The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Babies and Election

Pilgrim said:
In case you haven't experienced it, trying to argue that any unborn baby or infant will be consigned to eternal damnation will most always evoke strong opposition and the wrath of man will fall upon you for doing so.

Therefore, be forewarned!

to which I replied:
Some conclusions are best reached on ones own if you catch my drift. [snip]
Two questions:
Is there actually any biblical support for the
babies-whisked-to-heaven thing?

Is the non-elect babies going to hell deal an extrapolation from Calvin only?

And, indeed, Christ was sanctified from earliest infancy, that he might sanctify his elect in himself at any age, without distinction. For as he, in order to wipe away the guilt of disobedience which had been committed in our flesh, assumed that very flesh, that in it he might, on our account, and in our stead, perform a perfect obedience, so he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, that, completely pervaded with his holiness in the flesh which he had assumed, he might transfuse it into us. If in Christ we have a perfect pattern of all the graces which God bestows on all his children, in this instance we have a proof that the age of infancy is not incapable of receiving sanctification. This, at least, we set down as incontrovertible, that none of the elect is called away from the present life without being previously sanctified and regenerated by the Spirit of God. [This strong assertion must be seen in its relationship to the question of the salvation of elect infants dying in infancy. If they are to have remission of sins, a new nature, and the blessing of eternal life, it is clear that they must be regenerated.] As to their objection that, in Scripture, the Spirit acknowledges no sanctification save that from incorruptible seed, that is, the word of God, they erroneously interpret Peter’s words, in which he comprehends only believers who had been taught by the preaching of the gospel (1 Pet. 1:23). We confess, indeed, that the word of the Lord is the only seed of spiritual regeneration; but we deny the inference that, therefore, the power of God cannot regenerate infants. This is as possible and easy for him, as it is wondrous and incomprehensible to us. It were dangerous to deny that the Lord is able to furnish them with the knowledge of himself in any way he pleases.

But faith, they say, cometh by hearing, the use of which infants have not yet obtained, nor can they be fit to know God, being, as Moses declares, without the knowledge of good and evil (Deut. 1:39). But they observe not that where the apostle makes hearing the beginning of faith, he is only describing the usual economy and dispensation which the Lord is wont to employ in calling his people, and not laying down an invariable rule, for which no other method can be substituted. Many he certainly has called and endued with the true knowledge of himself, by internal means, by the illumination of the Spirit, without the intervention of preaching. But since they deem it very absurd to attribute any knowledge of God to infants, whom Moses makes void of the knowledge of’ good and evil, let them tell me where the danger lies if they are said now to receive some part of that grace, of which they are to have the full measure shortly after. For if fulness of life consists in the perfect knowledge of God, since some of those whom death hurries away in the first moments of infancy pass into life eternal, they are certainly admitted to behold the immediate presence of God. Those, therefore, whom the Lord is to illumine with the full brightness of his light, why may he not, if he so pleases, irradiate at present with some small beam, especially if he does not remove their ignorance, before he delivers them from the prison of the flesh? I would not rashly affirm that they are endued with the same faith which we experience in ourselves, or have any knowledge at all resembling faith (this I would rather leave undecided); [It is instructive to take note of Calvin’s careful restraint and sense of proportion in the previous few sentences. With respect to the question of the manner in which elect infants dying in infancy are saved, Calvin, while presupposing their need and the Spirit’s supply of regeneration (see note on section 18), makes no definite assertion concerning the presence or absence of faith in them. This position of indecision (as Calvin terms it) is commendable, precisely because it does not presume beyond the teaching of Scripture.] but I would somewhat curb the stolid arrogance of those men who, as with inflated cheeks, affirm or deny whatever suits them.

However, another point may be helpful in answering this question. While infants and children have neither sensed their personal sin and need for salvation nor placed their faith in Christ, Scripture teaches that condemnation is based on the clear rejection of God's revelation—whether general or specific—not simple ignorance of it (Luke 10:16; John 12:48; 1 Thess. 4:8).

But an uncircumcised male ... shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.

When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. ... For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy.

In Genesis 17 where we read the command to Abraham that every male child eight days old is to be circumcised (including the children of servants and slaves - even if not Abraham's descendants (verse 12), there is this unnerving penalty presecribed in verse 14:

An eight-day-old covenant breaker? It's not as though an eight-day-old could circumcise himself if his parents failed to do so - yet God's word is explicit.

Robin said:

Election in infancy is also demonstrated in the yet-unborn John the Baptist's reaction to Mary's visit with Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-56). Verses 41 and 44 say


That was definately an elect baby... and compelling evidence of God's election prior to birth - let alone prior to any verbal articulation of faith.

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

Joe k said:
Does scripture ever say that people are eternally damned because of Adam's sin? I am not aware of any.

Joe k said:
I should have clarified my question better!!!! I am aware of what you wrote. Is there any scripture that states a person is punished for anothers sins? God lifted this sour grapes "rule". Is there any NT scriptures that speak as such?

Christ appears to be the only man who suffered and was punished for anothers sin. I may be wrong, but I cannot find any evidence.