If endless punishment were true & victims of infanticide all go to heaven

[SBC]

Hi SBC,

All I'm saying is that the Scriptures don't present the issue in that manner. It's certainly how we want to consider it in our human nature, but God isn't us. We would like to think that when the death angel passed over Egypt that the firstborn who were merely little babes in their mother's arms weren't affected. We want to think that when the flood covered the whole earth that surely there must have been some mercy for the little children. But, that's how we, in our human nature, want to see the issue.

As I say, I'm willing to let God be God, but I'm not prepared to say that God is going to do something or handle something in a particular way, if He hasn't said so. Your argument continues to rest on the ability of a human being to cognitively understand the law, but the Scriptures never infer that requirement.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

Your argument continues to rest on the ability of a human being to cognitively understand the law,

No, it is not only about the law. Greater is Gods WORD, than the letter of the law. No, my difference with you, is the ability for a human to be accountable for what he has not yet the capability, to yet know.

The LAW exists, whether or not one UNDERSTANDS the LAW. Just as the Word of God exists, whether or not one has Heard it, or understands it. Just as all things God has created and made exists, whether or not men believe it is Gods creation. They can clearly see what exists, and clearly know, men did not create it.

It is not some kind of mystery, that BABY'S do not have the capability to KNOW what a LAW is, let alone, begin to comprehend what it means.

but the Scriptures never infer that requirement.

What the Scriptures .... do not INFER.....but rather precisely SAY, is that God IS JUST.

If you KNOW what JUST means, you would KNOW, JUSTICE prevails according to what IS JUST.

IS it JUST, to punish one who has NOT the capacity to know, to love, to believe in God?

IS it JUST, to punish one who has NOT the capacity to know, or understand what death means, and therefore we should sentence to death (like a connotative adult), a 5 yr old murderer, who smothers to death his baby brother?

Scripture is full of teaching of what is JUST, and how to exact JUSTICE.

Do you somehow believe Scripture is teaching what is JUST, is in opposition to what is JUST according to God? I don't.

Scripture identifies those WITHOUT excuse. ARE those WHO...have clearly seen what He has made, by the things themselves that exist, and by the Power God exacts over the things clearly seen.

Rom 1
[20] For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Seriously, do you believe a BABY, has clearly seen the WORLD, the things made, His Power? I don't.
I was talking with a 3yr old once, who had been listening to a conversation of adults speaking about a teen who had been killed in a car accident, and saying she was going to be cremated. I asked the 3yr old, what does dead mean. He said, that meant people couldn't see them any more. I asked why? He said because God came and got them and took them to His house in Heaven. I asked him where is Heaven. He said, way, way, up past the clouds. I asked if we could go there and see God. He said no, we couldn't. I asked why not. He said because we have to wait until God comes to get us. Then I asked him if he knew what cremation meant. He said yes. I asked him to tell me what it meant. He said they burn the girl, then put the crumbs in a box. I asked if it hurt the girl to burn her. He didn't think so, but didn't know why. I ask what do they do with the crumbs in the box. He wasn't sure, but thought they might bury it in the ground. I asked then how does God taken them to his House. He said, when we are not looking, God comes and takes them.

Point being, a BABY does not know what is clearly seen, neither does a small child who is in the process of learning about God ......

It is EASY to learn how much or how little a child knows and understands, by talking WITH them instead of AT them.

A HOW LITTLE example;
My children were taught to pray before meals. When my son was 5, in Kindergarten, I went to his school, stood where he could not see me, to observe him eating his lunch. He paid no mind to other children and folded his hands, blessed his meal and ate. Several weeks later, he was telling me he sat next to a little girl in his class, and she started asking him stuff while he was praying. She asked him what he was doing. He told her he was asking God to bless his food. She asked Him who is God. And asked him what is a bless.

Point being ~ God provides His WORD that it be known to men, and men work diligently around the world to make His Word known to men. PRECISELY because we are not naturally BORN or CREATED already KNOWING His Word.

Point being ~ God IS JUST, and gives opportunity for men to KNOW, about He who has created all things, BY the very things He has created. He further gives opportunity for men to KNOW, by hearing, by reading His Word. God further INSTRUCTS, for men to NOT KEEP little children from coming to Him,
that they ALSO may learn about Him. And baby's? Does God instruct men to teach Baby's about Him?
Where? Does God instruct men to punish Baby's for not believing in God? Where?

