dead babies go to heaven without baptism?

[Tania]

im waiting for you to give me a better explanation of what you meant lool naa seriously bro, what did u mean by that

May be its pointing out to move to other religion :?

 

[ddz]

May be its pointing out to move to other religion :?

Hmm.. I shall wait for the brother to answer and we'll see God Bless

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well first of all, I admitted that my chain was a slippery slope, I merely presented it since it represents my personal interpretation not because I hold it to be a self evident.

About Limbo, I thought it was one of the 7 layers of hell? I think you might have it confused with purgatory?

About original sin, the original sin I was thought in catholic schools was not merely that humans are born with a tendency to sin, but also that humans are born with an inherited guilt from Adam and Eve. In other words, we are partly responsible for their sins. I remember one teacher I had even went that far that he interpreted Genesis in such a way that a woman's period is a punishment for Eve's sin. Because according to him; since her sin, mankind became mortal; due to their mortality they need to create offspring; and finally due to their need for offspring woman have periods. As the chain continues, accepting the savior would not only erase your own sins, but also the inherited guilt you have when being born. Therefor a child who has not yet had the opportunity to sin, but also not had the opportunity to accept Jesus (peace be upon him) as savior still has to account for his inherited guilt and thus has to burn. So not accepting Limbo means not accepting the inherited guilt (a.k.a. original sin). As for the other interpretation of original sin (mankind is born with an inclination toward sin); I'd argue that this isn't enough to require a savior. Even with an inclination people still have a choice, so even though a savior would still be easy, one couldn't argue that it's a necessity. With the more dogmatic view of original sin though, where people are born guilty, there the concept of a savior really is the only way out of a guilt that you haven't had any choice in in the first place.
Btw, just so we're clear, I do realize most Christians don't believe this, I'm just saying this is how it was thought on catholic school, and if I'm not mistaken this is also how the Vatican presents it.

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

Declaring a person that believes that he is Muslim as non-Muslim is a very serious matter. There is actually a school of thought behind it. First of all, only scholars which fit certain criteria have the authority to make such claims. Secondly, there are only a few cases that give them ground to judge a person as non-muslim. For example a Muslim who drinks, is still a Muslim. A Muslim who sinned, but nevertheless still a Muslim. A Muslim who starts worshiping a false deity on the other hand, can by all logic no longer be called "Muslim".

Just to make things clear, I am not making takfeer of anyone. Not everyone who commits kufr is a kaafir, in the same way that not everyone who commits shirk is a mushrik. But the general principle is, denying/disbelievng in a part of Islaam is kufr.

There are different types of kufr, and one of them is the kufr of ta'teel (the kufr of denial), as referred to in the following verse:

"And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allaah, or rejects the truth when it comes to him? Is there not an abode in Hell for those who disbelieve (kaafireen)?" [29:68]

But ofcourse, there are conditions to be met - such as, the actual rejection of which itself constitutes kufr, and there is no confusion in the mind of the ignorant person or who is misinterpretting the sharee'ah. And as you stated, in such cases takfeer is performed by one who is able to do so, i.e. a person of knowledge.

Ibn Taymiyyah states: "Whoever's Islaam was affirmed with certainty, than it cannot be removed from him with doubt. Rather, his Islaam will never cease until after the proof has been established against him and any doubt [concerning his case] has been removed." - Majmoo' al-Fataawa (12/467)

Here is a nice article on the principles of takfeer.

 

[ddz]

I do realize most Christians don't believe this,

Yh, most dont

I'm just saying this is how it was thought on catholic school,

I've been to a catholic school, though the teacher never told me of such things and there were many teachers, I have come accross what you said by a student who told me, but I thought it was just his opinion at the very most

and if I'm not mistaken this is also how the Vatican presents it.

Have you got any source as to the Vatican presenting it like this? because Im not sure on that entirley

 

[Ahmed.]

I think there may be a difference of opinion on this issue from an Islamic point of view; one is that babies go straight to heaven and the other is that, Allah knows best [meaning that it may not be the case that babies and children go to heaven].

Here is an article on this issue:

‘A’isha, the mother of the believers, said that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) was called to lead the funeral prayer of a child of the Ansar. I said: Allah's Messenger, there is happiness for this child who is a bird from the birds of Paradise for it committed no sin nor has he reached the age when one can commit sin. He said: ‘A’isha, per adventure, it may be otherwise, because God created for Paradise those who are fit for it while they were yet in their father's loins and created for Hell those who are to go to Hell. He created them for Hell while they were yet in their father’s loins. (Sahih Muslim, Book 033, Number 6436)


Narrated ‘Imran:

I said, “O Allah's Apostle! Why should a doer (people) try to do good deeds?” The Prophet said, “Everybody will find easy to do such deeds as will lead him TO HIS DESTINED PLACE FOR WHICH HE HAS BEEN CREATED.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 641)

...........

