Ok I realise for some, this is an old chestnut.  But I was discussing the topic recently with some Christian friends, and the range of views was quite interesting.

What's the view of Christians at TPG?  If a young child, baby, infant dies - does it go automatically to Heaven?

I'll reserve my views for now, but curious to hear yours...

Egad! Will someone please close the religion thread until further notice. This website is the product of modern technology. It wasn't designed for medieval data processing.

Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise.

('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)

I took it to be a genuine question, to be honest.  And why shouldn't he ask it if he wants?  Whether other people answer it or not is down to the individual, but I don't think the last two posts have been particularly helpful to the discussion.

As for me, Cybacat, I guess the only reaction I had on reading your question was, "Why not?"; I can't see why they wouldn't go to heaven.  If you take the theory at base level, a baby/very young child should not have committed any sin so would therefore go straight to heaven.  I think they call it being born without the stain of original sin.

My theory by A. Elk, brackets, Miss, brackets. This theory goes as follows and begins now. All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end. That is my theory, it is mine, and it belongs to me, and I own it, and what it is, too.

Ange's Odyssey

On the contrary, neither of our comments were intended to be helpful. 

Your quite right though, anyone is entitled to discuss what they please. At the same time, one needn't simply move on when they notice something they're unimpressed with. Therefore, speak your mind freely, raise the things concern you fearlessly, discuss your points-of-view rigorously. But don't think you'll get away with everything you ask or say.

Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise.

('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)

One of the most difficult things for me to grasp as a Catholic is the "original sin" idea.  But if a baby dies who hasn't been baptised they will go to purgatory until the second coming.

This idea scared my non-religious ex husband so much that I baptised him in the kitchen sink just to be safe.

It's not a stupid question because Catholics and Protestants ahve two differing views about this question.

Catholics believe in original sin. As a result, a baby that dies before being baptised goes to Pergatory.

Protestants don't believe in Pergatory whatsoever. And as a result, Protestants believe that any child born before they understand salvation will go into Heaven because of their lack of spiritual understanding (I'm paraphrasing the theology quite a lot here).

So to answer the original question - I would say yes.  

Jordan .

I have an uncle who is a reverend. I've mentioned him here before. He and my aunt were missionaries way back in the 50s in Cuba and then, post-Castro, in Puerto Rico. My sister and I used to privately laugh at them when we were kids because they were stereotypically "Church Lady-ish." Prim, no make-up on my aunt, but dyed red hair. Astrology, which my adolescent sister found fascinating, was the equivalent of witchcraft to my aunt. When I adored the young folksinger, Bob Dylan, my aunt confided in my mother that he was a Communist. Okay, you get the picture.

Well, all my life I had heard that my uncle was 'about to get his doctorate' once he completed his thesis. This went on for decades. I lost touch with them outside of Christmas cards and didn't reconnect until my dad's funeral in 1997. By that time, my uncle had become a PhD. I was curious. I no longer felt that cocky condescension toward them. They were human beings with all that goes along with it and I was willing to give them every benefit of a doubt. So I asked my uncle what his thesis was about. At first he didn't want to tell me since he is pretty much of the Old School Etiquette - don't discuss religion or politics -- but then he answered. The subject had been: Who Is Saved?

And that, my fellow TPG-ers, is what he had labored over for years and years. He researched his subject in the original languages all the ancient holy texts and not just Judeo-Christian but also Sanskrit texts among others. I asked him if during the time he worked on the project, if he had changed his thinking from his original premise when he started out.  He surprised me by saying yes. How so? He told me that he came to realize there was no way for him to know who was saved and why; that it was God's decision.

This seems elementary to some, ludicrous to others, childlike superstititon to my Euro-secular friends, or dead wrong to others who believe these details are explicitly spelled out somewhere in religious dogma. To me, it reinforced what I love about the Jewish belief system of not describing the afterlife or its attributes -- who's in and who's out -- too definitively. And were I to be a specific religion, this is yet another reason I like the logical premises of Judaism. Do your best, follow the Commandments, and have faith that God has a bigger plan that we can neither know nor can we fiddle with.  In fact the idea of trying to determine who makes or breaks the barriers of a Paradise, a Purgatory, or an Inferno seems like something that should be left to obsessive poets.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

My theory by A. Elk, brackets, Miss, brackets. This theory goes as follows and begins now. All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end. That is my theory, it is mine, and it belongs to me, and I own it, and what it is, too.

