Water Baptism NOT Necessary for Salvation!

[Gamera]

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

God DID say that. God inspired every word of the Bible (at least, that’s what we Catholics believe). The CONTEXT is that GOD SAID THAT JOB’S WIFE SAID IT. See the difference? This is what you are missing — context! Job 2:9 and every other line of Scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit. But if you read one verse in isolation, you totally confuse yourself. Read Job 2:9 in isolation and you will not understand WHAT God said — that Job’s wife had said “Curse God and die.” Understand? This is the peril of quoting out-of-context verses from Scripture without knowing what you are quoting from.

Unless, of course, you are denying that all Scripture is God-breathed … but we Catholics believe it is.

 

[Church_Militant]

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

And your so important and relevant point is?

Why don’t you stay on the topic.

Baptism, according to the Word of God, actually does wash away sins (Acts 22:16 & 2:38) and is indeed necessary for salvation.

Panel Backs Hopes for Unbaptized Infants Who Die (LINK)

Pope OKs Publication of Report on Limbo

VATICAN CITY, APRIL 20, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI authorized the publication of a report that expresses the hope that babies who die without baptism are able to get to heaven.

The report by the International Theological Commission, published today, concluded that there are serious theological and liturgical grounds for the hope that such babies are saved and enjoy the beatific vision.

The commission says the theological hypothesis of “limbo” appeared to be based on an unduly restrictive view of salvation.

The 41-page document noted this is an “urgent pastoral problem,” especially because of the large number of unbaptized babies who die as victims of abortion.

The commission’s documents are not considered official expressions of the magisterium. But the commission does help the Holy See to examine important doctrinal issues.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church in No. 1261 explains: "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,’ 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."This looks like all the more reason to embrace infant baptism and to reject the protestant practice of denying it to infants.

Was circumcision salvific for the Jews? It was commanded by God to be carried out on the 8th day. Who made their confession of faith? Their family and the whole Jewish community, yet it brought them into the community of faith did it not and in obedience to God. The New Testament compares Baptism to circumcision, and since whole households were baptized that includes not only the children of the immediate family, but those of the servants and slaves. Even the early church baptized infants as the martyrdom of Polycarp plainly points out when he says in his defense that he has been a Christian for 86 years and will not deny Christ now when in fact he was 86 years old at the time. In fact, it is very likely that he was infant baptized by St. John the evangelist, since he was a disciple of his.

 

[Church_Militant]

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

Really? Has an newborn infant? Has someone who is completely mentally incompetent from birth? Did Christ?

Where;'s your definition of “all” now? Out the window with any God-given common sense…

I think all you know is your own biased and errant interpretation of what you wish God had meant in His Word.

Are you baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

 

[Church_Militant]

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

2nd Timothy 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,

This looks like another case of your interpretation of the word “all” and contrary to the Bible.

 

[believers]

Okay, good. Fair enough, So original sin is the ONLY thing which would have kept Zechariah and Elizabeth out of heaven, right?

They were blameless. If they died blameless under the law of Moses, then they would not go to hell.

No, Christ needed to be resurrected first before anyone could enter heaven.

They still needed a savior because of original sin, but not because of any personal sin. Are we agreed?

Because they lived under the law of Moses, they had to perform a yearly sacrifice for the atonement of their sins.

 

[Gamera]

They were blameless. If they died blameless under the law of Moses, then they would not go to hell.

No, Christ needed to be resurrected first before anyone could enter heaven.

Because they lived under the law of Moses, they had to perform a yearly sacrifice for the atonement of their sins.

What sins? You just agreed that Luke 1:6 says Zechariah and Elizabeth followed all the laws and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly. Never having broken God’s laws, they had never committed any personal sin (although, of course, still bearing the stain of original sin). Agreed? Personal sin means breaking God’s laws, right? And they never broke God’s laws, right? So they never committed personal sin, right? So it is POSSIBLE, however unlikely, to go one’s whole life without breaking God’s laws, right?

 

[believers]

2nd Timothy 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,

This looks like another case of your interpretation of the word “all” and contrary to the Bible.

What is there not to understand? All means all. When God says “all” I believe Him.

 

[Gamera]

What is there not to understand? All means all. When God says “all” I believe Him.

So do we. But we read the whole chapter to see what He is talking about. We believe what He actually says, not some out-of-context twist of His words.

 

[Church_Militant]

So do we. But we read the whole chapter to see what He is talking about. We believe what He actually says, not some out-of-context twist of His words.

