• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Infants in Heaven

Status
Not open for further replies.

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
First there is the declaration of King David on the death of his first child with Bathsheba!

2 Samuel 12:23. But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

King David, called a man after God's own heart, obviously was among the redeemed. His child died after seven days. David indicates that he and the child will be together after death.

*************************

Following are remarks by Albert Mohler on the death of infanta.
Much I agree with, much is contradictory. There seems to be a blend of 3 of the 4 views I outlined, and that cannot be scripturally consistent if one believes a sinner is justified by grace through faith. This is the reason we must let Scripture stand as the final authority and reject views from great theological minds if it doesn't align.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Much I agree with, much is contradictory. There seems to be a blend of 3 of the 4 views I outlined, and that cannot be scripturally consistent if one believes a sinner is justified by grace through faith. This is the reason we must let Scripture stand as the final authority and reject views from great theological minds if it doesn't align.

The Scripture regarding King David and his son settles it for me. Those dying in infancy are covered by the Grace of God.

First there is the declaration of King David on the death of his first child with Bathsheba!

2 Samuel 12:23. But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

King David, called a man after God's own heart, obviously was among the redeemed. His child died after seven days. David indicates that he and the child will be together after death.

And then there is:

Luke 18:15, 16
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.


The above passage, and the verse that follows, is routinely misinterpreted to justify condemnation/baptism of young children!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Winman

Active Member
I will take this opportunity to respond to Amy G., whom I was replying to as well when the thread closed.

This is a ridiculous statement. First, I didn't say people aren't born with a sin nature. I can't speak for anyone else, as it's a long thread, but I've not read anything to that effect.

Secondly, being born with a sin nature does not negate an "age of accountability" which is what Winman and I are talking about. As with other doctrines like the Doctrine of the Trinity, which is not specifically spelled out, there is an age of accountability that, though not specifically spelled out, is established in biblical writings.

People are accountable for their response to the witness of God in creation -- as Paul's excellent treatise in Romans 1:18-32 establishes -- and also to the witness of God in the Bible and in the person of Christ.

Acts 17, NASB
30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,
31 because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."​

But second, since that response is based on one’s ability to comprehend and respond to the message, a person becomes personally accountable when he or she reaches a point where they have the spiritual and mental faculty to grasp the issues. This does not mean they are not sinful, it does not mean they do not have a sin nature with which they were born. It only means that they have not reached a place where they can understand.

Children reach an age of knowing right from wrong much earlier than they learn and can conceive of the need for a Savior who is Christ the Lord. Around four, five, or six years of age, children know what behaviors are expected of them and what behaviors will get them in trouble with mom, dad, grandparents, brothers, sisters, sitters, teachers, etc. Knowing there is no hope for them to escape the inherent nature within them without Christ is still years away.

My own kids committed to Christ at the age of eight. I know of children who made that decision even earlier, though I'm not convinced anyone younger than nine or ten, frankly, is fully capable of comprehending the need for Jesus Christ in their lives, and I believe more are much older. The Jewish age of accountability -- when a boy becomes a man and a girl a woman -- is 13. Like the biblical age of leadership being established at 30 years, I believe that "age of accountability" as traditionally held by the Hebrews is very accurate, though maturity comes still later in life. There has to be a level of understanding, an ability to be convicted of sin, before one can make a decision for Christ. So this "age of accountability" has a two-fold aspect: Knowing right from wrong, and knowing there is nothing we can do about it.

While having the first without knowledge of the second may not make one accountable, it does make one feel guilty. That is when the search begins for righteousness, though of course no one that young understands that word. But it is, nonetheless, what they are looking for, and will continue to seek. When they realize there is something specific to be seeking, that is when they have become accountable.

Good post. Yes, the Jews held 13 years old as the age of accountability for boys, age 12 for girls! :smilewinkgrin:

So, even the ancient Jews recognized that women tend to be more mature than men.