Ange's Odyssey

Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise.

('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)

No, but his farts stink worse than that sounds. Not so suave, Suave Folk. But still funny ..

Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise.

('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)

Thanks for the replies - some very interesting observations.

For the atheists out there, I promise if you create a section for Atheists, I won't go in there and feign horror and disgust when you discuss atheist issues.    In summary, if you don't want to discuss religion, what the hell are you doing in a religion forum?? 

Back on topic, I guess amongst my friends there are a few schools of thought:

1.  Babies are born with sin - it's an inherent element of all humans.  The only way for a sinner to go to heaven is to ask forgiveness of Christ.  Therefore a baby can't enter Heaven until they accept forgiveness.  God is black and white on some issues, and entering Heaven is one of these where our human emotions and judgement may disagree with God's view, but are irrelevant.

2.  Babies are born with sin, but go to heaven because even though they can't understand God or accept his forgiveness for sins, we know the nature of God through the Bible.  He epitomises love and forgiveness, and would not allow an innocent to perish.  This would apply to anyone incapable of asking God for forgiveness - the mentally retarded, the very young etc.  This wouldn't necessarily apply to those who are geographically isolated because the Bible tells us that God is revealed to every person on Earth at least once in their lives - and it's their choice whether to believe and be saved, or to perish.

3.  Babies are born without sin, and therefore enter Heaven.

The whole issue seems to boil down to where/when people become responsible for their sin.  In human terms this is an issue we struggle with in our own societies.  In Australia for example, we have car thieves aged 10-14yo...yet at law they are not responsible for their actions due to their age.  So where would God draw the line?  I guess like everything else...that's up to him.

The concept of atheism (or of agnosticism for that matter) has no existence outside the context of religion.  Ergo, the Religion section is the right and proper home for atheism.

I'm not claiming you disputed this, I just felt like using "ergo" in a sentence.

x-ray
if your back's against the wall, turn around and write on it...

Yeah. Most people don't not believe in God without giving it some thought. (I know far more people who do believe in God without having given it any thought.) So atheists have a right to express their opinions here.

But to get back on topic, the Methodist church I wentr to believed that babies do go to heaven. In fact, there was no mention of hell at all in the decade or so of my church (not Sunday school) going career. Is it true that some people think that pets don't go to heaven? That's awfully sad. I wouldn't want to go to a heaven without animals.

Jordan and Susan

I've been asked to do a presentation on this topic in a few days, so I'm going to have to do some research.  Can you flesh out your views a bit more for me, or provide any particularly good references?

Jamie - I'm suitably impressed with your ue of the word "Ergo".  If there's no copyright, I might pinch it to use in my presentation... 

rainbow

In my experience, there's almost no mention of hell in the christian churches I've been to...shattering yet another atheist myth that christians are rounded up by some form of fear campaign...

CCC

I welcome intelligent discussion on the topic - whatever your viewpoint.  However, random whining, and standard Atheist 101 mantras don't qualify as intelligent discussion.

Jesus spoke more about "hell" than anyone else in the Bible, except maybe for John (in Revelation). Most churches don't talk about hell because they don't want to branded a certain way and "scare off" congregation members. the only tiem "hell" is really ever brought up in most services is when the salvation message is being discussed point blank. Fear? Sure...but religions aren't hte only ones who use fear to get their points across. (Even though it seems that only churches are the only ones criticized for doing so.) It should also be mentioned that Jews don't view "hell" as a real place, but rather the distance in which a person is away from God (I'm poorly paraphrasing the theology for sake of clarity).

Cybaca - with regards to expanding on the subject, it really is a two-fold discussion, so I'll start jut with the question of babies and Heaven between Catholics and Protestants.

Catholics believe in "original sin." This original sin comes from the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden. It's built into human kind from birth. Any baby born and dies before baptism, Catholics say, go to pergatory (something Protestants also don't believe in). In order to skip pergatory, a child must be baptized and that original sin must be forgiven (which only a priest baptising can do).

