PART 1 – a biblical case that they don’t go to hell and do go to heaven.

• I like to tackle tough topics and dig deep for biblical clarity on them. o What is the fate of people who die as infants, young children or mentally handicapped?

Heaven, Hell, limbo, some sort of reincarnation… or are we in the dark Today – surveying what the Bible teaches on this

• If you’ve lost a child… o I can’t imagine o I feel like asking for your grace toward ME

I will fall short. I won’t try to “fix” you

• As if this never happened o Weak comfort

We can sense it We want and need scripture

• Many say the Bible is unclear on this… but I do think it gives us a lot • What happens to people who die as infants (or who die with mental impairments) • “God will do right”

o I trust God’s character and you should too Trust His goodness.

o That’s a good enough answer… but I do think the Bible gives us more o Starting with verses that I think people use wrongly.

Why? Because it helps us be consistent. • 2 parts – today dealing with where they go, next week, answering questions about free will and

sin nature?

• 5 Disqualified passages o 1 Cor 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the

unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. Their case – that kids of believers are holy/saved by virtue of having at least one

Christian parent. 1 Corinthians 7:12–16 (NASB95)

12But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. 14For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.

16For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

Several problems with this • 1- the same word is used for the husband (vs 14) and he’s not saved

o See vs 16 • 2- if this WAS about salvation then it depends NOT on having a Christian

parent but having one that’s married to your other parent. o 14 “otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy”

The “otherwise” is if they get divorced. • 3- This assumes the condemnation of all other kids!

o We will cover it later • 4- it’s about the positive impact a believer has on a family and the

positive impact of a marriage as opposed to a divorce. o Used to show that Jeremiah was saved in the womb

Jeremiah 1:5 (NASB95) 5“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

• Consecration for service as a prophet, not for salvation in particular. • Jeremiah is unique in consecration.

This could be a double edged sword • Jeremiah is a rare exception

o 1 Kings 14 Where God says of the child of Jeroboam that He “found something good in

him” • Some use this passage to say that there is something good about

infants, that they are therefore welcomed by God into His presence. The rest of Jeroboam’s line is cut off and God refuses them burial – a shameful

death but not this child. • 1 Kings 14:7–13 (NASB95)

7“Go, say to Jeroboam, ‘Thus says the Lord God of Israel, “Because I exalted you from among the people and made you leader over My people Israel, 8and tore the kingdom away from the house of David and gave it to you—yet you have not been like My servant David, who kept My commandments and who followed Me with all his heart, to do only that which was right in My sight; 9you also have done more evil than all who were before you, and have gone and made for yourself other gods and molten images to provoke Me to anger, and have cast Me behind your back— 10therefore behold, I am bringing calamity on the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam every male person, both bond and free in Israel, and I will make a clean sweep of the house of Jeroboam, as one sweeps away dung until it is all gone.

11“Anyone belonging to Jeroboam who dies in the city the dogs will eat. And he who dies in the field the birds of the heavens will eat; for the Lord has spoken it.” ’ 12“Now you, arise, go to your house. When your feet enter the city the child will die. 13“All Israel shall mourn for him and bury him, for he alone of Jeroboam’s family will come to the grave, because in him something good was found toward the Lord God of Israel in the house of Jeroboam.

• This would SEEM to imply salvation o An honorable death, approved by God o More likely than not

But, the passage doesn’t give us any indication that the son in question (Abijah) was an infant as opposed to a 15 year old.

• The only indication of the age of the boy is the terms used to describe him

o “Naar” – BDB says “boy, lad, youth” and shows it is used of infants and even a 17 year old

o “Yeled” which is often used of very young children but is also used of young men as well. 1 Kings 12:8-14; 2 Kings 2:24

• Jewish tradition says he was older • And, as we’ll see later infants aren’t measured by what good they have

in them. o “Children have angels and those who have angels are people who are saved”

Matthew 18:10 (NASB95) 10“See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven.

• WITH Hebrews 1:14 (NASB95) 14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?

Why it doesn’t work like that. • Is Jesus saying LITERAL children have personal angels or BELIEVERS WHO

ARE LIKE CHILDREN have personal angels • Matthew 18:2–10 (NASB95)

2And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, 3and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4“Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5“And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; 6but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea…

- “who believe”

10“See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven.

o The “little ones” of vs 5 are the “little ones who believe in Me” from vs 10. They are believers.

• So the angles argument doesn’t work • But, this text does one thing.

o By using children as the example of how we must come to Jesus for salvation it at least adds favor to the idea that they ARE welcomed into God’s presence at death

o Ezekiel 16:20–22 (NASB95) 20“Moreover, you took your sons and daughters whom you had borne to Me and sacrificed them to idols to be devoured. Were your harlotries so small a matter? 21“You slaughtered My children and offered them up to idols by causing them to pass through the fire. Case for:

• God calling them “My children” indicates that they are saved at the point of their murder

• Further, they are not the children of believers so we can’t attribute their salvation to their parent’s salvation

Against: • There are other reasons why God calls them “my children” which don’t

require those kids to be saved eternally • In Ezek 16 - The reason they are called “my children” by God is because

they are children of the Israelites whom God laid special claim on, not because they are saved.

o In Ezekiel 16 Jerusalem is seen as God’s bride. Their children are then HIS children.

o Further, God laid special claim, in other places, to the children of Israel. Exodus 13:1–2 (NASB95) 1Then the Lord spoke to

Moses, saying, 2“Sanctify to Me every firstborn, the first offspring of every womb among the sons of Israel, both that of man and beast; it belongs to Me.”

