[Christian_Capitalist]

The Calvinist position when taken to the same extreme that this author takes the Wesleyan position

It's John Wesley's own position, fer-cryin-out-loud. I don't need to "take it to extremes", when I can just quote the man himself and his own church standards!

"they cannot be saved, unless this be washed away by baptism."

[P-Marlowe]

It's John Wesley's own position, fer-cryin-out-loud. I don't need to "take it to extremes", when I can just quote the man himself and his own church standards! "they cannot be saved, unless this be washed away by baptism."

If Wesley said that then he was wrong. It certainly doesn't mean he was preaching Satan.

Further there is nothing in traditional Calvinist Theology which would indicate that just because some Child dies in infancy that they were numbered among the elect. Indeed God hated Esau before he was born. Now if that hate was based on foreknowledge, then you could argue for God's mercy on innocent children, but if you believe God's hatred for Esau had nothing to do with God's foreknowledge, then you cannot argue that God automatically has elected every infant that dies, and the conclusion to come to is that God must hate some of them, even before they were born, because he clearly hates a lot of them even before they grow up.

[xzins]

It's John Wesley's own position, fer-cryin-out-loud."

It's not Wesley's position.

It's what wingnuts think is wesley's position.