Questions

Send us a question - any question! We'll do our best to answer in an easy to understand way....

(click on the question to get an answer)

Q: Why does it seem like God blesses the evil but not the good?
My big question is this: why does it seem like God blesses the evil but not the good? I don’t want to focus on myself, but it’s so difficult for me to understand why we can’t have children when some woman who is on crack and doesn’t even want a baby gets pregnant and has a child. Please help me to understand.

Thanks for taking the time to write... you've asked one of the most significant questions that can be asked. I've asked it myself. Although the answer to this is certainly not so simplistic that it can be expressed in a short reply, let me share a few of the thoughts that I've had as I've struggled with this.

Jesus said at the end of Matthew 5 that God causes His blessing to be given to both the evil person and the good person... and that both the evil and the good go through difficulties also. Believer or unbeliever, evil or good; we all face sickness in our families and natural disasters. God does not always protect us as believers from having to face the same difficulties that unbelievers must face, and He allows unbelievers to experience some of the same benefits that we as believers enjoy because we are a part of His creation. One reason for this: it allows those who don't know Christ to see what it really means to know Him. When they see a believer finding even a bit of light in their struggle when all they can see is darkness, it helps those who do not yet know Christ to see who He REALLY is.

I know that the theology of that is no comfort for you as you wait for a child. My wife and I were told a year ago by doctors that we would never have children. Believe me when I say that I know the struggle you´re facing right now, and that it is one of the most hurtful things anyone can go through. I found during this time that God did not turn the light on for me all at once... He just gave me enough light to make the next step. My prayer is that He will do that for you also!

Q: What about the dinosaurs?
How do they fit in with the idea that God created the world rather than the world evolving on it’s own? Why doesn’t the Bible talk about dinosaurs?

The Bible tells in Genesis 1 that God made the world in 7 days, and that He made all of the animals on the 5th day and the 6th day. All of the animals were created at the same time, so they all walked the earth at the same time. I know that the pictures we all grew up with in the movies were that dinosaurs roamed a lifeless, volcanic planet. Remember these are just pictures drawn by someone today! The Bible’s picture is that dinosaurs and man lived together on the earth, an earth that was filled with vegetation and beauty.

What happened to the dinosaurs? The scientific record lets us know that they obviously became extinct through some kind of cataclysmic event on the earth. Many scientists theorize that this may have been an asteroid striking the earth, while many Christians wonder if this event could have been the worldwide flood in Noah’s day. No one can know for certain what this event was.

Although it cannot be stated with certainty, it appears that dinosaurs may have actually been mentioned in the Bible. The Bible uses names like "behemoth" and "tannin." Behemoth means kingly, gigantic beasts. Tannin is a term which includes dragon-like animals and the great sea creatures such as whales, giant squid, and marine reptiles like the plesiosaurs that may have become extinct. The Bible's best description of a dinosaur-like animal is in Job, chapter 40. We don’t know for certain if these are actually dinosaurs or are some other large creature that became extinct.

This should not sound so strange. After all, God tells us that He created all the land animals on the 6th day of creation, the same day that He created mankind. Man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. There was never a time when dinosaurs ruled the earth. From the very beginning of creation, God gave man dominion over all that was made, even over the dinosaurs.

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day."
--Exodus 20:11

"All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made."
--John 1:3

"Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feed on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! His tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are tubes of bronze, his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God..."
--Job 40:15-19 (NIV).

Q: Is there a "gap" of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 that could include millions of years in time?

The Gap Theory is a desperate attempt to harmonize the first chapter of Genesis with the time scale of uniformitarian geology and evolutionary biology by pigeon-holing the geologic ages in an imaginary time-gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. This time-gap is forced upon the text and context of Genesis 1 by an unwarranted manipulation of the Hebrew grammar of its second verse in order to accommodate the evolutionary interpretation of the fossils within the rock record.

According to this concept (also known as the "Creation Reconstruction," "Ruin-Reconstruction," and "Pre-Adamic Cataclysm" Theory), the primeval Earth was totally devastated by a global cataclysm (referred to as "Lucifer's Flood") because of divine judgment on Lucifer's sin of 31 as a supernatural "re-creation" of earth in six solar days, this holding to a "literal view of Genesis" while not believing in a recent origin of the "heavens and the earth."