• Did that mean all the firstborn were saved? No. Exodus 22:29 (NASB95) The firstborn of your sons you

shall give to Me. • Though not as sacrifices • Again, not saved

• In Scripture when God calls the children of Abraham “my people” doesn’t mean they are saved. Since many are not.

o This passage doesn’t show children who die are saved. o It DOES show

God’s special concern for kids

That even though the parents were absolutely wicked… the kids didn’t deserve this

BUILDING OUR THEOLOGY

• ARE KIDS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY SIN? o Regardless of having a sinful nature

• God’s reference to children as innocent o Jeremiah 19:4 (NASB95) 4“Because they have forsaken Me and have made this an alien place and have burned sacrifices in it to other

gods, that neither they nor their forefathers nor the kings of Judah had ever known, and because they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent

BUT the Bible uses the term “innocent” to speak of people who have sins but simply aren’t guilty of a particular crime under the Law.

• See Exodus 23:7, Deut 27:25, 2 Sam 15:11, 1 Kings 2:31,

o BUT it’s different with children o the Bible indicates kids aren’t just innocent of particular sins but are in a condition

where they are not morally culpable by virtue of them not being morally CAPABLE. • Biblical teaching that children are in a unique state moral incapability or incapacity

o Israel not entering the land Deuteronomy 1:39 (NASB95) 39‘Moreover, your little ones who you said would

become a prey, and your sons, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall enter there, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it.

• So you see, they are different than others in that they are innocent due a lack of capacity rather than good conduct.

o Morally unaware, morally unaccountable • Note the similarity to “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”

o Kids still have sin nature… but aren’t responsible yet Isaiah 7:16 (NASB95) 16“For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and

choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken. • A temporary state of every human.

o This is uniquely different than being sinless through obedience or goodness They aren’t sinless. But they aren’t morally aware yet.

o How this plays out in judgment situation Jonah 4:11 (NASB95) 11“Should I not have compassion on Nineveh, the great

city in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know the difference between their right and left hand, as well as many animals?”

• If they shouldn’t be killed in Nineveh then why not? o Their ignorance makes them unaccountable

Judgment doesn’t apply! • Side note

o The death of babies in judgment is collateral damage o God’s judgment on adults impacts children but it’s not ON

children If kids are welcomed into His presence then it casts

their deaths in a new light

Note: wicked and unsaved parents don’t doom kids. • Nineveh

o the parents were guilty and deserving of judgment. o The kids were not guilty and not deserving of this judgment.

• Before saying that the Israelite children “have no knowledge of good or evil” God says about their parents that they are an “evil generation”

o Deuteronomy 1:35 (NASB95) 35‘Not one of these men, this evil generation, shall see the good land which I swore to give your fathers,

• The sin of the parents does not transfer to the kids. o Even WHEN judgment comes to a community and kids die to

they are collateral damage and it’s a grief even to God o Another passage that shows they don’t get guilt from their parents

Ezekiel 18:20 (NASB95) 20“The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

• We have it in examples and direct teachings • How does that reconcile with

o Exodus 20:5–6 (NASB95) 5“You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. 1) the overwhelming lovingkindness is the larger point 2) could be the results of the children suffering as a

result of the parents sins but not them deserving it • A drunk causes his kids to suffer • A criminal goes to prison and his kids suffer.

One could say the govt “visits the iniquity of the father on the children”

• Israel goes into bondage because of sin, the kids suffer

o But this wouldn’t be holding the kids guilty.

• So two things o 1- Children are in a unique state of no knowledge of good and evil

No moral awareness o 2- they aren’t YET personally accountable.

If they grow they will all sin… eventually. • Let’s build on this

o By looking at how people are condemned by God and showing that this judgment simply doesn’t apply to children

• I’m not yet arguing that babies go to heaven, just that they don’t go to hell o Because the conditions that cause people to go to hell don’t apply to babies.

Romans 1-3 teaches the universal condemnation of man because they (1) knowing of God and good (2) choose to reject God and sin

• Rom 1 o They know God (His existence) o Romans 1:18–21 (NASB95)

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Doesn’t apply to babies… yet

o Romans 1:32 (NASB95) 32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. Babies don’t, Deut 1:35 “have no knowledge of good or

evil” o Jesus also showed that without knowledge there is no personal

guilt for sin John 15:22 (NASB95) 22“If I had not come and spoken

to them, they would not have sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin.

• They would still be sinful in other ways, but not for rejecting Him.

