INFANT SALVATION

The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination - Section 11 ^ | 1963 | Loraine Boettner

[Matchett-PI]

"....depending on His mercy *widened as broadly as possible* ---

HAVE ENTERTAINED A *CHARITABLE HOPE* ---

---- that since these infants have never committed any actual sin themselves, their inherited sin would be pardoned and they would be saved on wholly evangelical principles.

Certainly there is nothing in the Calvinistic system which would prevent us from believing this; ---

... and until it is proven that God could not predestinate to eternal life all those whom He is pleased to call in infancy ----

--- we may be permitted to hold this view.

Some hold that the in teaching that all those dying in infancy are saved; but ----

---------- BE THAT AS IT MAY...----------

.... No doubt there have been individual Presbyterians who held that some of those who die in infancy have been lost; but such was never the official teaching of the Presbyterian Church and as matters *now stand* such a position is contradicted by the Church's creed." [snip]

### I happen to be one of those "individual Presbyterians" who thinks that its "Declaratory Statement" goes beyond the Scripture. And based upon the wording in the above commentary (which I took great pains to highlight), I think they know it does, too. :D

[Matchett-PI]

Bump to those interested.

[Matchett-PI]

Correction to the comments section. I inadvertantly didn't copy the whole sentence, which should have been:

Some hold that the Declaratory Statement goes beyond the Scripture in teaching that all those dying in infancy are saved; but ----

---------- BE THAT AS IT MAY... ----------

To which I responded: "### I happen to be one of those "individual Presbyterians" who thinks that its "Declaratory Statement" goes beyond the Scripture. And based upon the wording in the above commentary (which I took great pains to highlight), I think they know it does, too."

Bump

[RnMomof7]

Excellent post MPI..and one I agree with.....ONLY under the docrtines of Grace does Infant salvation make good sense.

Under Arminian thought one day a child is saved by virtue of his age and the next day lost because he failed to choose in time..Eithor God is God or he is not!

[pro-life]

God will show mercy and compassion to whoever He chooses to. (Rom 9:15) He could choose to show mercy to infants, and since He knows all, he knows if they would become saved if they lived longer lives. This issue definately does not prove the Calvinist point of view, because there are non-calvinist thoughts on this.

[Matchett-PI]

"..there are non-calvinist thoughts on this"

That's right. There are two schools of thought:

[1] God is the only One who decides who will be saved.

[2] Man is the only one who decides who will be saved.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

If only a single infant dying in irresponsible infancy be saved, the whole Arminian principle is traversed.

If God does not wait upon Man's Choice, God does not wait upon Man's Choice.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Love the screen-name, Pro-Life; I did my time with Operation Rescue, so I am always glad to meet another pro-lifer.

Now... let us consider:

God will show mercy and compassion to whoever He chooses to. (Rom 9:15) He could choose to show mercy to infants, and since He knows all, he knows if they would become saved if they lived longer lives. This issue definately does not prove the Calvinist point of view, because there are non-calvinist thoughts on this.

Matthew 11: 20 - 27 --
Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

Now, what do these verses tell us, regarding the breadth of God's Foreknowledge?

One question. Simple enough:

• God foreknew Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom’s free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of such Miracles; AND
• God foreknew Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom’s free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
• God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, just as He foreknew.

  True, or False?

---

This is the predestination of the saints,--nothing else; to wit, the foreknowledge and the preparation of God's kindnesses, whereby they are most certainly delivered, whoever they are that are delivered. But where are the rest left by the righteous divine judgment except in the mass of ruin, where the Tyrians and the Sidonians were left? who, moreover, might have believed if they had seen Christ's wonderful miracles. But since it was not given to them to believe, the means of believing also were denied them. -- Saint Augustine

---

So... do you UNDERSTAND Matthew 11, or do you NOT UNDERSTAND Matthew 11?

Answer the question which I have posed...

[rdb3]

That's right. Either God decides, or man decides. There is no middle ground.

[vmatt]

I offer a little fearful perspective.

1 Samuel 15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Hosea 1:15 Though he be fruitful among his brethren, an east wind shall come, the wind of the LORD shall come up from the wilderness, and his spring shall become dry, and his fountain shall be dried up: he shall spoil the treasure of all pleasant vessels.