However, acceptance of the geologic ages implicitly involves acceptance of the whole evolutionary package. Most of the fossil forms preserved in the sedimentary rocks have obvious relatives in the present world, so that the "re-creation" concept involves the Creator re-creating in six days many of the same plants and animals which had been previously developed slowly over long ages, only to perish violently in the global pre-Adamic cataclysm of "Lucifer's Flood." In fact, the very concept of a worldwide deluge precludes the geologic ages, which are founded specifically on the assumption that there have been no such global floods in Earth's history! The Gap Theory, in addition to not facing the evolution issue at all, also leaves unanswered the serious problems as to why God would use the method of slow evolution over long ages in the primeval world, then destroy it, and then use the method of special creation to re-create the same forms He had just destroyed. As a device for compromising Genesis with geology, the Gap Theory is simply bad geology…and worse theology.

Written by Dr. Carl Baugh, www.creationevidence.org

Sources: Ken Ham, "Closing the Gap" and John D. Morris, "Does Scripture Allow a Gap?" Back to Genesis article dated Feb. 1990 ( San Diego : ICR). -Henry M. Morris & John D. Morris, Scripture and creation, Volume One of The Modern Creation Trilogy (Green Forest, Arizona: Master Books, 1996)pp. 50-60, Ham, Snelling, Wieland, "The Answer Book"

Q: Protestants have typically said that man is claimed to be justified by Faith alone. Where is this story coming from? From what I read, the Bible says that man is justified by Faith that leads to works, and those works demonstrate the validity of his Faith (James 2). So it looks like it's faith and works that get us saved!

You have answered your question in its asking. You state: “the Holy Spirit says that man is justified by Faith that leads to works, and those works demonstrate the validity of his Faith (James 2).” Your interpretation of this verse is right on!

James never says that works provide the justification. He says works – a changed and changing life, new attitudes, new appetites, etc. (see James 2) - are the proof that justification has happened in someone’s life. To quote your son’s e-mail, “those works demonstrate the validity of his Faith.”

Justification comes by faith and faith alone (see Paul’s writings below). To say there is any other way goes against scripture and basically says God is stupid! I mean, why would He allow Jesus to die on a cross if there was an alternative method or a Plan B for justification?

Justification comes by faith and a changed life (works) are the proof of the life change.

Where the conflict comes in is when Paul and James seem to – at first glance – differ on the faith and works issue.

Look at the writings of Paul:

Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Seems all pretty cut and dry, doesn't it? But then James weighs in with a seemingly different approach in Chapter 2 (this is the passage you quoted from and questions).

“You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” James 2:24

Let’s unpack this verse.

First, there’s a problem in the phrasing or make-up of your question. You use one scripture verse, pulled out of context to start a discussion. This is a hermeneutical “no-no!”

The basic rules of hermeneutics or the rules of Bible study require that we always take into consideration 1) content, 2) comparison (with other scriptures), 3) culture and 4) context. We have to look at more than just one verse that was pulled from scripture to make a point or argument!

So let’s view the passage as a whole.

[James 2:12] Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, [13] because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment! [14] What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? [15] Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. [16] If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? [17] In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. [18] But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. [19] You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder. [20] You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? [21] Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? [22] You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. [23] And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend. [24] You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. [25] In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? [26] As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

Specifically, let’s look again at James 2:24 (NIV)

“Ye see then how that by works a man

is justified, and not by faith only.”

Second, this verse causes great problems for some people, because it seems to say that when Abraham offered up Isaac in obedience to God’s instruction, he was justified. That is, Abraham was justified by works.

Is a man justified by works? Is that what is meant? No!

What James is saying is that Abraham proved that he was justified; he proved that he was justified by what he did—by his works. Abraham’s faith was proven to be a true and living faith by his works. How do we know that this is what James really meant? Because James says so! Remember the Bible study rule of “context?” Note what James says:

Abraham’s faith wrought (worked with, cooperated with) his works. (James 2:22).

That is, his faith was acted out and proven by his works. By his works Abraham’s faith was made perfect (eteleioôtheô), that is, finished, completed, carried to the end (James 2:22).

Abraham’s faith was proven, shown to be a complete faith. A true and living faith works: it completes and finishes its course. If a faith does not work or act or complete or finish its course, it is a dead faith—an incomplete, unfinished, and unproven faith.

