Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Sometimes It's Heaven, Sometimes It's Hell


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Here's another scenario...from Middletown Bible Church website "Questions about the Rapture". This question about infants and the Rapture is in response to the Left Behind series written by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. I'm not sure if I agree with this:


9. What will happen to infants at the time of the rapture?

The best selling book Left Behind and the film by the same title depict...

What will happen to infants at the time of the rapture?


I agree with LaHaye on this, but that's besides the point. The subject at hand is what happens to babies at death, not the Rapture. Edited by Rick Schworer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
I gave Scriptural evidence. You just rejected it. Your choice to reject it, I suppose.


Just like it's your choice to ignore the verses in Romans, again?

I reject your interpretation, which is at best described as a huge stretch. Yes, we're all born wicked, and we're all born sinners. But it you had looked at the verses in Romans you'd see that sin is not imputed when there is no law.

There's a difference between someone being punished and paying the death penalty because of their father's sin, and a whole nation being judged and children being killed as a result. If you take your hypothesis to its logical end you wind up just like the guys in the Gospels saying, "Who sinned so this man was born blind?" Did every single baby on earth sin and that's why God drowned them in the flood - and sent them to Hell according to your ridiculous theory? All however-million of them? Is every time a baby aborted it goes to Hell?

It's ridiculous to suggest that a baby dying as a result of God judging a nation is evidence of it going to Hell.

The textbooks on Salvation are Romans, Ephesians, and Colossians - you should be looking there. I explained your Scriptures twice, your turn to explain the verses I posted in Romans.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do not ignore the verses in Romans. Paul was not saying he was saved before coming to the knowledge of the law, lost, then saved again. Such a teaching is unScriptural

Scripture tells us that if one died for all, then were all dead. Well, according to the Word of God, Christ did die for all. So that must mean that all were dead... including infants.

Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? (Genesis 18:25b)

Amen, sister.

I do not ignore the verses in Romans. Paul was not saying he was saved before coming to the knowledge of the law, lost, the saved again. Such a teaching is unScriptural


But a baby can somehow know it's a sinner in need of a Saviour, and trust Christ and be saved before it can crawl, or talk, or maybe even smile? The same baby later on somehow trusts Christ again? Was it lost in between? I have three kids under the age of five. The two oldest ones know who Jesus is an they love Him and talk about Him all the time – but when asked if they are a sinner they reply, “No, I not a sinner, I wasn’t naughty today.” They don’t get it, no matter how hard we try to explain it.

This is the New Testament teaching:

Rom. 7:9, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.”
Rom. 5:13, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”

Paul is saying in 7:9 that there was a time when he was alive, but when the commandment came sin revived in him and he died. He was writing at the time so we know he was talking about his spirit. Before then, he wasn’t dead… so his spirit must have been alive! Big difference. Romans 5:13 shows us that sin isn’t held against someone when there is no law, or as 7:9 puts it, before “the commandment”.

A baby is not saved, a baby is not in the spiritual Body of Christ, and a baby does not have its sins forgiven. What a baby has is it's sins NOT IMPUTED to its account. It is not accountable for its sins until the commandment comes, written in the heart, and it's different for every child.

http://ricksarticles.blogspot.com/search/label/Where%20Do%20Babies%20Go%3F Edited by Rick Schworer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Amen, sister.



But a baby can somehow know it's a sinner in need of a Saviour, and trust Christ and be saved before it can crawl, or talk, or maybe even smile? The same baby later on somehow trusts Christ again? Was it lost in between? I have three kids under the age of five. The two oldest ones know who Jesus is an they love Him and talk about Him all the time – but when asked if they are a sinner they reply, “No, I not a sinner, I wasn’t naughty today.” They don’t get it, no matter how hard we try to explain it.

This is the New Testament teaching:

Rom. 7:9, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.”
Rom. 5:13, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”

Paul is saying in 7:9 that there was a time when he was alive, but when the commandment came sin revived in him and he died. He was writing at the time so we know he was talking about his spirit. Before then, he wasn’t dead… so his spirit must have been alive! Big difference. Romans 5:13 shows us that sin isn’t held against someone when there is no law, or as 7:9 puts it, before “the commandment”.

