Ryan Schatz

How do we know from Jesus’ statement about Judas that He is not simply inferring less judgment? In other words, if Judas had died as a baby before he committed the sins that he did, he would have been under less severe judgment. Would this not have been much better for him? Further, would it be possible that Jesus is saying here that it would have been better that Judas had never existed, not that he died before or at birth? If so, then this passage doesn’t prove that babies go to heaven. Or at least the uncertainty wouldn’t help us conclude one way or the other. Further, we might only be able to conclude from the passage in Jeremiah that those ‘innocents’ were innocent of the sins of their fathers. Is this a strong enough statement to conclude on its own that babies are innocent of all sin? While my view is that babies and those mentally unable to understand sin and the gospel are covered by the blood of Jesus, I’m not sure the above verses make a rock solid case for it. On the other hand, the examples from King David’s reactions to the deaths of Absolom and the first born to Bathsheba portray to us what his beliefs were and make a stronger case for the salvation of babies.