This should be interesting! Still waiting to see , per our brother, what prt of us unaffected by Fall...
-
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 hell
- Thread starter Agent47
- Start date
- Status
Which part of scriptures makes all men sinners 'in the fall of Adam'?
What exactly do you agree with?
Now, on to my position. I base it on a number if reasons and I will share them one at a time.
While I can't find isolated passages that directly answers this question, I find the scriptures not silent overall just as on Holy Trinity.
1. Romans 1:2 describes recipients of revelation of God to be without excuse and subject to the wrath of God.
This provokes me to wonder of the fate of non-recipients of this (general) revelation of God. Are they still subject to wrath? I doubt.
Infants would fall into this category. They have an 'excuse'
Now, on to my position. I base it on a number if reasons and I will share them one at a time.
While I can't find isolated passages that directly answers this question, I find the scriptures not silent overall just as on Holy Trinity.
1. Romans 1:2 describes recipients of revelation of God to be without excuse and subject to the wrath of God.
This provokes me to wonder of the fate of non-recipients of this (general) revelation of God. Are they still subject to wrath? I doubt.
Infants would fall into this category. They have an 'excuse'
ALL are under the wrath of God in that there is a sin debt owed and due to Him!
For just as all died in Adam, all shall be made alive in Christ!
So you actually have no Scripture to back up your position. Thank you for being transparent on that, at least.
Romans 1:2. 'Which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures.' What has that to do with the topic?
Now that Agent 47 has made some attempt to explain himself, I will give my understanding on this topic.
I will say that it is disgraceful that some have made accusations against Reformed Christians on this matter, but they can be forgiven because they have done so in ignorance. Even worse is the same people's attitude towards Almighty God. Unless He complies to their fallen understanding and logic, He is being unjust. 'But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?"' (Romans 9:20-21; cf. Isaiah 29:16).
First of all, we need to understand that all people are fallen in Adam and inherit his sinful nature. First of all, compare Genesis 1:27 with Genesis 5:3. Then consider Psalm 51:5. 'Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin my mother conceived me' and Psalm 58:3. 'The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.'
Surely those of us who are parents know about this. You have to teach a little child everything: how to be clean, how to talk, how to hold a spoon. But you never need to teach them how to be bad. No one ever needs to say to a child, "Now sally, this is how you tell a lie. You think of something that isn't true and you say it as if it is." Or, "Now the Johnny, this is how to be selfish. You keep all your toys to yourself and you don't let your little sister play with them." You never need to do that. They learn these things all by themselves.
Then you an turn to Romans 5:12-19 to see where Paul insists over and over again that sin came into the world through Adam, and through him spread to all men. And if that is not enough, he repeats in in 1 Corinthians 15:22.
So infants, even new born ones, are sinners, and if they are saved, it is purely by the grace of God. Jonathan Edwards was absolutely right when he said that if God condemned infants to hell, He would be just to do it.
However, The universal understanding of Reformed people has been that all infants who die in the womb or in infancy will be found in heaven at the Last Day. Indeed, It is my confident belief that all those who have been aborted will rise up in the judgement to condemn this wicked generation.
Here is C.H. Spurgeon on the subject: http://www.metropolitantabernacle.o...on-Charles-Spurgeon/Sword-and-Trowel-Magazine
Here are Al Mohler and Danny Akin on the subject: http://www.albertmohler.com/2009/07...-little-ones-do-infants-who-die-go-to-heaven/ This one is quite short and easy to read.
These two articles give some of the Biblical data on this subject. I hope people will see what a foul calumny it is to say that Reformed folk, especially Baptists, believe that all infants end up in hell.
One other point: when David's infant son was taken ill, he fasted and wept before God, but when the child died, he recovered himself and worshipped (2 Samuel 12:15-23). In v.23, he says, "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." Some believe that he was just saying that in due course he would join his son in the grave (or Sheol), but in Psalm 16:10, David says, "For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." David knew that death was not the end, and he looked forward to being with his son again in heaven. Compare his self-control in 2 Sam. 12, with his unrestrained grief after the death of Absolom, who he knew full well was not going to make it into heaven (2 Samuel 18:33).
