This is not a question unique to today (though emotionalism and universalism perhaps make it more difficult to address). Infants died in Bible times, pioneer Ontario, and indeed still today. Although infant mortality has decreased, still children die, particularly the unborn (miscarriage, abortion[1], the disposal of embryos in fertility treatments, etc).[2] So long as there are children and so long as there is sin and death this question will be relevant.
Before I begin to give a basic and introductory response, I want to emphasise that I do not embark on seeking to answer this question as if from a distance. My wife and I lost numerous children through miscarriage and we have had close friends and family members suffer the loss of both unborn and newborn children. Something else that I must stress before I proceed is that this question is often approach through emotionalism. While our affections have a role to play we must submit ourselves to Scripture, conceding that our ways are not God’s ways (Isa 55:8–9). Generally when we are uncomfortable about something in the Bible God is correct and we are wrong. If you proceed in reading this blog please pause, pray and be open to reason [or reasoning] (James 3:17). Christianity is like a train and the order of that train is important. First must come the train, then the car and finally the caboose. Put another way, first must come fact (or the promises and truths of God), then faith (or belief in those) and then feeling. Get the order wrong and the train soon runs off the track to wherever we want it to go. Get the order right and it runs smoothly along. The question centres around salvation and namely, if the Bible teaches original sin and the need of salvation (which it clearly does), what about children? It also touches upon our beliefs about what the character of God should be in relation to this question, either leaning toward His love (how could a loving God allow…) or His justice (God is soft on sin if...). Numerous passages and verses in the Bible teach original sin, but three are perhaps most pertinent to this subject.[3] The first is Psalm 51:5 where the Spirit says through David: Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. This verse teaches that not only from birth but from conception we are sinners. The second is Ro 5:12, which addresses why we are born sinners. Here the Spirit says through Paul: Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned. This means that because the head of the human race—Adam—sinned, all humans are born sinners (original sin). Not only are we born guilty sinners but we also co-opt into sin through sinful choices throughout our lives. Thirdly, and perhaps the most challenging, come passages like Deut 20:16–18 and 1 Sam 15:2–3 where the Spirit says the following about the destruction of the Canaanites: 2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” We must remember that these passages speak of judgement because of societal sin of a great magnitude (with simply a different means to address it being commanded than against say Sodom and Gomorrah). It does not spell genocide. Traditionally this total judgment has been understood by Christians as a real event backed up by archaeology, but also as a picture of hell. If children had no sin, children wouldn’t die, because death—generally speaking—comes from sin (Ro 6:23b). In light of these three passages, we return to the question. There have been at least 8 ways that Christendom has sought to answer this question.
[1] In 2020 there were 1622 infant deaths under the age of one (or 4.2%), 74,155 abortions and untold deaths of embryos in fertility clinics. [2] I believe it is possible to differentiate between the immorality of abortion for instance and issues of infant salvation. One is a moral issue and the other spiritual. [3] Jesus saying, “let the little come to me” has as little to do with salvation as it does baptism, rather Jesus is breaking down barriers in the apostles hearts, because the Gospel was not meant for “us” (the disciples or the Jews) but for them (Jews and Gentiles and all who believe). [4] This is very similar to forms of universalism where it is believed people will get a second chance before entering heaven to believe (but see Heb 9:27). What did the Thief Believe to be Saved?