• Rom 2 shows that judgment comes because we both KNOW and PRACTICE sin

o Romans 2:1–2 (NASB95) 1Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. Babies don’t pass judgment

• They therefore have an excuse Babies don’t practice such things

• Good or evil o Rev 20 describes final judgement and it seems like it doesn’t apply to those who have no

works to be judged. Revelation 20:12–15 (NASB95) 12And I saw the dead, the great and the small,

standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. 13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

o Romans 1:18 (NASB95) 18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, Babies just don’t qualify

• Hell is ruled out – o Some would suggest limbo or another location

• David’s words about the death of his son o Background

David and Bathsheba, the child will die, fasting… then. o 2 Samuel 12:19–23 (NASB95)

19But when David saw that his servants were whispering together, David perceived that the child was dead; so David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” And they said, “He is dead.” 20So David arose from the ground, washed, anointed himself, and changed his clothes; and he came into the house of the Lord and worshiped. Then he came to his own house, and when he requested, they set food before him and he ate. 21Then his servants said to him, “What is this thing that you have done? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept; but when the child died, you arose and ate food.” 22He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.’ 23“But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” David fasted and wept for the child, his servants feared he might hurt himself! Point – David looked forward to the day he would be with his son again!

• Heaven! Against

• David didn’t speak of heaven but of sheol in the sense that everyone who dies, saved and unsaved, goes there

o But, even if he did speak of Sheol he did so in context of relationship and it’s not like they thought they would be in relationship with the wicked dead even if they went to Sheol.

Jesus’ story of Lazarus o So, David must have, at minimum, thought that the place he

would end up is the place the boy went. Not limbo, not an alternate locality for infants

• The same place David was going! • He’s a father who just lost his son!

o “I will go to him” o To think of a parent saying this and NOT meaning real future

relationship with their deceased child in the afterlife is to be emotionally unaware Scripture is meant for us

• While some say that David didn’t have the hope of eternal life. o A longer study but it’s my view, and most Christians would

probably agree. o And all of scripture clearly gives us that hope

Compare Absolom • 2 Samuel 18:33 (NASB95) 33The king was deeply moved and went up to

the chamber over the gate and wept. And thus he said as he walked, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”

• Point: the contrast is impressive. o Only six chapters later.

• How does this interplay with sin nature? Aren’t we condemned when born? o They have sin nature.

Evil inclined o Developmentally aren’t accountable yet.

No knowledge of good and evil No works, good or bad.

o Therefore, they are not holy, they are just unaccountable Still need Christ

• To deliver from sin nature • To rescue from their fallen state • To give them eternal life

• AGE/STAGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY o Age is different for each one

Because it is based on knowledge, not age. o Based upon individual “moral knowledge and acts” o Mentally disabled too

The Lord knows • We should evangelize all.

Other texts

• Mark 10:13–16 (NASB95) 13And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15“Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.” 16And He took them in His arms and began blessing them, laying His hands on them.

o How old? A parallel passage, Luke 18:15 (NASB95) 15And they were bringing even their

babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them.

• Gk “Brephos” – only used of infants • Paidion is also used

o So it varied from newborns possibly up to 12 year olds Also, vs 16 “He took them in His arms”

o Not baptism A German, Lutheran theologian named Jeremias taught

• “hinder” from “do not hinder them” was a technical term relating to baptism

o Revealing that they are getting baptized in Mk 10. • No – “koluein” is used 23 times and rarely refers to baptism

Actually against it! o No repentance

No knowledge of good and evil o Just a welcome with a blessing

Jesus was “indignant” • Truly upset at the idea that He wouldn’t welcome them

o “the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” Is that CLEAR? no At least it makes you wonder How can they be examples of the saved if they are not, in their current state,

accepted by God. o It seems more CONSISTENT with them being saved than not.

If you have other reasons to think they are saved… then this adds to it o John Calvin wrote that it is presumption and sacrilege to drive far from the fold of Christ

those whom He cherishes in His bosom, and to shut the door, and exclude as strangers, those whom He does not wish to be forbidden to come to Him

MacArthur, John F.. Safe in the Arms of God (p. 60). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.

• There is still more… a good deal more • What we learn from John the Baptist

o John was still in the womb when he was filled with the Spirit Luke 1:41 (NASB95) 41When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped

in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. • Not only Elizabeth, also JOHN

• Luke 1:15 (NASB95) 15“For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.

o Means personhood “he will be filled” o Means relationship with God

Not capable of rational thinking or speech but still. o At 6 months gestation age (24 weeks)

The angel told Mary that Elizabeth was at 6 months Mary goes quickly to Elizabeth

• Luke 1:39 (NASB95) 39Now at this time Mary arose and went in a hurry to the hill country, to a city of Judah,

After Mary visits her 3 months goes by till John is born • Luke 1:56–57 (NASB95) 56And Mary stayed with her about three

months, and then returned to her home. 57Now the time had come for Elizabeth to give birth, and she gave birth to a son.

o Was John saved? Born again? Not sealed, empowered. It was a rarity.

o Point – infants are persons and relationship with God is possible • A couple more points that add something to my case

o Job’s preference MAY help o Job would rather be stillborn

Job 3:11–19 (NASB95) 11“Why did I not die at birth, Come forth from the womb and expire? 12“Why did the knees receive me, And why the breasts, that I should suck? 13“For now I would have lain down and been quiet; I would have slept then, I would have been at rest, 14With kings and with counselors of the earth, Who rebuilt ruins for themselves; 15Or with princes who had gold, Who were filling their houses with silver. 16“Or like a miscarriage which is discarded, I would not be, As infants that never saw light. 17“There the wicked cease from raging, And there the weary are at rest. 18“The prisoners are at ease together; They do not hear the voice of the taskmaster. 19“The small and the great are there, And the slave is free from his master.