So, although the Biblical data is not great, as a Reformed, Calvinistic Baptist, I believe we are justified in believing that all infants dying before or around birth are saved. Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?
I will say that it is disgraceful that some have made accusations against Reformed Christians on this matter, but they can be forgiven because they have done so in ignorance. Even worse is the same people's attitude towards Almighty God. Unless He complies to their fallen understanding and logic, He is being unjust. 'But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?"' (Romans 9:20-21; cf. Isaiah 29:16).
First of all, we need to understand that all people are fallen in Adam and inherit his sinful nature. First of all, compare Genesis 1:27 with Genesis 5:3. Then consider Psalm 51:5. 'Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin my mother conceived me' and Psalm 58:3. 'The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.'
Surely those of us who are parents know about this. You have to teach a little child everything: how to be clean, how to talk, how to hold a spoon. But you never need to teach them how to be bad. No one ever needs to say to a child, "Now sally, this is how you tell a lie. You think of something that isn't true and you say it as if it is." Or, "Now the Johnny, this is how to be selfish. You keep all your toys to yourself and you don't let your little sister play with them." You never need to do that. They learn these things all by themselves.
Then you an turn to Romans 5:12-19 to see where Paul insists over and over again that sin came into the world through Adam, and through him spread to all men. And if that is not enough, he repeats in in 1 Corinthians 15:22.
So infants, even new born ones, are sinners, and if they are saved, it is purely by the grace of God. Jonathan Edwards was absolutely right when he said that if God condemned infants to hell, He would be just to do it.
However, The universal understanding of Reformed people has been that all infants who die in the womb or in infancy will be found in heaven at the Last Day. Indeed, It is my confident belief that all those who have been aborted will rise up in the judgement to condemn this wicked generation.
Here is C.H. Spurgeon on the subject: http://www.metropolitantabernacle.o...on-Charles-Spurgeon/Sword-and-Trowel-Magazine
Here are Al Mohler and Danny Akin on the subject: http://www.albertmohler.com/2009/07...-little-ones-do-infants-who-die-go-to-heaven/ This one is quite short and easy to read.
These two articles give some of the Biblical data on this subject. I hope people will see what a foul calumny it is to say that Reformed folk, especially Baptists, believe that all infants end up in hell.
One other point: when David's infant son was taken ill, he fasted and wept before God, but when the child died, he recovered himself and worshipped (2 Samuel 12:15-23). In v.23, he says, "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." Some believe that he was just saying that in due course he would join his son in the grave (or Sheol), but in Psalm 16:10, David says, "For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption." David knew that death was not the end, and he looked forward to being with his son again in heaven. Compare his self-control in 2 Sam. 12, with his unrestrained grief after the death of Absolom, who he knew full well was not going to make it into heaven (2 Samuel 18:33).
So, although the Biblical data is not great, as a Reformed, Calvinistic Baptist, I believe we are justified in believing that all infants dying before or around birth are saved. Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?
Voddie Baucham said ppl were wrong when they said babies were little angels. He said they are vipers in diapers. Tell a baby no and see the anger in their eyes.
Are you done banning me?
If you can't state your position.because it is too embarrassing then I.have no business engaging you
If you can't state your position.because it is too embarrassing then I.have no business engaging you
If they banned members for shamelessly lying then it's a miracle you are still around.
Look at this statement;
The universal understanding of Reformed people.
What is more 'universal' than what Augustine,Calvin,Dort,Westminster,Edwards..... openly alleged and propagated on the subject namely God damns some infants?
You have not attempted to demonstrate otherwise from my quotes. For your information,Edwards statement was not hypothetical, it was in his opinion the most sensible and logical of the two alternatives he gave, the other being that there is salvation outside Christ.
else that those infants that are saved are not saved by the death of Christ.
