Why dont Christians kill their childrens immediately after they baptize them?

[cambridge79]

Most people would recoil at the very thought. But then, Christians believe that the dead child will go to heaven, right? So you are basically guaranteeing their salvation by murdering them. Even if you lose your soul in the process, isn't that an act of love? If Christianity is true, of course. If it isn't true, then you would just be a deluded murderer. But still, isn't it better to take Pascal's wager and kill the child?

Finally a good father thinking at what's good for the child and not what's good for himself.

 

[4consideration]

That would be murder for you, but for them is heaven. If you have like 30 childrens and you baptize them and than you kill them all, wouldn't be your soul in hell a fair price to pay, being 100% sure that all of them will have a guaranteed eternity in heaven? Its 30 vs 1.

Well, I don't believe the things you seem to be assuming about Christians, so I don't have to defend against the things you say here.

I find it interesting that would assert murder as a reasonable outcome for a belief of Christians, when there are so many denominations and so many, very different beliefs, it seems you would have to have a very narrow view of Christianity, with very limited understanding -- or maybe just be trolling.

If you want to believe baptism is a ticket to heaven, and without it -- whatever else you believe without it -- that's fine. Go ahead. But...don't make assertions or assumptions about me. I think it would be stupid and sick to murder kids after baptism, no matter how reasonable you seem to think it is to suggest a person ought to believe it is the right thing to do. You seem to want to pigeon hole Christians.

 

[cambridge79]

Well, I don't believe the things you seem to be assuming about Christians, so I don't have to defend against the things you say here.

I find it interesting that would assert murder as a reasonable outcome for a belief of Christians, when there are so many denominations and so many, very different beliefs, it seems you would have to have a very narrow view of Christianity, with very limited understanding -- or maybe just be trolling.

If you want to believe baptism is a ticket to heaven, and without it -- whatever else you believe without it -- that's fine. Go ahead. But...don't make assertions or assumptions about me. I think it would be stupid and sick to murder kids after baptism, no matter how reasonable you seem to think it is to suggest a person ought to believe it is the right thing to do. If you want to pigeon-hole all Christians according to the beliefs of the Christians you know, it doesn't convince me Christians are that bad. I'll assume the ones in your life are.

Would you kindly fill my lack of knowledge about the spectrum of Christian denominations providing me, among all of these denominations, at least the names of a couple that would think that the mentioned children would go to hell ( and possibly a very brief theological explanation of why the children should go to hell for something he is not ultimately responsible of? )

 

[Sees]

The universalistic ones and/or those who see life as a gift and not just a game-show would obviously be exempt but it could be a conundrum for some.

Though...I've never heard of baptism alone being security for salvation. Think it is a misunderstanding people have of some denominations.

 

[4consideration]

Would you kindly fill my lack of knowledge about the spectrum of Christian denominations providing me, among all of these denominations, at least the names of a couple that would think that the mentioned children would go to hell ( and possibly a very brief theological explanation of why the children should go to hell for something he is not ultimately responsible of? )

No. Educate yourself.

 

[cambridge79]

No. Educate yourself.

Very kind indeed, very Christian indeed.
Ok, just give me the names of such denominations and I will go looking for their theological explanation myself, otherwise I ll assume you are as ignorant as me on the subject

 

[4consideration]

Ok, just give me the names of such denominations and I will go looking for the theological explanation myself, otherwise I ll assume you are as ignorant as me on the subject

No. Look. You made an assertion as though all Christians link baptism to staying out of hell.

You defend why people ought to murder their children after baptism, if that's what you think.

I said it is murder. I'm not going to justify why people should not commit murder. I think it's obvious.

If you are taking a position that, in order for me to baptize my children, and not murder them, I need to explain it to you why not -- when I don't even believe people will end up in
"hell" whether they baptize, or not -- or even believe in God -- I certainly don't need to defend not murdering my kids. If you are convinced I ought to murder my children because I baptized them, you need to say why you think I should.

I said it is murder. That's reason enough.

If you think you are so wonderfully knowledgeable about Christians, by all means cover all the bases with your explanations. So far, you haven't convinced me anyone should kill their kids to get them into heaven. You haven't even convinced me a person must be baptized to get into heaven. I'm open to hearing it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This life is transitory, true life starts after you die, and if you've been good enough you go to heaven.
Now if you baptize your children in that moment he is sin free, why not kill him right than? That would prevent him to be exposed to all the moral corruption of this world, basically you would deny him the chance to sin and go to hell. You re giving him a first class ticket to heaven. Why not?

I sse where you getting. I'd admit, with no children, it is still pretty extreme. I'd say the actual murder or act of killing of with intent would be against god's laws. So, even though the baby has a free ride, that doesn't mean the parent has a right given by god to excute that right.

So, yeah, once baptized, the baby is set free of death after life. Why have one person out of the two go to heaven when they can both go if they lived by their gods laws without needing to kill the other?

 

[4consideration]

Very kind indeed, very Christian indeed.
Ok, just give me the names of such denominations and I will go looking for their theological explanation myself, otherwise I ll assume you are as ignorant as me on the subject

Don't give me that "very Christian" crap. I can't be yanked around by my desire to be seen as a "good Christian". Try it one someone else. I don't care whether you think I'm Christian, or not. I'm glad to see it's not just Christians that play that BS game.

 

[Glaurung]

This life is transitory, true life starts after you die, and if you've been good enough you go to heaven.
Now if you baptize your children in that moment he is sin free, why not kill him right than? That would prevent him to be exposed to all the moral corruption of this world, basically you would deny him the chance to sin and go to hell. You re giving him a first class ticket to heaven. Why not?

