I can't believe this meme even exists. |
Ahhh, now that I've graduated, I have more time to spend blogging. This means that all of my blogs (which have gotten a little stale) will enjoy constant updates from now on.
One thing that I've read recently about blogging (and writing in general) is that if you don't know what to write about, find something that you're passionate about, that you get worked up over, and write about that. So before I jump back into the numerous blog series I've left hanging (this and this), that's what I'll be doing. Posting about things that, for lack of a better expression, get my blood up.
Most will probably have to do with objections to Calvinism. I usually don't get emotional or worked up about most arguments, but some of the "arguments" against Calvinism are just so outrageous (like Irresistible Grace being "spiritual Rape"), that I think you'll understand my position.
So today I'd like to dive into one of the more emotionally-charged claims that is often leveled at the proponents of the Doctrines of Grace.
Here it is: "Calvinists believe that babies go to hell" Just hearing it makes me angry. However, I'll do my best not to let my emotions take control. Speaking of emotions, this argument is what's called an emotional attack, which, if you didn't know, is a fallacy (a mistake in logic or thinking).
The argument fails to disprove any one of the five points of Calvinism, but rather, it serves to discredit Calvinism and those who hold to it. Instead of using scripture to try to show us that Calvinism is unbibical, it uses our emotions to turn us against Calvinism. Doesn't sound very Christ-like, does it?
But let's deal with the claim. Do Calvinists believe that babies go to hell? The answer is that some do, some don't, and some aren't sure! If you listen to John MacArthur's (a well-known Calvinist) sermon series on the "Campaign for Immorality" (which deals with Homosexuality and Abortion) we see that he believes that babies go to heaven if they die. However, there are Calvinists that do believe that babies go to hell when they die. But then there are also Calvinists, like Stephen Gambill, who believe that we can't know for sure where a baby's soul goes when it dies. Then there are some Calvinists who believe that some babies go to hell and others go to heaven.
What should this tell us? It tells us, first of all, that NOT all Calvinists believe babies go to hell, and thus that the argument is false, but it also reveals another fallacy in the argument. The fallacy of composition, or the "Part-to-whole" fallacy, which basically goes "Some Calvinists believe babies go to hell, therefore, all Calvinists believe babies go to hell." Another mistake in logic, and not the last. Moving on...
I don't know how many times I've heard the claim "Calvinist X believes in weird doctrine X!" but the main problem with that claim is the main problem with this one. The question that needs to be asked dealing with this claim is this: "Does weird doctrine X flow from Calvinism, or somewhere else?"
Let me give an example. R.C. Sproul is a Calvinist, but he's also a Presbyterian. As we know, Presbyterians believe in infant baptism, and so does R.C. Sproul. Now I'm Baptist, and disagree with Dr. Sproul on the issue of infant baptism. So I could look at R.C. Sproul and say "Hey, R.C. is a Calvinist, and he believes in infant baptism! Calvinists must believe in infant baptism!" and now all my baptist friends and I are backing away from Calvinism. But let's ask that question: "Does R.C. Sproul's believe in Infant baptism flow from his belief in Calvinism?" the answer is no, it flows from the fact that he's a Presbyterian.
So when we hear that "X Calvinist believes that babies go to hell" what question should we ask? "Does X Calvinist's belief that babies go to hell flow from his belief in the Doctrines of Grace?" The answer will most likely be "No," and upon closer examination, we would probably find that such a belief comes from somewhere else in X Calvinist's worldview.
So we've looked over the three major logical problems with this argument. First, it's an emotional attack, and does nothing to disprove Calvinism. Second, it's a faulty generalization/blanket statement, saying that ALL Calvinists agree on something which they clearly don't; and thirdly, it assumes that just because a Calvinist believes babies go to hell means that the believe that because they're a Calvinist (when the belief very well could come from somewhere else).
"Okay, so not all Calvinists believe babies go to hell. But what if they're just being logically inconsistent? What if Calvinism teaches that babies go to hell, but those people are just ignoring it?"
Now we're getting somewhere! The argument has changed from "Calvinists believe babies go to hell" to "Calvinism teaches that babies go to hell." Most of the fallacious content has been removed, but the argument still has problems. Let's take it head on.
Nowhere in the five points of Calvinism (the Doctrines of Grace) will you find anything about babies going to hell. The fact is, Calvinism doesn't specifically say where babies go when they die. That's why we have Calvinists who do not agree on the whole issue. Only when Calvinism is combined with other outside beliefs do we get a verdict on where babies go when they die.
But, for the sake of discussion, let's say that Calvinism does teach that babies go to hell when they die. Now, let me ask a seemingly heartless question: What's wrong with babies going to hell when they die? I know! I sound like such a bad guy, don't I? But let's answer the question. What's wrong with babies going to hell when they die?
"Isn't it obvious?" we cry. "Babies are so helpless and cute and fragile and innocent, a loving God would never let them go to hell!"
But where's the logic? More importantly, where's the scripture? All I see is emotions. Now I probably sound really heartless.
The truth is, bad things happen. Things that we don't want to happen.Things that we have a hard time believing a loving God would allow. Tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters kill millions of people. Serial killers, murderers, and evil dictators kill millions more. Does God intervene? Not always. He allows us to suffer the curse of sin we've brought upon ourselves by disobedience to Him. Why would God let babies go to hell, you ask? For the same reason He lets anything bad happen: our sin. The real question we should ask is, why shouldn't God send everyone--not just babies--to hell, because of sin?
If you've read this far, I highly admire you. You've most likely read through some stuff you disagree with, and you probably don't have a very good opinion of me right now. Which is why I think it's high time that I shared my stance on this issue.
