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

ClementofA · Jul 28, 2018

redleghunter said:
Thou shalt not kill. ( Exodus 20:13)

So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

redleghunter · Jul 28, 2018

ClementofA said:
So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

Made that reply in Dec 2017 in a different context than you are.

SkyWriting · Jul 29, 2018

ClementofA said:
So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

Children are welcomed by God and they welcome Him.
That's what scripture says anyway.

ClementofA · Jul 30, 2018

SkyWriting said:
Children are welcomed by God and they welcome Him.
That's what scripture says anyway.

Yet the problem remains, as i said:

So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

As for the Scripture (Mt. 19:14) you refer to:

Weymouth New Testament
Jesus however said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them; for it is to those who are childlike that the Kingdom of the Heavens belongs."

It doesn't say "little children" are forced to go to heaven (whether they want to or not) if they die as "little children".

Furthermore, Mt.19:14 says nothing about aborted babies, but refers to "properly, a child under training" http://biblehub.com/greek/3813.htm

Also, the idea isn't that these "little children" go to heaven if they died, but that one must become "like" such, in a certain way or ways, if they are to qualify for heaven:

Matthew 18:3
"Truly I tell you," He said, "unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Mark 10:15
Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."

The apostle Paul, & earlier in Matthew Jesus, puts the statement of Mt.19:14 in proper perspective:

1 Corinthians 14:20
Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.

Matthew 18:3
"Truly I tell you," He said, "unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

"In Mark and Luke it is said he immediately added, "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall not enter therein." Whosoever shall not be humble, unambitious, and docile, shall not be a true follower of Christ or a member of his kingdom. Of such as these - that is, of persons with such tempers as these - is the church to be composed. He does not say of those infants, but of such persons as resemble them, or are like them in temper, is the kingdom of heaven made up. As emblematic, therefore, of what his own followers were to be, and as having traits of character so strongly resembling what he required in his followers..."

"...All are fallen; all have, a tendency to sin, and none but Jesus can save them. Little children, too..."

"... it does not appear to be the design of this passage to teach that all infants will be saved. It means simply that they should be suffered to be brought to Christ as amiable, lovely, and uncorrupted by the world; as having traits of mind resembling those among real Christians; and as themselves needing his blessing."

"...for of such is the kingdom of heaven; that is, as the Syriac renders it, "who are as these" or as the Persic version, rather paraphrasing than translating, renders it, "who have been humble as these little children": and it is as if our Lord should say, do not drive away these children from my person and presence; they are lively emblems of the proper subjects of a Gospel church state, and of such that shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: by these I may instruct and point out to you, what converted persons should be, who have a place in my church below, and expect to enter into my kingdom and glory above; that they are, or ought to be, like such children, harmless and inoffensive; free from rancour and malice, meek, modest, and humble; without pride, self-conceit, and ambitious views, and desires of grandeur and superiority."

Matthew 19:14 Commentaries: But Jesus said, "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

As to babies & little children entering the Kingdom of God:

"Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." " (Jn.3:3)

Babies who died weren't born of the Spirit in their mortal life. They can't enter the kingdom of God till they are born of the Spirit.

"Flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of the Spirit." (Jn.3:6).Babies were born of the flesh, and died without being born of the Spirit.

If there is no salvation (being born again) after death, then how do those who died as babies or children get saved?

Do they at some point get to hear the gospel in the afterlife & make a choice for or against Christ?

Or is salvation forced upon them by irresistible grace?

If so, then wouldn't it be a great blessing to have been aborted & thereby avoid any risk of endless hell? Wouldn't it be doing them a favor to have an abortion? Clearly that can't be true.

Evidently babies who die are not immediately forced into heaven without a choice and without being first saved or born of the Spirit.

Therefore, though many deny it is possible, there must be after death salvation.

Some other Scriptures to consider re infants who die in their infancy & with their fallen sinful nature remaining inside of them:

"The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world." (Jn.1:9)

"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." (Jn.12:32)

"He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son." (Rev.21:7).

