calvinsim, but that is the label people are using.

And I think the discussion is warranted. If you don't, why post?

 

[webdog]

I read and re-read this post trying to understand what connection you made between the sin of these men spoken of in John 9 and the doctrine of original sin (as we call it theologically) revealed in other places in Scripture. In reading the story, I see a man quite sensible of his sin and need of Christ, that is, the man born blind who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, some of the Pharisees who were following Jesus with a wicked heart, that they may trap Him or ensare Him somehow, heard what Jesus said of Himself.."...for judgment I am come into this world That they which see not, might see And that they which see might be made blind." v.39

When those certain Pharisees heard it they asked the Lord if they were blind also. I do not suppose they asked this question with grieved and worried hearts, sensible of the possible danger of their souls. No. I believe they felt the finger of God upon their souls, and His conviction burned in their minds and they asked with indignation this question, considering themselve to be wise and knowledgeable.

So our Lord tells them that if they were blind, that is, if they were sensible to it, and desired to know the truth, then they would have no sin. Not that our Lord is teaching that unbelief is not sin, but that they might have pardon of their sin, and being somewhat sensible of their blindness, have hope that they may be forgiven and illuminated.

But becasue they thought themselves already wise and knowledgeable, needing nothing, and certainly not from Jesus, their sin remains. That is, it is not taken away. Their error would not be forgiven.

From my estimation Jesus in the case is highlighting a specific sin. The text is not teaching or supposing to teach what we theologically call "Federal Headship" This is clearly taught in other passages of Scripture, and this passage in no way (as best as I can see) takes away from such teaching.

Just my thoughts on it...

I was trying to show the corrolation between "remains" (meno) which means to stay and not depart from, and how that applies to mankind. Jesus told them that their sin does not depart from them. When Adam sinned, his sin remained with him, it wasn't passed on to all of mankind. The consequences of that sin (sin nature) did, along with the first death, but that's it. We are not born into this world spiritually dead, as Augustinian original sin teaches. The soul that sins dies...we die spiritually when we sin. For an infant to be born spiritually dead, he would have to be guilty of Adam's sin, which I have shown is not the case, as Adam's sin "remained"...stayed with him.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I was trying to show the corrolation between "remains" (meno) which means to stay and not depart from, and how that applies to mankind. Jesus told them that their sin does not depart from them. When Adam sinned, his sin remained with him, it wasn't passed on to all of mankind. The consequences of that sin (sin nature) did, along with the first death, but that's it. We are not born into this world spiritually dead, as Augustinian original sin teaches. The soul that sins dies...we die spiritually when we sin. For an infant to be born spiritually dead, he would have to be guilty of Adam's sin, which I have shown is not the case, as Adam's sin "remained"...stayed with him.

Ok, I see the connection you are trying to make. I do not think that can be taken from John 9, and I believe its an improper application of this passage, but I see the connection you are tying to make. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[webdog]

Ok, I see the connection you are trying to make. I do not think that can be taken from John 9, and I believe its an improper application of this passage, but I see the connection you are tying to make. Thanks for the clarification.

So only their sin remained...and Adam's was passed on

 

[ReformedBaptist]

So only their sin remained...and Adam's was passed on

No, what I am saying is that John 9 is not addressing the doctrine of original sin. However, it is addressing a specific sin of those Pharisees. I think its a misapplication of this passage to take their willful sins and make generalizations about the doctrine of original sin.

The doctrine of original sin is taught in Scripture, and that clearly, in other passages and in no way constradicts or conflicts with what is written in John 9. That's all I was saying.

 

[Dewey Sturgell]

Dear Brothers I looked up the scriptures that have the word infants and infant out of the strongs exhaustive concordance and these are the scriptures that was listed 1Samaul 15:3 Now go and smite amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and women,INFANT and suckling,ox and sheep, cameland ass Isaiah 65:20 There shall be no more thence an INFANT of days an old man that hath not filled his days:for the child shall die an hundred years old but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. Job3:16 or as an hidden untimely birth i had not been:as INFANTS which never saw light. Hosea13:16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God:they shall fall by the sword:thier INFANTS shall be dashed in pieces, and thier women with child shall be ripped up. Luke18:15 and they brought unto him also INFANTS, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. Luke18:16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, suffer little children to come into to me, and forbid them not: for of such is the Kingdom of God. Luke18:17 verily i say unto to you, Whosoever shall not recieve the Kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter there in. Brothers this is all I could find, which is not some mans idea of the bible but of the spirit, which from these scriptures we see that unless we become as a little child (INFANT) we our selves will not enter there in ,. let God be true , may God bless you all.amen

 

[moondg]

And I think the discussion is warranted. If you don't, why post?

I did not say the discussion was not warranted. I said I do not believe we are still talking about it. If you look at my posts I have been a member since 1/2004 I have 33 posts.
The reason this is, because people that are supposed to be like minded (Baptist) Christians. Would have to debate over some of the things we do. I love to debate but you would think everyone would agree on this topic.
I can not believe Christians would think that a aborted baby would go to HELL. I know someone will say a aborted baby has not been mentioned. What is the difference not born yet or 1 year old.