The words Bar Mitzvah and Bat Mitzvah mean "son of the commandment" and "daughter of the commandment". This is when Jewish boys and girls were taught the law. Afterward they were held to be accountable for God's law. I believe this is what Paul is explaining in Romans 7, when he says, For I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. Paul thought the law was good and would lead to life, but sin, taking occasion by the law convicted him as a sinner and slew him.

Paul was saying that he was spiritually alive until he learned the law. When he came to know the law he was convicted as a sinner and died spiritually.

Little children do wrong things all the time, but they are not guilty before God because they do not fully understand their actions.

It is no different with our laws, if a three year old boy picked up his father's pistol and shot his sister, no court in the land would try the boy as a criminal, because he did not understand his actions.
 

Winman

Active Member
I agree that Skan's use of the word "deserve" was problematic. My view is simply that infants don't "deserve" anything in particular....either "salvation" (because that assumes guilt) nor damnation (again, because it assumes guilt).

Mosquitoes "deserve" no particular treatment in reference to eternal fate.......ditto an infant. I believe the Scriptures give us no options aside from two possibilities:

1.) They are all in hell sheerly due to their guilt in Adam's sin
2.) They are all in heaven because they have not sinned

I don't think any Biblically-based Theology can suggest any special treatment for them. They operate under the same rules as everyone else:

1.) You are under condemnation for your sins except ye repent

Infants cannot and do not repent and believe....they are non-theists. They also have never transgressed God's law. So also that stupid rabbit my wife talked me into buying for the kids

Yes, Paul said that Jacob and Esau had done no evil in their mother's womb in Romans 9:11. What were they doing in Rebecca's womb? FIGHTING. But Paul says they had done no evil, because they could not possibly understand their actions.

They were most likely simply fighting for space and comfort, fighting to comfort their flesh. The flesh has lusts and desires, but this is not sin. Sin is when we knowingly obey the flesh when it would transgress God's law.

Eve displayed the three lusts when she was tempted by the tree of knowledge of good and evil. She saw it was good for food, this is the lust of the flesh. She saw it was pleasant to the eyes, this is the lust of the eyes. And she saw it was desired to make one wise, this is the pride of life.

Eve displayed all the worldly lusts shown in 1 John 2:16. But was she evil at this point? NO. She was only evil when she obeyed these lusts and ate the forbidden fruit. It is not wrong to eat or enjoy beauty, or even to be wise, but Eve had been commanded not to eat this particular fruit, and that is why it was sin.

But fleshly lusts are not sin, Jesus came in the flesh and was tempted in ALL POINTS as we are, yet without sin.

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

According to this verse Jesus fell the pull and tug of every temptation known to man. But he was not a sinner because he never obeyed these lusts.

Likewise, babies are born flesh with many lusts and desires, but this does not make them evil. Only when they know right from wrong and choose evil do they become sinners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Inspector Javert

Active Member
Yes, Paul said that Jacob and Esau had done no evil in their mother's womb in Romans 9:11. What were they doing in Rebecca's womb? FIGHTING. But Paul says they had done no evil, because they could not possibly understand their actions.

They were most likely simply fighting for space and comfort, fighting to comfort their flesh. The flesh has lusts and desires, but this is not sin. Sin is when we knowingly obey the flesh when it would transgress God's law.

Eve displayed the three lusts when she was tempted by the tree of knowledge of good and evil. She saw it was good for food, this is the lust of the flesh. She saw it was pleasant to the eyes, this is the lust of the eyes. And she saw it was desired to make one wise, this is the pride of life.

Eve displayed all the worldly lusts shown in 1 John 2:16. But was she evil at this point? NO. She was only evil when she obeyed these lusts and ate the forbidden fruit. It is not wrong to eat or enjoy beauty, or even to be wise, but Eve had been commanded not to eat this particular fruit, and that is why it was sin.

But fleshly lusts are not sin, Jesus came in the flesh and was tempted in ALL POINTS as we are, yet without sin.