A baby is not saved, a baby is not in the spiritual Body of Christ, and a baby does not have its sins forgiven. What a baby has is it's sins NOT IMPUTED to its account. It is not accountable for its sins until the commandment comes, written in the heart, and it's different for every child.


http://ricksarticles.blogspot.com/search/label/Where%20Do%20Babies%20Go%3F

David professed that God was his God from his mother's belly.

Psalms 22:9-10 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.

I have to go with Scripture here, Rick. Apparently, there is some way unbeknown to us that God reveals Himself to even the infant in the womb, giving that infant an opportunity to trust Him.

Sin not held against an infant? Wow! OBviously God must have forgotten that when He decreed all infants to be dashed to pieces in Hosea 13:16. Edited by Standing Firm In Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Sin not held against an infant? Wow! OBviously God must have forgotten that when He decreed all infants to be dashed to pieces in Hosea 13:16.


Dying and going to Hell are two different things. When God kills a Christian for backsliding that means they're going to Hell to?

I Cor. 5:5, "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."

I Cor. 3:17, "If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are."

Like I said before, God didn't make a decree to murder infants in Hosea 13:16 because of their sins. The children dying is as a result of one nation attacking another. You're putting something there that's not.

What a terrible thing to say - that God throws babies into Hell! You sit there and say "I have to go with Scripture here, Rick..." but you have NOTHING that states that God throws babies into Hell! You have no evidence that God judges a baby personally for its own sins! You have nothing, no evidence at all. What's next - infant baptismal regeneration? You need to think seriously about what you're trying to say here.

Yes - God doesn't hold a baby's sins against it. That's what the Bible clearly says:

Rom. 7:9, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.”
Rom. 5:13, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”

You've yet to expound on these verses in Romans, and it is the fourth time I've pointed that out to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Here's another scenario...from Middletown Bible Church website "Questions about the Rapture". This question about infants and the Rapture is in response to the Left Behind series written by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. I'm not sure if I agree with this:


9. What will happen to infants at the time of the rapture?

The best selling book Left Behind and the film by the same title depict all infants and young children being removed and raptured from the earth, including infants and children of unsaved people. Mothers were running around in panic crying out, "Where is my baby?", etc. But does the Bible really teach this?

The rapture is when Christ comes to remove ("catch up"–1 Thess. 4:16-17) the church (all true believers) from earth. He will come to receive His bride and bring her to heaven. Thus, the rapture is for those "in Christ," those who are part of the body and bride of Christ.

Infants are not saved and they are not in Christ; nor are they part of the church. It would be wrong to point to a living infant and say, "That baby is saved and has eternal life and his sins are forgiven!" On the contrary, every baby is born in sin and every infant has a wicked sin nature (Rom. 5:12, Psalm 51:5; JOB 14:4; Psalm 58:3). Babies are not saved and they do not possess eternal life. If this were true, then does this mean that when they get older they become UN-saved and forfeit eternal life? This is Biblically absurd. It would also be absurd to say that all the unsaved children around the world growing up in Hindu and Muslim and Buddhist homes are part of the church that is in Christ.

Keep in mind that an infant that is a year old at the time of the rapture will be approximately 8 years old at the time when Christ returns to this earth to rule and reign, and thus will be certainly old enough to make a responsible decision for or against Christ at that time or even prior to that time.

Whether or not Christ takes infants that belong to saved parents is not revealed in the Scriptures, though it does seem reasonable to suppose that God would take such infants instead of leaving them parentless and defenseless. One thing we do know for sure is that God will do what is right (Gen. 18:25; Rom. 9:14). God is certainly far more concerned for every infant and young child (saved or unsaved) than we are.

What kind of concept of God does the Left Behind book and film convey to the world when unsaved mothers are going around in deep panic crying, "Where’s my baby?" It makes God look like a kidnapper! This gives Reformed men and others all the more reason to mock our "secret rapture theory" (as they call it).