And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Rev.21:27)

Do demon possessed babies and children who die go to heaven with the demons still inside them? Or do they need to be saved after death from these demons before they are allowed into heaven? Do they need to be born again postmortem before they can enter the kingdom (Jn.3:3-8)?

It's clear those not born again aren't getting into the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8). Were aborted babies born again before they died? No. So they will have to be born again postmortem before they can enter the kingdom of God. That would be postmortem salvation.

Will Love Omnipotent force the aborted to be born again postmortem? Will He give them no choice in the matter? Is He a Calvinist? If dead babies get an automatic entry into heaven, should a loving parent let their child reach the age of accountability & possibly go to hell forever? Or would it be more loving to send the child to heaven?

These questions reveal the absurdity of the view that there is (1) an endless torture chamber awaiting billions of humans & (2) that babies who die as such automatically avoid such a hell & are forced (whether they want to or not) into heaven. Both (1) & (2) cannot be true. In fact both are false.

http://www.hopebeyondhell.net/articles/further-study/eternity/

redleghunter · Jul 30, 2018

Let's proceed to show your dishonesty in plucking out what I responded to:

ClementofA said:
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?

This is what I quoted from you. Showing parents have no right to murder their own children just because they would have assurances said children would be in Jesus's care.

redleghunter said:
Thou shalt not kill. ( Exodus 20:13)

There it is above.

Let's turn this dishonest approach of your own on its head. You are advocating parents kill their children to ensure they don't grow up and perhaps deny Messiah Jesus.

How do you defend parents murdering their own children thus making themselves out to be God?

ClementofA · Jul 30, 2018

redleghunter said:
Let's turn this dishonest approach of your own on its head.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Which is nothing new as regards many of your posts.

redleghunter said:
You are advocating parents kill their children to ensure they don't grow up and perhaps deny Messiah Jesus.

Wrong. Clearly you don't "get" my point.

redleghunter · Jul 30, 2018

This should clear up the matter;

ClementofA said:
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?

To which I replied

redleghunter said:
Thou shalt not kill. ( Exodus 20:13)

Parents have no right to kill their children.

You responded:

ClementofA said:
So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

What’s wrong is you advocating infanticide.

Apologetic_Warrior · Jul 30, 2018

ClementofA said:
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?

"Evangelicals are divided in their opinion about the fate of infants who die.

"Some, who believe in God's sovereign election of the "few," also believe that non-elect babies who die will spend eternity suffering in hell. John Calvin said, "there are babies a span long in hell."

"Others consider this unfair, and assert that infants who die will spend eternity in heavenly bliss. This of course is true, but not because the child is innocent. It's true because the Scriptures teach that God intends to save everyone from everything that they need to be saved from.

"A few years ago there was a story in a Montreal paper about an Ohio lady who drowned her baby in a bathtub. Her defense was that she loved the baby so much that she wanted to make sure that her child would not have to suffer forever in hell. After serving a sentence she remarried, had another child and drowned it for the same reason. She trusted that God would forgive her because her intention, though warped by false theology, was for the good of her children.

"The jury decided that she was mentally ill, BUT WAS SHE? The simple pragmatic fact remains that if Arminianism is right, her two infants will spend eternity in heavenly bliss because she loved them so much that she insured, by killing them, that this will be so.

"Apparently, many Christians believe that there is a magical split-second in time before which a child, if they die, will go to heaven, and after which, if they die will spend eternity suffering in hell. They call this the "age of accountability."

"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.

"Folks, the actual truth about the matter is much more sane and blessed. The Scriptures teach that salvation is all of the Lord, and He will not fail to save every one of us according to His own timing. No one will be able to boast in His presence and say, "I have saved myself from eternal hell by exercising my faith in God's provision. God will get all of the glory for everyone's salvation.