Recently in our 5 Minute Moments we’ve been thinking about “theological triage” (see Jan 16, 23 and 30). Last week we considered what a primary (salvation) matter was and how you could tell. That got me thinking, what did the thief, or criminal,[1] on the cross necessarily believe that resulted in His salvation? Read the story from Luke 23:32–43: 32 Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. 33 And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left. [vv. 34–38, the criminals witness great mockery against Jesus, including the criminals, Mk 15:32b] 39 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” What did the thief believe? Though in ordinary circumstances there is much fruit his faith would have borne (e.g. baptism, fruit of the Spirit, service in the Church), this passage is a helpful window into the bare necessity of belief in order to be with Jesus in Paradise—a real death bed conversion: 1. There was a change in the way he viewed Himself At the outset of the story he heaped up insults upon Jesus for claiming to be the Christ, the promised King sent from God. Even as he faced the sentence of death for his own crime he still found the time to think of himself as better than someone else. Humans like to alleviate their own guilty consciences in this way! Yet as His standard of perfection moved from himself to Jesus, as He perceived Jesus’ innocence, he became painfully aware of his own sinfulness as a convicted criminal. When we move the standard of perfection from our own to God we necessarily see ourselves as sinners in need of saving. 2. There was a change in the way he viewed Jesus At the outset he demeaned Jesus along with the crowd and his fellow criminal. As time passed and he gazed upon the Lamb without blemish who opened not His mouth, upon the blood, the anguish, as he listened to the different views about Him that the crowd expressed, , his view of Jesus radically changed. From the crowd’s he’d learned of Jesus’ claim to be the Christ. He may have even been aware of Jesus prior to being crucified alongside of Him. Reading between the lines it is clear he perceived Jesus’ divinity and innocence such that he came to fear God. He began with a high view of self and a low view of Jesus. He ended with a low view of self and a high view of Jesus. 3. He trusted in Jesus for entrance into Paradise (God’s presence) Initially he’d joined the mockery of Jesus, yet through witnessing how he responded to this mockery, how he hung there—innocent, perhaps even something of Jesus’ persona, the criminal was led to believe that Jesus was truly the Christ, a King who offers salvation from sin and death, and a place in His eternal Kingdom to all who believe. It is true this goes against what we now know of verses such as Ro 10:9, yet we must remember this was on the other side of the Cross, the side that no one could see. Fearful of his own impending death and aware of his own sinfulness, believing that Jesus was the Christ who had power over sin and death (despite the circumstances which might suggest otherwise) He trusted in Jesus. In the bleakness of that crucifixion scene, with no other alternative for help, he asked Jesus to have mercy upon Him. Ultimately it was not just what the thief believed but who the thief trusted that he was saved. Jesus’ response is telling, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” If we put this all together we can simply affirm that to be saved one must: · See themselves as a sinner in need of saving and fear God; · See Jesus as the perfect Saviour from sin and death; · Trust in Christ alone for salvation. Christianity is simple but not simplistic and the thief helps us to see this on the very primary issue of the Gospel. [1] Criminal or insurrectionist. Romans reserved crucifixion for the worst of crimes. If salvation is only found in Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12), what about all of those people who lived before Him? That is a good question.
In Mk 12:26 Jesus spoke about the subject of a future Resurrection. He referred to the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whom the LORD said to Moses that He was the God of. Jesus said, “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” (v. 27). The patriarchs, who lived long before Christ, are alive in Him. How is this possible? Faith in the Lord and His promises and covenants, which since the Fall (Gen 3:15) have always pointed to Jesus, is how those of long ago could be saved long before Christ came. All of the OT was pointing to Jesus (Lk 24:44b). By virtue of these forward looking promises the people of old who trusted them were saved (That is what Ro 3:25b is speaking of). Specifically, to reverse the curse of the Fall God chose (when He didn’t need to choose any) to do so through one man’s family, Abram (Gen 12). God would bring about a blessing to the nations through Abram’s offspring, Jesus (Mt 1). From this time, specifically, God’s Covenant promises of salvation became caught up with this people, the Jews, until Christ came when it was opened more fully to the Gentiles. This didn’t mean all Jews were saved, only those who had faith in the promises (Gal 3:7). This also didn’t mean that non-Jews, or Gentiles, couldn’t be saved either. The OT has a number of examples of Gentiles who came to fear God and join this Covenant community. People like Rahab and Ruth and the Queen of Sheba. God has been saving a people unto Himself ever since the Fall. Just as salvation is exclusive to those who trust in Christ since the coming of Christ, the same was true before Christ came, but it was by faith in the promises of Christ that they too were saved. A question that is often asked of Christianity is this:
“What about all those who never hear about Jesus; is God just to sentence them to hell?” The question is usually asked because someone wonders as to the ethic of such an exclusive claim of salvation. So let’s begin with an example of an exclusive claim to salvation, Acts 4:12, “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” The objection then often arises, but what about someone in a secular community or a remote island nation who has never heard of Jesus, doesn’t have missionaries or a church or a Bible to instruct them in the way of salvation, is that person eternally damned to hell? Yes, they are “without excuse.” Why? To understand this one must realize what the Bible says about humans, we’re fallen, sinful beings, cut off from God and incapable of any spiritual good that might please Him and therefore earn our salvation (read more here). This is why God graciously sent Jesus, to be the rescuer of all those who’d hear the Gospel message and put their trust in Him. This is the basis for an exclusive salvation. We’re sinners, God appointed a means for salvation, we must believe in Jesus in order to be saved. But is that fair? (Another option would have been for God not to have saved anyone, we see His grace in that He choose to save some; something to think about). Yes, because people are “without excuse.” Why are people without excuse? If I were born on a stranded desert island with no knowledge of Jesus I would be without excuse for not believing in Him for three simple reasons from Romans 1:
For these sorts of reasons Paul says that unbelievers, everywhere, are “without excuse” (Ro 1:20b); even if they’ve never heard of Jesus. Knowing of Jesus and rejecting Him only increases our culpability; not knowing of Jesus doesn’t diminish it. There has been a lot of praise of late, and rightly so, for our amazing health care professionals. Most of them have fearlessly embraced their calling to serve their communities, even at risk to their own health and that of their families. They deserve our praise.
