Do sacraments save?

[Jonathan_Gale]

Guess you haven't read Acts 22:16 lately, nor 1 Peter 3:21.

Guess you haven’t read Matt. 3:11 lately, not Lk. 3:16, Jn. 3:5.

 

[concretecamper]

The thief on the cross was not baptized and is one of the only people Jesus directly promised would go to heaven with Him.

The thief was saved under the Old Covenant, so Baptism wasn't needed

 

[Jamdoc]

I also don't view ordinances as necessary for salvation. But I'm not talking about ordinances, but the holy Sacraments of Jesus Christ which He Himself instituted and has given for the express purpose of God's grace making us new in Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

Okay but the criminal on the cross next to Jesus didn't do any holy sacraments
He had no good works, he was a condemned criminal hanging on a cross to die, and Jesus promised him he'd go to paradise with Jesus. All the man did was repent and ask Jesus to remember him.
That's as free grace as it gets, a death bed conversion if you will.

 

[Jamdoc]

The thief was saved under the Old Covenant, so Baptism wasn't needed

no he wasn't. he was a criminal right up to the point he was nailed on a cross. he repented and believed that Jesus was the Messiah, he believed Jesus when others wouldn't believe He had a kingdom.
He was saved under the promises that Jesus made, "24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Guess you haven’t read Matt. 3:11 lately, not Lk. 3:16, Jn. 3:5.

somehow i never see contradictions in these verses; baptism washes away sins and the Holy Spirit is given in baptism. A wonderful dual gift of grace from God.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

somehow i never see contradictions in these verses; baptism washes away sins and the Holy Spirit is given in baptism. A wonderful dual gift of grace from God.

The problem is that the real remission of sins is through the blood (Is. 1:18, Matt. 26:28, Rev. 7:14). If water baptism were sufficient for the remission of sins, the blood wouldn't have been emphasized as much.

 

[Valletta]

The problem is that the real remission of sins is through the blood (Is. 1:18, Matt. 26:28, Rev. 7:14). If water baptism were sufficient for the remission of sins, the blood wouldn't have been emphasized as much.

The sign of water is emphasized for the sacrament of Baptism. However, there is also Baptism by blood.
1 Pet 3:20-21 God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now.

 

[The Liturgist]

How so? The Catholic church believes that the church has equal authority as scripture because the Magisterium and Pope are infallible in their judgments.

Trent Horn affirms exactly this in this debate on Sola Scriptura.

Gavin Ortlund Vs.Trent Horn: Is Sola Scriptura True

Gavin Ortlund of (@TruthUnites ) and Trent Horn (@TheCounselofTrent ) debate whether scripture is the sole rule of faith for Christians.Join our Locals commu...

www.youtube.com

The point of the Reformation was that scripture alone was infallible. What makes Luther stand out is that he wrote 95 things that the Catholic Church was doing that contradicted scripture.

The Catholic Church and its Magisterium have nothing to do with my statement, for in case you hadn’t noticed, I’m Orthodox, and my church has never been subject to the Pope of Rome, and adheres instead to a Patristic tradition which is entirely harmonious with Scripture, lacking, for example, purgatory, Papal infallibility, or the flawed Augustinian model of original sin (we believe in original sin, but not that it spreads through concupiscience like a venereal disease, but rather in its ancestral nature, as was advocated by another early Latin theologian, St. John Cassian, whose views were once prevalent in the Roman church as well before Roman Catholic theology began to drift apart from our own due to the rise of Scholasticism*).

And your remark did not explicitly name Catholic theology, so I had to assume it was directed at anyone whose church believes in Holy Tradition and Sacramental efficacy, which includes not only the Orthodox but also the Lutherans, Anglicans and traditional Methodists (for example, the excellent Epsworth Chapel on the Green in Boise, Idaho). Although even if you had singled out Catholic theology as being incompatible with Scripture, I would object, because on most points Roman Catholic theology is still in accord with Scripture; it is worth noting that of Luther’s objections in the 95 theses, many of these related to ecclesiastical corruption and were subsequently addressed, for instance, the sale of indulgences was banned. Indeed most of what Luther argued for in the 95 theses has been implemented by the Roman Catholic Church, and many other issues the early Reformers had with Rome have also been addressed, for instance, the chief objections of St. Jan Hus (who is venerated by the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia) that the Roman church did not use a vernacular or semi-vernacular liturgical language such as Church Slavonic in the Czech Republic, despite having one and using it in what are now Croatia and Herzegovina, Glagolitic, and also that unlike the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics did not provide the Eucharist in both species, both concerns being echoed by the Lutherans, Anglicans and later Protestant movements, have been addressed.