Protestants on the other hand, don't believe in Pergatory.  We also don't believe in original sin. We belive children are born pure and only at some unknown age does the action of "committing" sin actually kick in. Once children understand right and wrong, and understand the basics of salvation is when most would say this kicks in. This varies from child to child of course. A mentally-challenged child may never understand the salvation message and would at death enter the Pearly Gates.

In both cases, Catholics and Protestants belive in a "just God" who will judge people on what they know spiritually. We just view the "judgement" differently.

To learn more about Original Sin, click here . Charles Finney back in the 1700s rejected the notion of original sin. Basically, the argument (I'm paraphrasing poorly) is that sin is an action one must commit. Since a child has not committed any actions to commit sin, then they are pure spiritually. He argued that we are born with physical impurity, not moral. There's also a whole issue of "free will" but that's for a later discussion, methinks. Do a search for "Charles Finney original sin" and you should be able to find plenty of fun stuff.

So once we understand that a just God would not allow a baby to "go to hell", then it's safe to assume that yes, babies go to Heaven - otherwise God would be very unjust -- and that goes against the principles of the Bible.  

CCC and Susan bring up another related issue that is very difficult. That is how can a "just God" allow a child to die.

Preface - to my atheist friends, I'm probably going to say stuff that will be completely illogical to you (to a higher degree than above) at this point. So jsut bear with me.

The first thing we have to understand is that the Earth is cursed.  Adam and Eve's original sin caused the earth to be cursed. Their sin caused death, sickness, bad labor pains, weeds and all sorts of other things that make our world horrible.  (Doubting Thomases: Whether this happened in reality or not is not really the point - the point is that Christians believe the world is cursed -- whether Adam and Eve caused the curse is not the point.) This curse brings death and sickness.

When you read the Bible chronological, you'll find that in the early years of this world, God had a direct hand in dealing with the world. We have Noah and the Flood, we have Abraham dealing with Sodom and Gomorrah and being destroyed by God. But as you get further and further along in the Biblical History, God seems to almost take a backseat, only stepping in when it was His time. He allows the Jews to become slaves to Egypt. Then He steps in. He makes Saul king and then when Saul decides to open a can of whoop-ass on David, God allows it. David makes a number of missteps but God generally lets things happen. In one situation, David's punishment for his sin is the death of one of his sons. David's life is full of missteps and punishments by God. Then we got Job who was a pawn in an interesting little game between Satan and God. But as I said, once we get to a certain point in history, God sits back. He introduces Jesus to the world and then suddenly everything seems to just happen -- running its own course.

I think this is important point - God lets us run ourselves. He lets us run this world as we pretty much see fit. He may step in from time to time, but in most cases, He lets things just happen even though He has the power to stop it.

Jews and Christians both believe that the Jews are God's chosen people. And yet He has allowed the Jews to go through more crap than any other people. And yet, Biblically, they are His chosen. If God is going to allow His own chosen people to go through slavery, bondage, wars, famine, death, Holocaust, etc, then surely, God is going to allow his "non-chosen"
 to go through a bunch of bad stuff too.

The key here is that the world is cursed, and as a result, death happens. Even of innocent chilren. Life sucks sometimes. It's painful and for some reason, God allows this to happen even though He has the power to change it. So why doesn't God step in? is the question we are left with.

Susan answered it above - we don't know the will of God. We don't know what He's planning or thinking.

But we know some things. God often uses the bad so that His power and love can be shown at a later time. There's a story in the NT of a man who is crippled (I think). Jesus heals this man and then tells his disciples that this man was this way so that one day, God can show His love and power in the future. the curse of the world made this man crippled, but God healed him to prove his power.

there's a single scripture in the Bible that throws people when dealing with the death of a loved one - "God giveth and God taketh away." This Sripture sounds as if God decides who dies and who doesn't. It's often more comforting for some people to believe that God chose someone to die rather than face the harsh truth that the world just sucks sometimes.

In the NT, we know of a story in which Herod kills all the children under a certain age while searching for a child who would replace him. And yet God, knowing this, informed Joseph and he, Mary, Jesus and the rest of the family fled to Egypt for a time. God easily could've stopped the killing of all these children, but He didn't. He let Herod have free will which resulted in teh direct deaths of hundreds.

