# Are Babies Incapable of the Sin of Pride?



## InSlaveryToChrist (Jul 25, 2011)

I was reading through Matthew chapter 18 this morning, and I checked D.A Carson's comments on verse 4 where he says,

"The child is held up as an ideal, *not of innocence, purity, or faith, but of humility and unconcern for social status*. Jesus advocates humility of mind (v.4), not childishness of thought (cf. 10:16). With such humility comes childlike trust (cf. TDNT; 8:16-17)."

Is not Carson basically saying that babies are _incapable_ of _certain_ sins (against which I have no objections)? It is clear we can abuse anything God has given to us. But undeveloped human beings (i.e., babies) obviously don't possess all the abilities that fully developed human beings do. Is it not possible, then, that the "humility and unconcern for social status" is due to babies' lack of the ability to think what other people think about them? Babies are selfish (on this we all can agree), but are they ever so to the end of _boasting_? Parents, do me a favour and tell me if you've ever caught your 0-3 years old baby _boasting _with his/her toy.

Thanks.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 25, 2011)

I don't think anything at all is said of the baby's own _cognitive recognition_ of its humility or social-status.

The fact is that from the standpoint of any rational observer, these are undeniable facts. None is as helpless, hapless, and dependent on the grace and kindness of others as the baby--and this is universally true; there aren't some babies who can fend for themselves, and others who can't.

Nor does the the baby have enough self-awareness to be concerned for its "place" or standing in the bigger scheme. It is barely self-aware. It is the center of its own universe, however, that is a universe not populated with any other comparable entity, so far as it knows.

I think you are reading too much into Carson's point. Particular sins are an exhibition of the sin nature. A baby is incapable of theft, of murder, of blasphemy--indeed of many particular sins. The child's problem isn't this sin or that, but sin. However, in the context of Mt.18, the focus isn't on the child's sin-nature (or its denial, which the essence of the mistake of thinking of the baby as (more) "innocent or pure"). Rather, it is on the sheer "nothingness" of a child (without regard for its "potential" for good or bad).

The child is an illustration that is presented to correct the disciples' (and others') elevated self-conceit.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Jul 25, 2011)

Thank you, Rev. Bruce. Your comments are helpful as always.


----------



## Reformed Roman (Jul 25, 2011)

Yeah he is just really saying children tend to be dependent, and I guess it depends on the parents, but children don't go their own way like their parents do. They humbly submit to the parents. They follow their leadership, always clinging to mommy and daddy because they aren't old enough to know what to do in many situations. They always have to go asking mommy and daddy "what is this" "what is that". In the same way of a child's reliance upon their mother and father we should rely on our Heavenly Father.


----------