16 Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

Luke 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;

29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

[Matchett-PI]

"If God does not wait upon Man's Choice, God does not wait upon Man's Choice"

And if He did wait upon man's choice (or forsee it), it is still man's choice --- not God's.

Which means God is not in control --- man is.

[drstevej]

There are two schools of thought:

[1] The Potter is the only One who decides what He will do with the clay.

[2] The Clay is the only one who decides what the Potter must do with the clay, the Potter says -- have it your way.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

There are two schools of thought: [1] The Potter is the only One who decides what He will do with the clay. [2] The Clay is the only one who decides what the Potter must do with the clay, the Potter says -- have it your way.

The fact that classical Amyrauldians fall within the first camp is why I consider them (as opposed to duplicitious "calminians") to be genuine Allies of the Biblical Doctrine of Predestination.

As a far-too-simplistic analysis, one could claim that Amyrauldians and Calvinists essentially argue over whether God has simply "passed over" the un-purified clay in respect of their own Depraved Choices, or has "actively fashioned" the impure clay into Vessels of Destruction to the praise of his Justice. (In fact, I think it's a little of both)

It's an argument among Sola Scriptura theological "friends", IMHO.
Both positions really do see God as the Potter... a cosmological view which is antithetical to the Arminian/Pelagian view.

[drstevej]

I wonder if it bugs wc that you view classical Amyrauldians as "genuine Allies of the Biblical Doctrine of Predestination?"

The doctines of (T)otal depravity, (U)nconditional election and (I)rresistable grace are inseparable.

The doctrine of (P)erseverance flows out of these three. The extent of the atonement (L) is a legitimate but lesser point for biblical and logical debate -- a debate that is entirely within a framework that maintains Divine Sovereignty.

It's either T-U-I or Arminianism.

[Matchett-PI]

"[2] The Clay is the only one who decides what the Potter must do with the clay, the Potter says -- have it your way."

Of course those who embrace that school of thought will have to answer God's question (through Paul) here: "Does not the potter *have the right* to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? ...who are you, O man to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'why did you make me like this?" [Romans 9: 11-24]

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Welcome back. Sandbox still in disarray. You're missed. 8~)

[fortheDeclaration]

"..there are non-calvinist thoughts on this" That's right. There are two schools of thought: [1] God is the only One who decides who will be saved. [2] Man is the only one who decides who will be saved.

No, there is a third choice, God has decided to let man decide if man will be saved.

[drstevej]

#3 is the same as #2. Nice try.

[Jerry_M]

"Salvation is of the LORD"

Amen, and amen!!

I can trust that He is wiser than any part of His creation, and that He does all things well. There will be no tears in heaven, for we will fully recognize that He has done all things well. I praise Him daily that He holds me safe in His loving hands, and that I am not subject to the fickleness of my pathetic will.

[Matchett-PI]

I wrote: ".. There are two schools of thought: [1] God is the only One who decides who will be saved. [2] Man is the only one who decides who will be saved."

You responded: "No, there is a third choice, God has decided to let man decide if man will be saved."

Sorry, ftD, school of thought #2 presupposes that God decided to let man decide. There are only two schools of thought.

drstevej, in post #12, put it the way you did (where God tells man): "Okay, have it your way -- you decide if you will allow me to save you."

Notice:

drstevej wrote: "[2] The Clay is the only one who decides what the Potter must do with the clay, the Potter says -- have it your way."

I responded: "Of course those who embrace that school of thought will have to answer God's question (through Paul) here: "Does not the potter *have the right* to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? ...who are you, O man to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'why did you make me like this?" [Romans 9: 11-24]

So you have two choices, ftD:

[1] God elected (made) some in man's race for a noble purpose and elected (made) others for a common purpose.

[2] God allowed each man to say whether he would allow God to make him for a noble purpose or for a common purpose.

Then you must also consider the ones who, through no fault of their own, have no say, ie: the unborn who died in the womb, and various incompetents.

Are all who "have no say" (unable to "make a choice") consigned to hell?

Or, will some of them be in heaven?