[Dr. Eckleburg]

Calvin lost two children in infancy. He very much believed in the salvation of infants. Following the Scriptural logic that predestination affords, it is God who numbers our days. If He has chosen to limit an infant's life to mere days or months or even a few years, then, according to Calvin, He most probably has called those children home to Him.

What is the downside of believing that? I don't see any. Grace saves, and grace alone.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Ping to 1370.

[wmfights]

If He has chosen to limit an infant's life to mere days or months or even a few years, then, according to Calvin, He most probably has called those children home to Him.

What is the downside of believing that?

A whole lot is wrong with this. It is being argued that because an infant, child, or unbelieving spouse, is in the home of a believing adult that unbeliever is saved. Scripture is very clear.

John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

If Reformers want to create new "traditions" just like the RC's have done don't get upset when they claim beliefs are legitimate that are not in Scripture. Scripture is silent on this issue. It's an area where we should just have faith, not create beliefs that sprinkling water on a baby's head and saying because their parents are believers that the baby is going to heaven.