However, even in the midst of thanks where thanks are due, there is something, which at best is misguided and worst, is disturbing. That is how our naturalistic, death fearing society, treats health workers as saviours. If this life is all there is to existence and death is the great enemy, then of course they would view doctors and nurses and paramedics in this light. They alone, in their eyes, are the only ones who can deliver us from Covid-19. And so we see signs that say, “honk, heroes work here,” or in some communities like the UK there are pot banging parties each night at 8 p.m. in praise and support of these heroes. Now again, such praise is not inherently wrong, but it is wrong if we praise them as saviours. 100 years ago, there would have been signs and calls for national days of prayer during a pandemic. In an increasingly godless culture, turning to the One who is Sovereign over disease and death has been replaced by faith in medical saviours. Where are such calls to prayer, certainly not on the lips of most citizens or politicians (and even many Christians). I am aware that some organized one such prayer day in Canada. Christian politicians, church and business leaders in Germany recently organized perhaps one of the more cohesive events, but on the whole, a seeking of God (and a proper worldview which understands disease and death as rooted in the Fall and resolved in the Gospel), is absent in our society. It is that, the salvific heartbeat behind the praise of our wonderful medical professionals that makes this all so disturbing. Speaking to godless Israel, the prophet Amos said, “Seek me and live, but do not seek Bethel…” (Amos 5:4b–5a). Bethel, among other locations the prophet goes on to list, were among the high places, the centres of false worship, false security, false hope, false assurance. These all, “come to nothing.” And so it is with worshipping the medical system and professionals, as grateful as we ought to be for them, to place our ultimate trust in them over against the Lord is idolatrous and idolatry brings us to nothing. Ultimately spiritual (and physical[1]) life is to be found in the Lord alone. So may we seek the Lord that “we may live, and so the LORD,… will be with you.” [1] Whether by healing or through the Resurrection. When our toddler son articulated the reality that we had purchased a new home but were still temporarily living in our old one as we undertook renovations he described it as the “new, new house.” Affectionately, this is the way we’ve come to describe our new home. As many who have helped us will testify, it has been a fixer-upper. The saving grace is that the roof and foundation were in good repair, much in between that high and low has required substantial initial repairs and improvements. The walls and basement needed insulation. The floors took two men 5 days to sand back to their original state, thanks to a build-up of stain, floor wax and linoleum glue. The walls needed patching, puttying and in some cases dry walling (and not to mention the sanding). There was some framing to do, some plumbing, and new light fixtures. Then there were the coats and coats of paint and the many other little jobs (and the gardens to come!). The “new, new house” didn’t involve a simple lick of paint, rather it was a true transformation (see pictures below). There is a spiritual analogy here. Christianity is not just about covering up the old walls with a fresh coat of paint, we’re in a far needier place than this. To assume we simply need some touch ups is to fail to appreciate how absolutely corrupt and depraved we are as humans and the dire spiritual state we are in before a holy God. Such a faulty presumption would be works righteousness: legalism, that we can achieve a right standing before God; liberalism, that we are good enough to please Him through our charitable deeds; or even Christianity-lite, that we simply need His grace a little bit.
Paul says in Ro 7:24, “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?” We are all, naturally, like a wretch, abandoned, derelict, fixer-upper. We are fit for no good spiritual purpose and we deserve to be torn down or have the match set to us. What hope is there? None in works, but only in the grace and transforming power of God available through faith in the Gospel and by His Spirit. Later in Romans Paul speaks of the total transformation the Gospel can bring to our lives, one which is rooted in God’s work to transformationally save and not our ability to provide a meagre face-lift. Ro 12:2 speaks of being “transformed by the renewal of our minds.” The word transformed is the same as what happens to a caterpillar when it turns into something entirely new, metamorphosis. In salvation, God completely renovations our worm-like life and transforms it into something beautiful and to His glory. It’s as if He puts His “work done by” sign in front of our house so all will stand amazed at His craftsmanship. He buys our property. He fixes everything from top to bottom. The finished result blows the top out of the wow factor, a stunning new home. Would you recognize the desperate straits the home of your life is in? Would you repent of that and ask Jesus to renovate your life and make you new by His Spirit? In faith, be prepared to be amazed! |
