[Pim Pendergast]

Re: It's not me torturing you, it's my inability to make a valid argument

He wanted the eden paradise to last but unfortnuelty that didnt happen. The snake caused Adam and Eve to mess it all up for us. And once they did God realized he had to change his entire plan and save humanity.

If God is not sovereign, if things can happen that He doesn't expect or doesn't want, and if His first plan was thwarted, then how can we trust His current plan of salvation?

They are not of the age of accountability.

Where does the Bible mention the age of accountability or age of understanding? Chapter and verse, please.

Babies are automatically in Gods good grace when they are unborn and when they are born. Stop twisting scripture

Esau was not under God's grace. God hated him before he was even born.

Rom 9:11-13
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto [Rebecca], The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.


The Bible makes it clear that some people were before of old – i.e., before they were born – ordained to condemnation.

Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Pro 16:4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

You'll have no idea how many baptists I have seen on internet forums or even videos say that they would comfort parents who have lost a child or a brother who has lost a baby sister and they believed that babies are in heaven

Well, if someone's said it on the Internet, it must be true!

It's just a lie to comfort people who are grieving. Like doggie heaven.

Unbaptized babies are innocent of sin they dont have the capacity to sin

James 2:10 is really reaching there. Babies are not guilty of anything!

You seem to be forgetting that sin is not just doing something bad but failing to do what is good. There are sins of omission and sins of commission. Babies may be incapable of doing some bad things, but they are also incapable of doing anything good. Indeed, without God's intervention, all people are by nature incapable of doing good. We are born this way.

Jer 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Those who sin wilfully will be punished more severely than those who sin in ignorance, but the ignorant will still be punished.

Lk 12:47-4847 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Also child baptism does work so stop.

What evidence do you have to show that sprinkling water on a baby's head "works"?

I've already repeated this and I'll say this for the last time babies are forgiven of original sin.

What a strange thing to say! If babies have no original sin, and cannot sin, why would they need to be forgiven?

Matthew 5:17-20 is only mentioning the Torah.

No, it isn't.

Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law [Torah], or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Babies do not speak lies they do not have verbal capacity

Well, the Bible says they do, so I believe it, even though I have never heard a baby lie before and don't know anyone who has. I know the Author of the Bible, and He doesn't lie. Nothing would change my mind on the matter.

Also John 9:41 was written way after Psalm 58:3. The new testament has in some areas done away with old testament precedent with the birth death and resurrection of Yeshua! So just like most christoans don't have to do alter offerings anymore then that also means that the that scripture doesnt apply anymore!

Jesus declared all food clean (Mk 7:18-19) and rendered sacrifices obsolete (Heb 10:1-18). That means we don't have to observe Old Testament dietary and ceremonial laws, but the Old Testament still applies to Christians today. There is nowhere in the New Testament that says Psalm 58:3 no longer applies.

Indeed, even some of the most obscure laws contain valuable instruction for the Christian (2 Tim 3:16). For example. Paul quotes Deuteronomy 25:4 to show that he is worthy of being paid for his work as an Apostle.

1 Cor 9:9-10
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

[OneFailure]

Re: It's not me torturing you, it's my inability to make a valid argument

If God is not sovereign, if things can happen that He doesn't expect or doesn't want, and if His first plan was thwarted, then how can we trust His current plan of salvation?



Where does the Bible mention the age of accountability or age of understanding? Chapter and verse, please.



Esau was not under God's grace. God hated him before he was even born.

Rom 9:11-13
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto [Rebecca], The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.


The Bible makes it clear that some people were before of old – i.e., before they were born – ordained to condemnation.

Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Pro 16:4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.



Well, if someone's said it on the Internet, it must be true!

It's just a lie to comfort people who are grieving. Like doggie heaven.



You seem to be forgetting that sin is not just doing something bad but failing to do what is good. There are sins of omission and sins of commission. Babies may be incapable of doing some bad things, but they are also incapable of doing anything good. Indeed, without God's intervention, all people are by nature incapable of doing good. We are born this way.

Jer 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Those who sin wilfully will be punished more severely than those who sin in ignorance, but the ignorant will still be punished.

Lk 12:47-4847 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.



What evidence do you have to show that sprinkling water on a baby's head "works"?



What a strange thing to say! If babies have no original sin, and cannot sin, why would they need to be forgiven?



No, it isn't.

Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law [Torah], or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.



Well, the Bible says they do, so I believe it, even though I have never heard a baby lie before and don't know anyone who has. I know the Author of the Bible, and He doesn't lie. Nothing would change my mind on the matter.



Jesus declared all food clean (Mk 7:18-19) and rendered sacrifices obsolete (Heb 10:1-18). That means we don't have to observe Old Testament dietary and ceremonial laws, but the Old Testament still applies to Christians today. There is nowhere in the New Testament that says Psalm 58:3 no longer applies.

Indeed, even some of the most obscure laws contain valuable instruction for the Christian (2 Tim 3:16). For example. Paul quotes Deuteronomy 25:4 to show that he is worthy of being paid for his work as an Apostle.

1 Cor 9:9-10
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

Sorry but thecdefense of infant damnation Is reprehensible. Babies cannot lie

[Dennis Lukes]

Re: It's not me torturing you, it's my inability to make a valid argument

Sorry but thecdefense of infant damnation Is reprehensible. Babies cannot lie

You CANNOT base your argument on what YOU think is right or wrong. I shudder to think of infants in Hell, too, just as I shudder to think of criminal thugs attacking innocent white folks in our nation's cities, but that's the world we live in. I can't wish them all back to where they came from just because I think the world would be better if that were so. As has been amply demonstrated, the Lord thy God sees fit to damn babies to Hell. He's the omnipotent creator of the universe, so He can literally do whatever He wants. You and I have NO SAY WHATSOEVER, and our opinions count for NOTHING.


By challenging infant damnation, you're not arguing with us. We didn't write the Bible or come up with that idea. You're arguing with GOD, which is a great way to join all those babies in Hell.


Think long and hard about what you're doing here.

[Dolores de Barriga]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

Yes I HAVE shown several scriptures that show babies go to heaven. Go back and read them.

All of your arguments have been rebutted. Instead of addressing the rebuttal, you just return to your original claims - which have already been rebutted.

Babies do not go to hell they are free of original sin

As it has been demonstrated several times, this is not what the Bible says.

I have responded to all of the rebuttals that were sent to me

I respect your right to believe in alternative facts, but if you want to participate in a discussion, you will have to step out of your comfort zone of alternative facts into reality.

I'm not ignoring scripture I dont like I have responded to all of it as a whole in earlier posts

You did not.

I do pick and choose because some verses from the old testament are not viable anymore due to the the trial death and resurrection of Yeshua

Miss Basilissa provided you Scripture where Jesus says this is not true.

I have presented all of the evidence which proves babies go to heaven

You did not present a single verse that says "Babies go to heaven," thus, any evidence you think you presented is irrelevant.

It's not my opinion. I have demonstrated biblical proof that babies go to heaven.

Again, I respect your right to believe in alternative facts, but consider this: if there is such proof, why does the Bible contain all the verses which say the opposite?

Babies cannot lie

So you conclusion is, that the Bible lies when it talks about lying babies. OK, I get it. I am convinced. Now, if the Bible lies in the parts where it talks about lying babies, how do we know which other parts of the Bible are a lie?


Maybe Jesus is a lie, too?


Just a thought to consider.

[Basilissa]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

I'm not saying that 2 Timothy 3:16 is wrong of coarse all of the scripture is inspired by God but that doesn't mean that some of it has no bearing anymore because some of it just doesnt.

Where does it say so in the Bible?

Just like how Christians dont have to sacrifice animals do to the death of jesus is also how infant damnation isnt believed anymore

Then why the Hell does anyone need to be baptized? If you are correct, then we don't need to be baptized. None of us. Never.

Is this your position?

Infants are free from original sin as I think God would understand that they have no idea what's going on around them or what bad stuff Is or how to do it. I've been over this before so I'm really not going to bother refuting Roman's 5:12-15

It doesn't matter what you think. It only matters what the Bible says. And the Bible says that babies go to Hell (John 3:18, Romans 5:12-15). Period.

plus theres Jesus's saying of let the little children come to me which means that we shouldn't stop children from believing and also that we must be like little children if we are to recieve heaven which means that babies GO TO HEAVEN

Nope. I addressed it already. Here is the exchange:

Also Matthew 18:1-3 says

"At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus saying, sho is the greatest in heaven?

And Jesus called a little child unto him and set him in the midst of them and said,

Verily I say unto you Except you be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."

I have highlighted the most relevant bit. Converting is the first condition to be saved. Behaving like a child is a second condition, but it won't work without the first one.

Do you remember it now?

Sorry but thecdefense of infant damnation Is reprehensible. Babies cannot lie

So babies don't lie, and the Bible does lie. That's a blasphemy and you will burn in Hell for it!

[OneFailure]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

All of your arguments have been rebutted. Instead of addressing the rebuttal, you just return to your original claims - which have already been rebutted.

As it has been demonstrated several times, this is not what the Bible says.

I respect your right to believe in alternative facts, but if you want to participate in a discussion, you will have to step out of your comfort zone of alternative facts into reality.

You did not.

Miss Basilissa provided you Scripture where Jesus says this is not true.

You did not present a single verse that says "Babies go to heaven," thus, any evidence you think you presented is irrelevant.

Again, I respect your right to believe in alternative facts, but consider this: if there is such proof, why does the Bible contain all the verses which say the opposite?

So you conclusion is, that the Bible lies when it talks about lying babies. OK, I get it. I am convinced. Now, if the Bible lies in the parts where it talks about lying babies, how do we know which other parts of the Bible are a lie?


Maybe Jesus is a lie, too?


Just a thought to consider.

All of your arguments are proven false because of a false religion your taking them from. Calvanists are heretical and you defending a belief of them doesnt look good on your part.

[OneFailure]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

Where does it say so in the Bible?

Then why the Hell does anyone need to be baptized? If you are cor jiurect, then we don't need to be baptized. None of us. Never.

Is this your position?

