What is Arminian about his position is his rejection of Romans 9 as
soteriological. Romans 9 is an open and shut case of infants who are not
elect. Some reformed explain Romans 9 away with the proverbial "Esau lived
so the point (of some infants dying as unelect) is moot." Mac doesn't even
use it... he throws out the typical "national Israel" view of Romans 9.
I realize my thoughts are based on the anecdotal... I'd be interested in
knowing if MacArthur questions God's morality in the book. I would be more
"generous" in critique of MacArthur if I had not heard him suggest that his
view is rooted in God's morality. Who are we to tell God what is "cruel"
and what isn't? Such a statement is always a red flag, regardless of who is
making it (it's usually the Tony Evans's, Bill Brights, Billy Grahams and
Charles Stanleys who invoke the morality of God in suggesting that there is
still hope for those who never heard and never had the chance to respond).
This view of infant election is fraught with Arminian pitfalls... not just
in the way Romans 9 is exegeted, but the age of accountability that is
inherent to such a view. In order to have such a view, one must first
affirm the flip side implication of the double election: all unelect infants
live to an age of accountability. Not only is there no biblical evidence
(even implicitly) for such a view, but the old Arminian bugaboo, "faith
precedes regeneration" is inherent to the view. And one's election is
dependent (Mac would deny this aspect) on what one decides at whatever age.
What MacArthur, and other proponents of this do admit is that their view
creates a special dispensation for infants outside of the reformed ordo
salutis... but they insist it's the bible that created that special
a-typical "ordo salutis" for infants. For someone like myself who is
convinced that God does not do anything illogical or inconsistent in
everything he reveals about redemption and himself, that kind of a-typical
dispensation is dubious, IMHO.
I do know that MacArthur has been approached by some close to him to
reconsider the morality of God statement and his view of Romans 9 (esp.
since it is not in step with most of historical reformed theology)... his
answer was that he would "give it some thought". :-)
just some thoughts...
Chad Bresson
Xenia, OH
Chad Bresson
Xenia, OH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Thomas" <thomas64@...>
To: <soundofgrace@...>
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Infant Salvation
> Chad, I have the book, but haven't read it. However, I don't see it as
Arminian as saying that God automatically sends infants to heaven. God in
his Sovereignty elects who he elects, and I am not sure it is unreasonable
to say that he might have elected all infants who die. However, I would be
interested in seeing what Scriptures he would use to support his position.
I also must confess that I believe (hope) that the infants do go to heaven,
but in the end. I can only confess that the Sovereign Lord will do the
right thing.
>
> Love Jeff
>
> breusswane <breusswane@...> wrote:
> I haven't read it, but I've heard his defense of his view on the radio.
> There's nothing like setting aside good reformed theology when it doesn't
> fit your sentimentality. :-) The gist is regrettable, and entirely
> Arminian: a loving God wouldn't send infants to hell. The "age of
> accountability" is an Arminian fabrication intended to defend a loving
God.
>
> Chad Bresson
> Xenia, OH
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Reisinger"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 10:23 AM
> Subject: [soundofgrace] Infant Salvation
>
>
> Has anyone read John MacArthur's book on "infant salvation"? He exegetes
> many passages of Scripture seeking to prove there is "instant heaven" for
> every infant who dies before reaching the "age of accountability." The
back
> cover says, "John MacArthur offers truth from God's Word that puts the
> doubts of any grieving parents to rest." Instant heaven for all infants
"is
> based on much more than mere sentimentality; it is revealed in the Word of
> God . . ."
>
> JGR
>
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
>
>
>
> Jeff