What's my stance? Do babies go to heaven or hell when they die? My answer is that I do not know. The truth is, I love babies. A lot. I want to have as many babies as I can when I'm married, and when I can't have any more, I'll try to adopt some. I really wish my family could have another baby around the house right now, because I love babies so much.
Obviously, my emotions lie with babies. But my emotions don't decide truth. Scripture, on the other hand, does. And what do I see when I look at scripture?
I see verses which tell us that all of mankind, which include babies, is sinful (Romans 3:23). I see verses that tell us we are sinners from birth (Psalm 51:5). I see verses that tell us that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Putting two and two together will get me four. However, there are other verses such as Matthew 18:3 which make it seem like babies are innocent. There's also 2 Samuel 12:21-23, which suggests that David's dead son by Bathsheba went to heaven.
So in my opinion, it could go one way or another. My emotions tell me that babies who die do not go to heaven, but I think there is insufficient scripture to prove or disprove such a belief.
In conclusion: Do babies go to heaven when they die, or to hell? Do some go to hell and some to heaven? The Bible doesn't clearly say so. And since the five points of Calvinism are built upon the Bible, they don't say so either. Therefore, we would be wrong to say that "Calvinism teaches that all babies who die go to hell," or to claim that all Calvinists cling to such a notion.
I've been listening to the message where I first heard of this doctrine. It was presented by Doug Phillips at a Baby Conference a few years ago. In all fairness, he does say that there are different beliefs of where miscarried/aborted babies go, even in the reformed camp. He never said ALL lost babies go to hell; only those who are NOT "chosen" and "sanctified from the womb". He bases this theory on the doctrine of Unconditional Election.
ReplyDeleteIn reality, the Bible speaks little on the subject. Jesus said, "Suffer not the little children to come unto Me." David said of his dead newborn son, "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." Jesus said in Matthew 18:3 unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
In his book One Minute After You Die, Erwin Lutzer states: "Children will not be in heaven because they are innocent. Paul taught clearly that children are born under condemnation of Adam's sin (Rom. 5:12)...If children are saved (and I believe they shall be) it can only be because God credits their sin to Christ; and because they are too young to believe, the requirement of personal faith is waived."
As a mother who has given up 7 precious babies, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Lord allowed each of those pregnancies for His divine purpose (though I don't claim to know exactly what that is). Jonny, you cannot comprehend the pain that is involved in carrying a precious life within your body and then having to give it back. Through each loss, I have had to reaffirm my commitment to allow God to determine our family size. I've miscarried several babies since becoming a child of God, and each time I've had to say, "I give this one back to You Lord. Thank You for allowing me to mother this precious one, even for a short time."
One thought that has comforted my heart during the last few losses is that because I was willing to conceive, these children were given life (no matter how short here on earth), and that perhaps through my sacrifice, there may be one more eternal soul around the Throne of Grace, worshipping our Creator.
I'm glad you love babies! That is a rare quality in young people these days, even among Christians.
"...He never said ALL lost babies go to hell; only those who are NOT 'chosen' and 'sanctified from the womb'. He bases this theory on the doctrine of Unconditional Election."
DeleteBut how can you tell if a baby is 'not chosen' or 'sanctified from the womb?' You can't. There is a possibility that ALL babies who die have been chosen, and God allows them to die as a way of bringing them to be with Him. The opposite is also possible. Both can be made to fit with Unconditional Election.
I agree that the Bible speaks little on the subject, and I used those same verses. So I'm not sure why you're posting them again...
I would probably agree with Erin Lutzer, but then the question comes: How old do you have to be to be able to believe? And then you get into a bunch of extra-biblical stuff. My desire, like Erin Lutzer's, would be that those "unable" to believe, such as infants or the mentally disabled, are pardoned. But I just don't think there's sufficient scripture to give a clear verdict on whether or not such is the case.
You're right, I will never be able to comprehend the pain you've gone through. But I can comprehend the scriptures, and they tell me that all things work together for good to those who love God. Your faithfulness to God through such tragedies is an example to us all.
Really? I actually did not know that. I've always loved babies...
Sorry about repeating your verses; I read the post last night and then waited till this morning to comment.
DeleteI totally agree with your reasoning about not being able to tell which are chosen and which are not. Does this same argument not apply to every person ever born?
I'm not sure about the "age of accountability" either. I've heard it preached that age 20 stands to reason on the grounds that only those Israelites who were 20 and under were allowed into the Promised Land. Honestly, I haven't studied enough on the subject to give a biblical response.
I also dropped the ball on where I was headed with explaining about how many babies I've lost. There really was a point that I intended to make and it was that God does not waste pain. I cannot fathom that our Heavenly Father would create a baby and allow it to die for no other reason than to supply hell with more eternal souls. Just doesn't fit with the character of God. I also wanted you to understand that as much as this gets your "blood up", it truly is a painful subject for women who have experienced loss.
There is a war raging against babies in our culture, that has definitely infected the church. We've been called "irresponsible" by some well-meaning Christians for having so many children. Loving babies is rare indeed and I truly hope the Lord blesses you with many. Happy birthday, btw! :)
Oh! Okay, haha. I understand.
DeleteExactly. Which is why we must preach the gospel to all nations. However, if you know you are saved (I believe in assurance of salvation), then you know you've been elected.
Age 20!? Wow! I couldn't imagine living my life right now without feeling "accountable" for my sins. I usually hear age 13, which, though it sounds more reasonable, still doesn't seem right. I felt convicted of my sins at least as early as age 12.
Ohhh, thanks for clarifying. I wasn't quite sure what you were getting at! No, I do not believe that God wastes pain either. And just to clarify, the reason the claim gets my blood up is the way it characterizes Calvinists as "baby haters." I understand how everyone, especially women, have emotions invested in the subject.
It's so sad how that has happened. I'm blessed to have been raised with the teaching that children are a blessing from the Lord. Thank you!