The catholic church used fear to get people to make there kids catholic, and fear to keep people from leaving the church, thus securing a positive cash flow into the churchs pocketbook.
"So now I'm not a Christian? I did not "find [my] beliefs for [my]self". Irregardless, are you to argue that baptism is all one needs to be saved and go to Heaven? You seem to assume so..."
LMAO!
That just made my day..
irregardless... LOL
LMAO!
That just made my day..
irregardless... LOLReitz - According to Catholic teaching unbaptized babies do NOT go to hell. A child under what is considered the age of reason is not capable of sin - the effects then of Original Sin are only enough to stop an unbaptized child from entering directly into Heaven - instead they go to limbo.
Limbo is not a place of punishment or suffering - it is one of waiting. Countless books and discussions have been on the nature of Limbo, but it basically means they are given another opportunity to choose.
The age of reason is when the Child has his/her first confession and communion.
Baptized child under the age of reason - goes straight to heaven.
Unbaptized child under the age of reason - goes to Limbo, and one day they too will be able to choose freely between Heaven/Hell, Good/Evil, God/Darkness. They will be given the same choice as we have here - though no one is sure how exactly except God Himself.
Actually, many just but unbaptized person go through this same Limbo process when they die. Truly just people who sought right and truly followed the truth can go to Heaven even if they never had a chance for baptism.
Above the age of reason every person makes thier own choice.
According to the Catholic faith, no one "automatically" goes to hell - every single person chooses with thier own faith, actions, and heart.
<< The Catholic Church has labelled abortion as a crime; it is wrong in nearly all cases. >>
Actually, in ALL cases.
<< Why is the refusal to baptize an infant as a Christian not considered a travesty in the same light? >>
In a way it is - but it is a harder truth to understand for many people than "don't kill your children" should be. Therefore the Church is far more understanding, even though it is endangering the child's soul. But anyone can be baptized at any time - so even an unbaptized child can choose baptism when older. In the meantime if the child tries to live a good life then God sees and judges that fairly and the child is not destined for hell.
<< Both souls are headed towards Hell...where is the distinction? >>
Niether soul is. Both will be given another chance to make a free choice.
Let me know if I can try to answer any other questions!
/EDIT: WHOOPS! THIS IS OPTIMUS - ELITA LEFT HERSELF LOGGED IN AND I FORGOT TO LOG HER OUT! D'OH!
Limbo is not a place of punishment or suffering - it is one of waiting. Countless books and discussions have been on the nature of Limbo, but it basically means they are given another opportunity to choose.
The age of reason is when the Child has his/her first confession and communion.
Baptized child under the age of reason - goes straight to heaven.
Unbaptized child under the age of reason - goes to Limbo, and one day they too will be able to choose freely between Heaven/Hell, Good/Evil, God/Darkness. They will be given the same choice as we have here - though no one is sure how exactly except God Himself.
Actually, many just but unbaptized person go through this same Limbo process when they die. Truly just people who sought right and truly followed the truth can go to Heaven even if they never had a chance for baptism.
Above the age of reason every person makes thier own choice.
According to the Catholic faith, no one "automatically" goes to hell - every single person chooses with thier own faith, actions, and heart.
<< The Catholic Church has labelled abortion as a crime; it is wrong in nearly all cases. >>
Actually, in ALL cases.
<< Why is the refusal to baptize an infant as a Christian not considered a travesty in the same light? >>
In a way it is - but it is a harder truth to understand for many people than "don't kill your children" should be. Therefore the Church is far more understanding, even though it is endangering the child's soul. But anyone can be baptized at any time - so even an unbaptized child can choose baptism when older. In the meantime if the child tries to live a good life then God sees and judges that fairly and the child is not destined for hell.
<< Both souls are headed towards Hell...where is the distinction? >>
Niether soul is. Both will be given another chance to make a free choice.
Let me know if I can try to answer any other questions!
/EDIT: WHOOPS! THIS IS OPTIMUS - ELITA LEFT HERSELF LOGGED IN AND I FORGOT TO LOG HER OUT!