The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it's factitious. It's reductive to the point of absurdity and to pretend that such argumentation makes for a legitimate criticism is disingenuous. Further, you can't take one doctrine and decontextualize it from the wider framework which stresses the dignity of human life in the here and now.

You're playing games with the letter, utterly ignoring the intent.

 

[cambridge79]

No. Look. You made an assertion as though all Christians link baptism to staying out of hell.

You defend why people ought to murder their children after baptism, if that's what you think.

I said it is murder. I'm not going to justify why people should not commit murder. I think it's obvious.

If you are taking a position that, in order for me to baptize my children, and not murder them, I need to explain it to you why not -- when I don't even believe people will end up in
"hell" whether they baptize, or not -- or even believe in God -- I certainly don't need to defend not murdering my kids. If you are convinced I ought to murder my children because I baptized them, you need to say why you think I should.

I said it is murder. That's reason enough.

If you think you are so wonderfully knowledgeable about Christians, by all means cover all the bases with your explanations. So far, you haven't convinced me anyone should kill their kids to get them into heaven. You haven't even convinced me a person must be baptized to get into heaven. I'm open to hearing it.

would a pastor be a good advocate for my claim?
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/may-web-only/do-all-children-go-to-heaven.html

"He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 18:2-4)"

so basically being baptized makes him accept Christ as his saviour and the very fact of being a child makes him sinless, so perfectly elegible for the kingdom of heaven.

 

[cambridge79]

The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it's factitious. It's reductive to the point of absurdity and to pretend that such argumentation makes for a legitimate criticism is disingenuous. Further, you can't take one doctrine and decontextualize it from the wider framework which stresses the dignity of human life in the here and now.

You're playing games with the letter, utterly ignoring the intent.

the problem is the following: in legislation if you write down a law and that law backfires because it produces some outcome you had not predicted, than it means you've written down a bad law.

 

[InChrist]

This life is transitory, true life starts after you die, and if you've been good enough you go to heaven.
Now if you baptize your children in that moment he is sin free, why not kill him right than? That would prevent him to be exposed to all the moral corruption of this world, basically you would deny him the chance to sin and go to hell. You re giving him a first class ticket to heaven. Why not?

First, to kill children is murder.
Second, it is personal faith in Jesus Christ that saves, not baptism.

 

[cambridge79]

First, to kill children is murder.
Second, it is personal faith in Jesus Christ that saves, not baptism.

So where do childrens who have not reached the age to even grasp the very concept of "faith in jesus" go if they die?

 

[InChrist]

so where do childrens who have not reached the age to even grasp the very concept of "faith in jesus" go if they die?

To be with the Lord in heaven.

 

[cambridge79]

To be with the Lord in heaven.

well than why you felt the need for that remark if you agree with me they go to heaven?
i didn't say that baptism alone saves you, otherwise i'll be saved too, i say that baptism+their condition of being innocent childrens saves them.

 

[4consideration]

would a pastor be a good advocate for my claim?
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/may-web-only/do-all-children-go-to-heaven.html

"He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 18:2-4)"

so basically being baptized makes him accept Christ as his saviour and the very fact of being a child makes him sinless, so perfectly elegible for the kingdom of heaven.

No. I don't care what that pastor has to say.

I don't believe anyone is going to hell for eternity. I don't believe that is what Jesus was saying. I don't believe baptism is required, or is a secret pass to get in free -- none of that.

You tell me -- why, given I don't believe that stuff -- you think it's reasonable to murder children after baptism. I don't even believe that Jesus was telling people they had to "accept him" so the whole "as a personal lord and savior" argument doesn't cut it for me. I believe he was teaching a way of being, and an internal path. I don't believe we get sent to some sort of eternal damnation if we don't believe right.

So...please tell me why you think I should murder my children as some sort of act of love -- since I did have them baptized.

 

[cambridge79]

No. I don't care what that pastor has to say.

I don't believe anyone is going to hell for eternity. I don't believe that is what Jesus was saying. I don't believe baptism is required, or is a secret pass to get in free -- none of that.

You tell me -- why, given I don't believe that stuff -- you think it's reasonable to murder children after baptism. I don't even believe that Jesus was telling people they had to "accept him" so the whole "as a personal lord and savior" argument doesn't cut it for me. I believe he was teaching a way of being, and an internal path. I don't believe we get sent to some sort of eternal damnation if we don't believe right.

So...please tell me why you think I should murder my children as some sort of act of love -- since I did have them baptized.

i'm new heres so i hadn't the chance to know you, can i ask you what is your denomination and if this is your personal belief or the belief of the denomination you're in?

also i don't think you should at all, please don't.
I just say that according to those rules, for the childrens point of view, their murder would be the safest outcome possible ( the best would be of course to live an happy life and at the end enter heaven but is not guaranteed at all so is much more risky ) . It's not my fault if that rule produces that conclusion.

 

[Glaurung]

the problem is the following: in legislation if you write down a law and that law backfires because it produces some outcome you had not predicted, than it means you've written down a bad law.

No legal principal can be completely insulated against sophists determined to a contrived, fallacious reductionism. This is why intent is always important to consider.

And the intent of baptismal regeneration is not a free ticket into heaven at the hands of the psychopathic. Again, this kind of argumentation isn't honest and you know that. I've made the same argument myself, the difference however was that my tongue was in my cheek.

 

[InChrist]

well than why you felt the need for that remark if you agree with me they go to heaven?
i didn't say that baptism alone saves you, otherwise i'll be saved too. i say that baptism+their condition of being children saves them.

Okay, well you just made is sound as if parents should just baptize their children and then kill them as if baptism is the deciding factor regarding eternity. Anyway, killing children is murder.