There Are No Infants in Hell

Ekklesian said:
Answer my question first, and I will answer yours.
Click to expand...
Regarding Ephesians 2:8, there is much disagreement as to whether faith, or salvation is the gift. Even Calvin weighed in on the side of it, pointing to the totality of salvation. But for the sake of argument, I’ll answer, faith is the gift of God. Now answer my question.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Regarding Ephesians 2:8, there is much disagreement as to whether faith, or salvation is the gift. Even Calvin weighed in on the side of it, pointing to the totality of salvation. But for the sake of argument, I’ll answer, faith is the gift of God. Now answer my question.
Click to expand...
What would hinder an infant from receiving it?
 
ALAYMAN said:
Are you contending that God is limited in granting salvation to only those capable of the ability to reason
Click to expand...
No. My contention is that salvation is only by grace through faith, irrespective of one's natural cognitive abilities.
 
ALAYMAN said:
Worth the read, covering many of the questions/objections asked in this thread….


Do infants who die go to heaven.
Click to expand...
LOL. His own brand of Universalism. Universalism for infants...hey! Now I understand the blessing upon him that dashed the Babylonian infants against the stones. He was sending them straight to Abraham's Bosom!

For the sake of argument. Let's say that's true, that all who die in infancy are heaven bound. Here's the question that no one seems to want to touch: Are the infants who die infants in heaven?
 
Ekklesian said:
You're the one making it about the unborn. You asked a question, and I answered with Scripture.

The first Adam was not born of a woman, so why should the Second Adam have been? Why didn't God just scoop up some dirt and form a mature adult body for Christ to enter into?

We're told why. To made like unto His brethren in "every way," so that in every stage He shared their experience and could serve as a "merciful high priest in things pertaining to God." Now if there were no need of a mediator in the womb, there would have been no need for Christ to have lived and served there Himself.

But there He was, made under the law, showing us that even there we are under the law, and under a curse, and ripe for the Gospel.

Here's our interaction summed up:

You: The message of salvation is only for adults.

Me: Well, Paul and Silas told the jailer that the message was for his entire household.

You: Typical Calvinist, appealing to Scripture. But CONTEXT!!!! They're talking to an ADULT!!! I know the Scriptures, and there is no Scripture ever anywhere directed to a child!!

Me: The 5th Commandment comes to mind. To whom is it speaking? To them under the law. So children are under the law too. Whom did Christ come to redeem? Them under the law. Ergo, the Gospel message is for kids too.

You: (looking for a way of escape) But, but, but...what about the unborn?

Witless Joe: Ekkk is an ass!! Hee haw!!

Me: Was Christ ever an unborn infant?

You: Stop changing the subject!!!!
Click to expand...
Where does scripture speak about infants?
 
Ekklesian said:
No. My contention is that salvation is only by grace through faith, irrespective of one's natural cognitive abilities.
Click to expand...
Where does scripture say this?
 
Ekklesian said:
You're the one making it about the unborn. You asked a question, and I answered with Scripture.

The first Adam was not born of a woman, so why should the Second Adam have been? Why didn't God just scoop up some dirt and form a mature adult body for Christ to enter into?

We're told why. To made like unto His brethren in "every way," so that in every stage He shared their experience and could serve as a "merciful high priest in things pertaining to God." Now if there were no need of a mediator in the womb, there would have been no need for Christ to have lived and served there Himself.

But there He was, made under the law, showing us that even there we are under the law, and under a curse, and ripe for the Gospel.

Here's our interaction summed up:

You: The message of salvation is only for adults.

Me: Well, Paul and Silas told the jailer that the message was for his entire household.

You: Typical Calvinist, appealing to Scripture. But CONTEXT!!!! They're talking to an ADULT!!! I know the Scriptures, and there is no Scripture ever anywhere directed to a child!!

Me: The 5th Commandment comes to mind. To whom is it speaking? To them under the law. So children are under the law too. Whom did Christ come to redeem? Them under the law. Ergo, the Gospel message is for kids too.

You: (looking for a way of escape) But, but, but...what about the unborn?

Witless Joe: Ekkk is an ass!! Hee haw!!

Me: Was Christ ever an unborn infant?