D'OH! Can someone explain to me how, if god is supposedly controlling all the works, the church can change its mind about certain rules (eg. the baptism thing)? Seems like the system is creating god and the rules, not the other way around...
Pretender - As far as I possibly know, the Church has not changed its teaching on this ever. I outlined the teaching in my post accidentally under elita's login
There are several types of Church teaching - traditions, like alter servers, the format of the Mass, etc - can change and do (like Vatican II). Other teachings are held and can sometimes be altered or changed as well as they are not teachings considered absolutly necessary for salvation.
But some teachings, when the Pope speaks "ex cathedra" - from the chair of St. Peter and acting as the head of the Church - are infallible, and cannot change. The divinity of Christ, the Eucharistic prescence, etc are such teachings.
There are several types of Church teaching - traditions, like alter servers, the format of the Mass, etc - can change and do (like Vatican II). Other teachings are held and can sometimes be altered or changed as well as they are not teachings considered absolutly necessary for salvation.
But some teachings, when the Pope speaks "ex cathedra" - from the chair of St. Peter and acting as the head of the Church - are infallible, and cannot change. The divinity of Christ, the Eucharistic prescence, etc are such teachings.
<< "So now I'm not a Christian? I did not "find [my] beliefs for [my]self". Irregardless, are you to argue that baptism is all one needs to be saved and go to Heaven? You seem to assume so..."
LMAO!
That just made my day..
irregardless... LOL >>Sorry for being redundant, I'm glad it made your day. If you have a dictionary, it is considered a word, although I admit it's poor usage. Let me kiss you feet and apologize.
<< ThisIsMatt,
<< So now I'm not a Christian? I did not "find [my] beliefs for [my]self". Irregardless, are you to argue that baptism is all one needs to be saved and go to Heaven? You seem to assume so... >>
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it? >>
Instead of flaming me like the "14-year-olds" you seem to complain about and skirting the issue, please explain what you meant by:
<< It is not a blanket statement on those who consider themselves Christians, but find their beliefs for themselves >>
and answer my question.
Don't believe something just because you saw it in some movie. And Pretender, the Catholic Church is a human institution that (well, as I believe, but non-Catholics may not, so don't flame me for this) is divinely ordained (I think that's how it goes ). Emphasis on the human institution part...
God may not make mistakes, but humans do.
). Emphasis on the human institution part...God may not make mistakes, but humans do.
Children are sinless until reaching 'the age of accountability.'
There are no instances in the New Testament of children being baptised.
Jesus was not baptised until he was 33 years old.
In the New Testament the stories of baptism all involve full submersion.
I'm not Catholic...
There are no instances in the New Testament of children being baptised.
Jesus was not baptised until he was 33 years old.
In the New Testament the stories of baptism all involve full submersion.
I'm not Catholic...
Optimus,
Your explanation is good, but to the best of my knowledge (meager though that may be) the state of limbo is simply a regular tradition--not a Sacred Tradition (ergo, not a dogma).
<< I heard that it's the Church's teaching that unbaptized babies go to hell rather than limbo. Is this true?
No--but neither is it official teaching that they go to limbo. The fate of unbaptized children has not been determined.
[...]
The idea of limbo is a theological speculation about what happens to people who depart this life in original sin (1 Cor. 15:22) but without actual sin (Rom. 9:11). The only such people would be the unborn, babies, young children, morons, and a few others. They lack actual sin, so they would not be in hell, but they have original sin, so they would not be in heaven. It was speculated (emphasis mine) that they would be in a place of natural glory (limbo).
>>
Read more here.
Your explanation is good, but to the best of my knowledge (meager though that may be) the state of limbo is simply a regular tradition--not a Sacred Tradition (ergo, not a dogma).
<< I heard that it's the Church's teaching that unbaptized babies go to hell rather than limbo. Is this true?
No--but neither is it official teaching that they go to limbo. The fate of unbaptized children has not been determined.
[...]
