I know this may be a stretch but pertaining to your questions about heaven, and recognition of loved ones, what about the babies that have been aborted or miscarriages and the fertilized embryos that have been destroyed? Will we have more babies in heaven? Will there be sex in heaven?
It’s not a stretch. It’s a legitimate question. However, there is no plain address in Scripture to turn to.
First, I address the question of “what about babies who die, do they go to heaven?” and the so-called “age of accountability” (https://www.seriousfaith.com/asr/question.asp?questionid=1835) in another question so we’re going to assume for this question that we are talking about babies that DO end up in heaven for whatever reason God chooses for them to be there. If you want to study whether babies who die go to heaven, reference the link above.
So the unanswered question remains, WHAT FORM will babies take in heaven? From newly conceived fetuses to fully formed and birthed human, who most certainly have had the “breath of life” infused into them by God, what will their eternal form be?
Well, it’s entirely speculation, and I most certainly could be completely wrong, but it doesn’t seem to be that hard to “guess”. We will live for all eternity in heaven, so obviously they will not live as fetuses, or 1 month olds or toddlers because I think its pretty clear they wouldn’t enjoy the fulness of a complete relationship with God and the adults who dwell there.
So it leaves us with two alternatives:
- Their glorified bodies begin as babies (but what about barely developed fetuses?) and they grow up into adults then remain that way forever.
- They are immediately in the form and “age” of a fully formed adult in perfect health and stature, and receive their new glorified body in adult form to remain that way for all eternity.
What age is the “perfect adult age”? That’s irrelevant, we are still thinking in finite human terms. We don’t pick 20, or 28 or 35 as the “perfect age”. We will have the perfect adult body with no signs of aging or imperfection. We will be the “perfect us”, how we would be now if it weren’t for the sin curse.
Because there is no mention of children or growing up or adolescence in heaven in the Bible, and for logical reasons, I believe the babies who die at whatever stage of development or age, will simply be transformed into the perfect “adult” they would have become if allowed to live, and without the sin curse.
However, I’m left with an even more intriguing question when I think about this. We know that Adam and Eve, BEFORE THE CURSE OF SIN WAS IMPOSED, was commanded to multiply and fill the earth with their offspring (Gen 1:28).
We know there is no marriage in heaven but Adam and Eve weren’t married in the civil union sense we think about it. They were created for each other and told to “fill the earth”. In a sinless world, their offspring would choose and mate and do their own “filling” since obviously ONE couple could not “fill the earth” by themselves.
Without sin, there would be a perfect understanding of faithfulness and fidelity, hence, no need for a “contract of marriage”. If sin would have never entered, the earth would have filled with perfect people, choosing a mate as modeled by the First Couple and divinely written on their hearts by God.
So, it is understandable that there will be no MARRIAGE in heaven because a civil union and contract of faithfulness and fidelity is not necessary in a sinless environment. However, we assume that a lack of marriage means a lack of procreation.
Adam and Eve were commanded from day one to procreate, before sin. So will we continue to fill the earth with new, sinless births? Two arguments:
- NO, because there will already be the entire population of a fixed number of saved Christians and the Bible does not speak of anymore humans being added… and the natural assumption of “no marriage” means no procreation.
- YES, because Adam and Eve were commanded to procreate in the Garden before the sin curse, and there is no explicit Biblical statement that clearly says procreation will end once and for all. It’s an assumption from the “no marriage” verse, while not considering the original command to Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and multiply”.
I have read and read and read everything I can find about the question of “sex in heaven” and the only answer I can ever find is based on the assumption that there is no sex or procreation because there is no marriage.
I believe there may be no procreation for one set of reasons, but the Bible simply doesn’t say. The possibility remains open because Adam and Eve were commanded to procreate before the introduction of sin. We may well indeed have an eternal “mate” and “help mate” exactly as modeled by Adam and Eve, and if true, logically that would be your mate from this life if you have one.
I believe there may be no sexual love in heaven for an entirely different set of reasons, however, again, obviously Adam and Eve enjoyed that before the introduction sin. There is no clear directive or information in Scripture stating simply “yes” or “no” about sexual love in heaven. If you know of a Scripture that I am obviously unaware of, please let me know. (We’ve already discussed marriage, so don’t send that argument, please).
To summarize, and these are just my opinions and speculation on subjects the Bible does not cleary speak about, I think babies that die will be transformed into fully mature adults once in the presence of God.
There will not be marriage in heaven, that is a fact, but we cannot rule out the possibilty of procreation and sexual love, thus new babies, for two reasons: 1) the Bible doesn’t say one way or another, and 2) given the presence of sexual love and procreation BEFORE sin (Adam and Eve in the garden) there is reasonable curiosity that the same will continue in the New Eden (recreated heavens and earth) where marriage is not necessary because a contract for faithfulness and fidelity is not necessary.
I know this flies in the face of our typical assumptions on this issue and I welcome correction Scripturally if someone can show me something I have simply overlooked. Otherwise…. hmmm…..