You: Stop changing the subject!!!!
Click to expand...
eKKK continues his inane babbling. He needs to go back to his wine bottle and porno magazines. 😂🤣😂🤣😂
 
Ekklesian said:
I'm not saying that either.
Click to expand...
Wow...then you probably need to be straightforward in what you're saying instead of dodging and weaving. Do infants and aborted children go to hell? How can they repent in the womb or before they're old enough to comprehend the gospel? YOUR position. Not what you believe the Bible teaches...
 
Ekklesian said:
LOL. His own brand of Universalism. Universalism for infants...hey! Now I understand the blessing upon him that dashed the Babylonian infants against the stones. He was sending them straight to Abraham's Bosom!
Click to expand...

Maybe you should define universalism, because it appears you just created your own definition of it.
Ekklesian said:
For the sake of argument. Let's say that's true, that all who die in infancy are heaven bound. Here's the question that no one seems to want to touch: Are the infants who die infants in heaven?
Click to expand...

You continue to want to be dogmatic about things that the scriptures are silent on. That seems to be your main difficulty here. Bruh was exactly on the money about how rabidly fundamentalist and rigid your thinking is when it comes to the subject, as your thinking process is the same as those who insist on things that they would claim are essential doctrines like pants on women, abstaining from movie theaters, rock ‘n’ roll music, etc.

But to answer your question, we don’t know how infants will be in heaven at the moment they enter, but Biblical reason and inference would say that they would continue to grow, as any other human being who is saved, and has entered into the realms of heaven will do.
 
Ekklesian said:
Why were infants circumcised?
Click to expand...
Did they choose to be circumcised? Did they demonstrate faith and obedience volitionally in a demonstrable way after having circumcision performed on/for them? Did all who were circumcised eventually show evidence of faith/regeneration?
 
ALAYMAN said:
But to answer your question, we don’t know how infants will be in heaven at the moment they enter
Click to expand...
Is it the body or the soul that enters heaven?

ALAYMAN said:
, but Biblical reason and inference would say that they would continue to grow, as any other human being who is saved, and has entered into the realms of heaven will do.
Click to expand...
That's interesting. So would you say it's the same for someone aborted or miscarried at, say, 6 weeks?

Is this how you picture them in heaven?
1722468734642.png

In the Resurrection, will that be the body that is raised?
 
Last edited:
ALAYMAN said:
Did they choose to be circumcised? Did they demonstrate faith and obedience volitionally in a demonstrable way after having circumcision performed on/for them? Did all who were circumcised eventually show evidence of faith/regeneration?
Click to expand...
In other words, did they choose to be under the law, and therefore under its curse? Of course not.

But we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law, Romans 3:19. Therefore, the Scriptures speak to infants.
 
Last edited:
ALAYMAN said:
Do infants who die go to heaven.
Click to expand...
The death of an infant or young child is profoundly heartbreaking – perhaps the greatest grief a parent is called to bear.​
​
I'm not so sure that it is more profoundly heartbreaking than the death of one's child regardless of age. David was inconsolable over the death of Absalom, not so much so over the infant born of Bathsheba. So the article isn't starting out well.

The central error in the article, despite the obligatory lip-service to the contrary, is that some people go to heaven, because they ostensibly have no sins or guilt of their own. It's a works-based gospel, and not a gospel of grace. Faith isn't required. Neither is holiness, without which, the Apostle tells us, no one will see the Lord.

A second related error, very close to the center, is the thinking that original sin is not our sin. This seems to stem from the fallacious notion that Adam was a mere representative of mankind, and that mankind was not "in" him. Mohler treats original sin as something that is on the surface, and not the very essence of our being. The Scriptures are clear. One is either corrupt, or one is whole. Evil or good. The secondary sins, our acts of sin, are merely the fruit of who we are--NOT the fruit of something that was tacked onto us.

But to Mohler, at least in the cited article, there is an amoral state of being, in which one is neither good (lacking holiness), nor evil (lacking sin of one's own). And then, with some nebulous Christian jargon, Mohler stunningly describes something quite antithetical to the nature and work of the Atonement. In the case of infants at least, he says Christ removes the stain of original sin from those who die in infancy and the amoral child is taken to heaven.

No second birth.

No new creation.

No dying in Christ's death.

No being raised with Him to new life.

Just by the virtue of their amoral existence, they are taken unchanged...cleaned up a little, but fundamentally unchanged...to heaven.

It doesn't matter how you slice it, it comes up another gospel.

Again, original sin is our sin. It is who we are, the very essence of our being. There is no such thing as an amoral existence, and infants are quite capable of sinning in the body. More on that later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top