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

According to this verse Jesus fell the pull and tug of every temptation known to man. But he was not a sinner because he never obeyed these lusts.

Likewise, babies are born flesh with many lusts and desires, but this does not make them evil. Only when they know right from wrong and choose evil do they become sinners.

That is absolutely Scriptural...and absolutely true. You haven't re-defined any words...
You've accepted Scripture as written... and you are absolutely correct :thumbs:
 

Winman

Active Member
No one will enter through the portals of heaven w/o God's grace being upon/in them......

Then why did Jesus himself speak of persons who never went astray and need no repentance?

Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Mat 18:13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.

Luk 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

Why did Jesus twice speak of 99 persons who never went astray and which need no repentance?

Why did Jesus speak of the elder son who never transgressed his father's commandment at any time? This elder son was never "dead" or "lost" like his younger brother.

Why would Jesus say such nonsensical things if Original Sin is true? Did he forget correct doctrine? Absurd!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

quantumfaith

Active Member
The Scripture regarding King David and his son settles it for me. Those dying in infancy are covered by the Grace of God.



And then there is:

Luke 18:15, 16
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.


The above passage, and the verse that follows, is routinely misinterpreted to justify condemnation/baptism of young children!


OR, although I agree that infants are afforded some "grace", I am not convinced that this scripture is what defines it. It seems to me to simply an observation of David regarding his expectation and "hope" of seeing his child again. For me, it is personally important that scripture does not always address our questions and tensions in life.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
That Scripture says absolutely NOTHING about "Grace"...

Please quote the written Word of Almighty God, and Explain how that Scripture references God's "Grace"....

I'm waiting....

Wait no longer!

I have already quoted it. Now unless you believe David, a man after God's own heart [Acts 13:22], went into the eternal damnation, the only way he could be with the child is for both to be with God. Since there are no humans in Heaven outside the Grace of God then it follows that the child was in Heaven by the Grace of God.

Of course you could consign David to the grave but I don't believe that comports with Scripture.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
OR, although I agree that infants are afforded some "grace", I am not convinced that this scripture is what defines it. It seems to me to simply an observation of David regarding his expectation and "hope" of seeing his child again. For me, it is personally important that scripture does not always address our questions and tensions in life.

I don't claim that Scripture defines anything other than King David's statement; but as I responded to the Inspector I don't believe any human makes it to heaven outside the Grace of God.
 

Inspector Javert

Active Member
Wait no longer!

I have already quoted it. Now unless you believe David, a man after God's own heart [Acts 13:22],
You have quoted absolutely NOTHING of the sort:
I insist you demonstrate that David's Son is party to the same "grace" that David was party to. There is NO such Scripture.

I'm aware of David's identity....heck, I happen to know that he was the first King from the line of Judah (as opposed to Saul who was of the line of Benjamin, and therefore not qualified)<----something you've likely never thought of......but that doesn't answer the question:

I asked....where was "GRACE"spoken of in those Scriptures...

You've said absolutely NOTHING about how God's "Grace" was spoken of in Scripture....

I asked that on purpose knowing that it WAS NOT preached in those passages...now please show the actual SCRIPTURES where God's Grace insists that David will be reunited with his son in heaven...Please show how God's "Grace" was imparted to David's son.
 

percho

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Wait no longer!

I have already quoted it. Now unless you believe David, a man after God's own heart [Acts 13:22], went into the eternal damnation, the only way he could be with the child is for both to be with God. Since there are no humans in Heaven outside the Grace of God then it follows that the child was in Heaven by the Grace of God.

Of course you could consign David to the grave but I don't believe that comports with Scripture.

God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Acts 13:33,34

David was a prophet of God speaking of the Son of God Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. Jesus the Christ received from God, his Father the sure mercies of David. His soul was not left in Hell (Hades) neither did his flesh see corruption.

David?