• The babies are at rest with o The former captives o The weary o The prisoners are at ease together

o But Job thought he had a future resurrection! Job 19:25–27 (NASB95)

25“As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth.

26“Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God; 27Whom I myself shall behold, And whom my eyes will see and not another. My heart faints within me!

o This helps support the idea that the stillborn 1- have a pleasant after-life 2- also have a future resurrection.

• Otherwise how is that better? He likely didn’t think being stillborn threatened that resurrection or else it

probably wouldn’t be preferable to his current situation • Another argument, from collateral damage

o If they don’t deserve judgment but suffer in the flood, conquest of Canaan, etc., a problem seems to be obvious but it is made better by the idea that every one of these babies experiences

eternal joy. A VERY subjective argument

• Wouldn’t let it stand alone. o But, part of a cumulative case.

• God’s desire is for the salvation of all o 2 Peter 3:9 (NASB95) 9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness,

but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

o John 3:16 “God so loved the world” • A blanket restoration to all of creation

o Romans 8:19–22 (NASB95) 19For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. Shows God restores neutral characters

• Who were subject without their will. o Babies seem to be – until later when they will it.

• I’m not saying this is about babies… but it seem consistent to those who die in infancy are saved.

It’s Jesus, it’s Christ who does it, it’s grace. But if I’m in doubt I’m leaning toward restoration

• SO many good reasons o 1- not morally aware therefore not accountable o 2- specific examples of them not deserving judgment even when their parents are! o 3- The way people are judged and sent to Hell doesn’t seem to apply to

children/unaware Hell is ruled out

o 4- David’s response to losing his son seems to support a heaven view (fellowship) o 5- Without good reason to INVENT a new location for them, heaven is their destination

o 6- God’s DESIRE to save all is consistent with the salvation of infants o 7- God restores all of creation which was suffered unwillingly because of the fall. I think

it is consistent to apply this to babies/unaware in that • SEVERAL QUESTIONS AND ISSUES ARISE

o What do we do with free will? Do they choose Christ? All of them? Do they just get chosen without their own free will? Calvinist, Molinist, odd options… conjecture.

o What about Limbo? o What is the impact of this view in other areas?

• Conclusion o We can and should just trust God’s goodness o But we also have good reason to think we will see them in heaven

And that brings a lot of needed comfort.

PART 2 – SIN NATURE, FREE WILL AND OTHER ISSUES

• In my last vid I tried to offer a thorough biblical case that o Those who die as infants or those who, like infants, do not have moral awareness and

are not morally accountable before God, go to heaven A stage of accountability or a point of accountability Anyone who does not reach the point of accountability and dies, will have

eternal life. o But this brings up 5 issues

1 How do we determine the when a person is accountable? • 9 year old? • 13 year old? • Mentally handicapped

2 What about sin nature? 3 What role does Jesus have in their “salvation”? Do they need Jesus? 4 What about free will?

• Do they ever make a choice to love God or reject God? • How then are ALL of them saved?

o Interesting solutions 5 Does this give people an excuse to commit abortions?

o Time stamps • A word on why I did this in two videos

o 1- it’s too long o 2- it’s cleanup.

You can disagree on all the content in this video and still agree with my case that babies go to heaven.

1st a biblical case for their heavenly future This is about implications and how we process them.

• Sometimes our answers are more about prior commitments than anything else.

It’s conjecture • But, how you answer these questions most likely WON’T keep you from

affirming their future in heaven. • Don’t attach the conjecture to the biblical case

• 1 How do we determine the age? o Some say 20 years old!

Argument from Deut • Deuteronomy 1:39 (NASB95) 39‘Moreover, your little ones who you said

would become a prey, and your sons, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall enter there, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it.

• BUT – everyone under 20 years of age entered • Solution

o Deut 1:39 isn’t describing EVERYONE that enters the land

Just the “little ones” Numbers 14:3 (NASB95) 3“Why is the Lord bringing us

into this land, to fall by the sword? Our wives and our little ones will become plunder; would it not be better for us to return to Egypt?”

A 19 year old… married… has a kid… commits murder… • Not accountable? • Clearly know right from wrong

o Others 12 because bar mitzvah. A real stretch

o Accountability isn’t based on age! Based on level of mental awareness of

• Morality • God’s revelation in nature

o People are unique Unique to each individual Gradual nature Moment of accountability

• But that accountability is measured. o We don’t know, don’t need to know

Some obvious ones • An infant • A 20 year old

God’s judgment will be based on every factor • Each of us will only be held accountable for what we are truly

accountable for o Preach!

