If a newborn dies before he is baptized does that mean he goes to Hell?

Question

I'm not asking to be funny, I'm serious. I'm just saying what I know. Is it true according to the Bible or your beliefs?

I should have added this. I want an explanation and reasons, too, so I can understand...

But is there any mention of this in the Bible?

then according to what you said, Mike, I'm right.

Look, Nova. I'm not here to argue. Some people are here because they are truly confused and they need help on certain matters. And I'm one of those people. So I don't need irony or statements trying me to convince that I'm brainwashed.

Answer 1

No where in the Bible is that ever implied.Children are precious and there is an "age of accountability" which is more like 20 years of age than your church will tell you.God only held the children of Israel from 20 years up accountable for their sins in the wilderness.King David's infant son died and he said"He will not come back to me ,but I will someday go to him".Jesus said of children,"Their angels do always see my Father's face".
No where are kids baptised in the Bible.Dedicated ,yes but not baptised.Jesus said "Go out into the world and make disciples and baptise..."You have to be a believer first.
Doing it by proxy ,like the Catholics ,makes no more sense than the Mormons baptising for the dead.

Answer 2

Catholic theologians puzzled over this issue after developing the doctrines of Original Sin and its remission through the sacrament of Baptism. That's why they invented limbo, a place where people go who, through no fault of their own, were unable to have the effects of Original Sin cancelled because they were neither able, desirous or aware of the saving power of Christian Baptism. It was the only way to reconcile these doctrines with the already conflicted ideas of God's absolute justice and unfailing mercy.

The problem was the nature of limbo. Because it wasn't punishment, it had to be a nice as heaven. But the whole point of heaven was the Beatific Vision, the chance to be able to gaze upon the beautiful and loving face of God for all eternity. And that was impossible for limboites because of their impure condition. Anything less than the Beatific Vision would eventually become boring to the point of agony after a few eons, so limbo turned out to be just as bad as hell. It was pointless.

This year, theologians suggested abandoning the idea of limbo. The pope hasn't yet responded that I know. They would have to work out the disposituion of the former limbo-dwellers. Hell is too cruel. If Baptism has any salvific meaning, purgatory would not provide enough purification and getting a pass to heaven would be insulting to the other Christians.

Many Protestants may chuckle at these theological conundrums. How can Catholics pretend to know anything about these complicated, etherial workarounds? But medieval theologians struggled to answer all the unanswerable questions using logic on top of established doctrine. They did the best they could.

It still comes back to reconciling God's justice and mercy, and the nature of Baptism. My guess would be that God's mercy would be with the ignorant and powerless, regardless of the headaches it might give to some theological hair-splitter.

Answer 3

If you look at baptism as a covenant between God and his people, then the entire households that were baptized were an authority issue, not an age-of-accountability issue. And if you believe that babies inherit original sin, then every single person that has ever lived, baby or not, has a sin nature and is deserving of hell. This makes for a rather bleak outlook for mankind, but if baptism is a covenant, then there is certainly a hint in the entire households as being "marked" as God's property in the same way that circumcision was in the Old Testament -- where baby boys were circumcised and women were not, yet the household was still marked as God's own. This would make infant baptism simply a fulfillment of what is already a covenant within that household, not a ritual that "earns" anyone's way into heaven, baby or not.

This covenant status would allow God to make the right decisions (shouldn't He be capable of doing this anyway?) regarding who is saved and who is not, rather than taking God's role on for ourselves by making blanket "all babies go to Heaven" statements.

Answer 4

If babies were born without sin why wouldn't we just kill them all to ensure they all get to heaven? If babies are all born in sin and billions of aborted ones are headed straight to hell then what are we doing believing in a God so cruel? The truth is that the Bible does not answer that question in a black and white sense but answers it in a way that can be derived. If Jesus can look a prostitute in the eye and say you are forgiven, go and sin no more how could He also say all babies,children and mentally challenged people for that matter won't be looked after by Gods grace? The life of Jesus was one of a person who cared about people and helped them at every opportunity so my humble opinion is that He is trustworthy to ensure babies are saved. My opening statement is not as ridiculous as it sounds and some people have done it...we don't kill babies because they should decide for themselves, that's why. Baptism is for adults not children.

Answer 5

I was told that it is not the belief anymore by a catholic priest after i had my daughter. The belief was that the child would go to purgatory which is the place between heaven and hell. But supposely they have since changed that belief because the baby is born without sin. It was a big thing in my family to get my daughter baptised but she was almost 2 before i was able too because of military service.

Answer 6

In my opinion the child has to reach an age of accountability. Most religious scholars that I've read say it is between 7 and 9. The child has to know the difference between right and wrong and the consequences of those decisions. I don't believe that being baptized or not makes any difference on whether you go to Heaven. I think it's just an outward commitment to following the teachings of God and having our sins washed away. Hope this helps. Merry Christmas!!!

Answer 7

Babies have not inherited the guilt of sin.

Ezekiel 18:20 says, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

Also babies are not capable of committing sins. They can not choose between or understanding right and wrong, or between obediance and disobeying.

1 John 3:4 says, "...sin is the transgression of the law." If a baby is guilty of sin, what law have they transgressed? What law are they capable of transgressing?

A baby has no need to be baptized. Baptism is "for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). Babies have not sinned, therefore, they have no sin to be forgiven of.

Answer 8

No.

The reason is simple. You are NOT born with "original sin." ONLY Adam and Eve HAD ORIGINAL SIN! Why? Because they are the ONLY ONES who COULD perform sin FOR THE FIRST TIME, ORIGINALLY as adults moving from a state of perfection (physically to an imperfect state). WE are born IMPERFECT. Being born "imperfect" is to be born in a state of physical and even moral decay. Meaning that your set spiritual state is INCLINED TO SIN not to PERFECTION.

That is much different than being "born into Original Sin." One means your born "inclined to sin," but as an infant you cannot, because you don't know, you are not self-aware. The other (original sin) means your born with sin "on you" and if you die without confessing, then you go to hell.

Answer 9

You gotta be kidding. How can anyone go somewhere that only exists in someones mind?
Religion is the result of mans fear of death and his inability to explain his existence. It's the most successful business ever created. It has controlled the masses and their money for thousands of years, and still does...witness the Vatican and it's billions.
Religion has a bloody history, witness the Crusades where hundreds of thousands were murdered because they weren't christians...not to mention what's going on in Iraq for the same reasons. All this is the name of God...incredible!
I have no idea what created all of this, and neither does any religious group, but whatever it is it gave me a B.S. filter...it's called my brain and I use it.
Ask questions, lots of questions before you let anyone tell you what to believe...and then think for yourself.

Answer 10

Limbo:

Though it can hardly be claimed, on the evidence of extant literature, that a definite and consistent belief in the limbus patrum of Christian tradition was universal among the Jews, it cannot on the other hand be denied that, more especially in the extra-canonical writings of the second or first centuries B.C., some such belief finds repeated expression; and New Testament references to the subject remove all doubt as to the current Jewish belief in the time of Christ Whatever name may be used in apocryphal Jewish literature to designate the abode of the departed just, the implication generally is

that their condition is one of happiness,
that it is temporary, and
that it is to be replaced by a condition of final and permanent bliss when the Messianic Kingdom is established.<====

It is important that people understand the third point here...