"The important issue never should be "what is right or what is wrong." The only really important issue is, "What is God going to do with the person who is wrong?" The Scriptures teach that God will fit every one of us into His master plan in a positive way, and He will use our temporary involvement with sin to teach us the lessons that He wants us to learn. As my Dad often says, "That's what makes Him God!" "

Can Children Go to Hell?

Sorry to say, but the above is poorly reasoned. For starters, breaking a commandment of God in an attempt to out think the Creator of hearts and minds and souls, is foolishness. I imagine the same foolishness is reasoned to be a justification for pro-choice abortion. It is like encouraging a believer to commit suicide, just take the easy way out, you're going to Heaven anyway and will feel so much better. Such nonsense can only spring from the pit of Hell.

ClementofA · Jul 30, 2018

redleghunter said:
What’s wrong is you advocating infanticide.

What's wrong is making false accusations:

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-false-accusations.html

Is English not your first language or do you just not understand it very well?

redleghunter · Jul 30, 2018

ClementofA said:
What's wrong is making false accusations:

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-false-accusations.html

Is English not your first language or do you just not understand it very well?

This is your quote:

ClementofA said:
So you'ld follow that rule & let your child go burn in hell fires forever?

There's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill.

You need to explain.

My response was no parents have no right to murder and then quoted Exodus 20:13.

In your zeal to promote soul annihilation and universalism, you presented an absurd OP.

ClementofA · Jul 30, 2018

redleghunter said:
In your zeal to promote soul annihilation and universalism, you presented an absurd OP.

Soul annihilation? I certainly don't support annihilationism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annihilationism

ClementofA · Jul 31, 2018

Apologetic_Warrior said:
Sorry to say, but the above is poorly reasoned. For starters, breaking a commandment of God in an attempt to out think the Creator of hearts and minds and souls, is foolishness. I imagine the same foolishness is reasoned to be a justification for pro-choice abortion. It is like encouraging a believer to commit suicide, just take the easy way out, you're going to Heaven anyway and will feel so much better. Such nonsense can only spring from the pit of Hell.

The point is there's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill. So which is wrong (a) dead babies are forced into heaven whether they want to be there or not, with their fallen nature & even if they're full of demons or (b) billions of others who die with a sin nature are forced to burn in hell forever, whether they want to or not? Both are wrong, as my posts in this thread have proven.

It's clear those not born again aren't getting into the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8). Were aborted babies born again before they died? No. So they will have to be born again postmortem before they can enter the kingdom of God. That would be postmortem salvation.

Will Love Omnipotent force the aborted to be born again postmortem? Will He give them no choice in the matter? Is He a Calvinist? If dead babies get an automatic entry into heaven, should a loving parent let their child reach the age of accountability & possibly go to hell forever? Or would it be more loving to send the child to heaven?

These questions reveal the absurdity of the view that there is (1) an endless torture chamber awaiting billions of humans & (2) that babies who die as such automatically are forced to go to heaven & get a free "never go to hell" card without being born again or having made a free will loving choice for Christ or the gospel.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

SkyWriting · Jul 31, 2018

ClementofA said:
These questions reveal the absurdity of the view that there is (1) an endless torture chamber awaiting billions of humans & (2) that babies who die as such automatically avoid such a hell & are forced (whether they want to or not) into heaven. Both (1) & (2) cannot be true. In fact both are false.

1. Endless - becasue time does not exist in the next life.
Torment - Based on how bad you feel about the life you've lived
and the things you have done. The results fit the crime perfectly in the next life.

2. Babies take very well to being loved and since they are mentally orphans, they choose God over their short painful life. Do they all? God only knows.

SkyWriting · Jul 31, 2018

ClementofA said:
It's clear those not born again aren't getting into the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8). Were aborted babies born again before they died? No. So they will have to be born again postmortem before they can enter the kingdom of God. That would be postmortem salvation.

People experience time and God does not. So the before/after, now/then
quagmire is not an issue. Timing is not an issue for God. Only for man.

