Water Baptism NOT Necessary for Salvation!

[joshua_b]

Let’s try Mark 16:16 "Whoever believes AND IS BAPTIZED will be saved, "…if we combine that with the fact that “God wills that no man shall perish”.

God’s word tells me that I need to be baptized, and that has been the belief of the Christian community for 2000 years. There was NEVER any dispute about the nature or definition of baptism until the reformation. The historic Church interprets this verse the exact same way I do, and I challenge you to find any historical evidence to the contrary, instead of trying to engage in this silly “biblical badmitton” you seem so fond of.

So, I have biblically established that baptism is neccessary for salvation. (If you don’t like my interpretation of the passage, too bad, because I prayed to the Holy Spirit to lead me to the true interpretation of that passage and to guide me as I compose this response, and this is what is coming forth, so I know it to be Truth) If baptism is neccessary for Salvation, and God wills that no one perish, then God must make the means to Salvation available to those who have never had the opportunity on earth to be baptized. We call the means that God makes neccessary to those people “baptism of desire”.

 

[Gamera]

I already understand that you believe in the baptism of desire. But I’m going to tell you now… there is no such thing as the baptism of desire. Not you or any one of you here can prove it with scripture.

Nor can you prove with Scripture that everything true must be proven with Scripture. Therefore, why should I have to follow your arbitrary rule of what evidence I can or cannot use? That’s like Mr. Burns on the Simpsons telling his employees “Tell me why I shouldn’t fire you without using any words containing the letter ‘E’.”

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Nor can you prove with Scripture that everything true must be proven with Scripture. Therefore, why should I have to follow your arbitrary rule of what evidence I can or cannot use? That’s like Mr. Burns on the Simpsons telling his employees “Tell me why I shouldn’t fire you without using any words containing the letter ‘E’.”

Your avoiding:tsktsk:

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Let’s try Mark 16:16 "Whoever believes AND IS BAPTIZED will be saved, "…if we combine that with the fact that “God wills that no man shall perish”.

God’s word tells me that I need to be baptized, and that has been the belief of the Christian community for 2000 years. There was NEVER any dispute about the nature or definition of baptism until the reformation. The historic Church interprets this verse the exact same way I do, and I challenge you to find any historical evidence to the contrary, instead of trying to engage in this silly “biblical badmitton” you seem so fond of.

So, I have biblically established that baptism is neccessary for salvation. (If you don’t like my interpretation of the passage, too bad, because I prayed to the Holy Spirit to lead me to the true interpretation of that passage and to guide me as I compose this response, and this is what is coming forth, so I know it to be Truth) If baptism is neccessary for Salvation, and God wills that no one perish, then God must make the means to Salvation available to those who have never had the opportunity on earth to be baptized. We call the means that God makes neccessary to those people “baptism of desire”.

Your stretching---- Maybe it would be better if you can find out what the official CC"s take on it is. Im sure they have scripture somewhere that backs this up.

 

[joshua_b]

Let’s see what else Scripture has to say about baptism.

I know that it is a forensic act, as the Gospels clearly refer to baptism as such by stating that in Matthew 3:6,13,14,16; Mark 1:5,9; Luke 3:7,12,21,29,30;John 3:22,23…the list goes on and on.

Baptism as referenced in Scripture,is performed with water, by another person, and is neccessary to impart the gift of the Holy Spirit. Any separation of the two is false, and if you want a Scriptural defense of this I am more than willing to give it. (And I guarantee you it will be much more comprehensive than Acts 1:5, and Acts 8:16).

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Let’s see what else Scripture has to say about baptism.

I know that it is a forensic act, as the Gospels clearly refer to baptism as such by stating that in Matthew 3:6,13,14,16; Mark 1:5,9; Luke 3:7,12,21,29,30;John 3:22,23…the list goes on and on.

Baptism as referenced in Scripture,is performed with water, by another person, and is neccessary to impart the gift of the Holy Spirit. Any separation of the two is false, and if you want a Scriptural defense of this I am more than willing to give it. (And I guarantee you it will be much more comprehensive than Acts 1:5, and Acts 8:16).

Hi,
Thanks for being willing to do so. I appreciate it but Im not talking about the belief in baptism I do believe we are to be baptized. What I do not believe in is Baptism by desire .

 

[Gamera]

Your stretching---- Maybe it would be better if you can find out what the official CC"s take on it is…

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

 

[Gamera]

Your avoiding:tsktsk:

No, I just don’t see the need to follow rules of what sources I can or cannot use. For those of us who do not accept the doctrine of sola scriptura, it makes no sense to require that a given fact be proven specifically “from Scripture.”

Also, what I think has been overlooked is that I was objecting to someone commenting on what Catholics believe about baptism of desire without bothering to first learn what Catholics believe. The response, in effect, was “prove it from Scripture.” But I hadn’t set out to “prove” baptism of desire — my point was that the poster didn’t even know what it was, yet was commenting upon it anyway.

 

[clmowry]

Really? Prove it from scripture.

In fact “prove” anything from scripture.

Show me any group of “proof” texts and I sure
i can find a multitude of individuals who will argue that you"ve proven precisely nothing.

The best you can do is argue that certain scriptures support theological belief once you’ve assumed that the copy of scripture from which you are quoting is in fact the inspired word of God.

Which I guess by your standard, I need to now ask you to prove to me from scripture.

Chuck

I already understand that you believe in the baptism of desire. But I’m going to tell you now… there is no such thing as the baptism of desire. Not you or any one of you here can prove it with scripture.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

No, I just don’t see the need to follow rules of what sources I can or cannot use. For those of us who do not accept the doctrine of sola scriptura, it makes no sense to require that a given fact be proven specifically “from Scripture.”

