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

[ClementofA]

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?

"As a matter of fact, Jesus and the disciples spent a good deal of time exorcising demons and dealing with harassing demons. But were any of them children? Yes. There are two recorded instances of demonic possession in children. In one, the demon-possessed is referred to as a boy, and in the other, the possessed person is referred to as a daughter, later as a child. So we take from these facts that it is possible for demons to inhabit children.

In this example the father said of his boy that his son has been possessed "since childhood":

"Mark 9:14-29-- "And when He came to the disciples, He saw a great multitude around them, and scribes disputing with them. Immediately, when they saw Him, all the people were greatly amazed, and running to Him, greeted Him. And He asked the scribes, “What are you discussing with them?” Then one of the crowd answered and said, “Teacher, I brought You my son, who has a mute spirit. And wherever it seizes him, it throws him down; he foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth, and becomes rigid. So I spoke to Your disciples, that they should cast it out, but they could not.” He answered him and said, “O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I bear with you? Bring him to Me.” Then they brought him to Him. And when he saw Him, immediately the spirit convulsed him, and he fell on the ground and wallowed, foaming at the mouth. So He asked his father, “How long has this been happening to him?” And he said, “From childhood. And often he has thrown him both into the fire and into the water to destroy him. But if You can do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” Jesus said to him, “If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.” Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!”

"When Jesus saw that the people came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, “Deaf and dumb spirit, I command you, come out of him and enter him no more!” Then the spirit cried out, convulsed him greatly, and came out of him. And he became as one dead, so that many said, “He is dead.” But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him up, and he arose. And when He had come into the house, His disciples asked Him privately, “Why could we not cast it out?” So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.”"

In the second case of a demon-possessed child, it is recorded in Mark 7:26-30; "The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter. “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.” She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

So a boy and a child are shown to be possessed by a demon. The answer to the original question is "yes." MacArthur expounded in his sermon 'Food from the Master's table'.

“Now she [the mother] has a problem. She kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. She kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. Matthew says the demon was an unclean spirit...an unclean spirit. In a sense, all demons are unclean. Demons are fallen angels who operate in the kingdom of darkness. They indwell unbelievers. This is a little girl. This is a young girl, an unmarried girl under the age of twelve, thirteen, when people got married. Who knows? Eight, nine, ten...seven...who knows? A demon-possessed child. Horrific experience for a mother. I think much more common in the world today than we understand or the demons want us to understand.” "

The End Time: Exalting the name of Jesus through essays on prophecy, discernment, and encouragement

 

[1an]

"As a matter of fact, Jesus and the disciples spent a good deal of time exorcising demons and dealing with harassing demons. But were any of them children? Yes. There are two recorded instances of demonic possession in children. In one, the demon-possessed is referred to as a boy, and in the other, the possessed person is referred to as a daughter, later as a child. So we take from these facts that it is possible for demons to inhabit children.

Jesus healed them.

Two lessons in my view. (1) have faith in God for deliverance (2) never kill anyone.
.

 

[ClementofA]

I'm wondering where i can find a free copy of the whole article online:

When Augustine lamented the soft-heartedness that made Origen believe that demons, heathens, and (most preposterously of all) unbaptized babies might ultimately be spared the torments of eternal fire, he made clear how the moral imagination must bend and twist in order to absorb such beliefs. Pascal, in assuring us that our existence is explicable only in light of a belief in the eternal and condign torment of babies who die before reaching the baptismal font, shows us that there is often no meaningful distinction between perfect faith and perfect nihilism. Calvin, in telling us that hell is copiously populated with infants not a cubit long, merely reminds us that, within a certain traditional understanding of grace and predestination, the choice to worship God rather than the devil is at most a matter of prudence. So it is that, for many Christians down the years, the rationale of evangelization has been a desperate race to save as many souls as possible from God (think of poor Francis Xavier, dying of exhaustion trying to pluck as many infants as possible from the flames) ...

For all of this follows from an incoherence deeply fixed at the heart of almost all Christian traditions: that is, the idea that the omnipotent God of love, who creates the world from nothing, either imposes or tolerates the eternal torment of the damned. It is not merely peculiarity of personal temperament that prompts Tertullian to speak of the saved relishing the delightful spectacle of the destruction of the reprobate, or Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas to assert that the vision of the torments of the damned will increase the beatitude of the redeemed (as any trace of pity would darken the joys of heaven), or Luther to insist that the saved will rejoice to see their loved ones roasting in hell. All of them were simply following the only poor thread of logic they had to guide them out of a labyrinth of impossible contradictions; the sheer enormity of the idea of a hell of eternal torment forces the mind toward absurdities and atrocities.

Food for Thought Friday: David Bentley Hart on *creatio ex nihilo* • r/ChristianUniversalism

 

[1an]

Jesus in the "Sermon on the Mount" used the words "Hell of Fire" or depending on the translation "Fire of Hell" as being the final destination of the ungodly, so what is the Hell of which he spoke? Here is the quote: -
"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgement.' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgement; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire." (Matthew 5:21)

Hell is called "Sheol" in the Old Testament and "Hades" in the New Testament and simply translated means death and the grave.

