Water Baptism NOT Necessary for Salvation!

[japhy]

Yes, but Christ’s death was the propitiation for the whole world. I personally believe in the age of accountability. I believe God to be just and loving God.

Where is your Scriptural support for the “age of accountability”? Does not David say in Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me? Weren’t there likely to be infants killed in the Flood? By the plague of the death of the first-born in Egypt?

But then, Exodus 30:14 and Numbers 14:29 speak of people 20 years and older being counted (as adults). And Deuteronomy 1:39 reads "Moreover your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall go in there, and to them I will give it, and they shall possess it." So it does seem God is partial to children of some age. Now, if you’re either saved or not saved, does this mean infants are saved, but somewhere during childhood, they lose that status of salvation?

 

[MariaG]

The “age of accountability” is something I personally believe in. I believe God is a just God. Jesus death and resurrection is offered for the sins of the whole world not just ours. This verse below comes to mind…

1Jo 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.

We can certainly hope for God’s mercy, but thankfully in the Catholic Church as well as other Sacramental Protestants, we can have faith in Christ and the teachings of the apostles and know that through the faith of the parents, children and infants under the age of accountability can be saved as well through Christ and the gift of baptism.

It is a new teaching that has come along that infants and children are barred from entering into the New Covenant.

Respectfully,

Maria

 

[joshua_b]

It is a new teaching that has come along that infants and children are barred from entering into the New Covenant.

Respectfully,

Maria

Not only is it a new teaching, but it completely ignores the foreshadowing of baptism in the O.T. that can be found in circumcision.

Historical evidence verifies that baptism in the early Church was regarded exactly the same as it is today in the Catholic and Orthodox Church. Scripture overwhelmingly supports this belief (unless you choose to reject the reality and take the liberty of substituting your own).

People are saved without baptism (Catholics call this “baptism of desire”) but that is a perogative of God, and not up to us to decide. The normative means God gave us to enter into His Kingdom is through water baptism.

If you read your Bible, you will find that God is very legalistic at times. I personally could not fathom turning someone into a pillar of salt for merely turning their head in the wrong direction, or striking down the first born child of any family that did not slaughter a lamb, ritualistically eat it while being clothed a certain way, and smear the blood of that same lamb on the doorpost, but I am not God.

Anyone who wants to practice “Faith alone” “Jesus and Me guided by only the Holy Spirit” Christianity really needs to read more of their Old Testament and get an idea of how God really feels about people who want to do things outside of His prescribed methods.

 

[believers]

Apparently you missed this.

What is your response to Zechariah and Elizabeth being “BLAMELESS”? How does that fit your religious tradition that “all” literally means “all”?

Blameless means sinless?! Not because they were obviously “walking in all the commandments and ordinances”.

All means all and you really need to believe it. God is incapable of lying.

Here are a few more of the blameless verses…

1Th 5:23
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and * your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1Ti 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1Ti 3:10
And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being [found] blameless.

1Ti 5:7
And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.

Tts 1:6
If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

Tts 1:7
For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

2Pe 3:14
Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.*

 

[believers]

Not only is it a new teaching, but it completely ignores the foreshadowing of baptism in the O.T. that can be found in circumcision.

Historical evidence verifies that baptism in the early Church was regarded exactly the same as it is today in the Catholic and Orthodox Church. Scripture overwhelmingly supports this belief (unless you choose to reject the reality and take the liberty of substituting your own).

People are saved without baptism (Catholics call this “baptism of desire”) but that is a perogative of God, and not up to us to decide. The normative means God gave us to enter into His Kingdom is through water baptism.

If you read your Bible, you will find that God is very legalistic at times. I personally could not fathom turning someone into a pillar of salt for merely turning their head in the wrong direction, or striking down the first born child of any family that did not slaughter a lamb, ritualistically eat it while being clothed a certain way, and smear the blood of that same lamb on the doorpost, but I am not God.