It doesn't matter what you think. It only matters what the Bible says. And the Bible says that babies go to Hell (John 3:18, Romans 5:12-15). Period.

Nope. I addressed it already. Here is the exchange:

Do you remember it now?

So babies don't lie, and the Bible does lie. That's a blasphemy and you will burn in Hell for it!

And you'll burn in hell for supporting the blasphemy of the belief of infant damnation.


Infant damnation is of itself blasphemy and I've proven in my earlier posts why your just making yourself look so ridiculous right now

[Basilissa]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

And you'll burn in hell for supporting the blasphemy of the belief of infant damnation.

Infant damnation is of itself blasphemy and I've proven in my earlier posts why your just making yourself look so ridiculous right now

If following the Bible as it is written (rather than what I would like it to be) is blasphemy, than sure, I agree with you.


However, please forgive me for trusting what the Bible says over what you say. it's nothing personal, I just think that God is more trustworthy than you are.

[OneFailure]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

If following the Bible as it is written (rather than what I would like it to be) is blasphemy, than sure, I agree with you.


However, please forgive me for trusting what the Bible says over what you say. it's nothing personal, I just think that God is more trustworthy than you are.

Following the bible isnt blasphemy infant damnation is


Well I trust God to I just think the evidence proving heaven bound infants is strong due to all the stuff I posted

[Basilissa]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

Following the bible isnt blasphemy infant damnation is

And here we go back again, as I have clearly demonstrated to you multiple times that the Bible says all people who do not believe in Jesus and have not been baptized go to Hell. These two conditions have to be met, as Jesus explained in Matthew 18:1-3 and John 3:18. Babies do not meet these conditions, therefore they go to hell. I trust Jesus when He says that.

Well I trust God to I just think the evidence proving heaven bound infants is strong due to all the stuff I posted

Oh, sweetie, you are so funny!

[OneFailure]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

And here we go back again, as I have clearly demonstrated to you multiple times that the Bible says all people who do not believe in Jesus and have not been baptized go to Hell. These two conditions have to be met, as Jesus explained in Matthew 18:1-3 and John 3:18. Babies do not meet these conditions, therefore they go to hell. I trust Jesus when He says that.


Oh, sweetie, you are so funny!

You know what's funny you believing in something yhats already been proven false and is a blasphemy

[Basilissa]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

You know what's funny you believing in something yhats already been proven false and is a blasphemy

The Bible has been proven false?! When?! By whom?!

[OneFailure]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

The Bible has been proven false?! When?! By whom?!

I meant that infant damnation has been proven false not the bible!

[Brother Gonzalez]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

I meant that infant damnation has been proven false not the bible!

God punishes kids from little age, and even unborn. That is a proven fact in the Bible. 42 kids were massacred by bears because they made fun of a bold man. And He could have chosen a peaceful death while they were sleeping, but no, He chose one of the most horrible ways of dying. For little kids. Why?
And if you go and talk with people from Amalek, will know that even the unborn are condemned. God sent the israelis to open the wombs of pregnant women and kill the fetuses. Yes, He did.
So kids do not have an automatic salvation. No, that was invented by the Catholics to offer comfort to pagans, who did not want to think their dead babies were being tormented in Hell for an eternity.
If babies were going to Heaven, Heaven would.be populated more with infants than adults, because mortality was high until a century ago or so.
The only way to Heaven is by accepting the Lord as your savior. It is the one and only way, accepting Him as He is. You need.to know how to read, read the Bible, consciously decide this is the way, and going forward no matter what.


Hint: you cannot talk with people from Amalek or their descendants. They were all massacred. No survivors, no babies, no fetuses, even the animals were killed.




If you keep saying this a Calvinist idea, you don't understand anything. Which, in turn, makes me wonder why God has decided to punish you with a weak mind and the inability of connecting two things together. And of course, why on Earth He created a male ballet dancer instead of a football player, but I am not to question the ways of otrur Lord.

[Dennis Lukes]

Re: Scripture denier here. La la la, I can't hear you!

I meant that infant damnation has been proven false not the bible!

So when exactly does one stop being an infant? If a one-year-old dies, according to you, it will go to Heaven because it is too young. Most people consider a person to stop being a baby once they turn three. So would a three-year-old who rejects Christ go to Hell? Are they that much more capable of understanding the scriptures than their infantile comrades? They're really not, so shouldn't they get a pass too? If a three-year-old automatically goes to Heaven, even though they're not technically a baby, then where is the cutoff? Would a five-year-old-automatically get into Heaven? A ten-year-old? Most teenagers are pretty dumb, do they automatically go to Heaven?

Let's say the cutoff is three, because you've explicitly said that only infant damnation is false. So, there's a 24-month-old baby that's about to turn three. If it dies on the day before its third birthday, it automatically gets into Heaven, right? But if it dies the next day, it will be damned straight to Hell. And that's not even accounting for time zones and leap years. By your logic, we need to be passing laws to require children's hospitals to euthanize terminally ill two-year-olds the day before their third birthdays as an act of mercy.

No, this is much too confusing to think about. That's why I put my faith in God and the Bible. Age is no excuse for denying Christ, and a one-year-old sinner will be damned the same as a 100-year-old sinner.