Exactly!

 

[believers]

What sins? You just agreed that Scripture says they followed all the laws and ordinances of the Lord blamelessly. Never having broken God’s laws, they had never committed any personal sin (although, of course, still bearing the stain of original sin). Agreed? Personal sin means breaking God’s laws, right? And they never broke God’s laws, right? So they never committed personal sin, right? So it is POSSIBLE, however unlikely, to go one’s whole life without breaking God’s laws, right?

Everyone is born with the Adam’s sin. No one is born sinless. The only way to make atonement in the OT was by the blood of a lamb, or a “sin offering”. This sin offering was done 1 every year.

Exd 30:10 And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements: once in the year shall he make atonement upon it throughout your generations: it [is] most holy unto the LORD.

Lev 4:23 Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

 

[Gamera]

Everyone is born with the Adam’s sin. No one is born sinless. The only way to make atonement in the OT was by the blood of a lamb, or a “sin offering”. This sin offering was done 1 every year.

Exd 30:10 And Aaron shall make an atonement upon the horns of it once in a year with the blood of the sin offering of atonements: once in the year shall he make atonement upon it throughout your generations: it [is] most holy unto the LORD.

Lev 4:23 Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

Right, I understand that Zechariah and Elizabeth still had original sin (I think I mentioned that several times already). But neither Zechariah nor Elizabeth ever committed a personal sin, right? They personally followed ALL of God’s ordinances, according to Luke 1:6, right? And as you say, “all means all until you prove otherwise,” right? So having followed ALL of God’s ordinances blamelessly, both Zechariah and Elizabeth were free of personal sin, right?

 

[believers]

Right, I understand that Zechariah and Elizabeth still had original sin (I think I mentioned that several times already). But neither Zechariah nor Elizabeth ever committed a personal sin, right? They personally followed ALL of God’s ordinances, according to Luke 1:6, right? And as you say, “all means all until you prove otherise,” right? So having followed ALL God’s ordinances blamelessly, both Zechariah and Elizabeth were free of personal sin, right?

It is not that they never committed sins. They had to make an atonement for their sins every year for any and all sins they have committed. That was the Law of Moses. That was the only way to get right with God in the Old Testament.

Lev 16:34 And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year. And he did as the LORD commanded Moses.

 

[Gamera]

Exactly!

This is why my wife and I read one chapter of the Bible together every night, and why we read each book straight through on consecutive nights. It’s the only way “get it.” In college I attended many a Bible study, and in grad school I led many more, where individual verse-quoting constituted the “study.” Only now, in my 40’s, have I come to see just how flighty one’s knowledge of Scripture becomes when it’s absorbed bit by bit, verse by verse, cafeteria style. We really do need to read Scripture whole chapter by whole chapter, whole book by whole book, as God gave it to us in order to understand what the Holy Spirit is saying.

 

[Church_Militant]

This is why my wife and I read one chapter of the Bible together every night, and why we read each book straight through on consecutive nights. In college I attended many a Bible study, and in grad school I led many more, where individual verse-quoting constituted the “study.” Only now, in my 40’s, have I come to see just how flighty one’s knowledge of Scripture becomes when it’s absorbed bit by bit, verse by verse, cafeteria style. We really do need to read Scripture chapter by chapter as God gave it to us in order to understand what the Holy Spirit is saying.

I couldn’t agree more! And the context is often the thing that is most decisive! So much is lost in the “cherry-picking” Bible studies that I have been part of. Most of the n-C ones I was in either skipped the “Catholic parts” or went out of their way to offer the interpretation without the context in order to make it seem as if there was only that one way to read that passage or verse.

Talk about a “different gospel”.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Baptismal regeneration is not a Biblical concept. Baptism does not save from sin, but from a bad conscience.

Only Jesus saves. Baptism justifies us for that salvation.

ALLFORHIM:

Peter clearly taught that baptism was not a ceremonial act of physical purification, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.

Why can’t it be both? That’s what the Catholic Church teaches a sacrament is.

ALLFORHIM:

Baptism is the symbol of what has already occurred in the heart and life of one who has trusted Christ as Savior (cf. Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12). To make the source of salvation perfectly clear, Peter added, “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”

We all believe that Jesus is the source of our salvation. No one is in disagreement here. We disagree on whether baptism gives us the initial justification to call oneself a Christian.

