A bout a year ago, I wrote a piece for the Nicene Guys about the possibility of salvation for infants. I received a pair of comments from the same person, which I largely dismissed; now I would like to add an addendum to reply to my commentor (and more importantly any actually curious minds) more fully. I have therefore re-published the whole thing, complete with the addendum.

I usually don't take the time to reply to poorly thought-out comments such as his. Basically, my thoughts on this matter are that if you're too lazy to go so far as to even cite a chapter and verse for your disagreement--let alone a succinct explanation of why you think this is a rebuttal--then I think you're probably also too lazy to be bothered with reading whatever my reply may be. If by starting with Saint Matthew's gospel--canonically the first--you mean to insult me by implying that I don't read the Bible, then your contemptible comment is worthy of scorn. However, I know that I have other readers who may be curious as to what I have to say on this matter (whether they agree with my conclusions or not). As I mentioned before, this is mostly speculation, but it is meant to be "informed speculation."
-----

The idea of Sola Fide, though not explicitly found in the Scriptures, is for many Protestants a fundamental doctrine, on par with Sola Gracia and the patently non-Scriptural doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Such is presumably the case for a person who answers a long interpretive post by quickly saying "If your [sic.] reading this article please open your bible to Matthew and start reading the Scripture. I don't believe the Bible supports anything discussed here in this article," and then "I would say you need to open the bible and read it." Suppose we accept, momentarily and for the sake of argument, the position of Sola Fide*. Then an immediate question arises: to what extent do we need to have faith to be saved? In a simplified form, this faith is taken to be in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior--all propositions which I accept, as does any other "orthodox mere Christian" (for lack of a better term).

Ok, but this doesn't settle the difficulty of the extent to which this faith must go: either in the degree of the Christian in question, or in the kind (or quality) of the faith. For example, does a man need only to acknowledge that Christ is his Lord, or Lord of the whole human race, or indeed of the entire universe, of "all things visible and invisible?" Does he need to accept that Christ is True God, or can He merely be the highest of created beings, as was taught by Arius and his followers, or for that matter by the Socianians (Protestant anti-trinitarians)? Or for that matter, could we be like the Monarchists/Adoptinists or the much later Unitarians and treat Christ as the Son by adoption only?

Presumably said Christian also needs believe in the doctrine of sin--or does he merely need to believe in Christ as a generic Savior, a savior who rescues us from hell, whether because of sin or otherwise? And what of the doctrine of the Trinity? After all, it is not the least bit necessary to believe that the Holy Spirit is God to also believe that Christ is God? Do we need to believe that there are three Persons in one God, or could we be like the Monarchists/Modalists (Sabellians), and treat all as one person with many faces?

Apparently "faith alone" only works with a host of qualifications. I am not here trying to pick on Protestants, however, since a good number have a more coherent idea of faith and theology--indeed, if not for the fact that I have attached links to people who hold the "wrong" answer to some of these questions, such Protestants would suggest that I was attacking straw men; they at least have, within their personal interpretations of Sola Scriptura[i] a coherent set of answers to all of these questions, even if all of those individual interpretations disagree.

As to the actual salvation of infants, it is most certainly to be found in the Bible that Christ said, "Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such" (Matthew 19:14). Perhaps it is not clear that babies are the littlest of all children, often so young as to be under the stain of original but not personal sin.

Also to be found in Scripture is another passage of interest to the question of infant salvation:

Quote: For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him. He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil. For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved" (John 3:16-20).

God so loved the world, which includes the relatively innocent infants: relatively, because they are at least free from personal sin, though not Original sin. "He that doth not believe, is already judged" may seem at first glance to be problematic for infant salvation--since infants believe very little about anything, they obviously do not believe and affirm all the the points I laid out above. On the other hand, "doth not believe" can be interpreted in a more active manner: a baby fails to believe in a passive manner (e.g. by not having developed enough t actively believe), but there are some people who actively do not believe, that is, who actively reject faith. I think this is actually a better interpretation of the verses given, since babies don't necessarily (and often simply do not) "love darkness rather than light," let alone "doth evil." As I have noted before,

Quote: An infant, at least, keeps every commandment save possibly the first, by default: for they all begin with "Thou shalt not..." As to the first, or to the New Commandment ("Love the LORD your God...and love your neighbor..."), we simply can't know. From all outward appearances, babies love everyone, for I've rarely seen an infant who fails to smile at a new face, save when he's in some other discomfort. The infant has faith that his parents will be there to care for him, and through this faith perhaps also that God is there for him, too.

And it was Christ Himself Who said that "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him" (John 14:21). Or does being a "proper practitioner" of Sola Fide require that we ignore such words of the LORD? Luckily, not all Protestants take such an exclusive view of Sola Fide. How Christ Manifests Himself to infants whose powers of intellect have not begun to develop is a mystery to me, though I don't doubt that He can and indeed does. After all, the difference between God an an adult or God and baby is infinite either way, though the difference between an adult and an infant is quite finite, and thus infinitesimal by comparison. Do I believe that every child to whom our LORD "manifests" himself has whatever faith and love which that infant is capable? I'd like to hope so, though it is also entirely possible (and, thanks to Original Sin, likely) that this is not the case. We simply don't know. What we do know is that it is by no means impossible for God to save infants, even unbaptized or unborn ones--and I do not believe that the Bible proves otherwise.
-----
*It is not my intention to argue for or against these [i]Sola's today.

-----
This was originally posted on my Equus Nom Veritas blog, as well as an addendum to the post about infants and salvation on the Nicene Guys site. If you enjoyed this post, here are some other related posts:

What Happens to Non-Christians When They Die: A Speculative Reflection
Pascal's Wager and Invincible Ignorance: Irreconcilable? (Nicene Guys)
Homogeneity in Heaven and Hell?
Our Resurrected Bodies: New, Renewed, or Glorified (Nicene Guys)
_____

Tags: Theology Eschatology

Bookmark: