Tell me more ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

If we accept that unborn babies are human beings and not merely a non-human organism, and further we require baptism as a prerequisite for salvation (using it as justification for infant baptism)...

What happens to an unborn baby which never experiences live birth, and clearly can't have been baptized since it was not yet born?

share|improve this question
3  
interesting prerequisite to the question: "require baptism as a prerequisite for salvation" - what Biblical backing would that viewpoint have? – warren Aug 24 '11 at 15:11
2  
@warren That doctrine is sourced from Acts 2:38. – Richard Sep 16 '11 at 2:12
@Richard: It says you will receive the spirit, that doesn't necessarily mean saved. Romans 10:9 says "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." That doesn't include baptism. – Ian Nov 28 '11 at 12:42

6 Answers

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I cannot provide a better answer then the answer provided by the LCMS (The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod). This is taken from the LCMS FAQ: http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=537

On the role of infant baptism:

Q: How does faith play a role in infant Baptism? Is faith later taken care of when the child is confirmed?

A: Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Baptism, we believe, is one of the miraculous means of grace (together with God's written and spoken Word) through which God creates the gift of faith in a person's heart. Although we do not claim to understand how this happens or how it is possible, we believe (because of what the Bible says about Baptism) that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant. This faith cannot yet, of course, be expressed or articulated, yet it is real and present all the same (see, e.g., 1 Pet 3:21; Acts 2:38-39; Titus 3:5-6; Matt. 18:6; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim.3:15; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13).

Summary: Lutherans believe that through infant baptism God creates faith in the heart of the infant, this faith is present though it cannot be shown outwardly.

What about unbaptized babies?

"There is some basis for the hope that God has a method, not revealed to us, by which He works faith in the children of Christians dying without Baptism (Mark 10:13-16). For children of unbelievers we do not venture to hold out such hope. We are here entering the field of the unsearchable judgments of God" (Romans 11:33).

What is the basis of such hope? It is this, that God is not Himself bound by the means to the use of which He has bound us. That is to say that while Christ has commanded us to baptize all nations, God can save sinners without Baptism. He did so throughout the entire Old Testament. During the first 2,000 years we know of no special means of grace for little children. At the time of Abraham He instituted circumcision, but He did not thereby provide for little girls. It is for God to determine under what conditions He will receive children into His kingdom.

A most encouraging instance for the Holy Spirit's power to influence even unborn infants in a spiritual way is found in Luke 1:15, 41, 44, where it is stated that the unborn John the Baptist leaped for joy within his mother's womb when the unborn Jesus was brought into his presence by His mother Mary. Behind all this is the all-encompassing Gospel pronouncement that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world [including the little children] unto Himself" (2 Cor. 5:19).

As to the second point we might say: Whether individual Lutheran pastors have ever baptized stillborn children immediately upon their arrival, we do not know, and to our knowledge such practice has never been sanctioned by our church. Nor should it be sanctioned. The means of grace, including Baptism, are for the living only (Heb. 9:27).

Usage: We urge you to contact an LCMS pastor in your area for more in-depth discussion. Published by: LCMS Church Information Center

Summary: Lutherans believe that Baptism is for the living only, however, God may have created a means to save those who were not baptized or not able to be baptized (stillborn, or died quickly and unexpectedly shortly after childbirth). This hope is based on the fact that God has shown himself capable of saving without baptism and may still continue to do so.

share|improve this answer
Welcome to Christanity.SE! Thanks for finding relevant content, but for your information SE sites try not to become link repositories or just an engine to scrape other people's content. You can link to an external answer, but at the very least you need to summarize the relevant parts of the content in your answer. Thank you! See also Answers copied from an external source – Caleb Sep 16 '11 at 10:52
Interesting "we believe .. when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant. " -- what about baptized infants who go on to be nonbelievers -- like me? – zipquincy Oct 13 '11 at 13:47
1  
The loss of faith is always possible - as gaining it back is possible. It does not change what baptism does. – ericgorr Oct 14 '11 at 1:18
if A) you consider human life to begin at conception and B) unborn persons will go to heaven and C) the fact that most embryos never implant and are naturally lost [not talking about abortion, talking about the natural non-implant/miscarraige rate] then D) The majority of people in heaven are/will-be people who never experienced life on earth outside the womb. – zipquincy Nov 2 '11 at 15:33
"when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant" – Darye Jan 15 '12 at 5:12
show 2 more comments

One of the supporting scripture for the salvation requires baptism doctrine is this verse:

Acts 2:38
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

This verse is saying that forgiveness of sins requires repentance and baptism. However, the very foundation is that those are required for the forgiveness of sins.