Apologetic_Warrior · Jul 31, 2018

ClementofA said:
The point is there's something wrong here with someone's theology if the most loving thing to do is kill. So which is wrong (a) dead babies are forced into heaven whether they want to be there or not, with their fallen nature & even if they're full of demons or (b) billions of others who die with a sin nature are forced to burn in hell forever, whether they want to or not? Both are wrong, as my posts in this thread have proven.

What's wrong is:
a.) making judgements about the judgements of God
b.) not trusting in the knowledge, goodness, and mercy of God in His judgements
c.) not considering that we are fallen creatures and the just penalty creatures deserve considering the infinite holiness of a just Creator.

ClementofA said:
It's clear those not born again aren't getting into the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8). Were aborted babies born again before they died? No. So they will have to be born again postmortem before they can enter the kingdom of God. That would be postmortem salvation.

Actually we do not know whether such and such baby has been born again or not. With God all things are possible, consider John the Baptist in his mother's womb. This historical narrative tells me that God can regenerate a baby in the womb. Personally, rather than thinking God regenerates all babies in the womb, I would not call this the norm, rather it applies to those infants God has chosen, and I would not call it the norm for all of God's chosen people, however I see room to believe that God can regenerate infants in the womb knowing they will die in infancy, and am inclined to think He does this in the instances of the children of believers whom suffer the loss of loosing an infant.

ClementofA said:
Will Love Omnipotent force the aborted to be born again postmortem? Will He give them no choice in the matter? Is He a Calvinist? If dead babies get an automatic entry into heaven, should a loving parent let their child reach the age of accountability & possibly go to hell forever? Or would it be more loving to send the child to heaven?

I do not believe God bows to the idol of free will. I do not believe choices can be separated from desires. So if God has monergistically regenerated a soul, the same would choose to live in eternity with Christ, and the same is true of the unregenerate soul, the same would choose separation from Christ for eternity.

When we put ourselves in the place of God and think we could be more loving, we could never be more wrong.

ClementofA · Jul 31, 2018

SkyWriting said:
1. Endless - becasue time does not exist in the next life.

Are you seeing this in Scripture somewhere? Lk.16:19-31, for example, seems problematic for such a viewpoint.

SkyWriting said:
2. Babies take very well to being loved and since they are mentally orphans, they choose God over their short painful life. Do they all? God only knows.

Babies don't have the ability to make free choices re the gospel (which is the power of God unto salvation, Rom.1:16). So how are they going to believe it in order to be born again?

ClementofA · Aug 1, 2018

Apologetic_Warrior said:
What's wrong is:
a.) making judgements about the judgements of God
b.) not trusting in the knowledge, goodness, and mercy of God in His judgements
c.) not considering that we are fallen creatures and the just penalty creatures deserve considering the infinite holiness of a just Creator.

Infinite holiness is not a Scriptural expression & infinite punishment for finite sins is anti-biblical.

Apologetic_Warrior said:
Actually we do not know whether such and such baby has been born again or not. With God all things are possible, consider John the Baptist in his mother's womb. This historical narrative tells me that God can regenerate a baby in the womb. Personally, rather than thinking God regenerates all babies in the womb, I would not call this the norm, rather it applies to those infants God has chosen, and I would not call it the norm for all of God's chosen people, however I see room to believe that God can regenerate infants in the womb knowing they will die in infancy, and am inclined to think He does this in the instances of the children of believers whom suffer the loss of loosing an infant.

The Holy Spirit can enter anyone He wishes. In the OT He spoke through an animal. That doesn't mean the animal was "born again". Neither does it mean John the Baptist was "born again". To be born again one must first be born. But John hadn't yet been born. To be "born again" one must receive Christ (Jn.1:12-13). But babies can't even understand the word "Christ", let alone comprehend what it means to receive Him, let alone actually believe in Him to receive Him (1 Jn.5:1).

One who is not born again cannot enter the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8). So since John the Baptist hadn't been born again, Jesus said he "who is least in the kingdom of God" is "greater than he" (Lk.7:28). Yet of those merely "born of women", "no one was greater than John" (Lk.7:28).

