Results 1 to 16 of 16

Baptism discuss Do baptized infants go to heaven? do unbaptized infants or adults go to hell? in the Theology forums; I've been having a discussion on facebook with someone who said that he would rush a dying infant to be baptized. He also stated that ...

  1. #1
    tjm3383's Avatar
    tjm3383 is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9

    Do baptized infants go to heaven? do unbaptized infants or adults go to hell?

    I've been having a discussion on facebook with someone who said that he would rush a dying infant to be baptized. He also stated that Mark 16:16 indicates that you must believe and be baptized or be condemned to hell. I don't believe baptism saves your nor do I believe that not being baptized damns you. As I understand it baptism initiates a person into the visible church, but that does not mean they are members of the invisible church. Thoughts?

    ---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:03 PM ----------

    And of course let me clarify that I do believe that baptism is a command of God and a means of Grace. We must as Christians be baptized and have our children baptized or we are certainly in disobediance to God.

  2. #2
    TimV's Avatar
    TimV is offline. Puritanboard Botanist
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    8,198
    Tell him you agree, and Christ lied when He said the thief on the cross would be with Him in paradise. The poor dude went to hell, since he wasn't baptised. And in addition, every baby that was miscarried went to hell, and thank him for that word of comfort to all the moms. Sounds like a real scholar.
    Tim Vaughan
    Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
    Santa Maria
    California

  3. #3
    Scott1's Avatar
    Scott1 is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,505
    You may want to do a search of some previous threads on this topic (upper right).

    Regarding the first question, the Westminster Standards summarize the doctrine of Scripture in a way that does not tell us how few or how many infants who die in infancy go to heaven- only that baptism, in itself, is not determinative of that.

    Chapter X
    Of Effectual Calling

    ....

    III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who works when, and where, and how He pleases:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

    ....
    Chapter XXVIII
    Of Baptism
    ....

    V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

    ....
    Scott
    PCA
    North Carolina


    Post Tenebras Lux; "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." - Revelation 21:4

  4. #4
    bill's Avatar
    bill is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    32
    To the first question I lean towards no. However, that is a question only God knows. Just because one is baptized does not seal the infant to heaven. There is now baptismal regeneration and when we baptize our children we realize that they are sinners in need of the baptism of the Holy Spirit who is the seal of what baptism signifies.

    To the second question Yes and no. But only God knows.
    Bill
    PCA
    Douglass, Ks

    "There are two things suited to humble our souls of men. And they are, first a due consideration of God, and then themselves; of God, in his greatness, glory, holiness, power, majesty, and authority: of ourselves, in our mean, abject, and sinful condition."
    John Owen, Indwelling Sin In Believers

  5. #5
    tjm3383's Avatar
    tjm3383 is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9
    BTW --- the gentlemen I was discussing this with is a Traditional Anglican.

    ---------- Post added at 09:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 PM ----------

    I brought up the thief on the cross and this was his response ---

    "Good question, and i would ad St Alban who was a pagan who it is said died in a 'baptism of blood'. I think the thief qualifies under this.
    But then that was before He breathed the Holy Ghost onto the Apostles at Pentecost and gave them the authority to 'bind and loose' so even if you discount the 'last will be first'; knock and the door shall be opened, etc., and a baptism of blood; it seems that certain things were given or conveyed as a sign prior to the Churches birth

    He really has no good answer, he seems to be saying that by the work of pouring or sprinkling water on ones head that you are saved and if not you might be damned but now he makes an exception for being baptized in blood. I think responding to this is almost pointless.

  6. #6
    dudley's Avatar
    dudley is offline. Puritanboard Postgraduate
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,473
    Blog Entries
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by tjm3383 View Post
    btw --- the gentlemen i was discussing this with is a traditional anglican.

    ---------- post added at 09:45 pm ---------- previous post was at 09:37 pm ----------

    i brought up the thief on the cross and this was his response ---

    "good question, and i would ad st alban who was a pagan who it is said died in a 'baptism of blood'. I think the thief qualifies under this.
    But then that was before he breathed the holy ghost onto the apostles at pentecost and gave them the authority to 'bind and loose' so even if you discount the 'last will be first'; knock and the door shall be opened, etc., and a baptism of blood; it seems that certain things were given or conveyed as a sign prior to the churches birth

    he really has no good answer, he seems to be saying that by the work of pouring or sprinkling water on ones head that you are saved and if not you might be damned but now he makes an exception for being baptized in blood. I think responding to this is almost pointless.