Also, what I think has been overlooked is that I was objecting to someone commenting on what Catholics believe about baptism of desire without bothering to first learn what Catholics believe. The response, in effect, was “prove it from Scripture.” But I hadn’t set out to “prove” baptism of desire — my point was that the poster didn’t even know what it was, yet was commenting upon it anyway.

I actually think he did know what it was and wanted you to be able to explain using scripture.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

No, I just don’t see the need to follow rules of what sources I can or cannot use. For those of us who do not accept the doctrine of sola scriptura, it makes no sense to require that a given fact be proven specifically “from Scripture.”

 

[Gamera]

I actually think he did know what it was and wanted you to be able to explain using scripture.

Perhaps it was a rhetorical question which went over my head. It wouldn’t be the first time. What do you want, it’s Friday.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

Hi,

Thank you,
still there is no back up with scripture. I believe this is really a human attempt to appease people and to comfort them. Lets face it sometimes scripture is not comforting but really really hard truths for us humans to understand fully.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Perhaps it was a rhetorical question which went over my head. It wouldn’t be the first time. What do you want, it’s Friday.

LOL TGIF:extrahappy: Although Im a stay at home mom so I dont get a TGIF I get a TGIM when the kids go back to school
LOL

 

[Gamera]

LOL TGIF:extrahappy: Although Im a stay at home mom so I dont get a TGIF I get a TGIM when the kids go back to school
LOL

That’s OK, I’m a stay-home Dad with a law practice on the side. To me, every day is Monday.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

That’s OK, I’m a stay-home Dad with a law practice on the side. To me, every day is Monday.

That’s cool:thumbsup:

 

[clmowry]

Gamera;2101102:

But doesnt the CC teach that ALL SACRED TRADITION comes from Scripture?

No. Most of Sacred Tradition can be supported either Implicitly or Explicitly by Scripture, but it does not come from scripture. i.e. The esablishment of an apostolic tradition may pre-date documentation and not all Apostolic tradition was necisarily documented in what has become Scripture.

The CC does teach that scripture is the infallible, inerrant truth from God

Yes.

and I thought they do hold scripture above all else. Am I wrong to believe this

No. I think you are confused. Scripture is an honored part of the Apostolic tradition and holds an important place. Nothing contained in Scripture will contradict the teaching of Christ as handed down through his Apostles and vice versa, but that doesn’t mean if it’s not explicitly written in Scriptue that in can’t be true. Which I believe is what you mean by “above all else”.

Or to take your above all else more literally, I would place encountering Christ the Living God (both in general general personal sense, but also through his Sacraments) above all else.

Chuck

 

[ALLFORHIM]

ALLFORHIM;2101138:

No. Most of Sacred Tradition can be supported either Implicitly or Explicitly by Scripture, but it does not come from scripture. i.e. The esablishment of an apostolic tradition may pre-date documentation and not all Apostolic tradition was necisarily documented in what has become Scripture.

I get that.

Nothing contained in Scripture will contradict the teaching of Christ as handed down through his Apostles and vice versa, but that doesn’t mean if it’s not explicitly written in Scriptue that in can’t be true. Which I believe is what you mean by “above all else”.

Thanks Chuck,
So if baptism of desire isnt even in scripture then how can it even possibly be true. When I read the catechism on it it didnt even say that any Apostle passed it on. You know a thought just popped into my head. You know how the CC talks about oral Tradition and that it is passed on orally right down to today----well then wouldnt there be some sort of documentation that says that this Apostle says this or Jesus said this? Why would the CC not write that down? I mean look at all the problems it is causing You really cant trace oral tradition back to the apostles unless you can trace them back to who said what. Do you see what I mean. Sorry if Im not clear it really just popped into my head as I was writing.

Or to take your above all else more literally, I would place encountering Christ the Living God (both in general general personal sense, but also through his Sacraments) above all else.

I would agree having Jesus Christ as your Savior is the ultimate:thumbsup: :extrahappy: :extrahappy:

 

[Linkowski]

Let’s see what else Scripture has to say about baptism.

I know that it is a forensic act, as the Gospels clearly refer to baptism as such by stating that in Matthew 3:6,13,14,16; Mark 1:5,9; Luke 3:7,12,21,29,30;John 3:22,23…the list goes on and on.

Baptism as referenced in Scripture,is performed with water, by another person, and is neccessary to impart the gift of the Holy Spirit. Any separation of the two is false, and if you want a Scriptural defense of this I am more than willing to give it. (And I guarantee you it will be much more comprehensive than Acts 1:5, and Acts 8:16).

You may want to consider these passages…especially this first one…

Acts 10:43-48 NAS95 43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who ***have received the Holy Spirit ***just as we did, can he?” 48 And **he ordered them to be baptized **in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Galatians 3:2 NAS95 2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?

Ephesians 1:13 NAS95 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation–having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

John 7:39 NAS95 39 But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

 

[Gamera]

You may want to consider these passages…especially this first one…

Acts 10:43-48 NAS95 43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who ***have received the Holy Spirit ***just as we did, can he?” 48 And **he ordered them to be baptized **in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days…

Yes, the reason why Peter and the circumcized believers were amazed was because someone had received the Holy Spirit prior to baptism. That’s the whole point — it was amazing because it wasn’t the way things ordinarly work. The whole point of the miracle was that it was a sign for Peter, to show him that the Holy Spirit could indeed be upon the gentiles. This miracle, in fact, is the exception which proves the law — if it were not ordinarily required that a person first be baptized, then nobody would have been “amazed.”