We would like to think that when the death angel passed over Egypt that the firstborn who were merely little babes in their mother's arms weren't affected. We want to think that when the flood covered the whole earth that surely there must have been some mercy for the little children.

I wouldn't. I would rather trust to believe, Gods understanding is PERFECT, as are His acts and judgements and mercy. I would rather trust to believe, God REQUIRES the blood death of every individual naturally born person. I would rather trust to believe, only God knows the day, the time, He shall decide to require our blood lives, and that WHEN he takes, it is JUST.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[miamited]

Hi SBC,

Thanks for your reponse. You wrote:

No, my difference with you, is the ability for a human to be accountable for what he has not yet the capability, to yet know.

No, we don't share any difference in the fact that at different ages a human being has different capacities to understand. What we differ in is whether or not God's word addresses the issue of such capacity of understanding being any factor in one's receiving the promise of eternal life with God.

Then you further supported your understanding:

What the Scriptures .... do not INFER.....but rather precisely SAY, is that God IS JUST.

If you KNOW what JUST means, you would KNOW, JUSTICE prevails according to what IS JUST.

IS it JUST, to punish one who has NOT the capacity to know, to love, to believe in God?

Well, there is also the Scripture that tells us that God's ways are not our ways.

I read the rest of your post and I agree that God's word is true, but I don't agree that any of these Scripture references necessarily can give us any assurance in this matter. We'll see.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Hi SBC,

If I might also address your final point:

I wouldn't. I would rather trust to believe, Gods understanding is PERFECT, as are His acts and judgements and mercy. I would rather trust to believe, God REQUIRES the blood death of every individual naturally born person. I would rather trust to believe, only God knows the day, the time, He shall decide to require our blood lives, and that WHEN he takes, it is JUST.

I find it odd that you're willing to accept that in the case of the death angel you're willing to trust God as to how it happened and who all was affected, but you seem to balk at accepting that the very same understanding should apply to this issue rather than trying to make some claim of assurance that you know how God is going to handle something that His word doesn't address.

I agree that God is just and His judgment is righteous, but I can't proclaim to know whether that is then going to mean that God's going to save all the little babies. Because that's depending on my definition of justice and righteousness and...God's ways are not my ways. I mean, really, can we proclaim that His sense of justice and righteousness is the same as ours as the waters of the flood covered up the crying of likely thousands of babies and young children? Does that agree with your sense of justice?

I'm not saying that He isn't just and righteous, but merely pointing out that historically His sense of justice and righteousness isn't likely in agreement with most people. Many times, we as believers, are asked about how God could be just and righteous and yet tell His people to put to death an entire city of people. From the oldest to the youngest. So, I think there are many examples where God has done things that, in our humanness, we would question His justice and righteousness. I mean, in all of the accounts of God bringing wrath upon people of the earth, He doesn't seem to have ever once said, "But save the babies!!"

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[SBC]

Hi SBC,

Thanks for your reponse. You wrote:


No, we don't share any difference in the fact that at different ages a human being has different capacities to understand. What we differ in is whether or not God's word addresses the issue of such capacity of understanding being any factor in one's receiving the promise of eternal life with God.

Then you further supported your understanding:


Well, there is also the Scripture that tells us that God's ways are not our ways.

I read the rest of your post and I agree that God's word is true, but I don't agree that any of these Scripture references necessarily can give us any assurance in this matter. We'll see.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

What we differ in is whether or not God's word addresses the issue of such capacity of understanding being any factor in one's receiving the promise of eternal life with God.

I do believe understanding is paramount.
I also believe it is God who gives understanding to whom He will.
I believe God is Just.
I believe God by all efforts reveals his word to mankind, in whatever method or language, that is sufficient. goo goo ga ga.

Can I give you a billeted point by point Scripture that sets Gods Word designed for a babe to comprehend? No.
Neither can I give you what does not appear in Scripture but that which is taught by the Holy Spirit.
Neither can I give you what the Holy Spirit gives me to understand.

