The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Security, infant salvation, and universalism

I have been mulling over this issue for a couple weeks now and am just gonna throw this out for discussion in hopes that maybe someone can help me make sense of this and also let me know where I am erring, if at all.<br><br>If we are born in sin and dead in it at that, then the only way that all infants can go to heaven is if 1) they are all of the elect or 2) they are born saved. The first has more biblical ground, but the second is the one that has me stuck.<br><br>My dad is an Arminian, and believs that all infants and children and such are somehow in a suspended state of grace or something like that or they are saved until they reach the age of accountability. Well, he also believes in once saved always saved. And if OSAS is true, than that would mean that if infants are born saved than they will always be saved. And if ALL infants are born that way, than ALL people would go to heaven because you can never lose your salvation. <br><br>Am I following that through correctly? And if so, than isn't that universalism?

My experience with such non-Calvinists is that they do not believe all infants are saved, but rather that they are not condemned in the first place. Fundamentally, this has two errors with it. First, it ignores the imputation of Adam's sin. Second, it fails to realize the subtle yet important reality that we sin because we are sinners, not that we become sinners through personal sin. That is, we do not begin to be sinners through our actual acts of sin, they are the expression of the inherent corruption from birth. Hence, from conception, all are born sinners both federally and metaphysically, standing in need of salvation.<br><br>There are some respectable men, like Hodge I believe, who assume that all infants dying in infancy are elect. Personally, I find no warrant for such a conclusion, hence the very idea that all infants certainly go to heaven is without a compelling case IMHO.<br><br>Sincerely in Christ,<br><br>~Jason<br><br>

I tend to agree with Jason too.<br><br>Was not W G T Shedd of the same opinion as Hodge ?<br><br>howard

I in no way think that all infants go to heaven simply because they are of the elect and such. I, personally, and to the offense of many a person, think that infants who die in infancy go to hell since they were conceived in sin and all that. <br><br>I just really am uncomfortable saying that we are sinless until the age of accountability at which time we lose our sinlessness. How can someone be alive for a while and then dead but only so dead that they have to choose to stay that way or not. it just seems rediculous to say that. <br><br>I would even think, and be able to say with a clear conscience, that maybe possibly SOME infants go to heaven because SOME infants are of the elect. This would also fit with a Biblical view of original sin and God's sovereignty.

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]I would even think, and be able to say with a clear conscience, that maybe possibly SOME infants go to heaven because SOME infants are of the elect.</font><hr></blockquote><p>That is the position of the WCF as well, where it states that "all ELECT infants dying in infancy are saved . . ."<br><br><hr width="85%"><br><br><center>[color:blue]The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter X<br>Of Effectual Calling</font color=blue></center><br><br>III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]<br><br>12. Gen. 17:7; Luke 1:15; 18:15-16; Acts 2:39; John 3:3, 5; I John 5:12<br>13. John 3:8<br>14. John 16:7-8; I John 5:12; Acts 4:12<br><br><hr width="85%"><br><br>In your first post, the options of infant salvation were: 1) They are born regenerate, and 2) They are born saved. The problem with #2 is that to be saved, one has to be united to Christ. To be united to Christ, one has to be joined by faith. To have faith, one has to be regenerated. Thus it is a redundancy rather than another option. Jason articulated the biblical position quite nicely, emphasizing that ALL are born with the inherited corruption (Original Sin) and ALL have Adam's guilt imputed to them as well. Thus, even if someone were to argue that infants are born "Tabula Rasa" (a blank moral slate) and even died in the womb, they would still be liable to judgment due to the guilt they bear.<br><br>In His Grace,

It would seem that you are wrestling not so much with whether infants may go to hell but with whether they may go to heaven. Obviously elect infants (if there were any) dying in infancy would go to heaven. My guess, therefore, is that you are struggling with whether one may go to heaven (i.e. be elect) without coming to faith. Or, to put it another way, does God always prolong the life of all the elect at least until faith is exercised? To which I would say, we must not allow election to be contingent upon faith. Which you may not be doing, but some do. Therefore, you might be wondering whether God always brings the elect to faith. I would suggest that if the order of salvation is truncated prior to faith (in the case the infant), the infant may still be united to the Christ through the monergistic work of the Spirit. Salvation is, therefore, bound up in the decree of God, the particular redemption of Christ and the baptism of the Spirit. Faith, perseverance (in faith) and glorification are the result of the former. I, with the Confession, would say “yes”, there are elect infants who dye in infancy, but never at the exclusion of regeneration and union with Christ.<br><br>I'll take this one step further. We may have great hope for the children of believers who dye in infancy. But unlike A.A. Hodge, I believe there is little hope for those who die young from unbelieving homes. In fact, to die in infancy and in reprobation is an act of mercy; for a life of sin is more to be punished for.<br><br>Ron<br>

Concerning infants/children Jesus says, "LET the little children come unto me and FORBID THEM NOT, for of such IS the kingdom of God." They do not resist the Holy Spirit.

