Is this an accurate quote?

I believe it is, though I think (Not sure) deals with paedobaptist Calvinism view of Infant Baptist. Most paedobaptist churches believe that baptism convers grace to their infants and that they are not to doubt the election of their children. This of course is not agreed on by Reformed Baptists because of our rejection of infant baptism. I have heard that quote but am not sure the source.

 

I don't know if the quote is accurate or not, but it is not Scripture! It is but a human opinion!

 

And of course as John Edwards points out from Rev 14:10 - all the saints will be their to "watch them" roasting and suffering - and find it an occassion for rejoicing!

 

Yahoo! just look at them crispy critters just a churnin' 'n' burnin'!

Don't sound quite like what God has in mind for infants!

 

If it is, that is not the merciful God I serve!

 

To the best of my knowledge, no.

 

I only speak for myself but "no".

 

To the best of my knowledge, no. </font>[/QUOTE]Some do believe that, many, if not most, do not.
For example, Spurgeon and more recently Al Mohler, Jr. believe that all infants who die are elect.
Plus it is my understanding that those who do believe that an infant could go to hell believe that the infant would experience it as an adult, so to speak, not as an unaware baby.

Karen

 

Then in essence, they were created for hell!?! Can't be, because hell was created for the devil and his angels (although man chooses to go there based on his unbelief).

 

Infants don't go to hell because Christ is the "Atoning Sacrifice for OUR SINS and NOT our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" - 1John 2:2

And "To him that KNOWS to do right and does it not to HIM it is SIN"

The infant NEEDS a savior because of its sinful nature - and it has one.

It is too young to be capable of abstract concepts like rebellion/salvation etc. It is not capable of choice as an infant.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The citation makes absolutely NO reference to the children of the reprobate.

 

I don't think he says anything about them. It may be that he held the same view as many paedobaptists: that we don't know their fate. God does, but we don't.

BTW, if you find the reference to the book and chapter etc of Calvin's Institutes that your original quote came from, I'll look it up for you and help you put it in context.

One thing to remember: "infancy" in the language Calvin wrote in means "younger childhood". It included "babyhood", but it also includes children older than babies, too. So all Calvin is saying in that quote, taken all by itself, is that believers can assume that a child of theirs that dies went to heaven UNLESS that child shows evidence of unbelief, and that believers should automatically be assured that their VERY YOUNG children went to heaven.

 

The last two quotes are just statements of original sin, which is not particular to Calvinism. They are saying that people were born sinners with a nature that's corrupt. All of us are by nature (how we're born) children of God's wrath.

The first one is arguing from the fact that many nations throughout history were never given the gospel, and so they had no remedy available for their sin, and since God knew that was happening and he could have changed it, then it must have in some way been intended by him. This is all argument supporting the idea that God decreed the fall and the results of the fall. This is, of course, one of the classic objections people have to Calvinism.

Here's what comes directly after that quote:

Calvin is arguing, then, that objecting to the idea that God decreed (or intended) the fall and all it's consequences is an argument that God didn't have foresight (prescience), or that he was ignorant of what would happen.

I just read a quote from C. S. Lewis the other day that argues pretty much the some thing--that what God knows he intends.