John 14
[26] But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 21
[25] And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[SBC]

I find it odd that you're willing to accept that in the case of the death angel

Okay.

you're willing to trust God as to how it happened and who all was affected, but you seem to balk at accepting that the very same understanding should apply to this issue rather than trying to make some claim of assurance that you know how God is going to handle something that His word doesn't address.

I trust what Gods teaches me. That is MY TRUST. No one says you have to trust what I trust.
If you want to read all about little children in the scripture, and find all their requirements and damnation's pronounced upon them, and ask God Himself to give you His Understanding, go ahead, I already have.

I agree that God is just and His judgment is righteous, but I can't proclaim to know whether that is then going to mean that God's going to save all the little babies.

Okay.

Because that's depending on my definition of justice and righteousness and...God's ways are not my ways. I mean, really, can we proclaim that His sense of justice and righteousness is the same as ours as the waters of the flood covered up the crying of likely thousands of babies and young children? Does that agree with your sense of justice?

I did not say, Gods Way IS mans WAY. The point is SOME men attempt to know and understand Gods Way, and follow along in His Way.

I'm not saying that He isn't just and righteous, but merely pointing out that historically His sense of justice and righteousness isn't likely in agreement with most people.

I don't expect God to be in agreement with me, nor have I said that, but rather, I am in agreement with God.

Many times, we as believers, are asked about how God could be just and righteous and yet tell His people to put to death an entire city of people. From the oldest to the youngest. So, I think there are many examples where God has done things that, in our humanness, we would question His justice and righteousness.

Perhaps. But I don't.

I mean, in all of the accounts of God bringing wrath upon people of the earth, He doesn't seem to have ever once said, "But save the babies!!"

Saving of a baby, is not about saving its flesh! Unless you are speaking from a humans perspective.
Humans revel in their own BLOOD life, and bend over backwards to save it. God doesn't. As a matter of fact, He has already pronounced at least ONE death for every human born.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[ClementofA]

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then comes the judgment" -

That verse does not deny either:

1] the lost being saved after death & before judgement, or

2] the lost becoming saved after death & judgement

True of the living.

Jesus did not say that the dead must become born again.

For them "the story is over" -- they are either in or out.

If that were true, then babies would go to hell, since they were not "born again" (Jn.3:3-8). Fortunately it's false.

Jesus said that which is born of flesh is flesh (e.g. new born babies) & that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. And He said one MUST be "born again" of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3-8). No exceptions are given. Nowhere does He say His words apply only to the living & after death there is another way, a different principle. He doesn't say babies who died as such will be allowed into the Kingdom without being born of the Spirit. And since babies will be allowed to enter, once they receive the new birth of the Spirit, there is after life salvation.

Do you suppose babies who died will be forced into heaven without their consent of free will & remain in those little bodies (about 3 inches high & up) & minds on the level of an animal (or less) for all eternity? And being forced to confess Jesus is Lord (Phil.2:9-11) and worship God (Rev.5:13) without even knowing what they are talking about? And this will glorify God?

[BTW, Scripture says the saved will confess Jesus is Lord (Phil.2:9-11) to the glory of God the Father. And that no one can do this except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor.12:3).]

Or do you think it more reasonable & likely that Love Omnipotent will after their death bring these babies bodies & minds to a level of maturity so they can understand the gospel and make a free will choice between Jesus or Satan? And like in this life many will choose Jesus and many will reject Him. In which case there is after death salvation for the unsaved.


Matthew 12:32

“And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

This addresses one sin, but how does it address every other sin or what happens to all who die in sin in the afterlife?

The previous verse says:

So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Mt.12:31

IOW all those who die in sin (blasphemy of the HS excepted) shall be forgiven. So there is afterlife salvation.

For more comments on this passage, see the thread topic:

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

Spirit blasphemy - unpardonable sin

 

[BobRyan]

One doesn't have to be a universalist to believe babies get born again after being killed by abortion. Or that there is a purgatory (or the like) where the unsaved may have a first or second chance for salvation.

The living have to be born again - when they choose to accept the Gospel .. they believe and they are born again.

The dead don't have crusades and when the dead are raised they are raised incorruptible (the dead in Christ that is - 1 Thess 4) so they too do not need to be born-again.

One is either saved or lost when they die and being resurrected does not change it. When the saints are raised they are raised incorruptible. The baby that is raised is raised incorruptible.