Therefore, a better translation of verse 24 based on original language (content), comparison to similar scriptures, culture and the verses preceding and following (context), would be:

“You see then how that by works a man proves that he is justified, and not by faith only”

().

James plainly declares that when Abraham offered up Isaac he was proving his faith. In fact, there is not a chance that Abraham would have ever offered up Isaac unless he already believed in God. The reason Abraham offered up Isaac was because he did believe God. He believed; therefore, he did what God said.

This is true with any person. If a person believes Christ, he does what Christ says; he follows Christ. His inner man (spiritual) and outer man(lifestyle and actions) are changed. If a person does not believe Christ, he does not do what Christ says. He goes about doing his own thing; he does not follow Christ.

Note that Abraham was called “the Friend of God.” This says that Abraham had an intimate relationship with God; he believed God and walked in communion and fellowship with God, following and living for God. The point is clear:

“You see then how that by works a man [proves that he] is justified, and not by faith only” (James 2:24 ).

Faith only is dead faith, an inactive and worthless faith. True faith is a living and active faith—a faith that proves itself by living for Christ and working for Christ.

By the way, Abraham’s faith did something else. It fulfilled Scripture. What Scripture? The Scripture that said “Abraham believed God; and it was imputed unto him for righteousness” (Genesis 15:6). These words were declared some thirty years before Abraham ever offered up Isaac. God pronounced that Abraham was justified and saved thirty years before this event referred to by James. Just something else to think about....

Q: My co-worker was reading the passage in Hebrews 6:4-6 about if a believer falls away, they cannot be restored. We're trying to reconcile that with eternal security and not being able to lose your salvation. Help!!!

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, once people have seen the light, gotten a taste of heaven and been part of the work of the Holy Spirit, once they've personally experienced the sheer goodness of God's Word and the powers breaking in on us — once people have seen the light, gotten a taste of heaven and been part of the work of the Holy Spirit, once they've personally experienced the sheer goodness of God's Word and the powers breaking in on us — if then they turn their backs on it, washing their hands of the whole thing, well, they can't start over as if nothing happened. That's impossible. Why, they've re-crucified Jesus! They've repudiated him in public! Hebrews 6:4-6

Hebrews 6:4-6 is an interesting passage - a group of verses that has caused many a heated discussion. The answer to this question is not an easy, one paragraph answer. You're not the only one who's wondered - or argued - about this passage.

Before I offer up an explanation to this passage, I need to remind you (and myself!) that we must first be concerned with understanding what controversial texts like this actually say (exposition), before we are concerned with fitting what it says into a system of theology. In other words, let’s see what the scripture says not make it say what we want it to say!

Beliefs and systems of theology are important, because the Bible does not contradict itself; but the way to right systems begins with a right understanding of the text, not one that bends the text to fit into a system. Simply put, when it comes to problematic passages like this, more people try to make it say what they want it to say rather than what God is saying! That’s why there are so many doctrinal arguments!!!

Also, Satan knows Scripture, and this passage has rightly been called "one of the Devil's favorite passages" for its ability to be taken out of context for condemning the struggling believer. We need to be careful not to do the same.

Additionally, before we can understand the basics of the text we need to understand the background. We have to understand the reason Hebrews was written. The context of scripture is always critical to understanding the text!

With that in mind, let’s review a few things…

First, the author of Hebrews is unknown but we know that God inspired him, just as He inspired the authors of the other books in the Bible.

Second, the book of Hebrews was written for the Jews who had accepted Jesus as their Messiah. They were in danger of slipping back into the traditions of Judaism because they had not put down roots in the soil of Christianity.

Third, the book of Hebrews appeals to the Greek mind as well as the Jewish mind. The Greeks saw everything on earth as the shadows cast by what was real, so they were always searching for reality. You can see that today in the remains and ruins of the many temples in Greece . The Greeks were searching for truth and reality. Hebrews presents Jesus as the reality.

On the other hand, the Jews were searching for a way to approach God because historically they had felt too unholy to approach Him. From the time they were children to the day they died, the Jews were reminded by their writings and religious leaders of their unholiness and unworthiness. To the Jews, Hebrews presents Jesus as the approach.

That’s the context of Hebrews as a whole.