The idea of limbo is a theological speculation about what happens to people who depart this life in original sin (1 Cor. 15:22) but without actual sin (Rom. 9:11). The only such people would be the unborn, babies, young children, morons, and a few others. They lack actual sin, so they would not be in hell, but they have original sin, so they would not be in heaven. It was speculated (emphasis mine) that they would be in a place of natural glory (limbo).
>>
Read more here.
reitz: I don't believe any church would ever say a child is doomed to hell, especially an innocent newborn. So since I never believed that, I can't answer you.
Pretender: The Bible was written by humans, and I look at it this way. We get smarter, and realize maybe not all of that stuff came from God, and maybe some of it was put there by men who just wanted to add to it, for whatever reason. I myself have often wondered that though, how they suddenly decided after 2000 years, Oh Jesus didn't mean this, he actually meant that. But anything written by men is always gonna have mistakes, thats just a given.
I couldn't imagine being haunted by the thought that there actually is a Hell.
It's not being haunted, the reason I live my life the way I do is not based on a fear of Hell, or being smitten down. Its just personal choices, and I think most people are the same way, religious or not.
Pretender: The Bible was written by humans, and I look at it this way. We get smarter, and realize maybe not all of that stuff came from God, and maybe some of it was put there by men who just wanted to add to it, for whatever reason. I myself have often wondered that though, how they suddenly decided after 2000 years, Oh Jesus didn't mean this, he actually meant that. But anything written by men is always gonna have mistakes, thats just a given.
I couldn't imagine being haunted by the thought that there actually is a Hell.
It's not being haunted, the reason I live my life the way I do is not based on a fear of Hell, or being smitten down. Its just personal choices, and I think most people are the same way, religious or not.
You might think there is a hell but are confident that you won't end up there
I wouldn't go that far.... :Q
I wouldn't go that far.... :Q
Bignate603
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 13,897
- 1
- 0
That's why my church doesn't believe that unbaptized people go to hell, or that any normal person living a normal life can go to hell in the first place. If you don't have a chance to learn the truth here you can get a chance later after you die. Nobody would be judged on standards they didn't have a chance to learn, that's just not right.
ThisIsMatt,
Let me break this down for you, in simple terms that I hope you can understand:
Some Christian religions (its followers would naturally be labelled as Christians) believe that unbaptized children go to straight to Hell when they die. Some people call themselves Christians, but follow no particular doctrine or religion ("It is not a blanket statement on those who consider themselves Christians, but find their beliefs for themselves". People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued, therefore I posted that quote
I never once stated that I, myself, believe that to be the case. Have you ever heard of advertising? I deliberatedly chose a vague and controversial topic to ensure that this thread would not be immediately pushed off of the first page. The topic of the thread in no way states by beliefs; it is merely a summary of some of the ideas discussed inside. Is it really that difficult to comprehend?
Nowhere in this thread have I stated my own personal beliefs on the subject. I was attempting to start an interesting theological discussion, which failed miserably because too many people here are unable or unwilling to read a post carefully enough to grasp its meaning. That can be quite obviously shown by the few who told me my beliefs on the subject, or accused me of taking my beliefs from popular culture.
For the mental lighweights among us, the sentence about watching the movie Stigmata was only background information, explaining that the movie got me thinking. For those who have never seen it, the central theme of the movie throws traditionally accepted Catholic (and other Christian) doctrine and beliefs out the window. It was that theme that got myself and my roommate discussing other accepted beliefs that don't always make sense to me.
Has the intelligence of this board really sunk this low?
Let me break this down for you, in simple terms that I hope you can understand:
Some Christian religions (its followers would naturally be labelled as Christians) believe that unbaptized children go to straight to Hell when they die. Some people call themselves Christians, but follow no particular doctrine or religion ("It is not a blanket statement on those who consider themselves Christians, but find their beliefs for themselves"
. People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued, therefore I posted that quoteI never once stated that I, myself, believe that to be the case. Have you ever heard of advertising? I deliberatedly chose a vague and controversial topic to ensure that this thread would not be immediately pushed off of the first page. The topic of the thread in no way states by beliefs; it is merely a summary of some of the ideas discussed inside. Is it really that difficult to comprehend?
