How to save your children from hell

[Joods]

Probably not.

[Losty]

---

Greetings fellow species members, I was tinkering around with some thoughts in my head and followed a certain line of reasoning that, wouldn't ya know it, lead to the first original argument I had since becoming atheist (gotta start somewhere right? ). I don't know if it's original in the sense that I'm the first person to come up with it (I'd be astounded if I was, and a little worried too) but it was original to me in the sense that I didn't just see this point posted on a forum or in a book somewhere.
So I wanted to put it out there to the community and see how it would hold up under scrutiny. If at all possible I'd like at least one christian to respond to this. So with that out there, here's my thought:

All the time I hear of "God's plan" and how he puts hardships onto people for the good of their spiritual growth. This ranges from losing your car keys on the day of an interview to getting shot and becoming a paraplegic. Even death comes into the equation. If someone dies inexplicably, a christian can say that they're in heaven now and God sacrificed them for the good of the people still alive it would affect (one can argue about how God contradicts "free will" here but I want to bypass this and talk about a different point). This might help with the seemingly pointless deaths of adults but what about the little ones?

Every year around the globe, children and infants die due to disease, famine, war and some unpreventable causes. The U.S saw 24,000 infants die in 2011 alone, and we're a relatively safe place to live on the inside. What spiritual growth does this instill?

Let me answer this myself since I can already hear it. "The parents will be strengthened through their hardship knowing that when they die, their children will be waiting on the other side in heaven." And indeed I see this point frequently with parents who have lost a young child or miscarried. "My child was too young to comprehend the world and accept Jesus before he died but I received a vision from God telling me that my child is with him. Isn't God merciful?" The stance here being that the child couldn't make a decision due to the lack of proper mental faculties so God being a merciful and loving god gave them a free pass into heaven. So everything is roses and snickerdoodles, great.

If that's the case then what I want to propose is this: Should we kill our babies before they have a chance to understand having a choice? I mean think about it. They won't have to toil, they won't have to experience pain, they won't have to go through that awkward teenage puberty phase and they won't have the chance to doubt God and get themselves thrown in hell for all eternity. It might end up getting yourself thrown into hell in the end but wouldn't you do anything to guarantee the eternal bliss of your children? Heck, you might even get out of the whole hell bit if you truly repent and ask for forgiveness, win-win.
What say you? Why shouldn't we just kill our babies outright?

---

Don't mind Dyresand, his sarcasm meter is lying broken in a pile of junk along with his grammarometer and his spell checker. :p

Anyways, I like your idea a lot, but I would propose that simply not having children at all would mean they get to spend eternity only existing in the mind of god. It's easier for everyone that way.

---

calling the holy spirit a fuckbanana

[Joods]

Oh for christs sake. Yep I did it. Mixed up one post with another. Why? Because I'm on my stupid phone and didn't realize what thread I was posting in. I'll delete the other post when I get home. Grrr.

Oh well. At least I made a good rant. Lol

[urlawyer]

If they exist in the mind of god, do you think they could band together and control him from the inside?

[Joods]

I need to make a correction. Below was my response to what I thought I was responding to in breakman's thread here. Apparently lack of sleep coupled with frustration at circular posts causing me to make a point (still relevant in its own way) about getting off topic and whatnot. While the bulk of my post below was on point, the section regarding breakman's situation with his daughter really belongs on that thread and not this one. I have just gotten home and realized that I am unable to edit my post, so that is the reason for this one.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out my error in case anyone got confused with the post.

Carry on.

He IS crazy, he believes in what he says. Either that or he's got an agenda with just about every thread he posts in: To start out on topic, but eventually get things shaken up and so distorted that a thread dies simply because it is no longer feasible to debate with him anymore and it's been dragged so far off topic, with several pages of complete and utter nonsense that it's impossible to get it back on track.
And apparently he's accomplished this goal because you see where we are at now vs. discussing the OP. Instead of discussing the merits of the post and the frustration that breakman is having with another family crossing a boundary, we are now discussing how twisted drippy is and how he's not even staying on point anymore.

The main focus should have been on other parents crossing a line and forcing their beliefs on someone else's child and how this creates a problem. It's no longer about that and we call ALL see why. There is, to the best of my knowledge, NOTHING in the bible that even remotely states that one family has a right to inject their personal religious beliefs onto another family's child. In addition, this other family had no right to "sign" a non-relative, minor child's name to anything - bible or not, without the express consent of the parent's of said child.

[robvalue]

Well I'm off to hell for the night, I'll clear all your tabs while I'm down there so you're sorted.

Goodnight my lovely heathen friends!

[Joods]

Good night Rob. It's going to be awfully quiet around here until tomorrow

[Pyrrho]

I think the most Biblical response to the question is to say that infants go to hell, not heaven. Just look at the requirements that the Bible says are necessary to get into heaven, and one can easily see that infants do not satisfy those requirements. None of them believe in Jesus at all, as they are too young to have any understanding about such things.

For example, consider John 3:


15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.


Infants do not believe, therefore they go to hell. That is what the Bible says. Sissy Christians don't like it, so they pull ideas out of their asses and pretend they are following the Bible.

So, that is why a good Christian should not kill his or her children as infants, because it would condemn them to eternity in hellfire.


And there are Christians who take such a view:

http://nycpastor.com/2015/01/04/where-do...babies-go/

[TubbyTubby]

I've read discussions on christian forums where they argue about the cut off age for children to go to heaven (anything between 5 and 16 I recall).

How any sane adult can think that is somehow a topic that should be voiced publicly is beyond me.

[Pyrrho]

I've read discussions on christian forums where they argue about the cut off age for children to go to heaven (anything between 5 and 16 I recall).

How any sane adult can think that is somehow a topic that should be voiced publicly is beyond me.

People who call themselves "Christians" often make up a bunch of BS nonsense that has no basis in the Bible. There is nothing in the Bible to support that idea. But, of course, you are right that there are "Christians" who believe what you say they believe.