tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post7745864309935641561..comments2024-03-29T04:51:09.098-07:00Comments on Introibo Ad Altare Dei: Can Unbaptized Infants Achieve Salvation? Introibo Ad Altare Deihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comBlogger81125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-3668233995104089332023-05-17T19:11:54.620-07:002023-05-17T19:11:54.620-07:00Mary's Vagabond,
Using the Catholic Encycloped...Mary's Vagabond,<br />Using the Catholic Encyclopedia as your solitary source is analogous to a lawyer citing an online legal opinion in defense of his case. Much more is needed for correct analysis. <br />According to theologian Sagues, St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Gregory Nazianzen are two Fathers who denied pain for unbaptized infants who die. Among the Greek Fathers, none were opposed to the thesis that such infants would not suffer the pain of sense. <br />As to St. Augustine, he said of unbaptized infants who died, "I cannot define the amount and kind of their punishment, but I dare not say it were better for them never to have existed than to exist there." He was not definitive in his teaching. <br /><br />There was no consensus of the Fathers. Moreover, the thesis that there is no pain of sense for unbaptized infants is NOT held de fide, but Common and morally certain. You could hold that unbaptized infants ARE subject to torments without being a heretic. (See "Sacrae Theologiae Summa IIB," [1955], pgs. 592-598). <br /><br />Hence, the Feeneyites get it wrong again (no surprise there). BOD was infallibly defined at Trent as well.<br /><br />Hope this helped!<br />God Bless,<br /><br />---Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-16032994905371923792023-05-17T09:03:20.649-07:002023-05-17T09:03:20.649-07:00Introibo,
Recently I had a recognize and assist bu...Introibo,<br />Recently I had a recognize and assist but ironically Dimond fan guy (no surprise, same thing) tell me that St. Augustine's erroneous opinion on hellish suffering for unbaptised Infants held sway for 6 centuries until being challenged by St. Anselm (see the Cath Encyclopedia article on Limbo). That 'proves' that the 'common error of centuries' can't become OUM and ergo both BODers and sedes are proven wrong when they say consent at any point of time. I personally don't believe in that codswallop because despite my sins I have a higher opinion of Jesus and His Church that He wouldn't allow a month of error, leave alone centuries, and serious theologians like Tanquerey and Godts teach the same as us but I would like to understand how the twisters got this idea and what answer to be made to good willed inquirers. Mary's Vagabondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09565086577503013635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-59327425070817999862020-05-08T05:50:55.599-07:002020-05-08T05:50:55.599-07:00Another simple answer:
I’m not the most tech savvy...Another simple answer:<br />I’m not the most tech savvy guy and this is how Google does the time. No big deal. I just think ahead three hours.<br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-73839602045965635392020-05-07T23:33:43.312-07:002020-05-07T23:33:43.312-07:00Thanks Introibo. Sorry for this question, but I...Thanks Introibo. Sorry for this question, but I'm curious as to why this blog's time is the US Pacific time zone, yet you live in NYC?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-90678034850856288832020-05-07T23:20:48.621-07:002020-05-07T23:20:48.621-07:00@anon10:39
The simple answer: we don’t know. There...@anon10:39<br />The simple answer: we don’t know. There is no definitive Church teaching on this matter. Perhaps preach was all He did. <br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-9591499478873494212020-05-07T22:39:40.109-07:002020-05-07T22:39:40.109-07:00Introibo - regarding the ascension of the holy sou...Introibo - regarding the ascension of the holy souls from the Old Testament detained in hell, what did Christ do there other than preach on Holy Saturday?<br /><br />The Catechism of St. Pius X states that Christ was the [fittingly] first Soul Who entered heaven. Hence I don't buy the idea that the souls ascended on Holy Saturday.<br /><br />Aquinas even says that Sts. Enoch and Elias were in a lower heaven.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-44107026882400346982019-01-31T04:45:59.892-08:002019-01-31T04:45:59.892-08:00Introibo,
