ReformedBaptist;
We had a storm and my power went off. Maybe it was for a reason. I see now you do acknowledge that some Calvinist do say infants go to hell.
Brother Bob, perhaps its just your linguistics, but I have always agreed that some calvinists believe its possible/true that infants may and/or are suffering eternal damnation. Lest anyone be misunderstood, you have not drawn this idea from me, but is something I have always acknowledged knowing some calvinists who believe this thing.
I also see you, as Martin ,want to take the silence of the Synod of Dort, as saying all children are saved, of which it does not say.
Brother Bob, please be fair to what I did say, and do not put words into my mouth. What I said was quite plain. The article of the synod teaches that the children of believers who die in infancy are elect, and saved. It does not teach that all others are damned. There is no english word or syllable in the Article that even suggests it. I dare you to produce their language that says so. The article is silent on that point.
Martin asked for documentation of where the Calvinist believe infants in hell, and he provided the info himself. It is no great surprise to me, that you choose not to recognize what is plain in the article 17 of the Synod of Dort, that if you are not children of the elect, then we will not mention where you are going.
This is where you are being dishonest. You are reading beyond the text of the article and what is written there and drawing a conclusion based on what is NOT said, not what IS said. I am no master of debate brother Bob, but that sounds like an affirmation from nothing. It certainly is your interpretation and opinion of the mind of the writers of Article 17, but there is nothing written there that says what you are saying it in fact says. Please be honest.
Maybe, I posted a little hard but if you can produce anything I said that was entirely out of line, I will apoligize.
Brother Bob, I have already quoted you in this matter perviously. If you do not see it, may the Lord not charge it to your account.
I see Dale-C put his two cents worth in too. Believe me, maybe you were not around, but Dale-C was, and this subject has been around and around, with Dale-c right in the forefront. He said he was going to do better, but he just now stuck his nose in this debate, instead of letting us work it out between us.
You talk of dishonest, I think it is dishonest, to not recognize the fact ,that article 17 being silent on the unsaved's children.
In this you may be inadvertantly falsey accusing me my brother. I clearly stated before, when I shared my thoughts on Article 17, that the synod said nothing about the damnation of infants of unbelievers. If you insist I was being dishonest, then show me where I wrote such a thing and I will readily admit it.
Also, if it means what I take it too mean, then there are many Calvinist that do believe infants in hell, as you now acknowledge there are some. Seeing you would like me to lay down and roll over, instead of using what material I have to prove my point, then I see no point whatsoever in this discussion.
This is acting childish Brother Bob, is serves no profit to the readers or to us. I agree that some calvinists believe infants may go to hell. They are free to believe that. Let us even suppose, and you believe, that it is many...What does it prove? What is the point your trying to make. This thread is about the biblical doctrine of predestination. Let us discusss that doctrine and not what may or may not be the opinions of some or many calvinists upon a point and issue of which the Scirpture itself is very scant.
To say I would have you lay down and roll over, et. Is quite childish Brother Bob. And if this is the posture you wish to take, then I agree, the discussion is over.
Here you admit what you all read into it is mere speculation, but you choose to read into it that it does not say the infants of the unsaved miss heaven.
I think you have genuinely misunderstood me Brother Bob. Any conclusion made about the mind of the writers of Article 17 as to what they did not say, one way or the other, is speculation. But if you want to know what I believe about infant salvation/damnation and why I believe it, I will be glad to provide the best biblical answer the grace of God will allow me. But as to what the Synod of dort believed, I do not know for certain other than what they wrote concerning the children of believers.
If you have a right to speculate, so do I, and I read that it does indeed say by being silent on the children of the unsaved, while saying the children of the saved go to heaven, is saying the children of the unsaved do not.
That is indeed speculation and mere opinion. And therefore unworthy of full acceptance as absolute truth.
Also, that is what it says, whether you agree or not.
No Bob, it does not say that, and here you just contradicted yourself. In one breath you say this is my speculation and in other you say this is what it says.
I have heard too many Calvinist say so, yes right on here. Even Dale-c, if I remember correctly stated long before that he could not say whether infants went to hell or not, and he may have made it stronger than that, but if I can't remember, I will leave it at that.
I cannot speak for the brother in question as I was never a part of the conversation. I can speak of similar postures I have heard calvinists take (whether this brother is I do not know) in that they do not say one way or another based upon the FACT that Scripture is scant/silent on the subject and so they choose to be so to, trusting the perfect wisdom and will of God who does all things right and good.