When Jesus spoke of "Hell Fire" in the beatitudes he illustrated it by pointing out the well known fires in the Valley of Hinnom close to Jerusalem that had been used for human sacrifice to pagan gods.

G86
ᾅδης
hadēs
hah'-dace
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1492; properly unseen, that is, “Hades” or the place (state) of departed souls: - grave, hell. (Hades means the grave.)

H7585
שׁאל שׁאול
she'ôl she'ôl
sheh-ole', sheh-ole'
From H7592; hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranian retreat), including its accessories and inmates: - grave, hell, pit.


G1067
γέεννα
geenna
gheh'-en-nah
Of Hebrew origin ([H1516] and [H2011]); valley of (the son of) Hinnom; gehenna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerusalem, used (figuratively) as a name for the place (or state) of everlasting punishment: - hell.

Please, do not take the parables literally. Even today we cremate people in a fiery furnace and the effect on the body is eternal. However, those who believe in Christ will be with him in the spirit, not in mortal flesh (dust to dust, ashes to ashes) clothed in robes of righteousness.
For we know that when this tent we live in---our body here on earth---is torn down, God will have a house in heaven for us to live in, a home he himself has made, which will last forever.
(2Co 5:1 GNB)

If there is a lake of fire it is reserved for Satan and his minions until the day of judgement. Babies are not Satan, neither are they his minions. See the link to know what some Jews were doing even in the days of Christ, just as they had been sacrificing to false gods in the wilderness.

Gehenna - Wikipedia

 

[SBC]

Do babies have a sin nature?

Yes

So how will babies get into the kingdom of God/heaven without being born again?

Born again is a quickening of ones spirit.
The Lord quickens whom He wills.

It's clear those not born again aren't getting into the kingdom of God (Jn.3:3-8)

Correct.

Are babies born again? No.

The Lord quickens whom He will.
Scripture teaches for men to not prevent little children from coming to Him, the same would apply to you.

Those not born again are not saved. Babies are not born again. So they are not saved.

You claim babies are not saved. Scripture doesn't.

To get into heaven, they will have to experience - after death salvation -

Scripture teaches after physical death belief;
Scripture does not teach after physical death salvation.

something which many deny possible.

All things are possible, yet the Truth can not Stand against itself.

For they were not saved before they died as babies.

Why do you keep trying to forbid baby's from going to the Lord, when Lord says for you to not forbid them from going unto Him?

Matt 19
[14] But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[SBC]

Hi clement,

Just a small matter of meaning. It's not endless 'punishment'. It's endless 'torment'.

Punishment is generally something that someone does to you. Torment can be self-inflicted.

God bless
In Christ, ted

Agree.

The punishment ~ is the result of the pronounced sentence.
The torment ~ is knowing the Truth, then forever being Separated from the Truth.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[ClementofA]

Yes

You claim babies are not saved. Scripture doesn't.

To be saved is to be born again. How many babies have you met who are born again?

 

[SBC]

To be saved is to be born again. How many babies have you met who are born again?

Me meeting a baby has nothing to do with what is the Lords will for babies.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[ClementofA]

Me meeting a baby has nothing to do with what is the Lords will for babies.

Are babies born again? Are they saved?

To be saved is to be born again. How many babies have you met who are born again?

 

[Basil the Great]

Augustine taught that the unbaptized babies go to Limbo.

 

[SBC]

Are babies born again? Are they saved?

I believe all are born in sin, and commit sin.

I also believe while a body is alive, his soul can become saved, and his spirit quickened.

I also believe baby's do not have developed cognitive skills to "clearly see" what has been created and made.. period.

(Thus I believe, baby's are NOT held to being "accountable" and that they do have a valid "excuse", for not understanding they had a choice to believe God made and created all things.)

I believe God is JUST and saves their soul unto Himself and quickens their spirit unto their eternal life with God.

I do not believe the same applies to a person who has reach his own individual growth, of matured developed cognitive skills, seen the things that are created and made, heard about God, and chose to reject Him.

Rom 1
[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
[19] Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
[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:

I realize you attempt to make excuses for people who could clearly see what has been created and made, and that they rejected what is clearly created, made and seen, was made BY God.
I do not agree with you.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[ClementofA]

I believe God is JUST and saves their soul unto Himself and quickens their spirit unto their eternal life with God.

When do you think God does that for babies?

There are accounts of mothers who killed their babies to save them from growing up, rejecting Christ & going to hell forever. And to assure their place in heaven, not hell.

 

[Der Alte]

I believe all are born in sin, and commit sin.

I also believe while a body is alive, his soul can become saved, and his spirit quickened.

I also believe baby's do not have developed cognitive skills to "clearly see" what has been created and made.. period.

(Thus I believe, baby's are NOT held to being "accountable" and that they do have a valid "excuse", for not understanding they had a choice to believe God made and created all things.)

I believe God is JUST and saves their soul unto Himself and quickens their spirit unto their eternal life with God.

I do not believe the same applies to a person who has reach his own individual growth, of matured developed cognitive skills, seen the things that are created and made, heard about God, and chose to reject Him.

