Heaven and Unborn Children


#1

I’m really at a loss for words with this debate I’m having…I’m about to go to bed, and pray really hard about it. I’m going to post some of my posts as well as his. Please help if you can! Sources are lovely.

HIM:

"I want to start this with a disclaimer. I do not mean to be too personal, or to hurt anyone’s feelings. I respect the fact that this post may run a little too close to home for some, especially women.

When I was a student at Bible college, my Survey of Doctrine professor brought up the topic of unborn children, Heaven, and the “age of understanding”. He said that many Christians believe that children who are miscarried or who die before a certain age are automatically granted entrance into Heaven. The only verse, he said, that people had to support this was 2 Samuel 12:23 -

?But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.?

This verse is concerning his son who had died due to David’s sin with Bathsheba. According to him, this is not necessarily talking about David going to Heaven, but could simply say that his son will not return to life, but that David will one day, himself, die. He also said that he is unsure where this idea of an “age of understanding” came from. He said that he has found no basis for it in Scripture, and to be honest, I cannot find one either.

His conclusion was that he would not say for sure what happens to unborn children, as he did not have all the answers, but that he could not say with certainty that he believe young and unborn children who passed away would be in Heaven.

He said that humans are not sinners because they sin, but that we are sinners by nature. From the moment of conception we are fallen. We know that the unregenerate man cannot enter into God’s presence, so why should this fundamental truth not apply to children? If it is true that young children who die go to Heaven, than why do we get so angry over abortion. If what we’re saying is true then those children are going to Heaven anyway and we don’t have to worry about whether they will come to know Christ or not.

I thought my professor had some valid points, but I’ve yet to come to a final decision yet as to what I believe about this. I realize that this is a very personal and emotional thing, and as human beings this is an uncomfortable idea. I just want to know what other people here think. Has anyone heard any other evidence for the “age of understanding”? Once again, I don’t want to step on any toes, and I’m not trying to tell any mothers that their unborn children are not in heaven. My best friend’s mother miscarried one of her children, and I would never seek to ruin her hope by my speculation and rhetoric."


#2

HIM:

"God is loving, but His nature is also absolute. The Bible makes it clear that the unregenerate cannot be in God’s presence. If the child has inherited a sin nature, meaning it is an inherent, fundamental part of his nature, then he is unregenerate, regardless of whether he has sinned or not. Through Adam’s one sin, we all became sinners.

Honest to God, I really, really want someone to prove to me on the basis of Scripture that young children automatically go to Heaven. I want to be able to say I know that for sure. But I hold Scripture in too high of a light to simply disregard what it says because of my personal feelings. I hate the fact that people go to Hell at all, and I wish God’s nature would allow unregenerate people into eternity with Him. But Scripture makes it clear that that is not the case, and I am left having to accept it. Scripture does not seem to make clear what happens to children when they die, good or bad, but I can’t just assume one way or the other."


#3

I think I’ll just link you to the debate. I’m not necessarily looking for solid answers…Just wisdom. Scripture. Tradition. Something authorative, even if that authority is uncertain. Afterall, this is a delicate and intricate issue.

cslewis.drzeus.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4633&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

I am Tony, and the gentleman that I am debating with (among others) is Phos.

Peace be with you all. Thank you for checking this out!
lovetony


#4

Peace be with you friend.
To be honest… no one knows for sure… and anyone who does say, only gives speculation. From the church, all you’ll get is a ‘we dont know’. we cannot say one way or another where unbaptized babies go. they have not sinned, so they are not sentenced to hell, for hell is a concequence of our turning our backs on God. yet because of the fact that they have the stain of original sin, they cannot be given access to heaven. this is where the idea of limbo came from. limbo would be a glorious perfect place like the garden of eden, but without the (forget the proper term) direct vision of God in His Glory. the church has renounced the theologians perspective of this, saying we cannot konw. so all we can do is pray and leave it to the Mercy and Grace of God. (and dont forget baptism by desire)


#5

There’s an active thread on this forum which parallels this question.


#6

[quote=desire the end]He said that humans are not sinners because they sin, but that we are sinners by nature. From the moment of conception we are fallen
[/quote]

We are sinner by nature, and are fallen, but when we are infants we have no personal sin, nor any personal guilt. Catholicism does not teach personal sin for the sin of Adam.

Regardless, who can imagine a God that consigns infants to Hell?


#7

Psalm 32:2
Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.

Romans 4:8
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Romans 5:13
For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Eze 18 basically, I view Orginal Sin as being enviromental, and as a state of being seperated from God at birth.

Maybe someone can verifly these quotes?

FRAGMENTS OF THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER.

  1. CLEMENS ALEXANDRINUS, Eclog. 48. For instance, Peter in the Apocalypse says that the children who are born out of due time shall be of the better part: and that these are delivered over to a care-taking angel that they may attain a share of knowledge and gain the better abode [after suffering what they would have suffered if they had been in the body: but the others shall merely obtain salvation as injured beings to whom mercy is shown, and remain without punishment, receiving this as a reward].*
  1. CLEM. ALEX. Eclog. 41. The scripture says that infants that have been exposed are delivered to a care-taking angel, by whom they are educated and so grow up, and they will be, it says, as the faithful of a hundred years old are here.
  1. METHODIUS, Conviv. ii., 6. Whence also we have received in divinely-inspired scriptures that untimely births are delivered to care-taking angels, even if they are the offspring of adultery.

earlychristianwritings.com/text/apocalypsepeter-roberts.html

mb-soft.com/believe/txh/peter2.htm

While the text may refer only to infanticide, a widespread practice among the Romans, the phrase “born before their time” was an idiom for abortion. A theology embodying a high view of life is present in this passage: life is under God’s will and providence from its inception and that are we responsible for the care of life “before the judgment seat of Christ.”

antiochian.org/1135104215

google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22care-taking+angels%22


#8

I did not go to the other thread. But, I’m not sure what your “debate” is? What that person posted not far off of Catholic teaching.

We do not know what happens to unbaptized babies, we entrust them to God’s mercy.


#9

why does this thread not show that someone has posted?


#10

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.