It is important to realize that the issue under discussion is not what happens to infants who die. Though it is not our purpose here to defend the doctrine of infant salvation, yet we are assured, based on Scripture, that they will be SAFE IN THE ARMS OF JESUS (see the helpful book by ROBert P. Lightner entitled Heaven For Those Who Cannot Believe). The issue is this: What happens to infants that are alive at the time of the rapture? This is an entirely different question.

The book LEFT BEHIND is a fictional book based on prophecy, but it does teach doctrine. One of the very questionable doctrines it teaches is that at the time of the rapture pregnant women will suddenly become un-pregnant (that is, the unborn babies will be taken in the rapture, leaving the unsaved mother many pounds lighter!). A rapture for embryos! The following is found on pages 46-47 of the book LEFT BEHIND:

Then came the scream and the dropping of the camera, terrified voices, running nurses, and the doctor. CNN reran the footage in superslow motion, showing the woman going from very pregnant to nearly flat stomached, as if she had instantaneously delivered. "Now, watch with us again," the newsman intoned, "and keep your eyes on the left edge of your screen, where a nurse appears to be reading a printout from the fetal heart monitor. There, see?" The action stopped as the pregnant woman’s stomach deflated. "The nurse's uniform seems to still be standing as if an invisible person is wearing it. She’s gone. Half a second later, watch." The tape moved ahead and stopped. "The uniform, stockings and all, are in a pile atop her shoes." Etc.

According to this teaching, after the rapture there will be a period of nine months when no babies will be born anywhere in the world (the only exception being some babies conceived after the rapture that may be born pre-mature)! Maternity wards in hospitals will be empty for months! Later in the book there is an argument between Rayford and his flight attendant, Hattie, about Hattie's sister who is out of work because she worked at an abortion clinic and there simply aren’t any abortions to be performed. In summary, the film and book teach that at the time of the rapture all infants on earth are raptured and taken to heaven including all unborn children.

The tribulation is a period of time when God’s wrath will be put on display. It will be the most severe period of judgment the world has ever known. It will be similar to the plagues that fell on Egypt, only on a world-wide scale and more severe. It is helpful to think back through history on other occasions when God’s judgment fell in order to see what happened to infants. 2

Is it unthinkable that God should expose helpless infants to a terrible time of judgment? What about the babies in Jericho? Were they supernaturally delivered? What about the children of the kingdom of Bashan and the children of the kingdom of Heshbon (see Deut. 3:6)? In Egypt the firstborn of each household was slain from the palace of Pharoah and on down. In Bethlehem God allowed babies to be slain due to Herod’s jealous rage (Matthew 2).

Children often in Scripture and in life bear the consequences of their parents’ unbelief. Is this principle going to be overthrown at the rapture? Unsaved moms going around and saying, "Where is my baby?" eliminates one of the horrors of that time of judgment—having your children suffer with you throughout that period. It undercuts one important reason to be saved—that is, for the sake of our children and other family members (Acts 16:31; 2:39; 1Cor. 7:14 etc.). Was not one of the rich man’s worst torments in Hell (Hades) the fact that his brothers were going to join him (see Luke 16:27-31)? One of the greatest reasons to be saved is for the sake of family and friends that we may influence, that they may save themselves from this wicked generation. Cornelius is to be the example of us all, who called together his kinsman and friends to hear the gospel (Acts10:24).

Why would God deliver infants and unborn of the unsaved just prior to the first half of the tribulation, which is much milder, and have other infants suffer in the last half which is more severe (Luke 21:23)? Why would God allow pregnant women to be ripped up in other historical judgments and do extraordinary things to avoid it in this last one (2 Kings 8:12; 2 Kings 15:16; Hosea 13:16; Amos 1:13; Isa. 13:15-18)? See also Deuteronomy 28:54-56 and Lamentations 2:20 for other examples of children suffering (being literally devoured) in historical judgments.

The fact that people have experienced historical judgment does not automatically mean they have come under damnation. Moses is the classic refutation of this. He came under historical judgment which involved death, but certainly he was a saved man ( Hebrews 11: 24-26; Matt. 17:3-4). Are we to believe that all the infants that drowned in the flood are in hell because they experienced an historical judgment? Certainly not.

Those who advocate that all babies throughout the world will be raptured might reason in this way: Since infant salvation is true, then infant rapture must also be true. The rapture of infants of the unsaved is a very bold extrapolation on no Biblical grounds and seems an unwarranted sensationalist device for creating a dramatic effect in a book or film. The real horror is not babies disappearing, but remaining to grow up in those awful times. "Woe unto them with child and to them that give suck in those days" (Matthew 24:19).

Consider the message our Lord gave to the women of Jerusalem who were bewailing Him on His way to the cross. "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us [compare Hosea 10:8 and Rev. 6:16]. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" (Luke 23:28-31). If what God has done in the past is a indication of what He will do in the last great historical judgment, then this passage has great bearing. Children suffered greatly in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD which is a prototype of the last great judgment.

"But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people (Luke 21:23). This passage is significant because Luke seems to connect the sufferings in 70AD with end time events in the future at the return of Christ. The future tribulation will be a time of special suffering for those who are pregnant and for those who have small children who are nursing.

The days of Noah are parallel to the days just prior to Christ’s coming to earth (Luke 17:26; Matt. 24:36ff). Certainly the unsaved babies of Noah’s day did not escape the terrible judgment that came upon the entire world (and the fetuses did not escape either). They all drowned. I am not commenting on the eternal destiny of any of these children, but the historical judgments in this life certainly are experienced by them. Why would the judgments of the tribulation be any different than those of the past?

It seems far more in line with Biblical teaching to suggest that infants of unsaved parents at the time of the rapture will enter the tribulation along with their parents, and with their parents will face whatever those frightful days will bring. If an infant should suffer physical death during the horrors of the tribulation period, God will take care of this person based on His abundant mercy and the work of Christ on the cross. The benefits of Christ’s cross-work (justification, etc.) are applied to this person at the time of death and not before.

What will happen to infants at the time of the rapture?



HIGHJACKED!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Dying and going to Hell are two different things. When God kills a Christian for backsliding that means they're going to Hell to?

I Cor. 5:5, "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."

I Cor. 3:17, "If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple] ye are."

Like I said before, God didn't make a decree to murder infants in Hosea 13:16 because of their sins. The children dying is as a result of one nation attacking another. You're putting something there that's not.

What a terrible thing to say - that God throws babies into Hell! You sit there and say "I have to go with Scripture here, Rick..." but you have NOTHING that states that God throws babies into Hell! You have no evidence that God judges a baby personally for its own sins! You have nothing, no evidence at all. What's next - infant baptismal regeneration? You need to think seriously about what you're trying to say here.

Yes - God doesn't hold a baby's sins against it. That's what the Bible clearly says:

Rom. 7:9, “For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.”
Rom. 5:13, “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.”

You've yet to expound on these verses in Romans, and it is the fourth time I've pointed that out to you.

You say the death of the infants in Hosea were because of the sins of others, yet that flies in the face of Scripture. The Law stated the children would not be put to death for their father's sins.

2 Kings 14:6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Chronicles 25:4 But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.

As I said, I'll stick with the Bible on this one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



If not, it seems he has things in common with him.

I know who Thomas Cooper is and my husband has NOTHING in common with him...he doesn't even know who Thomas Cooper is. I certainly don't agree with everything my husband says here in this thread, but to compare him to Thomas Cooper is basically presupposition.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As to infant baptismal regeneration, I don't believe in baptizing infants for they have no way to communicate with me what they believe or don't believe. I would not baptize an infant unless God miraculously give that infant the ability to profess his or her faith in Christ and gave me an ability to understand that profession was genuine.

But even if God miraculously allowed an infant to speak in English professing his faith, I do not believe water baptism regenerates any more than sitting in a bakery makes one a doughnut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"David professed that God was his God from his mother's belly."

God is God over everything, whether lost or saved. Therefore this is accurate and right.

David said that God caused him to hope in verse 9. That has to do with belief. Infants do indeed have the capacity to believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...