ALLFORHIM:

Baptism is an important step of obedience that every Christian should take. Baptism cannot be a requirement for salvation. To make it such is an attack on the sufficiency of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Baptism is a requirement for salvation in most normal circumstances, because Jesus Christ commanded us to do it, and therefore we must follow His commandments.

 

[Gamera]

It is not that they never committed sins. They had to make an atonement for their sins every year for any and all sins they have committed. That was the Law of Moses. That was the only way to get right with God in the Old Testament.

Lev 16:34 And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year. And he did as the LORD commanded Moses.

Huh? Wait, Luke 1:6 says that Zechariah and Elizabeth obeyed ALL the ordinances and commandments of the Lord blamelessly. Right? A person sins when he breaks an ordinance or commandment of God, right? Lying, stealing, etc are all violations of God’s ordinances and commandments, right? So a person who has never broken God’s laws has never committed a personal sin.

Read Luke 1:6 again beacuse I think you finally are seeing that your man-made tradition contradicts Scripture. Here’s the King James Version: “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.” Luke 1:6.

If you never break God’s commandments or ordinances – you have not committed a personal sin.

The ONLY way you can reconcile Luke 1:6 with Romans 3:23 is to admit that “all have sinned” does NOT mean that every last person on earth has committed a personal sin. What it means is that all peoples, both Jew and gentile, are under original sin. The man-made fundamentalist tradition that distorts Romans 3:23 into a blanket statement about the personal state of every human soul is totally blown out of the water by Luke 1:6. Zechariah and Elizabeth never broke any of God’s commandments. They never sinned. They inherited original sin, of course, but they never personally sinned.

 

[believers]

I couldn’t agree more! And the context is often the thing that is most decisive! So much is lost in the “cherry-picking” Bible studies that I have been part of. Most of the n-C ones I was in either skipped the “Catholic parts” or went out of their way to offer the interpretation without the context in order to make it seem as if there was only that one way to read that passage or verse.

Talk about a “different gospel”.

Okay Church, What is the Gospel? We are all called to preach the gospel. What gospel do you preach?

 

[believers]

Huh? Wait, Luke 1:6 says that Zechariah and Elizabeth obeyed ALL the ordinances and commandments of the Lord blamelessly. Right? A person sins when he breaks an ordinance or commandment of God, right? Lying, stealing, etc are all violations of God’s ordinances and commandments, right? So a person who has never broken God’s laws has never committed a personal sin.

Nope, they have atonement made once every year for their sins. It doesn’t mean they’ve never sinned.

Read Luke 1:6 again beacuse I think you finally are seeing that your man-made tradition contradicts Scripture. Here’s the King James Version: “And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lird blameless.” Luke 1:6.

If you never break God’s commandments or ordinances – you have not committed a personal sin.

The ONLY way you can reconcile Luke 1:6 with Romans 3:23 is to admit that “all have sinned” does NOT mean that every last person on earth has committed a personal sin. What it means is that all peoples, both Jew and gentile, are under original sin. The man-made fundamentalist tradition that distorts Romans 3:23 into a blanket statement about hte personal state of every human soul is totally blown out of the water by Luke 1:6. Zechariah and Elizabeth never broke any of God’s commandments. They never sinned. They inherited original sin, of course, but they never personally sinned.

Rom 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.

 

[Church_Militant]

Okay Church, What is the Gospel?

Acts 2:38: And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

and Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

 

[Gamera]

Nope, they have atonement made once every year for their sins. It doesn’t mean they’ve never sinned.

Yeah, they had to follow all Jewish rituals. So? What does that prove? What personal sin could they commit if they never broke any of God’s commandments or ordiannces? How can anyone possibly commit a personal sin without breaking any commandment or ordinance of God?

Face it, Luke 1:6 shows that Zechariah and Elizabeth never committed a personal sin. You cannot disprove Luke 1:6 simply by saying that Zechariah and Elizabeth were required to follow Jewish ritual. That makes no sense.

Rom 5:18
Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.

Original sin. Right. You do know the difference between original sin and personal sin, right? Original sin is what’s being described in Romans Chapter 5: “the offense of one” is the original sin of Adam, which we all inherit. I’ve told you five times that Zechariah and Elizabeth inherited original sin. It is personal sin which they lacked, according to Luke 1:6. Personal sin is when you personally break God’s commandments. Luke 1:6 says that Zechariah and Elizabeth obeyed ALL God’s commandments BLAMELESSLY. “All means all until proven otherwise,” according to you. So Zechariah and Elizabeth never committed any personal sin, right? Why is that so hard to admit? It’s in Luke 1:6 in black and white.