Do babies deserve hell?

[Katzpur]

Perhaps it can be used to aid in removing the inclination towards sin.

How would that work? Do you believe it does?

 

[Quiddity]

How would that work? Do you believe it does?

How does it work for adults?

 

[Booko]

Hell is eternal suffering. I can't think of anything that would warrant an infinite punishment except an infinite crime and I have never know a person to commit such a thing.

It is an infinite scale and that tends to bunch all of humanity's crimes into one small portion right near "innocent". Compared with infinity, rapists and murderers only deserve hell a tiny bit more than babies do.

Generally speaking, I agree. Though I think there are a few select humans who might be much further along the scale than near innocent. The usual Hitler and Stalin, Pol Pot, and today's Kim Jung Il strike me as possible examples of people who chose to use their human capacity almost exclusively for evil.

Still, who knows. Maybe God would cut someone at least a little slack because their character was formed by a parent who repeatedly beat them near to death. Eternity, after all, is a very long time...

 

[Katzpur]

If I said "progressive revelation" is just ridiculous, hogwashing, blankity blank blank would I have to mention LDS for you to find that a tad offensive?

Well, since we are the only Christian denomination who believes that, it would be pretty obvious that you were referring to us. It would also kind of depend on what you really mean by the "blankity blank blank."

I don't mind "not accepting", but since I paint faces of everybody I talk to, I can't help but see Katzpur and attach wonderful images that I have of you. So it does differ on my side with the reality that I feel a tad closer to you and that I don't mind you "not accepting" (which I was already aware of). But was surprised to have you use such a tone. What can I say, it now hurts more when you say something versus someone else. :sad:

Evidently I really did push a button I didn't mean to push. You know how much I like you, Victor, and if the word "ridiculous" was really that offensive, I apologize, and do so sincerely. Let's just say, I can't accept the idea that babies are born less than perfect. As a matter of fact, I would even be willing to edit my initial post, if it would help. I would not want my choice of words to do anything to damage our friendship. Just let me know what I can do to clear the air and make things good between us again.

Then why not ask that question instead?

Okay, why baptize someone who is pure and free from sin when the Bible teaches that we must (1) have faith, (2) repent of our sins, and (3) be baptized?

For someone who does not submit to the Bible Alone, I often wonder why you would insist for those of us that don't submit to such a doctrine to have every detail in the Bible when I, James, Scott, and others have made it clear that we submit to Holy Tradition. Nonetheless, you'd have to convince us where it clearly indicates babies shouldn't be baptized.

I have no problem with tradition, provided tradition is grounded in truth. But I think that both of us know where a discussion of where, when and how this tradition began. We'd end up talking about dates again, and I know how you hate talking about dates. Obviously I don't believe the need for infant baptism was taught by either Christ or His Apostles, and it does seem to me that it goes counter to everything the scriptures do say on the subject.

 

[Katzpur]

How does it work for adults?

I think it can work for adults because we understand the difference between right and wrong. Having entered into a covenant relationship with our Savior (which is what we believe happens at baptism), He will strengthen us in our resolve to live righteously. An infant cannot resolve to do any such thing.

 

[Quiddity]

Well, since we are the only Christian denomination who believes that, it would be pretty obvious that you were referring to us. It would also kind of depend on what you really mean by the "blankity blank blank."

How do you know I'm restricting my comment to Christianity?
And no, you aren't the only ones.

Evidently I really did push a button I didn't mean to push. You know how much I like you, Victor, and if the word "ridiculous" was really that offensive, I apologize, and do so sincerely. Let's just say, I can't accept the idea that babies are born less than perfect. As a matter of fact, I would even be willing to edit my initial post, if it would help. I would not want my choice of words to do anything to damage our friendship. Just let me know what I can do to clear the air and make things good between us again.

No, just leave it. I'll just grow an extra layer of skin with people I get closer to. Perhaps this is good for me.

Okay, why baptize someone who is pure and free from sin when the Bible teaches that we must (1) have faith, (2) repent of our sins, and (3) be baptized?

Because we do not believe all these have to occur all at one time. That is the short answer. Hopefully we won't go too far off topic with this.

I have no problem with tradition, provided tradition is grounded in truth. But I think that both of us know where a discussion of where, when and how this tradition began. We'd end up talking about dates again, and I know how you hate talking about dates. Obviously I don't believe the need for infant baptism was taught by either Christ or His Apostles, and it does seem to me that it goes counter to everything the scriptures do say on the subject.

Not at all. I just can't get you guys to commit to anything. I either play by your rules of what is and what isn't Apostolic material or I don't play at all. Why should I even have to stick to LDS conditions on this? I'm only doing it because I'm trying to understand LDS tradition. And that's exactly what it is: LDS Tradition.

 

[Quiddity]

I think it can work for adults because we understand the difference between right and wrong. Having entered into a covenant relationship with our Savior (which is what we believe happens at baptism), He will strengthen us in our resolve to live righteously. An infant cannot resolve to do any such thing.

So understanding is what starts the relationship between you and God?

 

[Katzpur]

No, just leave it. I'll just grow an extra layer of skin with people I get closer to. Perhaps this is good for me.

This sounds more or less like you have chosen not to accept my apology. That makes me feel bad because it really was sincere. I hurt your feelings, though, and I suppose you are justified in taking the time you need to be able to forgive me. Hopefully, it will not take too awfully long.

Because we do not believe all these have to occur all at one time. That is the short answer. Hopefully we won't go too far off topic with this.

I don't necessary believe they have to happen all at one time, but I do believe they have to happen in that order. As a matter of fact, this would be official LDS doctrine.

 

[Katzpur]

So understanding is what starts the relationship between you and God?

I don't know. Understanding as opposed to what?

 

[john313]

no one goes to hell unless they are mentally capable of knowing the difference between right and wrong. once the person reaches that point, which is different for everyone and may never be reached by some, they are then responsible for their own actions and 'karma' will repay them accordingly in this world/life or the next.
....so i guess my answer is no, babies do not go to hell

peace

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

Some things said this thread, I can't respond to them there, so I hope they don't mind me starting a new thread so that I and others can ask questions as well.
I find the belief that God won't let us know that babies will be spared eternal torment to be horrendous and borderline psychological abuse for mothers who believe in Heaven and Hell and have lost infants and children. Why wouldn't God give mothers the comfort to know that the little one they lost is safe in Heaven? How can God be so cruel?

I know, I hear you saying, but Amy you don't believe in these things anyway, why do you care? You're right I don't believe in the vengeful, jealous, wrathful Christian God and I don't believe in an afterlife based on reward and punishment or on the whim of God. But I feel I must say something when I see a belief being promoted that is potentially so harmful to anyone who does believe and has lost a child.

Imagine a woman, a believer, who has just lost her infant, she goes to her pastor and pleads, "Please tell me my baby is safe with Jesus in Heaven!" Her pastor responds, "I'm sorry we just can't know for sure." What extra torment does that put on that poor woman! How do you justify this form of torture?

Depends on if you believe in atonment of sins or not. The original sin of Adam that people must be cleansed of first through baptizm. Muslims know all children who die before the age of accountability are going to paradise.