While I have a few problems with some views of the Reformed, it cannot be denied that they adhere to a closer doctrinal position of God's Sovereignty in regards to salvation then a great many groups do.
What? The idea that God decided who was saved and who was to be thrown into hell before He even formed the world? The to support that idea you have to invent Total Depravity to keep the hell-bound from making a positive decision to follow the gospel and Irresistable Grace to make sure the "elect" DO decide to follow the gospel.
Its soverign alright - in a mechanistic despotic kind of way.
Let's not derail the thread, but in short...that is a caricature view of what many Reformed teachers present. In a recent Reformed conference, which held some teachers that I believe are some of the best (you might be surprised should you hear them, lol) teachers available to the Church today, the question concerning babies going to Hell came up in the Q & A. I was a little surprised that none of them would confirm that they thought babies go to Hell.
As I said, I am not a Reformed Christian, I am a Transformed Sinner, lol. I take issue with both Calvinist and Arminian theology and see their fatal flaw, as I see among some of you here, is that there is a notable lapse in understanding and incorporating the Ministry of the Holy Spirit into the equation of regeneration.
To give a brief outline of my view concerning the Grace of God towards man, and how one who is natural can come to believe, repent, and turn in faith to Christ Jesus, I see the Ministry of the Comforter as the Key to unlocking that debate. Keeping in mind that the New Covenant held promise of God's indwelling and the remission of sins (never to be remembered again, because they would be forgiven in completion), and that the Covenant of Law was only given as a "parable" of sorts of the True that would come (i.e., the "rest" of Canaan which was temporal and did not guarantee eternal relationship with God and the true Rest found in Christ which is itself that very eternal relationship, guaranteed by the indwelling of God Himself).
In considering whether or not babies go to Hell, we simply have to look at the Old Testament principle of Grace, and the principle taught in Scripture that God judges according to man's understanding of the revelation provided him, and we understand that babies have no understanding at all.
Now some may protest, "But wait a minute, all men have a sin nature," or, the sin of all men must be dealt with in order for them to be able to dwell with God."
That is true, but if we look at the simple pattern of grace seen in the Old Testament, we see that not one person before Pentecost had an understanding...of Christ. What that means is that while men might have had faith in the First Principles of the Doctrine of Christ (and we see in Christ's Day that even the Disciples misconstrued that and looked for a temporal salvation), not one of them placed their faith in the Risen Lord. Why not?
Because that revelation was not provided to Man until after the Lord died, rose again, ascended into Heaven...and sent the Comforter to convict men of that knowledge.
So why didn't a murderer and adulterer like King David not go to Hell? Surely he could be found far more guilty than a babe that dies of some malady, or his/her life cut short through life's circumstances...right?
It is by the Grace of God that David did not go to Hell. God made provision for Man before the Revelation of the Knowledge of the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ...
...why would that change?
There are three specific means of revelation shown to us in Scripture: the internal witness of God, the witness of God in Creation, and direct Revelation, such as we have through God's direct intervention in appearing to Man and through His Word. Babies cannot be expected to understand any of those. So it seems reasonable that the same provision made for man before the Gospel was given to man is still available to man today.