Nowhere in this thread have I stated my own personal beliefs on the subject. I was attempting to start an interesting theological discussion, which failed miserably because too many people here are unable or unwilling to read a post carefully enough to grasp its meaning. That can be quite obviously shown by the few who told me my beliefs on the subject, or accused me of taking my beliefs from popular culture.
For the mental lighweights among us, the sentence about watching the movie Stigmata was only background information, explaining that the movie got me thinking. For those who have never seen it, the central theme of the movie throws traditionally accepted Catholic (and other Christian) doctrine and beliefs out the window. It was that theme that got myself and my roommate discussing other accepted beliefs that don't always make sense to me.
Has the intelligence of this board really sunk this low?
Actually, Red, it was closer to a 12-pack
Congratulations to Optimus for being the only person to actually read and correctly respond to the initial post.
I will concede that the fate of an unbaptized child is not official Church doctrine, but it is a commonly held belief among many Catholics, and several parishes preach the fate as I described (as a child in religious-ed classes, we used to have penny jars in the classrooms where we could donate money to help "...baptize pagan babies" in third world countries). Also, many smaller Protestant denominations either preach the beliefs, or have a great many members who hold them.
Congratulations to Optimus for being the only person to actually read and correctly respond to the initial post.
I will concede that the fate of an unbaptized child is not official Church doctrine, but it is a commonly held belief among many Catholics, and several parishes preach the fate as I described (as a child in religious-ed classes, we used to have penny jars in the classrooms where we could donate money to help "...baptize pagan babies" in third world countries). Also, many smaller Protestant denominations either preach the beliefs, or have a great many members who hold them.
Triumph
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,031
- 14
- 81
my my red dawn, aren't you a little sensitive? so quick to dish out the insults when none were thrown at you. you do not believe that there is a hell, so you don't worry about it. this however does not preclude its actual existance: you would just rather choose to believe that it isn't there.
btw, your postings have a very, how shall i say it, newsgroup-esque tone to them?
btw, your postings have a very, how shall i say it, newsgroup-esque tone to them?
reitz - your condescending attitude really doesn't help your argument, and stop telling me that you're trying to have an "intelligent" discussion when you are the one flaming. Let me break it down for you:
I said it was a blanket statement because you said this:
<< Why is the refusal to baptize an infant as a Christian not considered a travesty in the same light? Both souls are headed towards Hell...where is the distinction? What about a child who is raised Hindu, and dies before he is able to realize the "truth"? He is heading to Hell, since he has not been baptized. Why are Christians not spending all of their collective energy on baptizing those souls? >>
yet you'll find that baptism is not the key to salvation in a Christian sense, it is something you do after you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior and do it as a public testimony of your faith. Someone is not automatically a "Christian" because they're baptized.
<< Some Christian religions (its followers would naturally be labelled as Christians) believe that unbaptized children go to straight to Hell when they die. Some people call themselves Christians, but follow no particular doctrine or religion ("It is not a blanket statement on those who consider themselves Christians, but find their beliefs for themselves". People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued, therefore I posted that quote >>
Your explanation above, explaining why "Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it?" makes no sense. You in essence just proved that I did comprehend it. You are saying I call myself a Christian, but really am not. Seems odd, though, that I go to a Baptist church that preaches baptism is not the saving factor, doesn't it? Either way, if you say I'm a pseudo-wannabe Christian, and "People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued", then you in fact admit to it being a blanket statement - I'm "of that group" and I was "the first to protest", therefore it was a blanket statement
<< Has the intelligence of this board really sunk this low? >>
I said it was a blanket statement because you said this:
<< Why is the refusal to baptize an infant as a Christian not considered a travesty in the same light? Both souls are headed towards Hell...where is the distinction? What about a child who is raised Hindu, and dies before he is able to realize the "truth"? He is heading to Hell, since he has not been baptized. Why are Christians not spending all of their collective energy on baptizing those souls? >>
yet you'll find that baptism is not the key to salvation in a Christian sense, it is something you do after you have accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior and do it as a public testimony of your faith. Someone is not automatically a "Christian" because they're baptized.
