[RnMomof7]

The position I have stated does not imply nor state anybody deserves to be in heaven.
Infants, regardless of their names in the Book of Life, are considered to not yet be accountable for Divine good works, simply because they are not yet of age and accordingly, God is free to bless them with eternal life in heaven without encroaching upon His holiness, integrity, or righteousness.

The inference is that they deserve to be saved because they are not Judged , but found worthy due to their age or mental status. If an infant is worthy of salvation it is not by the grace or mercy of God, because they would not be judged.They simply deserve to be saved ...

You have said that God is FREE to "bless "them... not to give them mercy...bless them

Could God decide not to "bless " them"?

The non scriptural belief in the age of "accountability " makes God the debtor of the child.He owes them salvation based on something other than His mercy .

Before one can receive Mercy he must be judged guilty before the judge.. no judgment no mercy .

Can you give me scripture where the age of accountability is taught? Can you give me scripture that says all infants are written in the "Book of Life". That would mean salvation is their to lose, not Gods to give.

[the808bass]

The non scriptural belief in the age of "accountability " makes God the debtor of the child.He owes them salvation based on something other than His mercy .

This is not the case. It is precisely God's mercy that those who believe in the age of accountability have in mind when they discuss this doctrine. They don't believe God breeds puppies to kill them if they potty on the rug (This may be a harsh analogy, but I thought it fit).

That is God created the men He knew would deny him , and that would be judged guilty and sent to hell on the day of Judgment .

No, we do not have the same problem. To know that someone would deny God and to cause them to deny God are two completely different things. You can argue that they are not, but it is obvious that they are or all of us Arminians would be Calvinists.

[Cvengr]

I'm not following your argument. It seems as though you argue God may not bless and then insist He must judge and find an infant guilty.

Perhaps more guidance is available from discerning the tree of life, tree of knowledge of good and evil, and the Cross.

Christ has already paid the penalty for sin on the cross. If the partaker of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil also partakes of the tree of life, then a just God would be forced to condemn man to the Lake of Fire. But by man after partaking the tree of knowledge of good and evil, now partakes of the tree of eternal life (the Cross), God is now free to allow man to partake of eternal life.

The infant unknowledgable of the knowledge of good and evil is not yet in that position where God must condemn the infant to the Lake of Fire to remain holy.