Yes Edwards believed in salvation of infants, just not all, else the the highlighted phrase which distinguishes saved infants from the rest was unwarranted..
The other point you have attempted to bring across is how evil/sinful infants are. This begs the point; why do you insist they are automatically saved?
What special quality do they possess that entitled the to corporate election?
Look at this statement;
The universal understanding of Reformed people.
What is more 'universal' than what Augustine,Calvin,Dort,Westminster,Edwards..... openly alleged and propagated on the subject namely God damns some infants?
You have not attempted to demonstrate otherwise from my quotes. For your information,Edwards statement was not hypothetical, it was in his opinion the most sensible and logical of the two alternatives he gave, the other being that there is salvation outside Christ.
else that those infants that are saved are not saved by the death of Christ.
Yes Edwards believed in salvation of infants, just not all, else the the highlighted phrase which distinguishes saved infants from the rest was unwarranted..
The other point you have attempted to bring across is how evil/sinful infants are. This begs the point; why do you insist they are automatically saved?
What special quality do they possess that entitled the to corporate election?
Last edited:
Infants are rattle snakes ok. So, do some or all of them end up in hell?
Ain't playing your game Vooks.
Me neither Hulk Hogan
Bluefalcon
Member
You're either amazingly ignorant of the traditional reformed position or willfully dishonest about the traditional reformed position. Which is it?
...
I.e. original sin doesn't damn a single person.
Pelagian! Burn him at the stake!
Wonderful teaching on the subject by John MacArthur
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/80-242/the-salvation-of-babies-who-die-part-1
But I'd beg to differ on this;
All humans are born in sin. If infants were not sinful, if they were not morally corrupt, then they wouldn't die. If they were born innocent or pure or morally neutral there would be no basis for their death. The very fact that they die indicates that the disease of sin is there in them because sin is the killer. It is in their inherited sin nature that the seeds of death are planted.
We die because we have inherited (physical) corruption from Adam as a consequence of the Fall, and not because we are any guilty.
Even MacArthur who obviously considers himself Elect will still die yet he'd have you believe his sins and sinful nature have been dealt with.
And he appears to speak from both sides of his mouth. On the one hand he readily reckons that infants are vile and guilty sinners, yet in the other hand he agrees damning them over a sin they can't comprehend nullifies the essence of penalty and justice.
I also find MacArthur to be disingenuous. He would have at least indicated that Calvin subscribed to Infant Reprobation. But then again, 'thou shalt not revile gods'
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/80-242/the-salvation-of-babies-who-die-part-1
But I'd beg to differ on this;
All humans are born in sin. If infants were not sinful, if they were not morally corrupt, then they wouldn't die. If they were born innocent or pure or morally neutral there would be no basis for their death. The very fact that they die indicates that the disease of sin is there in them because sin is the killer. It is in their inherited sin nature that the seeds of death are planted.
We die because we have inherited (physical) corruption from Adam as a consequence of the Fall, and not because we are any guilty.
Even MacArthur who obviously considers himself Elect will still die yet he'd have you believe his sins and sinful nature have been dealt with.
And he appears to speak from both sides of his mouth. On the one hand he readily reckons that infants are vile and guilty sinners, yet in the other hand he agrees damning them over a sin they can't comprehend nullifies the essence of penalty and justice.
I also find MacArthur to be disingenuous. He would have at least indicated that Calvin subscribed to Infant Reprobation. But then again, 'thou shalt not revile gods'
Last edited:
I too am puzzled by this pronouncement.
Because straight from the horse's mouth:
John Calvin, Commentaries
Did you read the links that I provided? I thought not.
Here is Spurgeon, both Reformed and Baptist:
Perhaps you will say, 'What reasons have we for believing that it is well with the child?' Before I enter upon that I would make one observation. It has been wickedly, lyingly, and slanderously said of Calvinists, that we believe that some little children perish. Those who make the accusation know that their charge is false. I cannot even dare to hope, though I would wish to do so, that they ignorantly misrepresent us. They wickedly repeat what has been denied a thousand times, what they know is not true.