Do not delay • What about sin nature?

o Some might think that saying all infants/unaccountable people are saved causes a problem related to sin nature That they haven’t had sin nature dealt with, even if they are unaccountable

o Different views with implications o On Augustine’s doctrine

we actually sinned when Adam sinned • Seminal view

We are guilty • It’s as though babies have personally sinned and are guilty

How does it work? • Reminder: I’m NOT saying they go to heaven because of their holiness

o They have no holiness in character • They are NOT ACCOUNTABLE • They still need to be saved from, in this case, their sin

No problem

• Saved by Jesus • He dies for them • He delivers them from the fall, from sin nature. • Free will later

Why did Augustine say they were in hell? • but not suffering as bad

or the old popular Catholic teaching - limbo? http://www.lazyboysreststop.org/catechism16.htm [this has a number of sources]

o …The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, to be punished with different punishments…--Council of Lyons II (1274), Declaration Concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit, promulgated by Pope Gregory X, with later endorsements by popes Innocent V, Hadrian V, John XX1, Nicholas III, Martin IV, Honorius IV, Nicholas IV and Celestine V. (Denzinger 464)

o …Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds.—Council of Florence (1438-1445), Decree for the Greeks (from the Bull Laetentur coeli), promulgated by Pope Eugenius IV on July 6, 1430 (Denzinger 693)

o Both the councils mentioned above, Lyons II and Florence, were ecumenical councils convened by reigning popes.

• Baptism NECESSARY • Even now, this is the big issue in Catholicism

o The Council of Florence was ecumenical In 1493, in De novissimis [DS 1304-6]

• “Moreover the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds”

o Baltimore Catechism The Baltimore Catechism was the de facto text for

Catholic instruction in the United States from 1885 until the late-1960s.

Q. 631. Is Bapti sm necessary to salvation? • A. Baptism is nece ssary to salvation, because without it we cannot e nter into the kingdom of heaven.

Q. 632. Where will persons g o who -- such a s infants -- have not committed act ual sin a nd w ho, through no fault of the irs, di e without ba ptism?

• A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

o In eutero baptism o But things have changed

Official permission to hope They won’t say infants are saved by default They give permission to hope

Destiny of babies • Infant Baptism • Limbo

o Council of Florence seems to make it doctrine Source

https://books.google.com/books?id=M4xHDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT550&lpg=PT550&dq=%E2%80%9CMoreover,+the+souls+of+those+who+depart+in+actual+mortal+sin+or+in+original+sin+only,+descend+immediately+into+hell+but+to+undergo+punishments+of+different+kinds%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=78t07R_6PV&sig=ACfU3U199CR_sBw1kSlkzVgAocX0a1Tqww&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi4-7rT_eHqAhWPHjQIHSHrCEoQ6AEwC3oECAwQAQ#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CMoreover%2C%20the%20souls%20of%20those%20who%20depart%20in%20actual%20mortal%20sin%20or%20in%20original%20sin%20only%2C%20descend%20immediately%20into%20hell%20but%20to%20undergo%20punishments%20of%20different%20kinds%E2%80%9D&f=false

The Council of Florence was ecumenical. The question remains as to how this could be less than binding • In 1493, in De novissimis [DS 1304-6]

o “Moreover the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds” o Baltimore Catechism

Q. 631. Is Baptism necessary to salvation? • A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Q. 632. Where will persons go who -- such as infants -- have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism? • A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though

deprived of the happiness of heaven.

o Not guilty yet but we have sin nature Sinful inclinations which, in time, will manifest in sinful behavior We are born with sin nature Solution: Jesus saved them

o So, sin nature isn’t a problem for this view. The necessity of baptismal regeneration is

• Esp. a Roman Catholic view

o It removes original sin • Options

o Some alternate baptism Desire (parents) Baptism of blood (martyrdom)

o “God is not limited to His sacraments” • What role does Jesus have in their “salvation”? Do they need Jesus?

o Not from personal acts of sin o Not from knowing rejection of God o Do they just enter heaven because of their goodness?

No, they aren’t “tempted and sinless” like Jesus They aren’t loving God Given time, they will fail!

o From the fall Sin nature

• From sinful inclinations • From future personal acts of sin

Death • Eternal life

Made “children of God” through adoption by Jesus • Even in the gospels, Jesus receives them

• WHAT DO WE DO WITH FREE WILL – o Saying they all go to heaven raises a question

Do they ALL choose God • That seems odd since so many of their adult counterparts DON’T

Do they lack free will? • That seems odd for those who say that free will is needed to have the

best kind of love relationship with God o CONJECTURE WARNING

Your answers here don’t have to impact your view that they all go to heaven. • The question is about how that works out.

o Why must they make a choice? Keep free will for each person in heaven

• It won’t be the best kind of love • What’s wrong with

o Perhaps it isn’t love at all! POE requires free will

o They don’t make a free choice options Calvinist response

• Regeneration before faith o Irresistible grace

• They are all elect! • Some say this is compatibilism and that they are still making a choice. • My real point is this

o Calvinists have an EASY way to accept that babies/unaccountable are saved

o That’s how God ALWAYS does it • Compatibilism?

o I’m not weighing in on that here • Just – Calvinism easily answers this

You may not HAVE to be a Calvinist to say they don’t make a free will choice. • They are the exception to the rule • God chooses for them

o Why? They are children – we generally do choose for kids

• What they do, where they live, who they know o They couldn’t possibly choose.