For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, (A)fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers,(in Hades) and (B) saw corruption: Acts 13:36

David's prophecy concerning Jesus Christ: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Acts 2:27 Psalms 16:10

David himself on the day of Pentecost fifty days after the resurrection of Jesus. Fifty days after, "he (Jesus) led captivity captive."

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both (A)dead (soul in Hades) and (B) buried, (his flesh had seen corruption) and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Acts 2:29


Where was the soul of David on that day of Pentecost? Where was the son of David that day? Had David gone to him and was still with him on that day of Pentecost? The rich man died and was buried, just like David. In Hades, where the soul also of David being, he, the rich man, lifted up his eyes. He is being resurrected to judgement and can feel the torment of flames lapping at him. Across a great gulf he being resurrected can see the resurrected Lazarus and father Abraham and we are not told but I will bet you, because of the surety of scripture, David also will be with them. Send the resurrected Lazarus to my five brothers.

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
 

Aaron

Member
Site Supporter
I look to Moses and David for instruction in this matter. Did infants perish in the flood? Is not a blessing pronounced on him who dashes Babylonian infants? Yes to both questions. Infants were recipients of the judgment of God.

There is only one way for descendant of Adam to enter Heaven, and that is through the Door, and there is only one way through that door—faith.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
You have quoted absolutely NOTHING of the sort:
I insist you demonstrate that David's Son is party to the same "grace" that David was party to. There is NO such Scripture.

I'm aware of David's identity....heck, I happen to know that he was the first King from the line of Judah (as opposed to Saul who was of the line of Benjamin, and therefore not qualified)<----something you've likely never thought of......but that doesn't answer the question:

I asked....where was "GRACE"spoken of in those Scriptures...

You've said absolutely NOTHING about how God's "Grace" was spoken of in Scripture....

I asked that on purpose knowing that it WAS NOT preached in those passages...now please show the actual SCRIPTURES where God's Grace insists that David will be reunited with his son in heaven...Please show how God's "Grace" was imparted to David's son.

Sport you can insist all you want.:BangHead:

No one of the human race will enter heaven except by the Grace of God.:godisgood: If you believe otherwise then speak up.:saint:

Don't take that "inspector" label too seriously.:tonofbricks: It is made up you know!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
I look to Moses and David for instruction in this matter. Did infants perish in the flood? Is not a blessing pronounced on him who dashes Babylonian infants? Yes to both questions. Infants were recipients of the judgment of God.
Infants are recipients to the temporal judgment of God, not His eternal judgment!

Those "infants", 20 and under, of the Israeties who would not enter the Promised Land were not even subject to His temporal judgment.

There is only one way for descendant of Adam to enter Heaven, and that is through the Door, and there is only one way through that door—faith.

Faith in what?

There is only one way through the door: The Grace of God!
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Acts 13:33,34

David was a prophet of God speaking of the Son of God Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. Jesus the Christ received from God, his Father the sure mercies of David. His soul was not left in Hell (Hades) neither did his flesh see corruption.

David?

For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, (A)fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers,(in Hades) and (B) saw corruption: Acts 13:36

David's prophecy concerning Jesus Christ: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Acts 2:27 Psalms 16:10

David himself on the day of Pentecost fifty days after the resurrection of Jesus. Fifty days after, "he (Jesus) led captivity captive."

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both (A)dead (soul in Hades) and (B) buried, (his flesh had seen corruption) and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Acts 2:29


Where was the soul of David on that day of Pentecost? Where was the son of David that day? Had David gone to him and was still with him on that day of Pentecost? The rich man died and was buried, just like David. In Hades, where the soul also of David being, he, the rich man, lifted up his eyes. He is being resurrected to judgement and can feel the torment of flames lapping at him. Across a great gulf he being resurrected can see the resurrected Lazarus and father Abraham and we are not told but I will bet you, because of the surety of scripture, David also will be with them. Send the resurrected Lazarus to my five brothers.

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


Scripture says your eisegesis is incorrect!

Ecclesiastes 12:1, 7
1. Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;

7. Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top