Hello Seya,<br><br>Hmmm, I'm not quite sure what you are saying by this. If you are saying that this passage says that all infants that die will be in heaven, then I think you are misinterpreting it.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]"13 And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, 'Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15 Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it.' 16 And He took them in His arms and began blessing them, laying His hands on them."<br><br>Mark 10:13-16</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>As Pilgrim would say, "Context is everything. Without context, you have pretext."<br><br>You cannot separate verse 14 from the whole passage to try to make a point hold water. Verse 15 expounds on what was just said; "Truely I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it."<br><br>What is a child? We are told that entering the kingdom of heaven can only be done if we receive it like a child. Well what does that mean? Is it just some 'open-minded' state where we believe everything we are told with 'child-like' faith? I think not. A child, especially in that time, was of no prominence. He had no merit of his own on which he could stand. Such is the way we enter the kingdom of heaven; not through our own merit, but through that of our LORD as it is imputed on those who believe.<br><br>So this passage does not say that all infants will be in heaven, but rather, those 'such as these.'<br><br>A good rule of thumb in Biblical hermeneutics is to let the clear explain the unclear. Not the opposite. The whole of scripture tells us that we are born sinful. As Jason said, we do not become sinful because we sin, but rather because the sinful nature has been passed down from the fall, we sin. If a child is not born sinful, then it is possible for that child to live a perfect life and have no need of Christ.<br><br>In Him,<br>Chris

I see what you are saying. And what you said answered my question nicely, along with everyone else. <br><br>Now to one of the other things I think I asked in my original post. If eternal security be true, than if all infants are born saved and since we can't lose salvation, than doesn't that mean that everyone goes to heaven? I know that seems like a really simple question, but I just wanna make sure that I am thinking straight on this issue so that if I ever have to deal with it, I am able to speak the truth in boldness and compassion without any hint of unsure-ness.

Kalled2Preach,<br><br><font class="big">[color:red]IF</font color=red></font mu=big> one accepts the premise as being true that:<blockquote>If eternal security be true, than if all infants are born saved and since we can't lose salvation, than doesn't that mean that everyone goes to heaven?</blockquote>Then, universalism is a logical conclusion. However, since the Scriptures teach that not all are saved, then the premise is, de facto, untrue. <br><br>In His Grace,

Of course! I know it's not true. But apart from some minor things that are just a matter of rewording, my logic is as correct as prolly it can be for a fallible human?

Sounds "kosher" to me, brother! <br>

If we are born sinless, than the mothers should abort their unborn to gaurantee eternity with Christ. I would if I knew it would save my child from Hell.

Chris,<br><br>I'm not so sure that Mark 10:13-16 is being taken out of context as regards this topic. I do not mean to imply that any person of any age is suspended in a state of innocence. The Bible is very clear that all humans come into this world guilty. My point though is that if God has elected to save someone, they will be saved. Now we know that election is unconditional and we have no way of knowing who it is God has chosen, but this passage of Scripture gives me great hope that those little ones who die, have been regenerated and saved by the blood of Jesus Christ.<br><br>"The kingdom of God belongs to such as these" -- these were little ones He was speaking of and little ones who die in infancy or early childhood, (or even in a state of retardation) would certainly be considered "such as these". Again, these particular little ones aren't being blessed by Jesus because they are inherently innocent but they are being blessed by Jesus because Jesus has chosen to bless them, and that is the key to any ones salvation, (God choosing to bless). As the song goes, 'Oh how I love Jesus, because He first loved me.' <br><br>We can't say for certain who is in heaven, but this beautiful portion of Scripture gives me great hope that there are many tiny ones who have entered the kingdom of God. I would not be uncomfortable sharing this passage and the hope that I think it brings, with those in grief over such a loss. The question then can be turned to them---We have great hope that your little loved one is now with Jesus, but what about you? Are you sure of your hope of seeing this precious one again? There is only one way that you can, and that is to put your trust completely in the very same One who held these children in His arms and blessed them. Have you come to Jesus yourself?<br><br>Hope I made a little sense. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/crazy.gif" alt="crazy" title="crazy[/img]<br><br>Stucco

I must disagree with you on this point, Stucco.<br><br>If what you are saying is that all those that die in infancy are elect and saved by God, then I think you are incorrect. Following this logic, as Gailmac stated in another post, then we should just kill our infants to ensure their salvation. And pagans should do the same! Don't get me wrong, I think there is a great hope to be had that the promise of salvation extends to our children (Acts 2:38-39, though there are obviously exceptions), but I do not think this passage in Mark teaches that all infants that die are saved.<br><br>I agree with your statement that we do not know whom the LORD has chosen to redeem, but I do not agree with your application of the text ("the kingdom of God belongs to such as these"). The "such as these" is refering to those who come to Christ upon no merit of their own (ie: as a child would, metaphorically speaking). I could be wrong in my interpretation of the text here, but I find no text elsewhere to support the idea that all infants that die are saved.<br><br>In Him,<br>Chris