"to him that knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin" James 4:17 babies are not in that group.

Nothing in this opinion provides Scripture denying after death salvation by the Saviour of the lost to the same.

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then comes the judgment" -

As opposed to "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then more chances to accept the gospel"

That verse does not deny either:

1] the lost being saved after death & before judgement, or

2] the lost becoming saved after death & judgement

I admire your optimism in the face of that disconfirming text.

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then comes the judgment" -

As opposed to "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then more chances to accept the gospel"

not "it is appointed unto man once to die then comes evangelism then comes judgment". INSERTING your beliefs into the text is called eisegesis. There is not limit to the false doctrine that can be had via the floodgates of eisesgesis. Anyone can "just insert whatever they wish" and it becomes "their Bible".

Also Note -- you don't get evangelized while you sleep.


1 Thess 4
13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Matt 22 "God is not the God of the dead - but of the living" - such that bodily resurrection is the only solution Christ allows.

 

[BobRyan]

Jesus said, ye must be born again to enter His kingdom (Jn.3).

True of the living.

Jesus did not say that the dead must become born again.

For them "the story is over" -- they are either in or out.

If that were true, then babies would go to hell, since they were not "born again" (Jn.3:3-8).

Only the living need to be born again. Babies die and have forgiveness of sins - when they are raised they have sinless bodies and already had no ability to 'sin' (to him that knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin - James 4:17) even while living.

the point remains.

Jesus said that which is born of flesh is flesh but he is talking to an adult.

His conversation is in the context of an adult - and one who knows to do right ... and at times.. does it not.

This is irrefutable.

Do you suppose babies who died will be forced into heaven without their consent of free will & remain in those little bodies (about 3 inches high & up) & minds on the level of an animal (or less) for all eternity?

1. Babies make no choices... they have no concept of abstract ideas such as obedience, sin, salvation, the gospel etc.

This is irrefutable.

2. Babies grow up over time.

This is irrefutable.

3. A sinless being (which is what that baby is in the resurrection) would not choose death, sin and misery without a lot of deception to coax them into it. Adam and Eve were sinless adults and needed a devil to tempt them to do evil. They would not do it of their own accord.

4. A sinless baby would have no sins to confess, no repentance, no "turning from sin" -- fully sinless from the very start.

This is irrefutable.

 

[BobRyan]

Matthew 12:32

“And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

This addresses one sin, but how does it address every other sin or what happens to all who die in sin in the afterlife?

The previous verse says:

So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Mt.12:31

IOW all those who die in sin (blasphemy of the HS excepted) shall be forgiven. So there is afterlife salvation.

For more comments on this passage, see the thread topic:

the text says "will not be forgiven" you turn it into "see there is forgiveness in the next life".

We have many texts saying that in this life a person can be forgiven... and NONE saying that in the next life you are forgiven of sins. The only statement made at all about the next life is... no forgiveness.

Thus Matt 12 is not helping the point you seek to make.

 

[ClementofA]

the text says "will not be forgiven" you turn it into "see there is forgiveness in the next life".

We have many texts saying that in this life a person can be forgiven... and NONE saying that in the next life you are forgiven of sins. The only statement made at all about the next life is... no forgiveness.

Thus Matt 12 is not helping the point you seek to make.

The passage (Mt.12:31-32) doesn't use your words that in "the next life is...no forgiveness". It says only one single sin is not forgiven. And the penalty for that is limited to this age & the coming age. Since there is at least one age beyond that (Eph.1:21; 2:7; Lk.1:33; Rev.22:5, etc) coming age, the passage (Mt.12:31-32) tells us nothing about the final destiny of those who commit such a sin. [Or if anyone ever committed it]. It does, however, inform us as to the final destiny of all others who didn't committ that sin, namely forgiveness.

“And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this AGE, neither in the AGE to come.” (Mt.12:32)

This addresses only one sin not forgiven, but how does it address every other sin or what happens to all who die in sin in the afterlife?

The previous verse says:

So I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Mt.12:31

IOW all those who die in sin (blasphemy of the HS excepted) shall be forgiven. So there is afterlife salvation.

For more comments on this passage, see the thread topics:

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

Spirit blasphemy - unpardonable sin

 

[ClementofA]

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then comes the judgment" -

As opposed to "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then more chances to accept the gospel"

I admire your optimism in the face of that disconfirming text.