So He saves them • Free-will version?

o And then, environmental factors ensure they love God back Perhaps they COULD choose otherwise but they don’t

Forever Infants • They are in heaven but…

o Never mature, even in eternal life o Solves the free will question

• In relationship but never more strongly developed o Is that a real relationship?

Do you have a relationship with your child? yes

o And this is MORE SO Because they are internally united to the Holy Spirit

• Do they get new bodies? o If so, why are they stuck as infants? o The nature of the glorified body

1 John 3:2 (NASB95) 2Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.

• My logic – if they are saved they are children of God… if they are children of God they will get new body like that of Jesus

Dementia? • Seems arbitrary to make it different for kids

o Another possible theological problem New body that is permanently impacted by the fall.

• Are they bodiless? o Not

1 - If you are God’s child you get a new body like Jesus’ 2 – they have no resurrection!

• 2 Corinthians 5:4 (NASB95) 4For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life.

o A new body is part of eternal life for us o They do make a choice options

Environmental influence • They COULD say no but they don’t • Compatibilism

Whichever view you take you’ll be confronted with explaining why ALL of them are saved

Molinist response • God has so ordered the world that while they COULD choose to reject

Him, He makes sure that the persons who are killed in infancy are souls that will accept Him and freely choose to know and love God.

• Alternately, God makes sure that those who WILL reject Him are given that opportunity in life.

o To vindicate His own judgment of them and to assure their own free will

• Therefore, killing people to get them saved doesn’t work. o You are just cutting the life off from those who would otherwise

have lived for the Lord. • How likely is this really?

o It’s possible. • How carefully do you think God has ordered history according to His

plan? o Acts 4:28 (NASB95) 28to do whatever Your hand and Your

purpose predestined to occur. o Ephesians 1:11 (NASB95) 11also we have obtained an

inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,

o Matthew 10:29 (NASB95) 29“Are not two sparrows sold for a cent? And yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.

o The death of a baby is part of that plan Not caused, but planned for.

o When do they make this choice? Before death, which bypasses the intellect In an instant at death

• How o Naturally

But lack of knowledge and accountability Perhaps on some level

o God enables them o Maturity comes gradually at a later time and they choose

Two options here. • 1 They are in heaven, saved and as they can

choose they do choose God • 2 they are kept out of heaven until they can

choose… o Which leads to some problems

o 2nd life response In an afterlife testing ground

• Not the classic doctrine of limbo • Why heaven seems better than creating a new place

o I think heaven and hell are legit o I don’t want to make up a new location

It’s simpler o Hell is ruled out o Heaven is what’s left o David’s hope puts his child PRESENTLY in the same place as

David will be eventually. o And “rest” terminology for infants makes sense if heaven is

where they are going o Jesus received the kids, he didn’t say “wait till they grow up”

In the Millennium • Same problems as before • Plus

o What about Job’s preference Now he just gets a new life of new trials.

o Reincarnation – we’re getting a bit creative This quickly leans you toward thinking that many may reject God

• But I think this conflicts with the biblical evidence o Let that confidence impact you

• If they won’t reject, why do they need this? • I lean molinist or that God chooses for them

o Our preconceived notions may drive us That’s ok

• Ad hoc? o Not so bad, if that’s all you got

• Simplicity? • Are your other assumptions grounded?

• Impact of this view o Heaven is more populated than you thought! o Perhaps more saved than unsaved

God just makes sure the unsaved have that full chance to reject Him • Is abortion now ok?

o MURDER o “innocent blood”

Psalm 106:9 (NASB95) 9Thus He rebuked the Red Sea and it dried up, And He led them through the deeps, as through the wilderness.

Psalm 106:38–40 (NASB95) 38And shed innocent blood, The blood of their sons and their daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with the blood. 39Thus they became unclean in their practices, And played the harlot in their deeds. 40Therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against His people And He abhorred His inheritance.

o It may be worse! Not only is it murder It is murder of one of God’s children, a Christian

• Effectively, even if not yet. Revelation 6:10 (NASB95) 10and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, “How

long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”

o Who else can you kill now? 1 year olds? 2 year olds? Christians?

• Avoids possibility of apostasy! Also, abortion robs them of serving God in this world and enjoying many

relationships and life experiences o Perhaps they would have been saved anyways

Election/Calvinism Molinism If EITHER of these is true, then their death didn’t CAUSE them to be saved

• Yet another in a long line of o The Bible seems to address this sort of twisted thinking

Romans 3:8 (NASB95) 8And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), “Let us do evil that good may come”? Their condemnation is just.

o Whatever excuse you give, God will judge you for it anyways Abortion supporters have LOTS of excuses..

• They don’t matter • WHY doesn’t God do that with everyone!?

o Well, he does do it with a lot of people. o Some would use this as an accusation against God for judging those who reject Him.

It doesn’t work • God takes the morally unaccountable into eternal grace – we see that as good • God judges the morally accountable based on their knowledge and actions, even after extending a chance for grace through faith.

o That seems unobjectionable. o But why bother LETTING us choose to reject Him?

