The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Infant salvation

Trust me, you don't want to go there, because we have been, more then once. Our friend seems content to continue to proclaim these kinds of statements (i.e. regeneration being by "word and sacrament") as unarguable truth long after they have been dicsussed, refuted, and shown to be in patent error. Even just do a search on the phrase "word and sacrament," and you should find some of these threads I speak of.

I believe all elect people from infant to adult are saved by the same means, by grace through faith.
As much as I am a big fan of people like CH Spurgeon who believed that all infants go to heaven, and that infants who are not old enough to have sinned goes to heaven. I see no biblical support for it.
Many people who agree with Spurgeon about this, say that there is no way infants can have faith. How do they actually know this? Just because we may not be able to see their faith, doesn't necessarily mean that they don't.
Spurgeon's view comes from wishful thinking, but I see no solid evidence from Scripture to support it.
I see no reason from Scripture that any person is exempt from the biblical formula of by grace through faith.

Tom

But, since those threads, I have studied the Westminster Confession and I seem to agree with it more than many on The Highway who confess it.


The WCF says "all". There is no exclusion in WCF for elect infants in the effectual calling by His Word and Spirit. What is effectual calling other than a regeneration?


Baptism (which the WCF calls a sacrament) does confer grace to elect infants in His appointed time. What is grace other than a regeneration?

You are confusing/intermixing two separate operations of the Holy Spirit; i.e., "regeneration" and "effectual calling". It would behoove you to do some more theological study of these terms. Regeneration is the creation of the new nature which has a new disposition toward God. This renewing of the soul effects the mind, emotions and will, thus enabling a once spiritually dead sinner to comprehend God and His truth. Effectual calling is that operation of the Holy Spirit whereby He "draws" or "woes" the regenerated sinner to Christ by means of conviction of sin and displaying the loveliness of Christ and the necessity to believe upon Him for justification and reconciliation with God. Although they occur relatively concurrently; temporally regeneration occurs prior to effectually calling from the very nature of what they accomplish, the are nonetheless unique operations of the Spirit.

See here for detailed information of these respective terms:

Regeneration:
Regeneration, or the New Birth, by Arthur W. Pink
Regeneration and Conversion, by Samuel Hopkins
The Nature, Cause and Means of Regeneration, by John Owen

Effectual Calling
Irresistible Grace, by John Murray
Effectual Grace, by Lorraine Boettner

Again, you are confusing/intermixing terms. Grace is a very broad term which may be simply defined as God extending undeserved favor upon men. The term may even be sub-divided into two further categories; Salvific Grace and Common Grace. The former being extended to only those whom God has predestinated to salvation in Christ. The latter is that general benevolence of God whereby men are granted temporal favors, even physical life itself; i.e., the judgment that they deserve from the moment of conception is withheld during the time that the reprobate are allowed to live on earth. Regeneration was addressed above.

In His Grace,

Pilgrim, I will admit that it is not clear what David was sure of when he said "I will go to him, but he will not return to me." So it could be interpreted either way.

And as for Acts 2:39, I definitely do not believe that all of believers children will go to heaven, only those God foreknew or foreloved. I guess it makes sense to say that the children of believers that die in infancy may not be foreknown and therefore will not be glorified (Rom 8:30.

Does the same apply for the mentally retarded?

I would say it applies to all mankind, regardless of anything else.


God bless,

william

All right Ron just trying to get clarification.

But isn't the effectual call irresistable? All who receive the effectual call by Word and Spirit will be regenerated. Therefore, is not the Word the universal means whereby the elect are brought to regeneration?

John Owens, in "The Nature, Causes, and Means of Regeneration", describes the ordinary outward means for adults,



That squares with the WCF which states,


So Elect infants are regenerated being called by the means of the Word but not the ministry of the Word.


I'm a little confused here. If the WCF is referring to Common Grace or an even broader form of grace not Salvific Grace, why does the WCF say that the grace may be "offered, exhibited, and conferred" at a later time? What possible benefit would there be to the non-elect at a later time removed from the Baptism itself? Is Baptism ever a benefit to the non-elect?

