Consistent Calvinsim Believes All Babies Go To Hell

There are two types of Calvinists, Consistent and Inconsistent. This thread focuses on the consistent Calvinists because either you accept Calvinism or you don't it really is that simple. Either you believe in double predestination and be a consistent Calvinist or some where along the line you realize there are serious problems with this theology and attempt to ratify it to fit better, you think becoming a inconsistent Calvinist is still Calvinism, but it's not. If you fit in this group, please don't even bother posting your position because it is not true Calvinism. I want to hear from true Calvinists.

This thread address true Consistent Calvinist, the double predestination one. If you fall in this group, then you believe all babies go to hell because it is impossible for them to have been the elect. It is you who I want to hear from. How do you resolve this belief to yourselves? Abortion is part of God's plan to weed out early people who are not part of the elect, does that make abortion ok?

Please feel free to show us how all babies go to hell fits in predestination.

It is after all impossible according to consistent Calvinism for babies to go any where but hell. So why bother to fight abortion? It would be after all impossible to abort an elect.

Umm... how would thinking that God extends salvation to dead children be inconsistent with Calvinism? If God is the one who regenerates people... would it not be consistent that He regenerates the child even if they cannot respond? He's the one that causes salvation... not us.

Consistent Calvinists believe in

1. unconditional election: God has already picked who would be the elect from eternity past and who is going to hell.

You preach the gospel because you really don't know who the elect is, and is only revealed by seeing that you trust in Christ and endure to the end.

Babies were born in sin, never repented, not endured to the end. God makes no mistakes, this is predestined remember. Obviously dead babies were never the elect.

Perhaps you are one of the many inconsistent Calvinists who can not come to terms with true consistent Calvinism which is pretty straight forth and easy to follow. I was addressing real Calvinists tho.

Originally Posted by IndieVisible

This thread address true Consistent Calvinist, the double predestination one. If you fall in this group, then you believe all babies go to hell because it is impossible for them to have been the elect. It is you who I want to hear from. How do you resolve this belief to yourselves? Abortion is part of God's plan to weed out early people who are not part of the elect, does that make abortion ok?

On his own, mankind runs towards the abyss........... period. God initiates, intervenes & and saves period.

"ites"............. where are you "ites" in a discussion of "libertarian" free will?

That's fine, but that is not Consistent Calvinism, I am addressing true Calvinists here.

There is no need to intervene in Calvinism double predestination. No mistakes can happen.

Originally Posted by IndieVisible

That's fine, but that is not Consistent Calvinism, I am addressing true Calvinists here.

There is no need to intervene in Calvinism double predestination. No mistakes can happen.

Really
Quite excellent to know that I'm not a "strawman".......... or a "Consistent Calvinist"? Please show where I was against, straight up, or............ he he he..... equal to the Synod of Dordt.

I am curious how many consistent Calvinists we have here and how they defend/rationalize all dead babies go to hell?

Where are the great majority of "ites"

Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. ~ John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8............. London Baptist Confession 10:3

I'm sort of a Calvinist, although I'm open to more unconventional views of God, which I'm not going to deal with in a discussion about Calvinism.

As I understand it, Calvin says that our salvation is based on God's decision to save us, and send Christ to die for us. The key factor is what Paul calls being "in Christ." I don't see any reason that this should be impossible for infants. Faith is how we receive it. But the intellectual component varies with maturity and other things.

As far as I know, the historical Calvinist position is that there are elect infants just as there are elect adults. I don't think the idea that all infants are saved is part of traditional Calvinism. Nor is the idea that all infants are damned.

To the poster... would it not be logical to trust in a most gracious Lord? He's the one whom we have to deal with.... if babies go to Hell, then it was for a just cause... if God saves them, then it's for a just cause.

Regardless, that does nothing to my faith and knowledge of God's election and predestination.