So what is the passage saying? Here are some comments and observations:

1. While the salvation experience of those the writer is describing is impressive and would probably be featured on the 700 Club; the big debate is not if these people lost something – it’s obvious they did. The debate is whether what we’re talking about is the experience of salvation, or something short of salvation. Were these people Christ followers? Had they crossed the line of faith? Were they saved????

2. Some say these people were not true Christ-followers. After all, one can have great spiritual experiences and still not be saved (Matthew 7:21-23); and that one can even do many religious things and still not be saved.

A good example of this truth would be the Pharisees. These guys evangelized [Matthew 23:15], prayed impressively [Matthew 23:14], made religious commitments [Matthew 23:16], tithed rigorously [Matthew 23:23], honored religious traditions [Matthew 23:29-31] and who fasted [Luke 18:12]). While they were religious, the Pharisees didn’t know God and they certainly weren’t Christ-followers!!!!

3. It’s also possible to display some fruit or spiritual growth, then to die spiritually, showing that the "soil of the heart" was never right (Mark 4:16-19).

With that in mind, some theologians – especially those who believe you can never lose your salvation, no matter what! - would say the people described in Hebrews 6 were never true believers. In order not to have to admit that some of the Hebrews lost their salvation, some teachers and preachers say these people never "got the goods."

Is this what this text actually says or are we concerned with fitting what it says into a system of theology. Once again, are those who say these people were never saved trying to make the verses say what they want it to say rather than what God is saying? Was this the case with these people that the writer of Hebrews is describing?

Once again, we have to honestly ask ourselves - were they never truly saved? I don’t think so. In fact, I don’t think you can get much more “saved” than these people were.

There are some important facts the writer shares that leads me to believe these people had in fact made a decision to follow Christ.

1. The people described had been "enlightened." Enlightened has the same meaning in English as it does in the Greek. The word means “brought into the light.” Additionally, The author uses the same word (“enlightened”) again in Hebrews 10:32, where the reference to a true Christian experience can hardly be doubted.. These Hebrews that The author was describing knew and (I think) accepted the truth of the gospel.

2. Tasted the good word of God either implies a "test" or the introduction to a "full meal." You can imagine how the scholars and commentators differ greatly on this issue. While some say tasted describes an initial experience which may or may not lead to a "full meal," I think the word implies a full, real experience. A good example of this is in how Jesus tasted death (Hebrews 2:9). When Jesus tasted death, he died – it wasn’t an emotional, pretend or “not really real” experience!!!! Secondly, by using the term “Tasted the good word of God,” The author again employed familiar concepts related to initial conversion (see. John 4:10 ; Rom. 6:23 ; James 1:17-18, 1 Peter 2:3, which quotes Psalm 34:8). These people had been converted.

3. The heavenly gift is most likely salvation (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8). It certainly wasn’t the winning lottery numbers!!!!

4. Partakers of the Holy Spirit is an unique term, having to do with some sort of fellowship/interaction with the Holy Spirit. Again, that comes at salvation.

5. The powers of the age to come is a way to describe God's supernatural power; the people referenced have indeed tasted of these powers. God had worked in their lives.

6. From a human perspective, who would call anyone who seemed to have the credentials mentioned in verses 4-5 anything but a Christ follower?

So, now that you’re really confused, let’s try to answer your question by asking the bigger question: while the people being described in Hebrews 6 have had some impressive spiritual experiences, are they in fact Christians? Are they true Christ-followers? Once again, throw a bunch of scholars in a room and you’ll end up with the issue being firmly decided – in two ways with great certainty but no agreement!

So are they Christians? My answer - in my opinion, these were people who made a decision to become Christ-followers, tried it and wanted a refund. They sent back the meal because they didn’t like it. They couldn’t hack it. They walked away from the faith.

Please note that this doesn’t negate the assurance of our salvation – the fact that God protects us, preserves us and places us in the palm of His hand.” There are multiple scriptures that promise us that God doesn’t take away our salvation because we have doubts, fail or even sin. One of my favorites is II Timothy 2: 11-13 where we’re promised that God will be faithful to us even when we are faithless (waver in our faith, sin, doubt). However, that same passage also says that if we deny God, He will deny us.

My conclusion - while I firmly believe that no one, no sin or nothing can steal our salvation, I also believe we can make a conscious decision to walk away from it.