<< Some Christian religions (its followers would naturally be labelled as Christians) believe that unbaptized children go to straight to Hell when they die. Some people call themselves Christians, but follow no particular doctrine or religion ("It is not a blanket statement on those who consider themselves Christians, but find their beliefs for themselves"
. People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued, therefore I posted that quote >>Your explanation above, explaining why "Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, is it?" makes no sense. You in essence just proved that I did comprehend it. You are saying I call myself a Christian, but really am not. Seems odd, though, that I go to a Baptist church that preaches baptism is not the saving factor, doesn't it? Either way, if you say I'm a pseudo-wannabe Christian, and "People of that group are usually the first to protest when blanket statements are issued", then you in fact admit to it being a blanket statement - I'm "of that group" and I was "the first to protest", therefore it was a blanket statement
<< Has the intelligence of this board really sunk this low? >>
Triumph
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,031
- 14
- 81
<< To be honest sis, I'm not even sure of who you are. >>
so sorry if i am just a peon compared to the Almighty Red Dawn in the anandtech heirarchy. so sorry that you get insulted at the drop of a hat, and have to resort to the style of posts fitting for the newsgroups.
lets say for a moment that there is a hell. during this moment, you maintain your present view that hell doesn't exist. you are then, in fact, ignorant of the truth. and you are happy in your ignorance. hence the phrase "ignorance is bliss." i don't see why you have to get all uptight. but then what do I know? Red Dawn doesn't even know who i am.
kranky
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 21,019
- 156
- 106
I'm not Catholic, so I can't speak to their beliefs. But I cannot believe that a loving God would condemn children to Hell on what to me is a "technicality". I understand it is one of the sacraments of the Church, but frankly I don't see God as someone who would be trying to keep people out of heaven on technical reasons. As one of the earlier posters said, I think it would be much more of a factor how well people walk in the light that they have been given.
Hey Red, I think I'll agree with Triumph on this one. Your posts thus far in this thread haven't been any better than an every day nef. In fact, I find that many of your posts are no better, even though your "following" may not agree.
<< I couldn't imagine being haunted by the thought that there actually is a Hell. >>
/matt awaits classic flames because he is not 3133t like some members...
<< I couldn't imagine being haunted by the thought that there actually is a Hell. >>
/matt awaits classic flames because he is not 3133t like some members...
oh reitz,
I said nothing of the sort. I simply mentioned that the movie (whose topic has nothing to do with baptism or Hell, BTW) got me thinking. Perhaps you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.
what part of this: According to Catholic doctrine (and several other Christian religious beliefs), an infant goes to Hell if he or she dies before baptism.
are my pathetic reading comprehension skills preventing me from understanding? I don't really care if you were raised catholic you said something which was false and have yet to tell me how you concluded it.
Do I need to put a disclaimer such as that in every one of my posts to cater towards your 14-year-old intellect?
You might try responding with something substantive than continueing to dodge the subject with flames.
I guess I would be upset to if it was revealed that a subject I speak at lengths of is foreign to me.
I said nothing of the sort. I simply mentioned that the movie (whose topic has nothing to do with baptism or Hell, BTW) got me thinking. Perhaps you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.
what part of this: According to Catholic doctrine (and several other Christian religious beliefs), an infant goes to Hell if he or she dies before baptism.
are my pathetic reading comprehension skills preventing me from understanding? I don't really care if you were raised catholic you said something which was false and have yet to tell me how you concluded it.
Do I need to put a disclaimer such as that in every one of my posts to cater towards your 14-year-old intellect?
You might try responding with something substantive than continueing to dodge the subject with flames.
I guess I would be upset to if it was revealed that a subject I speak at lengths of is foreign to me.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter