The Archangel
Well-Known Member
I really hesitated before answering this post. Our interactions have been less-than-civil and your response, I would argue, demonstrates a reason that our discussions have been not-so-nice. Now, why I hesitated is this: Your post is a total misrepresentation of the Calvinist position. Whether intentional or not, it is still a misrepresentation.skypair said:Ouch! That hurts my brain to even think about! :laugh:
OK, so apparently God has "marked the elect out" to live until they are saved and reborn? And so this "elect mark" might be considered a "pre-existing CONDITION" whereby they are saved in time. But there are no "conditions" to election/salvation except that God chose them, knows them, and gives them salvation? Why do I feel like the tiger in "Little Black Sambo?" :laugh: Will I actually turn to butter??
So I guess if an infant dies, he/she wasn't "elect?" Or does baptism save them?
skypair
Calvinists DO NOT believe in being saved without responding to God in repentance and faith. Maybe you didn't read my follow-up post to Allan? If that is the case, I posed it below:
So, as has been pointed out to you before (by me and others) we (the Calvinists) do not believe in election/salvation without us having to respond. Please do not continue to misrepresent our position.Now, to answer your specific question. No, I believe the elect are not saved until they respond to God in repentance and faith. BUT, HERE'S THE CATCH. Because of the nature of election, it is AS IF they were not under condemnation (even though they still are, temporally speaking). Since, as I believe, the Bible teaches election, the elects' sins are paid for by Christ in the one moment-in-time at Calvary, then, by nature of Christ's substitutionary death, those elect, though under judgment until they respond, will respond to God's call to repentance.
I've heard the question "What if an elect person doesn't respond." That's a good question and shows a basic misunderstanding of election. That question is like asking "What would a square circle look like." As C.S. Lewis said, "It is a no-thing." An unresponsive elect person is like a square circle--they cannot, by nature, exist. Since a circle is, by nature, round and a square is, by nature, square they cannot be both. An elect person is, by nature--ONLY because of God's promises, destined to be saved. BUT, that salvation occurs at the one moment in time when God applies or credits Christ's work to their account. Or, at least, that's the way it looks from our perspective. It may look different from God's but the text is not, to my knowledge, clear on that.
Sorry to think out loud, but your question was a good one and I've never committed that explanation to paper (so to speak) before.
Ultimately, though, I believe the elect must respond before they are considered saved. It is not the case that they do not have to respond and, because they are elect, they are saved anyway. An elect person must show the fruit of repentance (one who doesn't is not saved and would be then a square circle)
Further, Baptists do not believe that baptism saves, in any way, shape, or form. I don't know exactly what the Presbyterians believe about infant-baptism (I know the Catholics believe it actually removes original sin). The Bible never says baptism is anything more than a outward sign of an inward change.
As for infant death/salvation, the Bible is not clear. They are sinners (by nature) and they are legally guilty for Adam's sin. I believe God saves infants in some way, but I cannot prove it scripturally. At best I can say I trust God to do what is right in every situation. To say more than that is getting into sentimentality which often leads us away from scripture--and that is a road down which we, as Christians, do not want to go.
Many Blessings,
The Archangel
PS. I do not think we should chase this rabbit too much further, it will get the thread off topic.