The essence of this question is this: Are unborn children guilty of sin?

For that, you have to ask What is the essence of sin? To answer that question, sin is the turning away from God's will. It's knowing God's desires for you--his rules if you prefer--and intentionally doing otherwise.

My argument is that these children can not know sin because they cannot know right from wrong.

Summary

Children that cannot understand sin cannot commit sin. Therefore they do not need baptism and cannot repent of their sins. Therefore unborn children (along with other very young children) gain immediate acceptance into heaven.

share|improve this answer
and so heaven is populated with a majority of unborn, since most fertilized eggs never implant or are miscarried... interesting. – zipquincy Nov 9 '11 at 15:18
I like this answer, but does the fact that we are descendants of Adam not mean that we are born as sinners? Ie, only when we become children of God (John 1:12-13, Rom 8:16-17) and are now no longer just "children" of Adam but also "children" of God are we justified under the blood of Jesus? – Ries Feb 18 at 10:02

Babies and children do not know the difference between right and wrong, and the Bible calls them "those who cannot tell between their right hand and their left." (Jonah 4:11)
Because they do not understand what is right, what is wrong, as they are too young, they do not consciously sin. They are innocent. There will come a time when they understand what is right and what is wrong, but until then, they are counted as "saved". God has a provision for babies and very young children who die early.

Edit:

This site puts it better.

Besides, Jesus did state that unless we were like the little children, we wouldn't go to heaven.

share|improve this answer
4  
Can you cite scriptural support? Otherwise, is there some other source for this viewpoint? – Software Monkey Aug 24 '11 at 8:10
9  
I can tell you my toddler knows very well when she is being rebellious! – ℝaphink Aug 24 '11 at 14:14
Interesting that (from the article referenced), Deut 1:39 says the Israelite's children "have no knowledge of good or evil". The wording is very reminiscent of Genesis. – Software Monkey Aug 26 '11 at 22:45
3  
I do not believe that this verse in Jonah is referring to infants. Reading it in context, it seems to support the idea that these adults are fools, not that these are actually children. Either way, this is a broad interpretation of that scripture. (Plus, this was a city that overwhelmed by sin even though it was filled with these people who couldn't tell their right hand from their left.) – Richard Sep 15 '11 at 15:06
2  
So they are actually lucky if they die young, because there's no chance of going to hell. – CiscoIPPhone Sep 16 '11 at 11:29
show 1 more comment

Catholics used to believe that they went to the Limbo of the Children (a part of Hell where there is no fire)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Letentur coeli,” Sess. 6, July 6, 1439, ex cathedra:

We define also that… the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go straightaway to hell, but to undergo punishments of different kinds.

However Benedict XVI abolished the concept of Limbo, claiming that it was never defined.

share|improve this answer
This is very interesting! How do we know this was ex cathedra? Is there an official ruling? See my question: When does the Pope speak ex cathedra? – dancek Sep 16 '11 at 9:28
Because it meets the requirements for infallibility defined in Vatican I. – apocalypse_info_click_here Sep 16 '11 at 14:41
There is nothing more official than the Papal decree from the council of Florence. – apocalypse_info_click_here Sep 16 '11 at 14:48

One verse I have heard in support of salvation of infants is in 2 Samuel 12:22-23, after King David's young child (not sure how young) dies.

22 He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who knows, the LORD may be gracious to me, that the child may live.’ 23 But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”

The idea presented from this is that "I will go to him" indicates that David plans to see his child in heaven.

I realize this doesn't specifically address unborn babies, but I think the same logic would hold.

share|improve this answer

Their is also the problem of conformity with Gods character. The passage early in Genesis gives us a good indication of God's character.

Abraham Pleads for Sodom

16When the men got up to leave, they looked down toward Sodom, and Abraham walked along with them to see them on their way. 17Then the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? 18Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. 19For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”

20Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”

22The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.e 23Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not sparef the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judgeg of all the earth do right?”

26The Lord said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

27Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city because of five people?”

“If I find forty-five there,” he said, “I will not destroy it.”

29Once again he spoke to him, “What if only forty are found there?”

He said, “For the sake of forty, I will not do it.”

30Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?”

He answered, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.”

31Abraham said, “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?”

He said, “For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.”

32Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?”

He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

33When the Lord had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

Now that gives me clear indication of God being just. I find it with that passage in mind difficult to believe that the just God of the bible will send a infant to eternal damnation just because of a cruel twist of fate.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.