    I believe that God can through the holy spirit instill the baptism of blood and desire for an innocent unbaptized baby. I like to believe innocent children are precious to God however I will not create a place they had at one time in Roman Catholicism called limbo, where unbaptized babies went instead of heaven. Even the Roman church no longer talks of that. I believe God in his eternal justice will take care of all innocent children.
    In faith,
    Dudley
    I am a member of The First Presbyterian Church of Manasquan, New Jersey. I am also a member of their weekly Bible class. I am in the process of joining The First Presbyterian Church of Manasquan Menís Ministry.www.fpcom.org/

    May we all be Sons of the Reformation and continue to proclaim what it means to be Reformed Protestant Christians! Being Protestant means we protest heresy and we proclaim the truth of the Gospel.

  7. #7
    Scottish Lass's Avatar
    Scottish Lass is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,351
    Quote Originally Posted by dudley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tjm3383 View Post
    btw --- the gentlemen i was discussing this with is a traditional anglican.

    ---------- post added at 09:45 pm ---------- previous post was at 09:37 pm ----------

    i brought up the thief on the cross and this was his response ---

    "good question, and i would ad st alban who was a pagan who it is said died in a 'baptism of blood'. I think the thief qualifies under this.
    But then that was before he breathed the holy ghost onto the apostles at pentecost and gave them the authority to 'bind and loose' so even if you discount the 'last will be first'; knock and the door shall be opened, etc., and a baptism of blood; it seems that certain things were given or conveyed as a sign prior to the churches birth

    he really has no good answer, he seems to be saying that by the work of pouring or sprinkling water on ones head that you are saved and if not you might be damned but now he makes an exception for being baptized in blood. I think responding to this is almost pointless.

    I believe that God can through the holy spirit instill the baptism of blood and desire for an innocent unbaptized baby. I like to believe innocent children are precious to God however I will not create a place they had at one time in Roman Catholicism called limbo, where unbaptized babies went instead of heaven. Even the Roman church no longer talks of that. I believe God in his eternal justice will take care of all innocent children.
    Define "innocent".
    Anna
    Wife of Tim/Marrow Man
    Mother of Grace Cameron
    Louisville, KY
    Member of Midlane Park Presbyterian (Associate Reformed Presbyterian)


    He who does not hate the false does not love the true ~ Spurgeon

    Updates on Gracie: http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/gracephillips2010

  8. #8
    christianhope's Avatar
    christianhope is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    340
    My thoughts are if a person refuses baptism out of a despising of the sacrament, they will go to hell. But it's because of their hatred for christianity of which baptism symbolizes their acceptance of and grafting into God's covenant of grace in the visible sense.

    If a child is not baptized, they will not go to hell because they are unbaptized. The water doesn't do anything of course, rather, they may go to heaven even if they are not baptized. The 'sign' never replaces the reality the baptism signifies, which is God's promise to aquire (regenerate) a people for Himself.

    I tell my baptist friend, "Friend, you don't believe in paedo-baptism, yet God still has mercy upon your children nonetheless, though you do not acknowledge it, God does not withhold it, because you are a child of God, His promises (covenant blessing) are not contingent upon your obedience in this matter."
    Josh
    1646 WCF
    Waupun, WI

    "Redeeming the time, for the days are evil" Eph 5:16

  9. #9
    Semper Fidelis's Avatar
    Semper Fidelis is offline. 2 Timothy 2:24-25
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    22,572
    Blog Entries
    1
    I can't imagine how a "traditional Anglican" could argue this unless he has abandoned the reformed ideas in the original 39 articles and has added Roman Catholic ideas of sacerdotalism into his theology of the Sacraments.
    Rich
    Ruling Elder, Licentiate, Under Care, Hope of Christ Church (PCA), Northern VA
    Student, New Geneva Theological Seminary

    WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
    SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

  10. #10
    interalia's Avatar
    interalia is offline. Puritanboard Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    78
    Define "innocent".
    This will be interesting. (where's the popcorn smiley?)
    Michael T. Jewell
    Ruling Elder, (EPC/Inactive)
    Member, Denver Presbyterian Church (PCA)
    Morrison, CO

  11. #11
    Grimmson's Avatar
    Grimmson is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    540
    Quote Originally Posted by TimV View Post
    Tell him you agree, and Christ lied when He said the thief on the cross would be with Him in paradise. The poor dude went to hell, since he wasn't baptised. And in addition, every baby that was miscarried went to hell, and thank him for that word of comfort to all the moms. Sounds like a real scholar.
    Let try to stay away from emotional charged arguments and rhetoric such as miscarried babies. I really do not think it helps the discussion one way or another. It needs to be approached with caution and respect, especially if the person you are having the discussion with you diagrees with you.