Rom 1
[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
[19] Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
[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:

I realize you attempt to make excuses for people who could clearly see what has been created and made, and that they rejected what is clearly created, made and seen, was made BY God.
I do not agree with you.

God Bless,
SBC

This entire discussion about babies has only one purpose, it is a back door attempt to prove that universalism is valid. The basic argument is this "Babies aren't baptized or born again so there must be salvation after death." My response is,

Romans 4:15
(15) because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13
(13) To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone's account where there is no law.​

 

[SBC]

When do you think God does that for babies?

Before they physically die.

There are accounts of mothers who killed their babies to save them from growing up, rejecting Christ & going to hell forever. And to assure their place in heaven, not hell.

Yes, I know.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[SBC]

This entire discussion about babies has only one purpose, it is a back door attempt to prove that universalism is valid. The basic argument is this "Babies aren't baptized or born again so there must be salvation after death." My response is,

Romans 4:15
(15) because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13
(13) To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone's account where there is no law.​

Agree.

Which is fallacy, and necessarily would require a BABY, to have the SAME reasoning and connotative skills as an ADULT, which they do not, thus BABY'S are NOT held to the SAME STANDARD, as ADULTS, (ie they have an EXCEPTION, as does anyone WHO is an ADULT, with the mind of a child)


God Bless,
SBC

 

[miamited]

Agree.

Which is fallacy, and necessarily would require a BABY, to have the SAME reasoning and connotative skills as an ADULT, which they do not, thus BABY'S are NOT held to the SAME STANDARD, as ADULTS, (ie they have an EXCEPTION, as does anyone WHO is an ADULT, with the mind of a child)


God Bless,
SBC

Hi SBC,

But that Scriptures says that there is no transgression when there is no law. When babies are born, the law does exist, they just individually are not aware of it. I don't read this Scripture to mean that if one is not aware of the law then there is no transgression.

I'm just sayin'.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[SBC]

Hi SBC,

But that Scriptures says that there is no transgression when there is no law. When babies are born, the law does exist, they just individually are not aware of it. I don't read this Scripture to mean that if one is not aware of the law then there is no transgression.

I'm just sayin'.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

Hi ~

The LAW exists, whether or not one IS aware of it.
As an ADULT, the LAW exists. As an ADULT, they can go read the law, and discover HOW it applies to them or not. They have no excuse, to be ignorant of the law, and why ignorance of the law is NOT a defense.

However with BABY'S, the LAW exists. And as a BABY....what? Mommy and Daddy tells them the LAW, so they should not be ignorant? Mommy and Daddy, A preacher, anyone can all day long tell a Baby the LAW, and? Perhaps give them a LAW - book... and? So what. They have not the matured developed connotative skill to reason or understand what is being said or written in a book.

Mommy and Daddy (the steward of their gift of a child), teach the child with what they CAN SEE;
food, yum yum, going in a mouth. What is food? What is a mouth? They don't know. Mommy puts something in their mouth. They like it. Humm, they begin to reason, put something in their mouth, they like it. Humm, put finger in their mouth, put toys in their mouth, put fuzz ball in their mouth.
Then comes the confusing part....Mommy says, put this in your mouth, but no no, not that. Pretty much a baby's FIRST (law), ie rule. no, no. And mommy is there, telling a baby, no no, for everything they are not supposed to do.... but what do they understand? no, no.....sometimes....no, no all the time?

We do not hold children accountable for what they are not skilled enough to comprehend.

And if we pay close attention to babies, we can define WHEN and WHAT they do comprehend up to a point. Mommy says no, no to putting the dogs food in it's mouth. Hummm, wait until Mommy is not looking, and put doggy food in the mouth.

Here they only comprehend no, no.....but they have not developed enough to reason and comprehend WHY.

And adult however, who can hear, reason, comprehend, read, reason, comprehend....
Believe in the Lord, and ye shall be saved from eternal death unto eternal life....is not something requiring a high IQ. Nor is it some big secret that an adult has never heard of death or that believing in the Lord saves a person from eternal death unto eternal life.

The choice hinges on what an individual HAS Heard, and comprehends what he HAS Heard, and thereafter what the individual CHOOSES; which is simply him choosing eternal LIFE or eternal DEATH.

A Baby is excepted from having to make a choice for that which he neither knows or comprehends.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[miamited]

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

 

[Der Alte]

If God had spared the infants and children during the flood and in Sodom and Gomorrah, who would have raised and cared for them?

Genesis 18:25
(25) Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?"​

 

[ClementofA]

Before they physically die.

So it seems in your view any baby who dies as such is born again before they die by irrresistible grace ( that's a Calvinist doctrine BTW).

Do you have any Scripture to support that opinion?

If what many believe is true, then why shouldn't a loving parent kill their baby to save them from endless torments? They'd become co-Saviour with Jesus by doing so, if what many believe is true.

Your theology is full of problems.

Christian universalism--Ultimate Reconcilation: The True "Good News" Gospel of the Bible

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

Universalism – The Truth Shall Make You Free

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell