Thanks, Nancy!!!!
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Newcomb" <nan_new39@...>
To: <soundofgrace@...>
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Infant Salvation
> Bravo, Chris! Are you sure J. MacArthur didn't consult with you on his
> book? ;) I believe that God is sovereign AND that we can find rest in
> Christ because His Word is true, and we believe His Word teaches that
babies
> will be in heaven with Him. Is there sentimentality involved? Oh, maybe.
> If someone who carried a baby for weeks or months, praying the Lord's
> protection and health and trying themselves to protect the baby as best
they
> were able was not somewhat attached to it, I would have to guess there was
> something wrong there.
>
> I don't think it seems strange then that we would take comfort in our baby
> being in the loving arms of our heavenly Father. For all the talk about
> Christ being enough, there's a REASON Christ is enough. It is because He
is
> the Creator, the Redeemer, the Word, the Lord, the image of the invisible
> God, the One who keeps all His promises, and so much more! For people to
> twist things around to where those who firmly believe and have assurance
> that babies will be in heaven to somehow not be rooted in the sufficiency
of
> Christ is just nonsense. There's no reason whatsoever to separate the two
> and make a false dichotomy. By the way, your reasoning about "let the
> children come unto me" was really good. John expounds on that more fully
in
> his book, and he also shows that God Himself called babies and little
> children "innocent ones." I had so many questions answered as I read and
> studied the Word through this book. I think you would really like it.
>
> I also don't get the arguments about Esau and Jacob being chosen before
> either of them were born. So what? I'm under the impression from
Scripture
> that neither of them died in infancy. To say that we would be doing all
> babies a favor by killing them before they could reach a maturity to where
> they may go to hell is a "hyper" argument. I think we all know that we
are
> to obey God in His REVEALED will. He has said not to murder, so that
should
> take care of that!
>
> In His amazing grace,
> Nancy
>
>
> >From: Chris Arnzen <carnzen@...>
> >Reply-To: soundofgrace@...
> >To: soundofgrace@...
> >Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] Infant Salvation
> >Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 13:12:07 -0500
> >
> >
> >[Chris (from previous post)]> > I don't believe this is a paedobaptist
> >argument
> > > > at all, since Christ was not baptizing these little children in the
> > > passage,
> > > > nor was any of His disciples.
> >
> >[Chad]> Have you read what the paedobaptists say about this passage? I
> >have
> >yet to
> > > see any of them suggest that Christ was baptizing little children in
the
> > > passage. What he is affirming, in their system, is covenantal
children
> >who
> > > are given the promises and blessings of the kingdom by the mere fact
> >that
> > > they are children of the covenant.
> >
> >[Chris] I am merely saying that the fact that Christ and His disciples
did
> >NOT baptize these children speaks loudly against paedobaptism to me, not
> >that the majority of paedobaptists claim that there were baptisms
performed
> >in this passage.
> >
> >
> >[Chris (from previous post)]> > I am finding it quite interesting to see
> > > > how tenaciously and passionately brethren are to attack the view of
> >infant
> > > > salvation, even when some are merely agnostic over it. Why does it
> >bother
> > > > you so very much that I and other Calvinists have been convinced by
> >the
> > > > Scriptures that infants and little children will not populate hell
> > > > (especially the agnostics--just because you are not convinced either
> >way,
> > > it
> > > > should not bother you quite so much that some of us are)?
> >
> >[Chad]> I think this is a fair question... I cannot speak for the rest,
but
> >it
> > > grieves me to know that some parents in our flocks are being given
> > > unwarranted comfort when the only comfort to give is Christ himself.
I
> > > wholeheartedly believe that Christ is slighted in your view... I guess
> > > that's why my "agnosticism" in this instance is a little more
passionate
> > > than it would be for the color of church carpet. :-)
> >
> >[Chris] Christ is slighted by reciting 1 Thes.4:13-18 to give comfort????
> >Would Christ be slighted if I did the same in regard to an adult loved
one
> >of a friend who dies that I believe is with Christ???? If I believe dead
> >infants are with Christ I don't believe I am slighting Him at all.
Although
> >His Sovereignty should be our chief comfort, it is not the only message
of
> >comfort the Scriptures give. 1 Thes.4:13-18 specifically says "comfort
one
> >another with THESE THINGS" (those who are asleep are with Christ and will
> >rise and return with Him).
> >
> >
> >[Chad]> Again... to paraphrase what I wrote yesterday...the only hope we
> >can
> >give
> > > parents of infants is on the chance that if their infant died "in
> >Christ"
> > > then that infant is "with Christ". It is an emphasis on
sentimentality,
> > > rather on Christ, that is giving these parents assurance and comfort.
> >Such
> > > a desire is a misplaced focus on the
> > > child's destiny and has become that parent's "sufficiency" or
> >"satisfaction"
> > > rather than in Christ himself.
> >
> >[Chris] But you are speaking as one who does not have certainty in the
> >destiny of deceased infants. I believe the Scriptures do give me
certainty,
> >and I take offense by your imputing a motive to my beliefs which I do not
> >accept as true. As I said earlier, it is not "sentimentality" driving me
to
> >this conclusion. If I was driven by "sentimentality" I would also become
an
> >annihilationist, or better yet, a universalist (I am not a parent, but I
> >can
> >imagine that the grieving process could be infinitely greater for a
> >Christian parent who loses an older child who they had more time to know
> >and
> >love deeply, especially if the child was in open rebellion to Christ
before
> >death--I am not so sentimental that I would candy-coat the truth to such
a
> >grieving parent). We as Baptists reject infant baptism because the
> >Scriptures describe who the proper candidates for baptism is, and they
are
> >totally absent of any example of an infant baptism. I have the same
> >evidence
> >for my views of hell. I reject the notion that infants are there because
> >the
> >Scriptures only describe wicked individuals who are conscious rebels
being
> >tormented there for there *deeds* (not solely due to inherited Adamic
sin),
> >and are totally absent of any example of an infant being tormented there.
> >
> >
> >[Chad] Ultimately, I must place my satisfaction in
> > > Christ, the Supreme Judge, who is always good and always judges
rightly.
> >If
> > > "good" and "rightly" means my child goes to hell I must place my
> > > satisfaction with that decision in Christ. The comfort for the parent
> >is
> > > that the child is in the hands of Christ who is good and righteous.
> >
> >[Chris] Agreed, but if one believes the Scriptures offer additional
comfort
> >to that truth, there is no reason to withhold it. You would not be so
> >ambiguous about the destiny of the deceased while offering comfort to
> >mourners who lost a loved one you were certain was a Christian. I have
that
> >same confidence from Scripture about the destiny of deceased infants.
> >
> >
> >[Chad]> As for Spurgeon, as a systematician he was brilliant (not to
> >mention
> >his
> > > unparalleled oratory). But I tend to find his biblical theology
lacking
> >at
> > > times (allowing the whole of the scripture to inform the exegesis).
But
> > > that's just my opinion.
> >
> >[Chris] And that is why I look to no uninspired writer as an infallible
> >guide but to the Scriptures alone as an inerrant authority.
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> >http://www.soundofgrace.com
> >
> >To unsubscribe, send ANY message to
> ><soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...>
> >
> >To view our online archive go to our web page at
> >http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
> >
> >
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Have fun customizing MSN Messenger - learn how here!
> http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize
>
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to
<soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...>
>
> To view our online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace
>
>
>
>