    ---------- Post added at 08:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:56 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by interalia View Post
    Define "innocent".
    This will be interesting. (where's the popcorn smiley?)
    I define innocent this way.

    "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
    Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." -Mat 22:36-40 KJV

    So I would say no one is truly innocent, even infants, because no one love God with all their heart, soul, and mind or truly their neighbor as one’s self. But I still think he saves them, however I am willing to admit that God has the right to send infants to Hell. But I think because of his special love for children that he does not.
    David Jolley
    Broadway Baptist Church of Escondido, CA
    Confessions: 1689-SLBCF/ 2000-BFAM
    Yuma, AZ (attending the OPC church plant/bible study in Yuma)

  12. #12
    Willem van Oranje's Avatar
    Willem van Oranje is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,486
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by tjm3383 View Post
    I've been having a discussion on facebook with someone who said that he would rush a dying infant to be baptized. He also stated that Mark 16:16 indicates that you must believe and be baptized or be condemned to hell. I don't believe baptism saves your nor do I believe that not being baptized damns you. As I understand it baptism initiates a person into the visible church, but that does not mean they are members of the invisible church. Thoughts?

    ---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:03 PM ----------

    And of course let me clarify that I do believe that baptism is a command of God and a means of Grace. We must as Christians be baptized and have our children baptized or we are certainly in disobediance to God.
    Ah, "emergency baptisms." Sounds like a Catholic or a Lutheran. No, this is not necessary. We don't baptize infants to save them. We baptize them because they are born into the saved community. It goes for infants as for everyone else. Those who are elect will go to heaven, while those who are reprobate will go to hell.
    Riley

  13. #13
    Edward's Avatar
    Edward is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    6,768
    Quote Originally Posted by bill View Post
    There is now baptismal regeneration
    Typo?
    Edward
    Deacon
    PCA
    Texas

  14. #14
    Andres's Avatar
    Andres is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott1 View Post
    You may want to do a search of some previous threads on this topic (upper right).

    Regarding the first question, the Westminster Standards summarize the doctrine of Scripture in a way that does not tell us how few or how many infants who die in infancy go to heaven- only that baptism, in itself, is not determinative of that.

    Chapter X
    Of Effectual Calling

    ....

    III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who works when, and where, and how He pleases:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

    ....
    Chapter XXVIII
    Of Baptism
    ....

    V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

    ....
    I think my brother Scott already covered pretty much all there is to say on this topic above. Which babies go to heaven? Elect babies. Do we know which babies are elect? No, but it is not for us to know or question as we are not God. All His decrees, including which humans are elect and which are not, are perfect. For me this is much more comforting than trying to formulate some reasoning as to why all babies go to heaven or how we can guarantee babies will go heaven.
    Andrew Silva
    RE OPC (currently not serving)
    Dallas Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA)
    North Dallas

    My blog - Lose Your Life
    Follow me - Twitter

    He is your friend who pushes you nearer to God. - Abraham Kuyper

  15. #15
    Grimmson's Avatar
    Grimmson is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    540
    Quote Originally Posted by Andres View Post
    Do we know which babies are elect? No, but it is not for us to know or question as we are not God.
    According to Dort, yes:
    Article 17: The Salvation of the Infants of Believers
    Since we must make judgments about God’s will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.
    I prefer the language of “elect infants” with the Westminster Standards here compared to Dort, which makes a perceive statement towards all infant election on the basis of the parents being godly (/believers depending on the version). Therefore marking out a particular group and guidelines required in faith for infant election and salvation as it relates to the status of the parents' faith in covenant to Christ.

    I am not in agreement with Dort, but I figured you all maybe interested in this piece of information.
    David Jolley
    Broadway Baptist Church of Escondido, CA
    Confessions: 1689-SLBCF/ 2000-BFAM
    Yuma, AZ (attending the OPC church plant/bible study in Yuma)

  16. #16
    Willem van Oranje's Avatar
    Willem van Oranje is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,486
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Andres View Post
    Do we know which babies are elect? No, but it is not for us to know or question as we are not God.
    According to Dort, yes:
    Article 17: The Salvation of the Infants of Believers
    Since we must make judgments about God’s will from his Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature but by virtue of the gracious covenant in which they together with their parents are included, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.
    I prefer the language of “elect infants” with the Westminster Standards here compared to Dort, which makes a perceive statement towards all infant election on the basis of the parents being godly (/believers depending on the version). Therefore marking out a particular group and guidelines required in faith for infant election and salvation as it relates to the status of the parents' faith in covenant to Christ.

    I am not in agreement with Dort, but I figured you all maybe interested in this piece of information.
    I am in hearty agreement with both Dordt and Westminster.
    Riley

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72