Simply put, there is only one way we can lose our salvation - we can walk away from God! Sin, discouragement or even a time of rebellion can’t take away our salvation – but, we can throw it away. Let me further explain what I mean.

First, remember there is a great difference between falling and falling away; falling away isn't just falling into some sin, it is actually departing from Jesus Himself. Falling away means you chose to turn away from the faith. Falling into sin or discouragement in the faith is not falling away from Christ. The two are distinctly different and the results are drastically different – when we fall into sin we lose God’s blessings. When we choose to fall away we lose the benefits – salvation.

Another passage of scripture I referred to earlier that shows there is a difference between “falling away” and “falling” but says it in a different way, using different words is 2 Timothy 2:11-13.

“The saying is trustworthy, for: If we have died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us; if we are faithless, he remains faithful.” 2 Tim. 2:11-13 (ESV)

This word for faithless is a Greek word "apisteo (ap-is-teh'-o)," and it’s sometimes translated "unbelief." But what it really has to do with is a wavering or uncertain faith.

A classic example of when it’s used is Mark 9:24. A lot of you remember this story. There’s a man who’s asked Jesus to heal his son, and he says "if you are able." Jesus says, "Why do you ask if you are able? Don’t you know all things are possible to one who believes?" The man’s response is, "I do believe. Help my unbelief." It’s exactly the same word, " apisteo" that’s used.

Do you ever have doubts? Do you ever lack certainty? Do you ever pray but you’re not really sure what’ll happen, like the man in the Gospel, "I believe; help my unbelief"? That’s the word that the author uses here.

So what is the author saying?

I believe the author is saying that even if we’re faithless, even if we have wavering, uncertain belief, even if we sin or backslide - God remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself. In other word’s, God’s faithfulness is greater than human fickleness.

On the other hand, the author also says that there is one way Christ will deny us – that’s if we make a conscious, definite decision to deny Him. If we reject Christ – He rejects us. If we deny Christ – He denies us. So “falling away” or “denying Him” is much, much more than doubt, some sin or even a period of backsliding. What we’re talking about here is a conscious, complete and permanent change of life away from Christ.

Summary

So, while I do not believe falling into sin or having doubts causes one to lose their salvation, falling away from Christ – making a conscious decision to reject Him can only have one result – salvation isn’t there. God didn’t take it away – we threw it away - we made that decision! Just as we decided to become Christ-followers, we can decide not to be Christ-followers!

There’s one other fact I’d like you to remember here.

Always remember that an important part of theology is this - God is love. Because He is love, God allows us to make our own choices. He would never force Himself on us – He can’t. To do so would go against His very character. As a result, we must choose to become Christ-followers, we choose to grow, we choose to bear fruit. He helps us, He motivates us, He works through us – but it is still our choice.

We can also choose to walk away. We can try it and eat the whole meal or we can demand a refund. We can send back the meal because we don’t like it.

In short, we can walk away from the faith. Because God is love He has to let us make that choice. He cannot – as much as He wants everyone to be a part of His family – force us to go against our will. Love would never do that. So when someone decides to reject or give up on God for good – they did not lose their salvation, they threw it away!

So where does that leave us?

Well, if someone chooses to deny or walk away from Christ I believe he or she also denies, walks (or falls) away from what Christ brings to the table – salvation. In the case of the Hebrews described in Hebrews 6, they forsook Christ and they turned their backs on their salvation.

That brings us to the next troublesome set of words. If these are Christians who "lost their salvation," did they lose it forever?

It would seem that’s what the writer is saying. The writer’s use of the word "Impossible" is emphatic; he is not saying it is just difficult, but truly without possibility.

Good illustrations of this are the other uses of impossible in Hebrews: It is impossible for God to lie ( 6:18 ); it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats can take away sin (10:4); and without faith it is impossible to please God (11:6). So, in true South Jersey terminology – impossible means impossible!!! It would be like me winning Mr. Olympia – impossible!!!

As a result, some theologies would say the terrible fact is that they can never regain it. In fact, this was used by some in the early church (like Montanists and Novatianists) to say that there was no possibility of restoration if one sinned significantly after their baptism.

Others have explained it by saying that this is all merely a hypothetical warning, in light of verse 9; no one can really lose their salvation. But what sense does is it make to warn someone against something that can't happen?

