“No system of theological thought can live in which it [the doctrine of infant salvation] cannot find a natural and logical place.” --B.B. Warfield, "Two studies in the history of doctrine: Augustine and the Pelagian controversy: the development of the doctrine of infant salvation" 1897, The Christian Literature Company (online text here)
« Southern Baptist theologian and statesman E.Y. Mullins--'denominations generally--except Baptists--much perplexed over salvation of infants dying in infancy until recent years' | Main | Saint Augustine--'first to teach infant damnation' »
2013.08.31
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
Free Church Resources
- The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
- The Center for Baptist Studies
- Southwestern Journal of Theology
- Mennonite Research Journal
- Mennonite Quarterly Review
- Baptist Studies Online
- Baptist History Homepage
- Baptist History & Heritage Society
- Baptist Center for Theology & Ministry
- Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies
You must understand that this statement implies an absolute denial of the modern Calvinistic well meant offer. Theologically all are regenerated in the same way as implied by Warfield's statement!
Posted by: Charles Page | 2013.09.01 at 09:51 AM
To be a true-blue Calvinist, the only logical conclusion a Calvinist can reach is that some infants who die go to hell. Such a "natural and logical" journey is a road cluttered with blind corners, endless alleys and dead ends leading to a misunderstanding of God as revealed in Christ. Why would a new generation of church folks desire to take this fork in the SBC road? What love is this?!
Posted by: Max | 2013.09.01 at 02:46 PM
On a general note Peter, thanks for all eclectic mix of info coming through at the moment. It all helps to paint a general picture and put Calvinism into perspective. :-)
Posted by: Andrew Barker | 2013.09.01 at 04:54 PM
I'm not here to defend Calvinism. Yet I believe that Lumpkins is using this issue to "rip" Calvinists.
It would be interesting to have interviewed John Calvin himself after his only child died before he was ten years old.
Posted by: Jerry Chase | 2013.09.02 at 08:39 PM
Jerry,
Forget about reasoning with Peter. He has narcissistic personality disorder=fancy word for acting like an ass=sin.
Posted by: Ben | 2013.09.11 at 10:41 PM
Peter has obviously left a stinger hanging in both Ben and Jerry. More power to him. A lot of neo-calvinistic influence in the SBC needs theological "ripping" from absolute stem to stern.
Ben, judging by the amount of digital ink you spill on a daily basis I would say that Peter (and others of us) don't have a corner on the narcissism market.
You guys fancy yourselves as academically inclined? Why don't you address the substance of the debates rather than hurl insults over your inability to do so?
This ain't the ice cream shop.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2013.09.12 at 09:41 AM