 

[4boys4joys]

I did not say the discussion was not warranted. I said I do not believe we are still talking about it. If you look at my posts I have been a member since 1/2004 I have 33 posts.
The reason this is, because people that are supposed to be like minded (Baptist) Christians. Would have to debate over some of the things we do. I love to debate but you would think everyone would agree on this topic.
I can not believe Christians would think that a aborted baby would go to HELL. I know someone will say a aborted baby has not been mentioned. What is the difference not born yet or 1 year old.

I agree with you moondg. It is beyond my comprehension that anyone would think an aborted baby would go to hell. So many here have given verses that could be applied or interpreted to make someone believe this. But in this case it would be nice to see clear literal scripture on this.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I did not say the discussion was not warranted. I said I do not believe we are still talking about it. If you look at my posts I have been a member since 1/2004 I have 33 posts.
The reason this is, because people that are supposed to be like minded (Baptist) Christians. Would have to debate over some of the things we do. I love to debate but you would think everyone would agree on this topic.
I can not believe Christians would think that a aborted baby would go to HELL. I know someone will say a aborted baby has not been mentioned. What is the difference not born yet or 1 year old.

Oh, ok brother. I understand now.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I agree with you moondg. It is beyond my comprehension that anyone would think an aborted baby would go to hell. So many here have given verses that could be applied or interpreted to make someone believe this. But in this case it would be nice to see clear literal scripture on this.

Here are some Scriptures that allude to the belief that the children of believers will be saved:

LUK 18:15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

ACT 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Therefore, the WCF says, "Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit."

Other Scripture may be considered also,

1 Cor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

King David said of his infant child he lost,

"He answered, "While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, 'Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.' 23 But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me." 2 Sam 12:22-23

The Scripture is scant on the subject, and I can't say directly answers the question. But it does give hope and comfort to the hearts of believers. And as I said before, the Calvinist system best fits the doctrine of infant salvation.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Dear Brother Reformed Baptist:

Thank you for citing those Scriptures, but I think that they refer not to eternal salvation, but to timely salvation.

I believe that all infants, whether they belong to believers, or to unbelievers, to the elect or the unelect, are eternally saved.

That is, God in His omniscience and great mercy and Him being a just God, had known who among all infants that will ever be born will die at infancy or in the womb, and as such had them covered with the blood of the Eternal Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.

Everyone of these infants were and are tainted with the sin of Adam, without a doubt, and as the Bible declares, they are "speaking lies from the womb", or such, but nevertheless the Scriptures very clearly state that at the Great White Throne everyone of the unjust will be judged based on the works they have done on this earth and in this plane called time, a plane on which these infants and like innocents did not grow up in.

The Lord Jesus Christ without a doubt looked upon those "little children" the way we look at little children: with love and great wonder at their innocency of actions and minds, and though they may indeed act or talk in a way that shows their fallen nature, yet the Lord Jesus says "of such" are those in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Jarthur001]

Hello board,

Once we got past Calvinism, this became a good thread.


I'm holding back for a few more pages. I want to ask something that will lead to other things later. Just two things now.

When does a person become a non-believer?

In Romans 3..the Greek word "ou" is used 8 times. What does this word mean?

As the old song said..ou + ou = ?

 

[menageriekeeper]

As the old song said..ou + ou = ?

Must be a really old song as I don't remember it! :laugh:

Okay, serious question:

Reformed Baptist, what is the WCF?

 

[charles_creech78]

Dear Brother Reformed Baptist:

Thank you for citing those Scriptures, but I think that they refer not to eternal salvation, but to timely salvation.

I believe that all infants, whether they belong to believers, or to unbelievers, to the elect or the unelect, are eternally saved.

That is, God in His omniscience and great mercy and Him being a just God, had known who among all infants that will ever be born will die at infancy or in the womb, and as such had them covered with the blood of the Eternal Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.

Everyone of these infants were and are tainted with the sin of Adam, without a doubt, and as the Bible declares, they are "speaking lies from the womb", or such, but nevertheless the Scriptures very clearly state that at the Great White Throne everyone of the unjust will be judged based on the works they have done on this earth and in this plane called time, a plane on which these infants and like innocents did not grow up in.

The Lord Jesus Christ without a doubt looked upon those "little children" the way we look at little children: with love and great wonder at their innocency of actions and minds, and though they may indeed act or talk in a way that shows their fallen nature, yet the Lord Jesus says "of such" are those in the kingdom of heaven.

I am just wanting to know . Where is that scripture that said they are lieing from the womb. please can you give me this verse. Thanks

 

[moondg]

Psa 58:3The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies
This is all I could find.

 

[Jarthur001]

Psa 58:3The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies
This is all I could find.

that would be the one.

is speaking lies a sin?