Anyone who wants to practice “Faith alone” “Jesus and Me guided by only the Holy Spirit” Christianity really needs to read more of their Old Testament and get an idea of how God really feels about people who want to do things outside of His prescribed methods.

Nope, it was called limbo. And, there’s no such thing as baptism of desire. Maybe that theory will get tossed out too?

 

[believers]

Where is your Scriptural support for the “age of accountability”? Does not David say in Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me? Weren’t there likely to be infants killed in the Flood? By the plague of the death of the first-born in Egypt?

But then, Exodus 30:14 and Numbers 14:29 speak of people 20 years and older being counted (as adults). And Deuteronomy 1:39 reads "Moreover your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall go in there, and to them I will give it, and they shall possess it." So it does seem God is partial to children of some age. Now, if you’re either saved or not saved, does this mean infants are saved, but somewhere during childhood, they lose that status of salvation?

Jesus was not resurrected in the OT

 

[Church_Militant]

Nope, it was called limbo.

Wrong!.. Limbo has never been a dogma or doctrine of the Catholic Church, so you’re talking out your hat there.

This also has only a very slight relevance to this topic. Though perhaps you wish it had more…

 

[Gamera]

Blameless means sinless?! Not because they were obviously “walking in all the commandments and ordinances”.

All means all and you really need to believe it. God is incapable of lying.

Here are a few more of the blameless verses…

1Th 5:23
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and * your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1Ti 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1Ti 3:10
And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being [found] blameless.

1Ti 5:7
And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.

Tts 1:6
If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

Tts 1:7
For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;

2Pe 3:14
Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.*

RIGHT! God IS incapable of lying, and God called Zechariah and Elizabeth “Blameless.” And yes, “blameless” means “sinless.” “Blame - less” = “without blame.” That’s what the word means. You refuse to acknowledge it because it contradicts your man-made tradition, but the Bible plainly shows that people such as Zechariah and Elizabeth ARE capable of living without committing personal sin. They still need a savior because of original sin, but your man-made tradition that every last human being is INCAPABLE of obeying God’s laws is plainly contradicted by Scripture. As you say, “God is incapable of lying.”

You ignored my lengthy review of the context of the verse within Romans Chapter 5, and the Old Testament passages which it echoed. Do you agree that Paul means “all have sinned” as in both Jew and Gentile, or do you maintain that Paul totally changed the subject in mid-paragraph to suddenly announce that every last human being is incapable of avoiding personal sin? And how does that fit your stated view that babies cannot commit personal sin? Aren’t they part of “ALL,” if “all means all”?

 

[believers]

Wrong!.. Limbo has never been a dogma or doctrine of the Catholic Church, so you’re talking out your hat there.

This also has only a very slight relevance to this topic. Though perhaps you wish it had more…

Like many protestants before me and now a pope… limbo doesn’t exist. Maybe your pope is really a protestant at heart. Maybe he has decided to clean out the closet. Hopefully purgatory is next.

 

[believers]

RIGHT! God IS incapable of lying, and God called Zechariah and Elizabeth “Blameless.” And yes, “blameless” means “sinless.” “Blame - less” = “without blame.” That’s what the word means. You refuse to acknowledge it because it contradicts your man-made tradition, but the Bible plainly shows that people such as Zechariah and Elizabeth ARE capable of living without committing personal sin. They still need a savior because of original sin, but your man-made tradition that every last human being is INCAPABLE of obeying God’s laws is plainly contradicted by Scripture. As you say, “God is incable of lying.”

You have successfully taken that verse out of context. Blameless people are now sinless?! They were without blame because they obeyed God. NOT because they were sinless.

 

[Gamera]

You have successfully taken that verse out of context. Blameless people are now sinless?! They were without blame because they obeyed God. NOT because they were sinless.

Blameless means without blame. A person who sins bears blame. Zechariah and Elizabeth were blameless because they obeyed God’s laws — which means they did not sin! That’s what sin is, breaking God’s laws! They still needed a savior because of original sin, not beacuse of any personal sin.

