Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

[BreadOfLife]

Ignorance does not exist in a vacuum. People can know or not know. You can't separate knowing or not knowing from people. If I have knowledge, it means I know something. If I have ignorance, it means I don't know and am ignorant. That seems logical to me.


Why call it invincible then?
That could be corrected in many cases by education if the person was willing. If he was unwilling, I'd call that willful ignorance.

Your explanation did not help at all. Maybe a child could explain it better.

WOW.

This is scary. Like I said – grade school kids understood this with MUCH less explanation . . .

You keep saying that the ignorance can’t be “invincible” because a person can be taught. Invincible Ignorance pertains to those who have DIED and are being judged. The time for learning is over.

The question then would be – were they knowledgeable of Christ and His Church and simply CHOSE not too follow Him”. Or - were they ignorant to the point where they didn’t know about Christ and His Church and didn’t know they were supposed to follow Him.

Now – if you don‘t understand that – I really don‘t know what else to tell you . . .

 

[prism]

And YOUR problem is context.

The “ignorance” of the Pharisees that Jesus was referring to was an ignorance that they CHOSE – not one of circumstance. Some people reject God and choose not to be knowledgeable of Him.

If you don’t understand the context of what is being spoken of in Scripture – you will LOSE the entire point.

This is why we have tens of thousands of perpetually-splintering Protestant sects that ALL teach different doctrines yet ALL claim that they got it “right out of the Bible” . . .

So I take it that your ignorance is one of circumstance?

 

[prism]

Paul uses the terms, “circumcision of the heart” and the “circumcision of Christ” (Romans 2:29, Col. 2:12-17) to describe the reality of circumcision being a spiritually inward act, not merely an outward sign. The Old Testament type that WAS circumcision is NOW baptism. And, whereas, circumcision was only applied to male Jews – baptism applies to ALL in the Christian family.

The circumcision of Christ is without hands involving the new birth, something you apparently haven't a clue about. (how can you describe color to one who has been blind since birth).

Colossians 2:11 (KJV) In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

 

[BreadOfLife]

So I take it that your ignorance is one of circumstance?

Can you be more specific?

I didn't think so . . .

 

[prism]

Can you be more specific?

I didn't think so . . .

Of course you didn't think so.
Your circumstance, was beyond your control, being baptized in ignorance as an infant. You had no choice in the matter.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The circumcision of Christ is without hands involving the new birth, something you apparently haven't a clue about. (how can you describe color to one who has been blind since birth).

Colossians 2:11 (KJV) In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Really?

The Bible says that Jesus called SIMON the Kepha (ROCK) that He would build His Church on (Matt. 16:18). This is why Peter is referred to as “Cephas” in Paul’s letters because “Cephas” is a Greek transliteration (sorry for the big word) of the Aramaic “Kepha”, which means “ROCK”.

As for being “members” of His Church – Protestants are incorporated into the body of Christ (the Church) through Baptism – but have voluntarily separated themselves from it.

As for the verse from Colossians you cherry-picked out of context – it’s funny how you “forgot” to show Paul’s comparison to circumcision and Baptism:

Col. 2:11-12
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ.
You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

BIG difference when you show the CONTEXT . . .

Luke 18:15 states, “Now they were bringing even infants to him.”
The Greek translation is: “Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha.”

The word ”brepha” in Greek means “infants”, who are completely unable to come to Christ on their own. They couldn’t POSSIBLY come to the conscious decision on their own to accept Christ. Did Jesus turn them away and tell them to come back when they were of the “age of reason”??
NO. He said

Luke 8:16:17
“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

YOU make the SAME blunder that the Apostles made when they turned away the children for which Jesus rebuked them . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Of course you didn't think so.
Your circumstance, was beyond your control, being baptized in ignorance as an infant. You had no choice in the matter.

You just made my point . . .
I asked you to be specific and you failed.

Nice job . . .

 

[aspen]

Like I pointed out earlier, a neihborhood of baptized devils refutes your theory and the 'Church Fathers' you attempt to exalt.
Believe and be baptized is the command. The same holds true for 'households'. You bring infants to be baptized assuming they believe, thus nullifying the command 'believe and be baptized'.

Did you think baptism cured bad or annoying behavior? I guess I will consider your neighborhood hooligans if you consider all the people on death row who are baptized as adults

 

[Giuliano]

This is scary. Like I said – grade school kids understood this with MUCH less explanation . . .

You keep saying that the ignorance can’t be “invincible” because a person can be taught. Invincible Ignorance pertains to those who have DIED and are being judged. The time for learning is over.

I think I understand what you're talking about now. People who have died. Thanks for clearing that up. Why didn't you say so to begin with?

 

[prism]

Did you think baptism cured bad or annoying behavior? I guess I will consider your neighborhood hooligans if you consider all the people on death row who are baptized as adults

I believe the issue was, 'is a person regenerate through water baptism?'.
Your question also enforces a 'no' vote arguing against baptismal regeneration for adults as well.
I would agree on both counts. (infant and adult baptism is not a means of regeneration).

 

[prism]

Really?

The Bible says that Jesus called SIMON the Kepha (ROCK) that He would build His Church on (Matt. 16:18). This is why Peter is referred to as “Cephas” in Paul’s letters because “Cephas” is a Greek transliteration (sorry for the big word) of the Aramaic “Kepha”, which means “ROCK”.

As for being “members” of His Church – Protestants are incorporated into the body of Christ (the Church) through Baptism – but have voluntarily separated themselves from it.

As for the verse from Colossians you cherry-picked out of context – it’s funny how you “forgot” to show Paul’s comparison to circumcision and Baptism:

Col. 2:11-12
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ.
You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

BIG difference when you show the CONTEXT . . .

