Author Topic: What is the logic of water baptism only? (Read 3396 times)

Arvinger · « **Reply #30 on:** December 10, 2016, 05:15:00 PM »

ESS475, the main problem with your objections is that they are driven by emotions, not theology and Church's teaching. You put yourself in a position of judging what would be fair or unfair for God to do. You admitted very candidly that you know the Church teaches absolute necessity of baptism and explicit faith in Jesus Christ an the Trinity for salvation, but you question it because it is "hard to accept" and "it seems odd that America and Asia were not exposed to the Gospel" (i.e. your emotions).

To conclude:
1. No one without baptism and no one above the age of reason without explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Trinity can be saved.
2. We can't presume that all ancient Chinese or Native Americans before Columbus were damned - some of them might have been of good will and God could have granted them faith and baptism without a missionary.
3. Those who never heard the Gospel were probably those about whom God foreknew they will reject it anyway. It is mercy, since if they heard the Gospel and knowingly rejected it their culpability and condemnation would be much greater. It is possible that God put those souls in pre-Colombian America, ancient Far East etc. precisely because He knew they will reject the Gospel, and this is why they were not exposed to it.

That does not include the mystery of predestination - God wants to save everyone and does not predestine anyone to Hell, nevertheless He does not predestine all to salvation.

Nadir · « **Reply #31 on:** December 11, 2016, 02:28:24 PM »

GJC said:

Quote

St Augustine said:

Quote
Anyone who desires in his heart to judge why God calls one and not another, only desires to error.

Cantarella · « **Reply #32 on:** December 11, 2016, 06:21:20 PM »

I agree, Arvinger. Indeed, human emotions, as well as an insaciable need to rationalize and fully comprehend God like He was our equal, are the root of Pelagianism, and many other heresies.

Arch-heretic Pelagius asked himself the same thing: If all men had indeed inherited original sin, and therefore would suffer the loss of the Beatific Vision unless they embraced the One True Faith and were baptized, what of the vast numbers of men at the ends of the earth who had never heard of Christ? Would it not be unjust of God to send such men to Hell?. In fact, this is an extremely common barrier for many (including Traditionalists) to accept and hold the True Faith inviolately, as Christ taught it.

St Jerome responds to this very question:

Quote from: St. Jerome

“But you, who do you think you, a human being, are to answer back to God? Something that was made, can it say to its maker, why did you make me this shape? A potter surely has the right over his clay to make out of the same lump either a pot for special use or one for ordinary use (Romans 9:20-21). Accuse God of greater calumny by asking Him why He said, when Esau and Jacob were still in their mother’s womb: ‘I loved Jacob but I hated Esau….’

“It is true that neither fertile Britain, nor the people of Scotland, nor any of the barbarian nations as far as the ocean knew anything about Moses and His prophets. Why was it necessary that He come at the end of those times when numerous multitudes of people had already perished? Writing to the Romans, the blessed Apostle cautiously airs this question but he cannot answer it and leaves it to God’s knowledge. So, you should also deign to accept that there may be no answer to what you ask. To God be the power and He does not need you as His advocate.”

Ladislaus · « **Reply #33 on:** December 12, 2016, 07:57:36 AM »

Quote from: Arvinger

ESS475, the main problem with your objections is that they are driven by emotions, not theology and Church's teaching. You put yourself in a position of judging what would be fair or unfair for God to do. You admitted very candidly that you know the Church teaches absolute necessity of baptism and explicit faith in Jesus Christ an the Trinity for salvation, but you question it because it is "hard to accept" and "it seems odd that America and Asia were not exposed to the Gospel" (i.e. your emotions).

To conclude:
1. No one without baptism and no one above the age of reason without explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Trinity can be saved.
2. We can't presume that all ancient Chinese or Native Americans before Columbus were damned - some of them might have been of good will and God could have granted them faith and baptism without a missionary.
3. Those who never heard the Gospel were probably those about whom God foreknew they will reject it anyway. It is mercy, since if they heard the Gospel and knowingly rejected it their culpability and condemnation would be much greater. It is possible that God put those souls in pre-Colombian America, ancient Far East etc. precisely because He knew they will reject the Gospel, and this is why they were not exposed to it.

That does not include the mystery of predestination - God wants to save everyone and does not predestine anyone to Hell, nevertheless He does not predestine all to salvation.

:applause:

Ladislaus · « **Reply #34 on:** December 12, 2016, 08:05:33 AM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Arch-heretic Pelagius asked himself the same thing: If all men had indeed inherited original sin, and therefore would suffer the loss of the Beatific Vision unless they embraced the One True Faith and were baptized, what of the vast numbers of men at the ends of the earth who had never heard of Christ?

Great quote. Indeed, it's the same thought process (i.e. emotive process) that produces the modern Semi-Pelagianism (and in many cases full blown Pelagianism).

Father Cekada said the same thing ... as a faithful disciple of Pelagius. At least Father Cekada has the honesty to ADMIT that it's this non-theological emoting that leads him to reject EENS for all intents and purposes.