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then comes the judgment" -

As opposed to "it is appointed unto man once to die - and then more chances to accept the gospel"

not "it is appointed unto man once to die then comes evangelism then comes judgment". INSERTING your beliefs into the text is called eisegesis. There is not limit to the false doctrine that can be had via the floodgates of eisesgesis. Anyone can "just insert whatever they wish" and it becomes "their Bible".

Also Note -- you don't get evangelized while you sleep.


1 Thess 4
13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Matt 22 "God is not the God of the dead - but of the living" - such that bodily resurrection is the only solution Christ allows.

The reference to Hebrews 9:27 does not speak of "an expiration date" for salvation or God's love. After death comes judgement for all, sinners & saints. Judgement can be a good thing:

"When your judgments come upon the earth, the people of the world learn righteousness." (Isa.26:9)

The Greek word for "chastening" here can mean correction:

The Lord is acquainted with the rescue of the devout out of trial, yet is keeping the unjust for chastening in the day of judging. (2 Pet.2:9)

Heb.9:27 says it is appointed to men once to die. Does that deny men can die twice? No. Does it say "only" once? No. If New England is appointed to play the Buffalo Bills twice, does that deny they won't meet again in the playoffs? No. How many times did those raised before the general resurrections die?

I think, in light of the Rapture theory, many Christians would disagree with the statement that 100% of mankind will die and face judgment. Not only that, but Hebrews 9:27 does not say men are "only" going to die once. Lazarus, for one, is a Biblical example of one who died twice & the book of Revelation speaks of the "second death"."

I already provided examples proving Heb.9:27 does not mean death occurs "once & only once". If it did there would be a Bible contradiction & the Bible would be lying.

Paul says "once was i stoned" (2 Cor.11:25). Does that mean he could never be stoned again or stoned twice? Obviously not.

Scripture reveals there are those who will not die even once & implies there are those who will die at least a second time. There are those who will never die, not even once:

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 says: “For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.”

It says what it says, and all of the conjectures will not change its meaning. V28 shows the context of v27 and example, Heb 9:27-28 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. No hope for repentance after death.

We can agree that "it says what it says". But your words do not equate to the "meaning" of the verse, nor have you provided any reason why it should be understood according to - your - opinion - that it establishes a doctrine of "no hope for repentance after death".

Let's be clear. The passage nowhere uses your words "no hope", "hope" or "repentance".

The passage does not rule out repentance "after...judgement".

Neither does it rule out the possibility of repentance after death & before judgement.

It simply doesn't address such issues.

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

 

[iwbswiaihl2]

It simply doesn't address such issues. This is what you said, and it is rightly so, that is why you have no scriptural defense at all, It simply doesn't address such issues. But it does specifically state what it says in Hebrews 9:27, so the written word, as always, is to be taken over opinions, unless they can be backed up with the written word, and as you so rightly stated about what you claim: It simply doesn't address such issues, as you claim.

 

[ClementofA]

It simply doesn't address such issues. This is what you said, and it is rightly so, that is why you have no scriptural defense at all, It simply doesn't address such issues. But it does specifically state what it says in Hebrews 9:27, so the written word, as always, is to be taken over opinions, unless they can be backed up with the written word, and as you so rightly stated about what you claim: It simply doesn't address such issues, as you claim.

I have no Scriptural defence? Of what? It is your view of Hebrews 9:27 that is in need of defence & has been debunked. Hebrews 9:27 does not support the position you claim it does.

 

[ClementofA]

True of the living.

Jesus did not say that the dead must become born again.

For them "the story is over" -- they are either in or out.



Only the living need to be born again. Babies die and have forgiveness of sins - when they are raised they have sinless bodies and already had no ability to 'sin' (to him that knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin - James 4:17) even while living.

the point remains.

Jesus said that which is born of flesh is flesh but he is talking to an adult.

His conversation is in the context of an adult - and one who knows to do right ... and at times.. does it not.

This is irrefutable.



1. Babies make no choices... they have no concept of abstract ideas such as obedience, sin, salvation, the gospel etc.

This is irrefutable.

2. Babies grow up over time.

This is irrefutable.

3. A sinless being (which is what that baby is in the resurrection) would not choose death, sin and misery without a lot of deception to coax them into it. Adam and Eve were sinless adults and needed a devil to tempt them to do evil. They would not do it of their own accord.

4. A sinless baby would have no sins to confess, no repentance, no "turning from sin" -- fully sinless from the very start.

This is irrefutable.

Scripture does not say babies will be raised with immortal bodies. Do you suppose they'd still be the same size (about 3 inches & up) as when they died & of the same mental capacity, i.e. like an animal (or less).

Scripture says:

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Rom.10:13)

9 that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with your heart you believe and are justified, and with your mouth you confess and are saved. (Rom.10:9-10)

Babies who died as such never did that while alive. So they died unsaved. They'll have to be saved after death. Therefore there is after death salvation.

Scripture does not say those (babies included) who died in sin, with sinful natures or demon possessed (or oppressed) will be welcomed into heaven with such. They must first be saved from such to enter. So there is after life salvation.

Nothing common, unclean, profane or unwashed shall enter the New Jerusalem (Rev.21:27). Salvation requires "the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). Babies didn't get that in this life, so they'll have to experience after death salvation.

Jesus said that which is born of flesh is flesh (e.g. new born babies) & that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. And He said one MUST be "born again" of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3-8). No exceptions are given. Nowhere does He say His words apply only to the living & after death there is another way, a different principle. He doesn't say babies who died as such will be allowed into the Kingdom without being born of the Spirit. And since babies will be allowed to enter, once they receive the new birth of the Spirit, there is after life salvation.

Do you suppose babies who died will be forced into heaven without their consent of free will & remain in those little bodies (about 3 inches high & up) & minds on the level of an animal (or less) for all eternity? And being forced to confess Jesus is Lord (Phil.2:9-11) and worship God (Rev.5:13) without even knowing what they are talking about? And this will glorify God?

[BTW, Scripture says the saved will confess Jesus is Lord (Phil.2:9-11) to the glory of God the Father. And that no one can do this except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor.12:3).]

Or do you think it more reasonable & likely that Love Omnipotent will after their death bring these babies bodies & minds to a level of maturity so they can understand the gospel and make a free will choice between Jesus or Satan? And like in this life many will choose Jesus and many will reject Him. In which case there is after death salvation for the unsaved.

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

Spirit blasphemy - unpardonable sin

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Myths and fairy tales grow and grow ..... throughout the world, throughout history .....

 

[SkyWriting]

If endless punishment were true & victims of infanticide all go to heaven, then infanticide saves infants from any chance of growing up & going to endless torments or annihilation.

Love provides options.

 

[SkyWriting]

Should a loving parent, therefore, kill their infants before they reach an age at which God would hold them accountable?

Only if, as children, they would wish that upon themselves.
Which may be the case, I dunno.

 

[SkyWriting]

"The important issue never should be "what is right or what is wrong."

That is the only issue.

4 Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 5 One man regards a certain day above the others, while someone else considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

 

[redleghunter]

If endless punishment were true & victims of infanticide all go to heaven, then infanticide saves infants from any chance of growing up & going to endless torments or annihilation.

Should a loving parent, therefore, kill their infants before they reach an age at which God would hold them accountable?

Thou shalt not kill. ( Exodus 20:13)

 

[Mountainmanbob]

"If I believed this nonsense I would take a gun into the largest maternity ward in Toronto and, before the police arrived, kill every infant who had just been born.

This would cause an enormous amount of suffering to the parents, but this wouldn't matter much in the long run, because probably most of them (according to evangelical theology) are destined to suffer forever in hell anyway, so why not save their babies from the same fate?

"Don't try to argue that what I would be doing would be wrong ("thou shalt not kill"). The fact remains that my act would, in fact insure the eternal salvation of the babies. If Arminianism is right, then infanticide would certainly be one of the most effective ways of "saving souls." Besides, God forgives murder, especially when it is done for such a noble, though misguided cause. Sure, they would lock me away in an institution, but I would spend my life revelling in the glow of the emotional high of knowing that I had, beyond any shadow of a doubt guaranteed the salvation of the babies that I had killed.

That would sign that you were not Born Again and heading for the Hot Spot.

Everyone does not end up in heaven.
What a ridiculous thought.

M-Bob