The gospel is the power of God to salvation to everyone who believes (Rom.1:16). Babies can't even understand it, let alone believe, so they cannot be "born again". When they die as such, whether born or preborn, they die unsaved. They will need to obtain salvation postmortem. This means they will have to be given the ability & maturity to hear & understand the gospel & make a decision to either accept it or reject it. Just like all others.

Apologetic_Warrior said:
I do not believe God bows to the idol of free will. I do not believe choices can be separated from desires. So if God has monergistically regenerated a soul, the same would choose to live in eternity with Christ, and the same is true of the unregenerate soul, the same would choose separation from Christ for eternity.

When we put ourselves in the place of God and think we could be more loving, we could never be more wrong.

Apologetic_Warrior said:
George Whitefield: "Man is nothing; he hath a free will to go to hell, but none to go to heaven, till God worketh in him" and "you dishonour God by denying election. You plainly make salvation depend, not on God’s ‘free grace’ but on Man’s ‘free will.’"

No one in a sane mind would make an eternal number of choices to be separate from Christ.

If we are all just robotic puppets whom God saves by irresistible force, like you turn on a TV with a remote control, then He should be able to save everyone. Unless He just doesn't feel like it & would rather burn billions alive forever for the hell of it. How, as you put it, "loving".

https://forum.evangelicaluniversalist.com/t/poll-can-i-be-a-calvinist-and-a-universalist/3030

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/unique_proof_for_universalism.html

SkyWriting · Aug 1, 2018

ClementofA said:
Babies don't have the ability to make free choices re the gospel (which is the power of God unto salvation, Rom.1:16). So how are they going to believe it in order to be born again?

Scripture says get out of the way of the children or get trampled
as they come to Jesus. It sounds more likely.

ClementofA · Aug 8, 2018

When God flooded the earth, Noah's ark was not laden with a world population of heathen babies. They felt the wrath laid upon them for the crimes of their parents. Call it just, or call it unjust, but that's the way it is.

Wrath? More like a gift, beyond all gifts possible, if popular Christianity is true that such innocents always automatically get a "don't go to hell, but to heaven" card. IOW they are forced into heaven by irresistible grace, & given no choice in the matter, since Love Omnipotent evidently doesn't care about a free choice being made to love Him. Instead He forces His love upon these. If only all created beings were so lucky. It seems salvation is a matter of pure luck, if popular beliefs were true. But they're not:

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...tims-of-infanticide-all-go-to-heaven.8037317/

ClementofA · Sep 11, 2018

2 Samuel 12:16-23 English Standard Version (ESV)
16 David therefore sought God on behalf of the child. And David fasted and went in and lay all night on the ground. 17 And the elders of his house stood beside him, to raise him from the ground, but he would not, nor did he eat food with them. 18 On the seventh day the child died. And the servants of David were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they said, “Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spoke to him, and he did not listen to us. How then can we say to him the child is dead? He may do himself some harm.” 19 But when David saw that his servants were whispering together, David understood that the child was dead. And David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” They said, “He is dead.” 20 Then David arose from the earth and washed and anointed himself and changed his clothes. And he went into the house of the Lord and worshiped. He then went to his own house. And when he asked, they set food before him, and he ate. 21 Then his servants said to him, “What is this thing that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child while he was alive; but when the child died, you arose and ate food.” 22 He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ 23 But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.”

If the child had gone to heaven & David had assurance that he would join the child in heaven, no matter how he lived the rest of his life, no matter how many more premeditated adulteries & premeditated murders he committed, then why couldn't you also live as wickedly as you want & also go straight to heaven after you exit this life?

Scripture says ye must be born again to enter God's kingdom (Jn.3:1-8), so the unregenerated aborted must be saved postmortem in order to enter heaven. Therefore there is postmortem salvation.

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

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

The Librarian

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Pilgrim

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Librarian

The Librarian

Pilgrim

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Librarian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads