CALVINISM: ITS DOCTRINE OF INFANT SALVATION

Good News from the Redeemer ^ | June 28-July5, 1997 | Daniel Parks, Redeemer Baptist Church of Louisville KY

[Colonel Kangaroo]

From Luke 1:13 we see that John was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb. That is no indication of the ability to sin. In fact, Balaam's mule spoke through God's power. (Numbers 22:27-33) These two special cases do not indicate that either babies or mules are sinful liars.

Remember, Isaiah 7:16 teaches that there is a time when a child does not know to choose good or evil, so we do not have to rely only on our common sense.

[xzins]

It means they're born with a tendency to sin early....we know also via the New Testament that they have a sin nature.

These next few stanzas of the psalm are also full of simile and metaphor. Am I to assume this is a psalm against wicked lions with fangs?

---

To the Chief Musician. Set to "Do Not Destroy." A Michtam of David.
1 [1] Do you indeed speak righteousness, you silent ones?
Do you judge uprightly, you sons of men?
2No, in heart you work wickedness;
You weigh out the violence of your hands in the earth.


3The wicked are estranged from the womb;
They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.
4Their poison is like the poison of a serpent;
They are like the deaf cobra that stops its ear,
5Which will not heed the voice of charmers,
Charming ever so skillfully.


6Break their teeth in their mouth, O God!
Break out the fangs of the young lions, O LORD!
7Let them flow away as waters which run continually;
When he bends his bow,
Let his arrows be as if cut in pieces.
8Let them be like a snail which melts away as it goes,
Like a stillborn child of a woman, that they may not see the sun.

[opus86]

read later

[SoothingDave]

If -- as John Calvin believed -- He has elected to salvation all those whom He has ordained to die in Infancy, then it logically follows that He effects His election by regenerating them in the womb

Why do you think it is "all" those who die in infancy?

It seems to me the consistent Calvinist idea would be that God may elect some and not others, as it pleases Him. Isn't that what you believe about adults? What is it about infants that makes God decide to elect 100 per cent of them?

SD

[stuartcr]

Saved from what? Why would God condemn an infant, when He knows beforehand, everything that that infant will do for his entire life?

[SoothingDave]

Therefore, all Humans born of Adam, are Born into the world as Sinners against God. Thus the Bible clearly teaches.

Except for those who die in infancy whom God has regenerated in the womb? Didn't you just argue that? Which is it? Are all born as "sinners against God" or are some born regenerated, but fated to die before being able to conceive of faith?

SD

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

It means they're born with a tendency to sin early....we know also via the New Testament that they have a sin nature.

No, the Verse doesn't say that at all. The Verse doesn't even hint at some vague, amorphous "tendency to sin", you just interpolated that in there because you WANT it to be there, even though it ISN'T there.

Psalm 58:3 is a Verse about Infants, and Sin. So let's just submit the matter to an acid test of spiritual honesty:

• A.) Psalm 58:3 teaches that Infants ARE SINNERS.
  
• B.) Psalm 58:3 teaches that Infants ARE NOT SINNERS.

It's either one, or the other. To claim that it is merely teaching a "tendency to sin", is to claim that the Verse is teaching "B".

So, which is it, Xzins: A, or B?

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

From Luke 1:13 we see that John was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb. That is no indication of the ability to sin. In fact, Balaam's mule spoke through God's power. (Numbers 22:27-33) These two special cases do not indicate that either babies or mules are sinful liars. Remember, Isaiah 7:16 teaches that there is a time when a child does not know to choose good or evil, so we do not have to rely only on our common sense.

Irrelevant. Whether or not they know Good or Evil, Psalm 58:3 teaches that Infants come into the world Committing Evil.

[xzins]

I have already said that they have a sin nature, OP.

I have also said that they don't speak/verbalize....that that is as metaphorical as the verse that says they have fangs like lions.

So, they are sinners by virtue of their sin nature. BUT...they don't "speak."

Both can be true in this instance due to the obvious metaphor.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Why do you think it is "all" those who die in infancy? It seems to me the consistent Calvinist idea would be that God may elect some and not others, as it pleases Him.

And, the usual fare continues. I correctly quote Roman Catholic beliefs in my post, whereas you just make up some contrived malarkey about Calvinism and claim that it's what Calvinists "ought" to believe -- even though we don't.

Isn't that what you believe about adults? What is it about infants that makes God decide to elect 100 per cent of them?

The Bible does not expressly state that "all" who die in infancy are regenerated in the womb; however, the only definitive examples of those Dying in Infancy provided in Scripture, are so regenerated (or sometime in early infancy; prior to their deaths, at any rate).

Ergo, the only examples in Scripture of those Dying in Infancy are uniformly Regenerate, and there's no contrary evidence of those Dying in Infancy NOT being Regenerate. So, it's a "rule of thumb" not infallibly known for certain, but based on the available Biblical evidence.

Except for those who die in infancy whom God has regenerated in the womb? Didn't you just argue that? Which is it? Are all born as "sinners against God" or are some born regenerated, but fated to die before being able to conceive of faith?

Fine. Correct my statement to read, "All infants conceived of Adam..." etc.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I have already said that they have a sin nature, OP. I have also said that they don't speak/verbalize....that that is as metaphorical as the verse that says they have fangs like lions. So, they are sinners by virtue of their sin nature. BUT...they don't "speak." Both can be true in this instance due to the obvious metaphor.

Alright, so "metaphor" or not, you agree that Psalm 58:3 does in fact teach that Infants are indeed Sinners.

Glad we cleared that up.

[xzins]

I thought we'd end up agreeing except for maybe the "speaking" thing.

[SoothingDave]

And, the usual fare continues. I correctly quote Roman Catholic beliefs in my post, whereas you just make up some contrived malarkey about Calvinism and claim that it's what Calvinists "ought" to believe -- even though we don't.

I'm merely trying to ascribe what seems like consistency to your beliefs. Don't you believe that God chooses some for salvation and not others? What have I said wrong?

The Bible does not expressly state that "all" who die in infancy are regenerated in the womb;

But you did, or at least you said that Calvin did. So there is some matter of surmising going on.

Fine. Correct my statement to read, "All infants conceived of Adam..." etc.

Good. But this kinda shoots through your blustering about Psalm 58:3. It must not teach that all infants are sinners, or that all are not. Some may be elected to have been regenerated in the womb.

SD

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I thought we'd end up agreeing except for maybe the "speaking" thing.

Mmm... I still say that if a regenerate infant can -- literally, not "metaphorically" -- leap for joy in the presence of his Savior, then the Bible does teach that infants can "communicate" in some manner on a rudimentary moral level. And so, I believe that Psalm 58:3 teaches that the natural communications of (fallen, unregenerate) Man are sinful from Infancy.

But, nevermind -- that's not really the main issue. It is enough to say that Psalm 58:3 does teach that Infants are Sinners.

[xzins]

:>)

Last Word Smile!

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I'm merely trying to ascribe what seems like consistency to your beliefs. Don't you believe that God chooses some for salvation and not others? What have I said wrong?

If God has elected unto salvation all those who die in infancy, is that Number Set not "some" of the whole Race of Mankind? Why, then, does it seem inconsistent to you that a Calvinist would believe as much?

But you did, or at least you said that Calvin did. So there is some matter of surmising going on.

Surmising from the available evidence, which is 100% in favor of the Calvinist hypothesis.

Fine. Correct my statement to read, "All infants conceived of Adam..." etc. ~~ Good. But this kinda shoots through your blustering about Psalm 58:3. It must not teach that all infants are sinners, or that all are not. Some may be elected to have been regenerated in the womb.

Yes, Soothing Dave. Those who are Regenerated in the Womb are not counted as judicially "wicked" in God's eyes, and so are not the subjects of Psalm 58:3.

However, as Regeneration happens only by the direct monergistic intervention of God, Psalm 58:3 remains an informative description of the normative state of fallen, unregenerate Man from Infancy on.

[Californiajones]

Yeah, that was the point. Hoping to avoid a time-consuming concordance battle. Off the top of my head, Jesus said in Matthew that children have guardian Angels and are particularly defended by God. That speaks to some special dispensation for children under the age of accountability.

God wants us to use our common sense as we trust in Him, like a child, btw, not spin our wheels in scripture battles (as per Paul's instruction) or denominationalism when it involves the non essentials of salvation or sin. The letter of law killeth, etc.

There never was a church that made me a better Christian -- only my personal relationship with Christ does me any good. That's my very forward (not "backhanded") "swipe" at denominationalism as well as a loose paraphrase of Lincoln's definition of being a Christian.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

But, nevermind -- that's not really the main issue. It is enough to say that Psalm 58:3 does teach that Infants are Sinners.

Until I see a talking newborn, I'll have to agree to disagree about Psalms 58:3. I can't see a process where sometime between conception and birth, a baby who does not know to choose right or wrong is led away of his own lusts (James 1:14-15) transgresses the law (I John 3:4) and thus separates himself from God. (Isaiah 59:1-2)

[SoothingDave]

If God has elected unto salvation all those who die in infancy, is that Number Set not "some" of the whole Race of Mankind? Why, then, does it seem inconsistent to you that a Calvinist would believe as much?

Well. God takes some who die at age 90, some who die at age 50, some who die at age 25. It would seem, to me, inconsistent to say that, below some age, He takes "all."

But I can see your point.

Yes, Soothing Dave. Those who are Regenerated in the Womb are not counted as judicially "wicked" in God's eyes, and so are not the subjects of Psalm 58:3. However, as Regeneration happens only by the direct monergistic intervention of God, Psalm 58:3 remains an informative description of the normative state of fallen, unregenerate Man from Infancy on.

Fair enough. Have a good day.

SD

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Yeah, that was the point. Hoping to avoid a time-consuming concordance battle. Off the top of my head, Jesus said in Matthew that children have guardian Angels and are particularly defended by God. That speaks to some special dispensation for children under the age of accountability.

The Bible does not describe any "age of accountability", before which children are "exempt". Quite the opposite -- the Bible teaches that children are Sinners from Infancy (Psalm 58:3).

Thus, the logical presumption is that the children of Matthew 18:10 were among God's Elect whom He predestined to Heaven, and that is why they had guardian angels. There's no reason, for example, to believe that the Pharisees ever in their lives enjoyed the protection of guardian angels -- because Jesus taught that they were Children of Satan, not Children of God, and were predestined to Hell, not Heaven.

God wants us to use our common sense as we trust in Him, like a child, btw, not spin our wheels in scripture battles (as per Paul's instruction) or denominationalism when it involves the non essentials of salvation or sin. The letter of law killeth, etc. There never was a church that made me a better Christian -- only my personal relationship with Christ does me any good. That's my very forward (not "backhanded") "swipe" at denominationalism as well as a loose paraphrase of Lincoln's definition of being a Christian.

I'm still not sure what you mean by "denominationalism" -- does it have anything to do with a Presbyterian posting and defending an article by a Baptist? One would think that "denominationalism" would militate against that sort of thing.

On The Other Hand, if "anti-denominationalism" boils down to "no church with a descriptive name has anything to teach me" -- that sounds to me at least as intellectually restrictive and counterproductive as most any sort of "denominationalism" I can imagine...

As to Lincoln -- aside from speeches for public consumption, the man was practically an Atheist. Not really a guy to whom I would look for a definition of "Christian". (Not an attack on you, just my own personal opinion)