Luke 18:15 states, “Now they were bringing even infants to him.”
The Greek translation is: “Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha.”

The word ”brepha” in Greek means “infants”, who are completely unable to come to Christ on their own. They couldn’t POSSIBLY come to the conscious decision on their own to accept Christ. Did Jesus turn them away and tell them to come back when they were of the “age of reason”??
NO. He said

Luke 8:16:17
“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

YOU make the SAME blunder that the Apostles made when they turned away the children for which Jesus rebuked them . . .

Still trying to proselytize a non RC? Why not try reaching the lost through evangelism? (I had never ever had an RC member share the Gospel with me when I was unsaved for 25 years). Maybe the only Gospel they know is to baptize infants...that is always good for growing a State Church. lol

 

[aspen]

I believe the issue was, 'is a person regenerate through water baptism?'.
Your question also enforces a 'no' vote arguing against baptismal regeneration for adults as well.
I would agree on both counts. (infant and adult baptism is not a means of regeneration).

How quickly do you expect regeneration to be completed?

 

[prism]

How quickly do you expect regeneration to be completed?

As quickly as it takes God to place us into the Son...

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
(2Co 5:17)

 

[aspen]

As quickly as it takes God to place us into the Son...

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
(2Co 5:17)

New, but not complete. Sanctification takes time

 

[epostle]

Like I pointed out earlier, a neihborhood of baptized devils refutes your theory and the 'Church Fathers' you attempt to exalt.
Believe and be baptized is the command. The same holds true for 'households'. You bring infants to be baptized assuming they believe, thus nullifying the command 'believe and be baptized'.

"neihborhood of baptized devils" - is that in the Bible somewhere or is that another man made tradition you blindly accept?

 

[epostle]

Really?

The Bible says that Jesus called SIMON the Kepha (ROCK) that He would build His Church on (Matt. 16:18). This is why Peter is referred to as “Cephas” in Paul’s letters because “Cephas” is a Greek transliteration (sorry for the big word) of the Aramaic “Kepha”, which means “ROCK”.

As for being “members” of His Church – Protestants are incorporated into the body of Christ (the Church) through Baptism – but have voluntarily separated themselves from it.

As for the verse from Colossians you cherry-picked out of context – it’s funny how you “forgot” to show Paul’s comparison to circumcision and Baptism:

Col. 2:11-12
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ.
You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

BIG difference when you show the CONTEXT . . .

Luke 18:15 states, “Now they were bringing even infants to him.”
The Greek translation is: “Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha.”

The word ”brepha” in Greek means “infants”, who are completely unable to come to Christ on their own. They couldn’t POSSIBLY come to the conscious decision on their own to accept Christ. Did Jesus turn them away and tell them to come back when they were of the “age of reason”??
NO. He said

Luke 8:16:17
“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

YOU make the SAME blunder that the Apostles made when they turned away the children for which Jesus rebuked them . . .

Still trying to proselytize a non RC? Why not try reaching the lost through evangelism? (I had never ever had an RC member share the Gospel with me when I was unsaved for 25 years). Maybe the only Gospel they know is to baptize infants...that is always good for growing a State Church. lol

TRANSLATION:
I cannot refute BoL so I will change the subject to evangelization.
I never heard the Gospel proclaimed daily in liturgy (public worship) because I never listened for 25 years.
I'll throw in the mythical "State Church" as a final insult to demonstrate my authority to re-write history, plus it's a handy rabbit trail.

You did not address the quote. It has nothing to do with baptism; it's off topic. This is evidence you cannot be reasoned with.

 

[prism]

New, but not complete. Sanctification takes time

Nice try. Sanctification is not regeneration/new birth.

 

[prism]

"neihborhood of baptized devils" - is that in the Bible somewhere or is that another man made tradition you blindly accept?

No, that was what I observed in my neighborhood full of baptized RC kids living for the devil.

 

[prism]

TRANSLATION:
I cannot refute BoL so I will change the subject to evangelization.
I never heard the Gospel proclaimed daily in liturgy (public worship) because I never listened for 25 years.
I'll throw in the mythical "State Church" as a final insult to demonstrate my authority to re-write history, plus it's a handy rabbit trail.

You did not address the quote. It has nothing to do with baptism; it's off topic. This is evidence you cannot be reasoned with.

Rather TRANSLATION: I am tired of repeating myself and wasting time with an individual set on converting me to his faith. So let's see if he has reached any lost folk with the Gospel instead of sheep stealing.

I never heard the Gospel proclaimed daily in liturgy (public worship) because I never listened for 25 years.

i was referring to my first 25 years I never stepped inside a church. Not one Roman Catholic shared the Gospel with me.

 

[epostle]

No, that was what I observed in my neighborhood full of baptized RC kids living for the devil.

You are comparing the best evangelicals (or whatever you say you are) with the worst Catholics. That's hardly fair.

Rather TRANSLATION: I am tired of repeating myself and wasting time with an individual set on converting me to his faith. So let's see if he has reached any lost folk with the Gospel instead of sheep stealing.

First, stop repeating yourself, especially the insults.
Second, nobody is trying to convert anyone to Catholicism. Most of the posts in here by Catholics are responses to challenges, misrepresentations, lies, and insults from ignorant anti-Catholics who refuse to understand much of anything.

I was referring to my first 25 years I never stepped inside a church. Not one Roman Catholic shared the Gospel with me.

All Catholics are not to blame because you were never exposed to an on fire Catholic community. Why don't you explain how a Catholic is supposed to share the Gospel, in terms that is agreeable to all Protestants (and whatever you say you are). Then we can compare "Gospels" and see if they differ from the historic Church that you borrowed it from in the first place.

Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995) | John Paul II