Blame To have the best kind of love relationship.

• Perhaps For life lessons (soul building)

• Even those babies can learn through the stories To glorify Himself even in the unsaved

• Through righteous judgment o Romans 5:8 (NASB95) 8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. o God can show His love MORE in this scenario

• We do this all the time in our stories (movies/books) o A bad guy gives the good guy a chance to exhibit his goodness

Gandalf and Saruman – YES! • Ents march on Eisengard

o Romans 9:22 (NASB95) 22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? God’s wrath is good.

• We see it in our stories • In our courts – judge drops a sentence against a rapist

o Finally But we are sinners too

• Naturally hesitant to want to be judged

o Finally He is God. It’s not up to you.

• He’s right • He knows better than you • He IS better than you • He does what’s right

It’s TOTALLY OK if you don’t get it • It’s not ok if you shake your fist at Him

o Guard your heart Trust the Lord

Conclusions

• My case isn’t based on these answers. o Yours doesn’t need to be either

• My case o Biblical data seems ALL in favor of their salvation

Judgment doesn’t apply to them David’s hope

o 1- not morally aware therefore not accountable o 2- specific examples of them not deserving judgment even when their parents are! o 3- The way people are judged and sent to Hell doesn’t seem to apply to

children/unaware Hell is ruled out

o 4- David’s response to losing his son seems to support a heaven view (fellowship) o 5- Without good reason to INVENT a new location for them, heaven is their destination o 6- God’s DESIRE to save all is consistent with the salvation of infants o 7- God restores all of creation which was suffered unwillingly because of the fall. I think

it is consistent for God to rescue babies/unaware as well o Other views seem forced

Seriously… try it! • How you answer these questions may seem ad hoc

o You allow other views to influence you But, hopefully you have good reasons to hold those views

o So, it raises their likelihood o Aren’t dealing with certainty here…

That’s ok • God will do what’s right

o God is morally perfect and loving • Think biblically

o Mark series continued. o playlist

• Jesus’ shocking wor ds about children a nd what it really means. • We read this pa ssage through moder n eyes and can totally miss it. • Modern –

o Children are more valua ble than adults o More pure o More honest o More likeable

• Ancient – o Children are not ready for participation in important areas of life

• Mark 10:13 –16 (NASB95) 13A nd they were bri nging chil dren to Him so that H e might touch t hem; but the di sci ples re buk ed them. 14But when Jesus sa w this, H e was i ndig nant and sai d to them, “Permit the childre n to come to Me ; do not hinder them; for t he king dom of God be long s to such as t hese. 15“Truly I say t o you, whoever does not receive the ki ngdom of God like a child will not e nter it at all.” 16And He took them in H is arms and bega n bl essi ng them, layi ng His ha nds on them. o How old?

A parallel passage, Luke 18:15 (NASB95) 15And they were bringing even their babies to Hi m so that He would t ouch the m, but when the di sciple s saw it, they began rebuking the m. • Gk “Brephos” – only used of infants • Paidion is also use d

o So it varied from newbor ns possibly up to 12 year olds o Not baptism

A German, Lutheran t heologia n na med Jeremia s taught • “hinder” from “do not hi nder them” was a technical ter m relating to baptism

o Revealing that they are getting baptized i n Mk 10. • No – “kol uein” is use d 23 time s and rarely refer s to baptism

Actually against it! o No repe ntance o Just a welcome with a blessi ng o “the kingdom of God bel ongs to such as these ”

Is that CLEAR? no At least it makes you wonder How can they be example s of the saved if t hey are not, in their current state, accepte d by God.

o It seems more CONSISTE NT with the m being save d than not. o We need more

• “so that He might touch the m” o Why? What is the sig nifica nce of Jesus touching them? o Jesus often heale d with physi cal touch, her e are 5 example s of thi s in Mark alone

A leper in Mark 1:41 (NASB9 5) 41Move d with compassi on, Je sus stretched out His hand and touched him, a nd said to him, “I am willing; be cle ansed.”

Mark 8:22 (NASB95) 22And t hey came t o Bethsai da. And they broug ht a bli nd man t o Jesus and implore d Him to touch him.

Healing many in M ark 3:10 (NASB95) 10for He ha d hea led many , with the r esult that all those who ha d afflictions pre sse d around Him in or der to touch Him.

The woma n with the blee ding pr oble m - Mark 5 :27– 31 (NASB95) 27after hearing a bout Jesus, she came up in t he cr owd behi nd Him a nd touche d His cl oak. 28For she thought, “If I just touch Hi s garments, I will get well.” 29Immediately the flow of her blood wa s drie d up; and she felt in her body that she was heale d of her affliction. 30Immediately Jesus, perceivi ng in Him self that the power procee ding from Him ha d gone forth, tur ned ar ound i n the crow d and said, “Who touche d My garment s?” 31And His di sci ples said to H im, “You see the crow d pre ssing i n on You, and You say , ‘Who touched Me?’ ”

Mark 6:56 (NASB95) 56 Wher ever He e ntered villag es, or cities, or country side, t hey were layi ng the si ck in t he market pla ces, a nd impl oring Him that they might just touch t he fringe of His cloak; and as many a s touche d it were being cure d. o But there’s nothing here about these kids needi ng healing.

They are just kids with parents w ho se em to believe in Jesus For a blessing

o What did they think it mig ht result in? And di d it? Protection? Future calling? God’s help in their vul nerable devel opment physically and/or character-wi se?

• “but the di sciple s rebuke d the m” o Are we supposed to feel they were bei ng jerks?

Sometimes we poke fun and caricature the m • But, it can cause us to mi ss the application

o By thinking they do something we would NEVE R do, we miss it

Do children who die go to heaven?

• Categorizing issues o What happens to them? o Why? What is the basis for this eternal life? o When do they shift from “grace” to “accountable”?

Is it quickly or a gradual thing? • Awareness of sin seems gradual • My theory

o Sudden accountability o Graded punishment

o What of their choice? • An argument from Christ’s blessing on children

o Kids can be seen in one of three conditions, spiritually Damned Not applicable Saved/under grace

o The disciples seemed to think N/A But Jesus welcomes them and blesses them Perhaps this hints that they are in the third category

o Calvin said That it is presumption and sacrilege to drive far from the fold of Christ those

whom He cherishes in His bosom, and to shut the door, and exclude as strangers, those whom He does not wish to be forbidden to come to Him

• MacArthur, John F.. Safe in the Arms of God (p. 60). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.

• “Rest” terminology is more consistent with an afterlife of entering heaven than it is with anything else

o Ecc. Job. Ecc speaks of their rest but also affirms judgment after death,

• So they seem to be ok in judgment • That’s more consistent with heaven than hell unless you invent a third

option. • Quick survey of options I don’t take

o Baptismal salvation for infants Link?

o Parental faith salvation for infants

FOR THE HEALING OF THE BLIND MAN LATER • A pattern in Mk, a common attitude in people when Jesus heals.

o See if you can find the commonality. A leper

• Mark 1:40–41 (NASB95) 40And a leper came to Jesus, beseeching Him and falling on his knees before Him, and saying, “If You are willing, You can make me clean.” 41Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, “I am willing; be cleansed.”

Paralyitic • Mark 2:3–5 (NASB95)

3And they came, bringing to Him a paralytic, carried by four men. 4Being unable to get to Him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above Him; and when they had dug an opening, they let down the pallet on which the paralytic was lying. 5And Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

Jairus, ruler of the synagogue (note how it looked for him to do this) • Mark 5:22–24 (NASB95) 22One of the synagogue officials named Jairus

came up, and on seeing Him, fell at His feet 23and implored Him earnestly, saying, “My little daughter is at the point of death; please come and lay Your hands on her, so that she will get well and live.” 24And He went off with him; and a large crowd was following Him and pressing in on Him.

Woman with the issue of blood • Mark 5:24–28 (NASB95)

24And He went off with him; and a large crowd was following Him and pressing in on Him. 25A woman who had had a hemorrhage for twelve years, 26and had endured much at the hands of many physicians, and had spent all that she had and was not helped at all, but rather had grown worse— 27after hearing about Jesus, she came up in the crowd behind Him and touched His cloak. 28For she thought, “If I just touch His garments, I will get well.”

o Pressing through – took commitment o Conviction and hope

In Gennesaret • Mark 6:53–56 (NASB95)

53When they had crossed over they came to land at Gennesaret, and moored to the shore. 54When they got out of the boat, immediately the people recognized Him, 55and ran about that whole country and began to carry here and there on their pallets those who were sick, to the place they heard He was. 56Wherever He entered villages, or cities, or countryside, they were laying the sick in the market places, and imploring Him that they might just touch the fringe of His cloak; and as many as touched it were being cured.

A Gentile woman comes to Jesus • Mark 7:25–30 (NASB95)

25But after hearing of Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately came and fell at His feet. 26Now the woman was a Gentile, of the Syrophoenician race. And she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter.

27And He was saying to her, “Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” 28But she answered and said to Him, “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table feed on the children’s crumbs.” 29And He said to her, “Because of this answer go; the demon has gone out of your daughter.” 30And going back to her home, she found the child lying on the bed, the demon having left.

A blind man • Mark 8:22 (NASB95)

22And they came to Bethsaida. And they brought a blind man to Jesus and implored [ESV begged] Him to touch him.

And today’s passage, the FINAL healing recorded in Mark • Mark 10:46–52 (NASB95)

46Then they came to Jericho. And as He was leaving Jericho with His disciples and a large crowd, a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the road. 47When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” 48Many were sternly telling him to be quiet, but he kept crying out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” 49And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him here.” So they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take courage, stand up! He is calling for you.” 50Throwing aside his cloak, he jumped up and came to Jesus. 51And answering him, Jesus said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” And the blind man said to Him, “Rabboni, I want to regain my sight!” 52And Jesus said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road.

o People who seek after Christ with intention, receive His attention and blessing Not a guarantee for healing

• God’s will and plan trumps everything o 1 John 5:14 (NASB95) 14This is the confidence which we have

before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. God CAN say no!

• But He is more likely to say yes when we persevere in hopefully pursuing His help.

8 examples in Mark alone. • .