Still others think that this penalty deals only with reward, not with salvation itself; they stress the idea that repentance is impossible, not salvation.

What do I think?

Well, first remember that context is critical. We need to remember the background of the whole book and the chapter we’re studying. In this case, this difficult passage is best understood in the context of Hebrews 6:1-2.

The writer is saying that if they do retreat back to Judaism, all the religious "repentance" in the world will do them no good. Their forsaking of Jesus is tantamount to crucifying Him all over again; especially if they were to express their repentance in traditional Jewish forms: a resumption of animal sacrifice, denying the total work of Jesus for them on the cross.

Second, remember what I said earlier - there is a great difference between falling and falling away. Falling away isn't just falling into some sin, it is actually departing from Jesus Himself. Falling away means you chose to turn away from the faith. Simply put, the Hebrews being described had turned their backs on Christ!

So the message to these ex-Christians who had given up was clear: if you don't continue on with Jesus, don't suppose you will find salvation by just going on with the old basics that are common to Judaism; if you aren't saved in Jesus, you ain't saved!

The idea is not that "if you fall away, you can't come back to Jesus ever," but that "if you turn your back on Jesus, don't expect to find salvation anywhere else, especially in the foundations of Judaism or other religions (or other priorities!). You can’t and won’t find salvation apart from the fullness of Jesus." If you try to hold onto these things, returning to Christ and the salvation He offers is impossible.

If we turn our back on Jesus we can’t expect to find salvation anywhere else. Salvation then becomes impossible. Why? Because without Christ there is no salvation.

However, I firmly believe that God is a God of second (and third and fourth, etc.) chances. He doesn’t want anyone to not know Him and the eternal and abundant life He offers. So, if we are willing to let go of the old religions, priorities and the past, God will always welcome us with open arms.

So can someone come back. I believe so – but only empty handed and only if they let every other religion and every other priority fall away!

Q - Do babies and young children who die go to heaven?

This question is best answered by an article entitled "Why we Believe Young Children Who Die Go to Heaven," by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. and Daniel L. Akin

Few things in life are more tragic and heartbreaking than the death of a baby or small child. For parents, the grief can be overwhelming. For the minister, to stand over a small, white casket and provide comfort and support seems to ask for more than he can deliver. Child in water

Many console themselves with the thought that at least the child is now in a better place. Some believe small children who die become angels. They are certain these precious little ones are in heaven with God.

However, it is important for us both to ask and answer some important questions if we can. Do those who die in infancy go to heaven? How do we know? What evidence is there to support such a conclusion? Sentimentalism and emotional hopes and wants are not sufficient for those who live under the authority of the Word of God. We must, if possible, find out what God has said.

It is interesting to discover that the Church has not been of one mind on this issue. In fact, the early and medieval Church was anything but united. Some Church Fathers remained silent on the issue.

Ambrose said unbaptized infants were not admitted to heaven, but have immunity from the pains of hell.

Augustine basically affirmed the damnation of all unbaptized infants, but taught they would receive the mildest punishment of all.

Gregory of Nyssa offered that infants who die immediately mature and are given the opportunity to trust Christ.

Calvin affirmed the certain election of some infants to salvation and was open to the possibility that all infants who die are saved. He said, "Christ receives not only those who, moved by holy desire and faith, freely approach unto Him, but those who are not yet of age to know how much they need His grace."

Zwingli, B.B. Warfield and Charles Hodge all taught that God saves all who die in infancy. This perspective has basically become the dominant view of the Church in the 20th century.

Yet, a popular evangelical theologian chided Billy Graham when at the Oklahoma City memorial service he said, "Someday there will be a glorious reunion with those who have died and gone to heaven before us, and that includes all those innocent children that are lost. They're not lost from God because any child that young is automatically in heaven and in God's arms." The theologian scolded Graham for offering what he called "… a new gospel: justification by youth alone."

It is our conviction that there are good reasons biblically and theologically for believing that God saves all who die who do not reach a stage of moral understanding and accountability. It is readily admitted that Scripture does not speak to this issue directly, yet there is evidence that can be gleaned that would lead us to affirm on biblical grounds that God receives into heaven all who have died in infancy. Some evidence is stronger than others, but cumulatively they marshal strong support for infant salvation. We will note six of them.