And on this point, I would further argue you are mischaracterizing the Reformation. As my friend @MarkRohfrietsch will confirm, Martin Luther and traditional Lutherans, and the Anglicans, and even many Calvinists, believed in the salvific and regenerative properties of sacraments which were historically not disputed during the Patristic era, and furthermore the idea that the sacraments are themselves Salvific is entirely compatible with Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura does not, contrary to the opinion of some Protestants and Restorationists, mean “throw everything out that Rome believed in because what ever they believed in was wrong.” Indeed, Anglicanism expressly bases its theology on Scripture, Tradition and Reason, and John Wesley controversially adds Experience (something Mark disagrees with, and I understand his reasons for disagreeing with it; you might say, amusingly enough considering it is over an issue of Wesleyan theology, that we agree to disagree).

 

[The Liturgist]

The Salvation Army don't baptise, nor have communion - they believe that every service is a sacred act of worship. You're surely not going to tell me that they're not saved?

I don’t think anyone can truthfully answer who will be saved and who won’t be - it is only after death in some rare cases that enough information becomes available to assert that someone has been saved, except in the case of martyrdom, where the act of dying at the hands of Muslims or Communists or Hindu Nationalists or Mormon Fundamentalists* for confessing Christ is itself salvific.

Also, happily the Salvation Army now permits members who are so inclined to receive Baptism and the Eucharist at churches that provide them, and some Salvation Army officers administer these sacraments themselves. Booth originally intended these sacraments to be administered by the Salvation Army, but fell under the influence of his wife, who was a Quaker and believed in the spiritual reception of these sacraments only.

 

[All Becomes New]

The Catholic Church and its Magisterium have nothing to do with my statement, for in case you hadn’t noticed, I’m Orthodox, and my church has never been subject to the Pope of Rome, and adheres instead to a Patristic tradition which is entirely harmonious with Scripture, lacking, for example, purgatory, Papal infallibility, or the flawed Augustinian model of original sin (we believe in original sin, but not that it spreads through concupiscience like a venereal disease, but rather in its ancestral nature, as was advocated by another early Latin theologian, St. John Cassian, whose views were once prevalent in the Roman church as well before Roman Catholic theology began to drift apart from our own due to the rise of Scholasticism*).

And your remark did not explicitly name Catholic theology, so I had to assume it was directed at anyone whose church believes in Holy Tradition and Sacramental efficacy, which includes not only the Orthodox but also the Lutherans, Anglicans and traditional Methodists (for example, the excellent Epsworth Chapel on the Green in Boise, Idaho). Although even if you had singled out Catholic theology as being incompatible with Scripture, I would object, because on most points Roman Catholic theology is still in accord with Scripture; it is worth noting that of Luther’s objections in the 95 theses, many of these related to ecclesiastical corruption and were subsequently addressed, for instance, the sale of indulgences was banned. Indeed most of what Luther argued for in the 95 theses has been implemented by the Roman Catholic Church, and many other issues the early Reformers had with Rome have also been addressed, for instance, the chief objections of St. Jan Hus (who is venerated by the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia) that the Roman church did not use a vernacular or semi-vernacular liturgical language such as Church Slavonic in the Czech Republic, despite having one and using it in what are now Croatia and Herzegovina, Glagolitic, and also that unlike the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics did not provide the Eucharist in both species, both concerns being echoed by the Lutherans, Anglicans and later Protestant movements, have been addressed.

And on this point, I would further argue you are mischaracterizing the Reformation. As my friend @MarkRohfrietsch will confirm, Martin Luther and traditional Lutherans, and the Anglicans, and even many Calvinists, believed in the salvific and regenerative properties of sacraments which were historically not disputed during the Patristic era, and furthermore the idea that the sacraments are themselves Salvific is entirely compatible with Sola Scriptura.

Sola Scriptura does not, contrary to the opinion of some Protestants and Restorationists, mean “throw everything out that Rome believed in because what ever they believed in was wrong.” Indeed, Anglicanism expressly bases its theology on Scripture, Tradition and Reason, and John Wesley controversially adds Experience (something Mark disagrees with, and I understand his reasons for disagreeing with it; you might say, amusingly enough considering it is over an issue of Wesleyan theology, that we agree to disagree).

You didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. But thanks.

 

[The Liturgist]

You didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. But thanks.

So I am hoping, against hope perhaps, from that statement, that you now know that your blanket assertion that Tradition is inherently contradictory towards Scripture is simply wrong and a broad over-generalization, even in the case of the Roman Catholic Magisterium.

 

[All Becomes New]

So I am hoping, against hope perhaps, from that statement, that you now know that your blanket assertion that Tradition is inherently contradictory towards Scripture is simply wrong and a broad over-generalization, even in the case of the Roman Catholic Magisterium.

The Reformation had to correct the Catholic Church.

 

[All Becomes New]

Tradition

I am using this word in a technical sense. Protestantism is a tradition. As is Lutheranism. As is word of faith. Etc.

 

[Strong in Him]

Also, happily the Salvation Army now permits members who are so inclined to receive Baptism and the Eucharist at churches that provide them,

I think that was always the case.
I've known SA members who've taken communion elsewhere. I don't think there's been a problem if the person wasn't in uniform and not on SA premises.

and some Salvation Army officers administer these sacraments themselves.

I don't know whether that might be the case or not.
I do know that a few years ago our local SA husband and wife team resigned over this issue. They had taken some people to an Alpha course, the people became Christians and wanted the SA officer to baptise them. The top bods got to hear about it, forbade him from doing so - because he agreed to that when he joined the church - so he resigned, and went ahead and did it anyway.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The problem is that the real remission of sins is through the blood (Is. 1:18, Matt. 26:28, Rev. 7:14). If water baptism were sufficient for the remission of sins, the blood wouldn't have been emphasized as much.

Regardless of the truth of being washed in the blood of the lamb, it is nevertheless true that baptism washes away one's sins. It is not difficult to acknowledge that both the water of baptism and the blood of Christ cleans the sinner, and because scripture asserts the baptism washes away sins (Acts 22:16) as well as the blood of the lamb washing "their robes white" in Rev 7:14.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Catholic church believes that the church has equal authority as scripture because the Magisterium and Pope are infallible

Have you read Dei Verbum? Reading it may be educational for you because it sets forth what the Catholic Church teaches about scripture, the magisterium, and papal infallibility. And it is a Dogmatic Constitution which puts it at the pinnacle of Catholic teaching.

Dei verbum

Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation - Dei verbum

www.vatican.va

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Dei Verbum
section 7 says ... "But in order to keep the Gospel forever whole and alive within the Church, the Apostles left bishops as their successors, "handing over" to them "the authority to teach in their own place."(3) This sacred tradition, therefore, and Sacred Scripture of both the Old and New Testaments are like a mirror in which the pilgrim Church on earth looks at God, from whom she has received everything, until she is brought finally to see Him as He is, face to face (see 1 John 3:2)."

It is scripture that is like a mirror reflecting the image of God, and holy Tradition reflects God - this is so because holy scripture is holy Tradition written under inspiration and while holy scripture is holy Tradition it does not exhaust it.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

Regardless of the truth of being washed in the blood of the lamb, it is nevertheless true that baptism washes away one's sins. It is not difficult to acknowledge that both the water of baptism and the blood of Christ cleans the sinner, and because scripture asserts the baptism washes away sins (Acts 22:16) as well as the blood of the lamb washing "their robes white" in Rev 7:14.

I don't know about you, man, I've been listening to The Blood Will Never Lose Its Power, Nothing but the Blood and the like, so please forgive me for being lopsided on this issue.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

Have you read Dei Verbum? Reading it may be educational for you because it sets forth what the Catholic Church teaches about scripture, the magisterium, and papal infallibility. And it is a Dogmatic Constitution which pouts it at the pinnacle of Catholic teaching.

Dei verbum

Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation - Dei verbum

www.vatican.va

The Catholic Church is not fallible due to any questionable dogma, it has lost its influence and authority due to, I hate to bring this up, the child molestation scandal, the compromise on homosexuality and many other PR crisis. That's considered as taking the Lord's name in vain, for which it will be held accountable (Ex. 20:7).

 

[All Becomes New]

Have you read Dei Verbum? Reading it may be educational for you because it sets forth what the Catholic Church teaches about scripture, the magisterium, and papal infallibility. And it is a Dogmatic Constitution which pouts it at the pinnacle of Catholic teaching.

Dei verbum

Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation - Dei verbum

www.vatican.va

I disagree with this line:

"The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13)."

Don't feel bothered to read further.