Why do so many Catholics drop the ball when it comes to EENS?
My closing points:
1.  It was proposed that the Bible had cases of Baptism of Desire -- the Good thief and Cornelius.

2.  We have shown that the Good thief was under the Old Covenant and went to the Limbo of the Fathers, as Jesus had not ascended to His Father at least by His Ressurection.  Therefore the Good Thief HAD to go to Limbo, where he was the same as any other righteous circumcised Jew.

3.  I have shown that Cornelius, according to scripture HAD to be baptized ("must do"), and that the strong language "forbid" shows an allegory between baptism and salvation.

4.  It was proposed that Augustine held Cornelius was "justified" before baptism. 

5.  I have demolished that supposition by quoting Augustine himself.

6.  It does appear, and I grant, that as of the writing of "Against the Donatists" that Augustine held the Good Thief to be "saved" by Explicit baptism of desire.  I disagree with Augustine here  as shown in "2" above, and Didi claims that Augustine later reversed himself.  As I have noted in the past, I am undecided on Explicit Baptism of Desire.  I fully disagree with "Implicit" baptism of desire.  Though I do not deny God His mercy, I only hold that any salvation outside of Baptism (or at the very least Explicit desire) has NEVER been revealed to us.

In summary, scripture most certainly does not show any baptism of desire.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Why do so many Catholics drop the ball when it comes to EENS? - by James02 - 09-02-2009, 08:39 PM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)