First, the grace, goodness and mercy of God would support the position that God saves all infants who die. This is the strongest argument and perhaps the decisive one. God is love (1 John 4:8) and desires that all be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). God is love and His concern for children is evident in Matthew 18:14 where Jesus says, "Your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost." People go to hell because they choose in willful rebellion and unbelief to reject God and His grace. Children are incapable of this kind of conscious rejection of God. Where such rebellion and willful disobedience is absent, God is gracious to receive.

Second, when the baby boy who was born to David and Bathsheba died (2 Samuel 12:15-18), David did two significant things: 1) He confessed his confidence that he would see the child again and, 2) he comforted his wife Bathsheba (vs. 23-24). David could have done those two things only if he was confident that his little son was with God. Any other explanation does not do justice to the text.

Third, in James 4:17, the Bible says, "Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins." The Bible is clear that we are all born with a sin nature as a result of being in Adam (Roman 5:12). This is what is called the doctrine of original sin. However, the Scriptures make a distinction between original sin and actual sins. While all are guilty of original sin, moral responsibility and understanding is necessary for our being accountable for actual sins (Deuteronomy 1:30; Isaiah 7:16). It is to the one who knows to do right and does not do it that sin is reckoned. Infants are incapable of such decisions.

Fourth, Jesus affirmed that the kingdom of God belonged to little children (Luke 18:15-17). In the passage he is stating that saving faith is a childlike faith, but He also seems to be affirming the reality of children populating heaven.

Fifth, Scripture affirms that the number of saved souls is very great (Revelation 7:9). Since most of the world has been and is still non-Christian, might it be the untold multitude who have died prematurely or in infancy comprise a majority of those in heaven? Such a possibility ought not to be dismissed too quickly. In this context Charles Spurgeon said, "I rejoice to know that the souls of all infants, as soon as they die, speed their way to paradise. Think what a multitude there is of them."

Sixth, some in Scripture are said to be chosen or sanctified from the womb (1 Samuel 1:8-2:21; Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:15). This certainly affirms the salvation of some infants and repudiates the view that only baptized babies are assured of heaven. Neither Samuel, Jeremiah or John the Baptist was baptized.

After surveying these arguments, it is important for us to remember that anyone who is saved is saved because of the grace of God, the saving work of Jesus Christ and the undeserved and unmerited regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Like all who have ever lived, except for Jesus, infants need to be saved. Only Jesus can take away their sin, and if they are saved it is because of His sovereign grace and abounding mercy.

Abraham said, "Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:25). We can confidently say, "Yes, He will." When it comes to those incapable of volitional, willful acts of sin, we can rest assured God will, indeed, do right. Precious little ones are the objects of His saving mercy and grace.

CONCLUSION:
On September 29, 1861, the great Baptist pastor, Charles Spurgeon, preached a message entitled "Infant Salvation." Spurgeon affirmed that God saved little ones without limitation and without exception. He, then, as was his manner, turned to conclude the message with an evangelistic appeal to parents who might be lost. Listen to his plea:

"Many of you are parents who have children in heaven. Is it not a desirable thing that you should go there too? And yet, have I not in these galleries and in this area some, perhaps many, who have no hope hereafter? … Mother, unconverted mother, from the battlements of heaven your child beckons you to Paradise. Father, ungodly, impenitent father, the little eyes that once looked joyously on you, look down upon you now and the lips which had scarcely learned to call you "Father" ere they were sealed by the silence of death, may be heard as with a still, small voice, saying to you this morning, "Father, must we be forever divided by the great gulf which no man can pass?" If you wilt, think of these matters, perhaps the heart will begin to move, and the eyes may begin to flow and then may the Holy Spirit put before thine eyes the cross of the Savior … if thou wilt turn thine eye to Him, thou shalt live …."

Little ones are precious in God's sight. If they die, they go to heaven. Parents, who have lost a little one, if they have trusted Jesus, can be confident of a wonderful reunion someday. Are you hopeful of seeing again that little treasure God entrusted to you for such a short time? Jesus has made a way. Come to Him now and someday you will see them again.

Article by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. and Daniel L. Akin.
R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of Southern Seminary. Daniel L. Akin is dean of faculty at Southern.

Q - What about divorce? (click here for the answer)

Q - My church is trying to take over my life! Is there such a thing as spiritual abuse? (click here for the answer)