In Calvin's advice to Knox, he interprets the second commandment, 'Shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me,' as referring to generations, and hence he seems to teach that dying infants who have had believing ancestors, no matter how remotely, are saved. This would certainly take in the whole race.
As for modern Calvinists, I know of no exception, but we all hope and believe that all persons dying in infancy are elect. Dr Gill, who has been looked upon in late times as being a very standard of Calvinism, not to say of ultra-Calvinism, himself never hints for a moment the supposition that any infant has perished. He affirms that it is a dark and mysterious subject, but states that it is his belief, and he thinks he has Scripture to warrant it, that they who have fallen asleep in infancy have not perished but have been numbered with the chosen of God, and so have entered into eternal rest.
We have never taught the contrary, and when the charge is brought, I repudiate it and say, 'You may have said so, we never did, and you know we never did.' We have never dreamed of such a thing. With very few and rare exceptions, so rare that I never heard of them except from the lips of slanderers, we have never imagined that infants dying as infants have perished, but we have believed that they enter into the paradise of God.
I think you will find that you have pulled the quotations from Calvin, and especially Edwards, out of context. Neither of them positively declare that those dying in infancy are lost. However, I am not a Presbyterian, but a Reformed Baptist and I'm not responsible for what Presbyterians may say.
Here is the 1689 Confession of the subject (Article 10:3):
Infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works when, where and how He pleases [John 3:8]. So are all elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word.
Now to turn to the article by R. Scott Meadows in Reformed Baptist Network. He wrote,
Therefore, to assert with Spurgeon and many others that this text [Matthew 19:14] is teaching universal infant salvation is to twist it perversely, and to rob it of its true spiritual sense, namely, that salvation only comes through Jesus Christ. He is its central focus, not infants.
I do not say that all infants dying in infancy go to hell, nor that all infants dying in infancy go to heaven, but that we simply do not know what becomes of any particular infant dying in infancy. Certainly God does with each one whatever he pleases, and he leaves us without any definitive revelation in this particular matter.
For grieving parents, it should be enough to know that God is wise and just and good, and we can trust him with our little ones who have died at a very young age. The Lord does all things well. It is wholly wrong for us to fear that the Lord our God will do anything censurable. When all is said and done, there will be no doubt that God is glorious, that he has kept all his promises, and that he has lavished unspeakably great blessings upon all his chosen people, however long they lived and suffered in this world below. Everyone else will receive only what punishment justice requires, and no more.
I agree with Meadows
1. That Spurgeon puts too much emphasis upon Matt 19:14, though there are other texts that give us great hope on this subject.
2. That the Bible does not tell us everything that we would like to know about this matter (cf. Deuteronomy 29:29).
3. That salvation comes only through Jesus Christ.
4. That we can trust God with our children who have died at a young age. I keep quoting Genesis 18:25. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" Of course He will, but He will not do so because people on this board in their arrogance demand that He do what they think He ought to do.
Last edited:
Other people will make that decision, but I rather think you have been banned previously.
Now, are you going to substantiate your own position from Scripture or are you going to carry on trolling? Because I don't think you would know Scriptural exposition if it bit you on the leg. At least, you didn't seem to when you were on the board before.
Spurgeon doubtless found Infant reprobation repulsive. What he does here though is a shameless attempt to rewrite history.
Take the highlighted;
1. Assuming his deductions are accurate, strictly speaking, God still damns some infants without believing ancestors.
2. He strains a gnat and suffers elephants through by deliberately ignoring plain and direct writings of Calvin on the subject.
There are decent Calvinists out there like Sam Storm and MacArthur who won't deny their heritage much as they differ with it presently. But we also have liars who whitewash their own history. What a shame.
The charge that Calvin was misquoted demands that you quote him in context. Start with the single instance I shared
- Status