You need to read your BIble — not one verse here, one verse there, but whole consecutive chapters all in a row. Romans talks about original sin. Read ALL of Romans Chapter 5, all at once, and you will begin to understand what Paul is telling us. Sound-byte theology makes gibberish of God’s precious word. Quoting one verse out-of-context like Romans 3:23 “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” gives you results like this: “Curse God and die!” Job 2:9. That is how preposterous it is to quote “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” to mean that nobody can possibly avoid choosing to commit personal sin.

 

[Church_Militant]

Like many protestants before me and now a pope… limbo doesn’t exist.

Get real! As I said… you cannot find Limbo in any doctrinal statement of the Catholic Church. If so, then produce documentation or lay off beating up on that straw man.

 

[believers]

Blameless means without blame. A person who sins bears blame. Zechariah and Elizabeth were blameless because they obeyed God’s laws — which means they did not sin! That’s what sin is, breaking God’s laws! You need to read your Bible. They still needed a savior because of original sin, not beacuse of any personal sin.

OK… so your bishops are sinless too right?

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 

[believers]

Get real! As I said… you cannot find Limbo in any doctrinal statement of the Catholic Church. If so, then produce documentation or lay off beating up on that straw man.

Like I said, millions of protestants including myself and your pope agree that limbo is a fictitious place.

 

[Church_Militant]

OK… so your bishops are sinless too right?

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Could be…who are you to judge another man’s servant? Do you know all Catholic bishops? (Not likely)

 

[believers]

Could be…who are you to judge another man’s servant? Do you know all Catholic bishops? (Not likely)

Nope but I do know what God said… All have sinned.

 

[Gamera]

Nope but I do know what God said… All have sinned.

God also said, “Curse God and die,” Job 2:9. Unless you read the CONTEXT, you make a mockery of God’s precious word. Read the WHOLE letter to the Romans, not just that one sentence in 3:23, and you will understand the meaning of “all have sinned.” You are latching on to those words without having read their context. Obviously someone pointed out that one verse to you, which has the three words, “all have sinned,” and told you their personal interpretation that it means nobody can ever obey God’s laws. Read Paul’s WHOLE letter to the Romans. Then come back and tell us what you think. Sound-byte theology may make you feel like you “know the Bible,” but so far you’ve made it seem that you haven’t actually read it through for yourself, but have memorized just individual lines here and there without getting their context.

 

[believers]

God also said, “Curse God and die.” Job 2:9. Unless you read the CONTEXT, you make a mockery of God’s precious word. Read the WHOLE letter to the Romans, not just that one sentence in 3:23, and you will understand the meaning of “all have sinned”.

Let’s get this definition straight first. Blameless DOES NOT mean sinless. It means the person was obedient to the commandments and laws and therefore blameless in the eyes of God.

 

[Gamera]

Let’s get this definition straight first. Blameless DOES NOT mean sinless. It means the person was obedient to the commandments and laws and therefore blameless in the eyes of God.

Okay, good. Fair enough, So original sin is the ONLY thing which would have kept Zechariah and Elizabeth out of heaven, right? They still needed a savior because of original sin, but not because of any personal sin. Are we agreed?

 

[believers]

God also said, “Curse God and die,” Job 2:9. Unless you read the CONTEXT, you make a mockery of God’s precious word. Read the WHOLE letter to the Romans, not just that one sentence in 3:23, and you will understand the meaning of “all have sinned.” You are latching on to those words without having read their context. Obviously someone pointed out that one verse to you, which has the three words, “all have sinned,” and told you their personal interpretation that it means nobody can ever obey God’s laws. Read Paul’s WHOLE letter to the Romans. Then come back and tell us what you think. Sound-byte theology may make you feel like you “know the Bible,” but so far you’ve only shown that you haven’t actually read it through for yourself, but have memorized just individual lines here and there.

By the way, Job’s wife said that. NOT GOD.