I believe that the Westminster Confession of Faith's answer is right on target:

[color:"blue"]The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter X
Of Effectual Calling[/color]

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]

12. Gen. 17:7; Luke 1:15; 18:15-16; Acts 2:39; John 3:3, 5; I John 5:12
13. John 3:8
14. John 16:7-8; I John 5:12; Acts 4:12

There is the "outward call" which is common to all men, e.g., through the preaching of the Word whereby sinners are called to repent and believe upon Christ. And, there is that special "inward call", aka: effectual calling, which is the sovereign and sure work of the Holy Spirit wherein a sinner, having been regenerated is brought under conviction and flees to Christ, believing upon Him and trusting in His atoning work. Those incapable of comprehending the "outward call", yet who by God's immutable counsel are to be saved at His appointed time, are called "inwardly" so that their souls are enlightened, united to Christ, reconciled to God and thus become adopted sons and daughters of the Living God.

In His Grace,

I perceive that there is much confusion which occupies your thinking and I'm not sure if I will be able to entangle the labyrinth that exists there.

1) Of course the effectual call is irresistible, for that is what "effectual means".

2) Let me state it one more time, although I fail to understand how you could have missed it before. In the order of time, first comes regeneration which is a quickening of a sinner's spiritually dead soul. This creation of a new nature ENABLES the individual (makes it possible) at the time of an "outward call" with which the Holy Spirit normally works in conjunction and brings the "inward call" (efficacious/effectual call), to which the sinner responds. I cannot help but believe that much of your confusion is due to your belief that a sinner has no part in conversion; i.e., that no one exercises their will in repenting of their sins and believing upon Christ. This position you hold and which you have often stated on this Board is as erroneous as it is extreme.

Nooooooo, you are so confused! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> Infants are incapable of hearing the Word; i.e., the normal ministry of the Word. Regeneration is normally wrought by the Holy Spirit during a time when the Word is preached. This is true for adults and all those who are physically capable of hearing that Word. Chapter 10, section III of the WCF is addressing a specific situation, i.e., infants who die in infancy and those who are incapable of apprehending the "outward call", the ministry of the Word. What it is teaching is that there is no reason to doubt the grace and mercy of God Who will have ALL the elect saved, even those who die in infancy and those who are physically impaired to the point where they are outside the effects of the preaching of the Word. In these specific cases, the Holy Spirit is not bound to the typical and normal means which God has ordained to call sinners to Christ.

IMHO, No! there is no benefit to the reprobate in baptism.

In His Grace,

I know chestnutmare brought up 1 Cor 7:14.

Pilgrim, I am interested in how you interpret this verse and what is meant by "holy."

I know Francis Turretin and John Gill believe the holiness to be a external or federal holiness. Turretin says they are called holy because they are born into christianity and not heathenism which is a sate of "uncleanness."

Before I entered this thread I interpreted this verse differently, but now I think I agree with Turretin and Gill. But where else does holiness refer to christianity?

I've answered this question previously when this subject was being discussed. Here is what I wrote then and which I still hold to be true:

Covenant children are to presumed unregenerate until proven otherwise, since they are born in sin and under the wrath of God, no differently than all of mankind. Covenant children are "holy" (1Cor 7:14), i.e, they are truly blessed in that they have been given the privilege of being born into a home where there is at least one believing parent through and by whom the gospel will be heard and used to regenerate them, if it so be God's electing choice to do so in His perfect time. And they are subject to the teaching of righteous living, according to the Scriptures. They also have the privilege of being present in the house of God where believers offer worship, hear the Word of God preached, witness the sacraments, hear the testimonies of godly men, women and children, etc. which are the means of grace given by God to convert sinners to Christ. Covenant children should be expected to make a valid profession of faith before the church when THEY are moved to do so; having been convinced of their own conversion and the necessity of doing so, thereby becoming full members, fellow heirs of Christ, with the Body of Christ.

Romans 9:4, 5 seems to me to describe how the word "holy" is to be understood; i.e., the primary definition used in Scripture of "being separated, separate". And let's not overlook the fact that the unbelieving spouse is likewise deemed "holy" (Grk: agiazo). Paul uses the same word when describing the position of unbelieving spouses as he does for the children that have come by the union of a believing and unbelieving couple. So, whatever one wants to make "holy" mean, it must be applied to both unbelieving spouses and the children.

In His Grace,

thanks Pilgrim, your the man