I was involved in an interesting discussion on another thread, but I think it got buried somewhere on page 34.  This is important enough to start a new thread.

For those of you who believe that salvation is possible without explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation, let's discuss how this would happen.

Let's say that I grant for now that someone could be saved by believing explicitly merely in the Rewarder/Punisher God so long as he believes it with a supernatural motive.  Nishant made this distinction on another thread.  I pointed out that belief in God can attained by the use of natural reason (de fide Vatican I), so Nishant responded that even though the truths are natural truths, they have to be believed with a supernatural motive (on the authority of God revealing).

Let's apply this to the following case.

There's a practicing orthodox Jew. He believes in the existence of God and that God rewards the good and punishes the wicked based on the authority of God revealing in the Old Testament. He follows the Law and he keeps the natural law and never committed anything that might be considered a mortal sin.  Let's say that he was invincibly ignorant enough to excuse him from the guilt of not accepting the faith.  To paraphrase Suprema Haec, he never knew that the Catholic Church was the True Church.

Let's say this Jew dies (without having converted to the Catholic faith or ever believing in the Holy Trinity or in the Incarnation).

Could he be saved?

The article below is from the life of Hermann Cohen, (Fr. Augustine Marie of the Blessed Sacrament).  His mother was Jєωιѕн.

http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2011/10/text-of-letter-prophesied-to-father.html

Do you believe that this must absolutely be false, then?

The article below is from the life of Hermann Cohen, (Fr. Augustine Marie of the Blessed Sacrament).  His mother was Jєωιѕн.

http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2011/10/text-of-letter-prophesied-to-father.html

Do you believe that this must absolutely be false, then?

I'm not arguing right now whether it's possible or impossible for the Jew to be saved.  I just want to show a logical consequence of saying yes to this question.

These BoD threads get way too big, so it's important to limit the scope of each thread, or otherwise each new BoD thread just turns into yet another 34-page monster.

Quote from: Ladislaus

Could he be saved?

Here is one possibility:

1)  He was sacramentally baptized in his infancy, perhaps unknown to him or anyone else (an angel?).

2)  He received "salutary repentance" at death's door.

I'm taking these types of scenarios off the table.  He just died as a normal practicing Jew.

So far no one except LoT (on the other thread) wants to answer this question.

I may just have to jump to the next point.

I suspect that people are afraid of the consequences of saying yes, but then they attack those of us who say, no, such a one cannot be saved.

I'm a little perplexed.  Despite the fact that many have accused me of heresy for saying "no" to this question, no one seems brave enough to come forward and say "yes".  Why is that?

Maybe others, like myself, don't trust you.  Your behavior in the other threads has caused me to regard you as dangerous to my Faith.  It is really a shame, because you seem knowledgeable, but in the end, I for one, am tired of communicating here only to be disrespected with calumny.  Sorry, but this is how I see it.

.

Major proposition:  BoD fanatics, when presented with a simple question, refrain from answering because they know where the truth will lead, and therefore, they avoid the question.

Minor:  But respondent claims, the question isn't worth answering because respondent does not trust the questioner.

Conclusion:  Respondent must be afraid of the truth.

.

Quote from: Ladislaus

I'm a little perplexed.  Despite the fact that many have accused me of heresy for saying "no" to this question, no one seems brave enough to come forward and say "yes".  Why is that?

Maybe others, like myself, don't trust you.  Your behavior in the other threads has caused me to regard you as dangerous to my Faith.  

When your "Faith" is endangered by unqualified acceptance of defined dogmas, then perhaps it's time to reconsider whether your "Faith" is the problem.  You are not bound to adhere to a false creed.  

It is really a shame, because you seem knowledgeable, but in the end, I for one, am tired of communicating here only to be disrespected with calumny.  Sorry, but this is how I see it.

Quote from: Ladislaus

I'm a little perplexed.  Despite the fact that many have accused me of heresy for saying "no" to this question, no one seems brave enough to come forward and say "yes".  Why is that?

Maybe others, like myself, don't trust you.  Your behavior in the other threads has caused me to regard you as dangerous to my Faith.  It is really a shame, because you seem knowledgeable, but in the end, I for one, am tired of communicating here only to be disrespected with calumny.  Sorry, but this is how I see it.

When you show a protestant that the Church is founded on the truth that was preached by the Apostles they take a left turn and jump topic, and try to head down another path.  They will do anything but stick to answering questions in the line that is presented to them because they can see where that line leads, and they do not want to go to that necessary conclusion.  Therefore they do not answer the question.  

The same is true of Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Jews, Mohammedans, atheists, Satanists and the worshippers of the Great Thumb.  They all have their own questions to ask, without being willing to subject themselves to the questions that the Church asks them.  

.