There exists difference of opinion concerning the fate of the children [who die as children] of the kuffar [disbelievers], some say they are in Jannah [paradise] and others say they are in Jahannum [Hell], while others hold other views. The preffered view is that we hold back from giving an opinion and rather say that Allah knows best. [Fatwa by Mufti Ibraheem Desai, ask-imam.com, # 11190]

Peace.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Have you got any source as to the Vatican presenting it like this? because Im not sure on that entirley

I wouldn't even know where to look for such sources. I'm just saying this is how we were thought, and we were were also thought that that specific way is the way the Vatican presents. So the best source I can offer is my teacher.

 

[Tania]

I wouldn't even know where to look for such sources. I'm just saying this is how we were thought, and we were were also thought that that specific way is the way the Vatican presents. So the best source I can offer is my teacher.

www.vatican.va there you can look after references

 

[Abdul Fattah]

www.vatican.va there you can look after references

Thx for your link, very interesting. I found this to back me up.

The inherited guilt by original sin:

How to read the account of the fall:

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.
source​

The link between original sin and the savior concept:

Original sin - an essential truth of the faith.

388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. the Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.

389 The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the "reverse side" of the Good News that Jesus is the Saviour of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. the Church, which has the mind of Christ,263 knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.
source​

Why infants need batism:

The consequences of Adam's sin for humanity

402 All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as St. Paul affirms: "By one man's disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners": "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."290

403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam's sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the "death of the soul".291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292
source​

I haven't found any good references for Limbo though. But I have found that apparently some view Limbo as a synonym for purgatory rather then a different place altogether.
(btw, the number in the text are indexes with references at the bottom of the page. Most of them to biblical verses, I won't copy them all, you can navigate to the source I posted and use the browser search function for those interested)

 

[barney]

Why are we talking about Limbo?
Limbo dosnt exist, the Vatican cancelled it in 2007.

Limbo was invented by the Infallible Popes centuries ago on the revalation of God. It was scrapped by the infallible Pope on the revalation of God.
Since the Pope's involved were both infallible, Limbo never happned and was never a teaching. If it was, then that would mean catholicism was wrong.

Simply delete any references to limbo from any book you read please and have the website mentioning it closed. Within 70 years nobody will remember it and , like the libary of Alex, there will be no records to disprove it, except in the vatican vaults.

Your cooperation is appreciated, (since burning heretics was banned).

 

[truemuslim]

Babies aint gotta choice. ther parents non muslims, they considered nonmuslims, but they cant really think or choose yet now can they... besides they prolly sittin ther while they parents saying "oh jesus" and the baby thinkin "oh allah, why my parents like dis. im smarter den dem" lol
anyway
WaSalaam

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Babies don't know sin. they are pure as ever Mashallah.

On a side note...

It beats me how a religion can be true if your adding and subtracting from it so much. If it was the truth...you wouldn't need to change a single bit of it. Thank Allah for Islam....

 

[barney]

Babies don't know sin. they are pure as ever Mashallah.

On a side note...

It beats me how a religion can be true if your adding and subtracting from it so much. If it was the truth...you wouldn't need to change a single bit of it. Thank Allah for Islam....

Ever hear of Abrogation?

 

[Tania]

It beats me how a religion can be true if your adding and subtracting from it so much. If it was the truth...you wouldn't need to change a single bit of it. Thank Allah for Islam....

The babies will be judge by God. Catholic church its a true religion and Limbo is still there:

Limbo, 1261. See also Baptism; Funerals
Source

 

[Tania]

The catholic church position over the issue:

"It is clear that the traditional teaching on this topic has concentrated on the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis. However, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), the theory of limbo is not mentioned. Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism (cf. CCC, 1261), and therefore also to the theological desire to find a coherent and logical connection between the diverse affirmations of the Catholic faith: the universal salvific will of God; the unicity of the mediation of Christ; the necessity of baptism for salvation; the universal action of grace in relation to the sacraments; the link between original sin and the deprivation of the beatific vision; the creation of man “in Christ”. "

Source

 

[north_malaysian]

But dead people can be baptised too right?:?

 

[Tania]

But dead people can be baptised too right?:?

Do you ask if we can baptise a dead people :?

 

[Abdul Fattah]

hi tanya, I find that a bit of a troublesome explanation.
Troublesome because it's like the Church is hiding between ambiguity. It doesn't say that babies go to hell because of original sin, but it also doesn't deny it. Basically what they say is: we hope that God will make an exception for them. So, will there or will there not be babies in limbo? Do babies have original sin or not? And if they do, is this double standard justifiable?
It's ok for to be forgiven for there inherited sin which they had no choice in but not ok for adults to be forgiven for there inherited sin which they had no choice in if they don't accept Jesus as savior?

I guess what this shows is not so much that there is a double standard, but more that the whole idea of being guilty bu birth is illogical. Guilt implies wrong choices. A baby didn't make any choices, so people cannot be held responsible for their parent's sins.

Anyway, Tania, I have another question, please don't take this as sarcasm, it's meant as a genuine question. Do you also believe that women's period is a punishment for Eva's sin?

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

The babies will be judge by God. Catholic church its a true religion and Limbo is still there:

Limbo, 1261. See also Baptism; Funerals
Source

Ehhh....lol

 

[truemuslim]

Lol
some people try to make allah look lyk he gots no mercy that in the hell he created ther is tiny lil babies in ther.... i juss got one thing....

Wasalaam