When I was a growing up, my uncle and aunt had a baby boy. Soon after birth they realized he had a medical problem involving his bowels (don't remember the details). He had a surgery or two, and after a long fight (I think 6 months to a year) this two year old boy died. Talk about one of the most depressing and sad funerals I've ever attended. I still remember this small coffin at the front of the churhc, my aunt, uncle and cousin placing a glove, ball and a pair of tiny shoes inside the coffin.

I've never experienced the death of a young child (besides the above) but I can imagine the difficult strain and spritiual debate of trying to figure out what happened and why. That is the most difficult question to answer, and no one really can offer a proper answer.

I feel strongly in teh notion that God allows this world to run as is. He rarely steps in to make adjustments. I think there are certain spiritual laws at play here too. If God was to start stepping in to stop bad things from happening, then the result may very well become that of a loss of free will. It is ultimately the "law of free will." When we start asking God to step in to stop things, our abiltiy for free will may also change. There's a cause and effect. We all love our free will and would go screaming into the night if God was to take it away from us. This isn't necessarily a Biblical principle but is a concept I've been formulating in my mind for quite some time because it makes some sense to me.

I dojn't belive that God necessariliy kills (but He has the power to), but that He does allow death, even to young innocent children. People die (young and old) because this world is cursed. And depending upon the spiritual walk (or age) will determine their ultimate place in eternity.

Jordan .

Hmmmm, I come to this discussion from a less religious dogma-related position, Cybacat. That's because my religious training ended at age 10 and prior to that time it was only coloring books, stories in Sunday school and attempting to read the Bible. I'm more of an eclectic collector of philosophies and it comes more from the words of various believers from CS Lewis, Joseph Campbell, Pope John Paul to various Jewish scholars and historical figures-writers like Dostoyevsky; even non-believers like Salman Rushdie.

I'm interested in concepts like Original Sin but I am too much of an Era-ist to get mired down in the Angry God imagery. Besides, I don't personify God as making daily decisions with whatever pressing issues he finds in his "In" box each morning. I think of God as an ever present force.

So, I don't believe in the justice of collective human punishments for the actions of Adam and Eve, whom I firmly believe did NOT surprise God by their actions anyway. I no more accept the divine justice of punishing generations millenia later for someone else's transgressions than I accept the idea of reparations for ancestors of slaves or having an entire 2nd grade class miss recess because one kid threw a spit ball.

I also totally reject Eastern concepts of karma -- ie. the leper begging on the street who was evil in a previous incarnation and is now working out his karma - because that seems to me to cancel out natural empathy for the afflicted. The child with the club foot is paying for past sins in the present life.

Plus it's too passive for my Western soul. There's a story I remember from one of Shirley Maclaine's books where she describes how she reacted during an episode she experienced in some Asian country -- could have been China. She watched as a child fell into a body of water from a boat. No one saved the child. They explained it in some passive way -- I can't remember it too clearly any more except to recall that I found it repulsive -- culturally insensitive boor than I am.

But what I can accept and do believe is in a greater picture justice. Heaven? Hell? In-betweens-ville? Have no idea and have never strived to know. Have no fear of any of it either. I just accept the rational beauty of the entire design and have no need to critique the plan. See, I'm operating on what it is I can observe and see.

So babies and Heaven or Hell? Well, while it makes sense to me that there is some sort of ultimate judgment -- what civilization has not believed in a judgment day? -- I would believe babies are tenderly protected.

While I agree with much of what Jordan writes, I don't think of death as being the result of this world as being "cursed." It's too splendid for me to have that view. To me the curse would have been to really lay it on Adam and Eve -- FOR YOUR DISOBEDIENCE, YOU SHALL NOW BE CURSED TO IMMORTALITY!

None of this will probably be of much use with your presentation though, Cyba. Sorry.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Jordan .

I am not a christian anymore but can I just say..

Yes I very strongly believe that babies and animals have souls and go to heaven. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't though I udnerstand the concept of being born into a sin-soaked world and why they wouldn't from a Christian point of view

"Anmals don't have souls?" Have you never watched Watership Down man What about my little bunnies!And if they don't have souls then why have I seen the spirit of my neighbours dead cat on several occasions? huh?... *sniff*

"watch out for my cousin.."