Thanks very much for the explanation!! ...Introibo,<br /><br />Thanks very much for the explanation!! Very interesting.<br /><br />JoAnnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-59002815397732811112019-01-30T22:20:30.337-08:002019-01-30T22:20:30.337-08:00Joann,
According to Theologian Pohle the fall of t...Joann,<br />According to Theologian Pohle the fall of the angels was unlike the Fall of the human race. The human race apostasized as a whole because all people were represented and virtually contained in Adam; thereby all contracted Original Sin through him except for Mary and Christ’s Human Nature. The angels were tested as individuals. About one third failed the test and became demons. The first to rebel was Satan, who is thought by most theologians to be of the highest of the nine choirs of angels—the Seraphim. The angels knew things better than people as they are pure spirits with no body. There was a test, the exact nature of which has not been defined. Most theologians agree that it was revealed to them what God planned to do. The angels were asked to submit to God and His plans. Some angels rebelled out of pride. Some theologians think it was a rejection based on their refusal to be subject to God, others think it was rebellion against His intent to create inferior humans and love them. (See Dogmatic Theology 3:340-342).<br /><br />God could reveal to the intellect of the Infant all He plans to do with him and the universe, and the infant can accept or reject God in an analogous manner.<br /><br />God Bless,<br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-22945795439390620152019-01-30T21:46:58.901-08:002019-01-30T21:46:58.901-08:00Introibo,
I don’t understand what the “test like t...Introibo,<br />I don’t understand what the “test like the angels” means. Can you explain? Thanks.<br /><br />JoAnn<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-34369335373166817522019-01-30T16:00:25.750-08:002019-01-30T16:00:25.750-08:00Joann,
Limbo may indeed be the answer, but the the...Joann,<br />Limbo may indeed be the answer, but the theory of Klee, etc. is not like predestination. BOD is not predestination. Nor is it predestination if infants are given a test like the angels. They pass or fail on their acceptance or rejection of God which they freely choose.<br /><br />However, Klee may be completely wrong. Limbo may indeed be the only answer. Only the Church can decide this question if and when we get a true pope back!<br /><br />God Bless,<br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-78196116913819640962019-01-30T14:29:16.620-08:002019-01-30T14:29:16.620-08:00Introibo,
If some babies went to Heaven and other...Introibo,<br /><br />If some babies went to Heaven and others didn’t, wouldn’t that be analogous to predestination? Limbo seems to be the only explanation.<br /><br />JoAnn<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-47465559571706379732019-01-30T07:06:39.142-08:002019-01-30T07:06:39.142-08:00Fred,
Thank you for the kind words. One of the do...Fred, <br />Thank you for the kind words. One of the downsides to the theories is the possible rise in abortion. However, the theories don’t claim that aborted babaies go to Heaven. SOME may, but others will not, analogous to BOD—not everyone is thereby saved. <br /><br />The doctrine of Limbo can therefore be retained. A child who has the choice at the last moment of life may reject God because they did not grow enough in the state of grace—an argument against abortion.<br /><br />I’m not advocating the idea Fred. Your concerns are real. The doctrine of Limbo May indeed be the only correct answer. <br /><br />God Bless,<br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-81723321778151690042019-01-30T05:49:22.390-08:002019-01-30T05:49:22.390-08:00Introibo,
Recently Pope Francis stated that the s...Introibo,<br /><br />Recently Pope Francis stated that the souls of the aborted are in Heaven. But if they are, then a mother who aborts her child assures that it will go to Heaven, whereas my poor wife and I have five adult children who still might just go to Hell. If the souls of the aborted enter Heaven, then Planned Parenthood has gotten more people into Heaven in America in the last fifty years than the Conciliar Church has. <br /><br />And imagine a teenage gal pregnant and in desperate straits. What to do? Give birth and have the child grow up in a terrible situation, or abort and assure that the child will be in Heaven. The belief that the aborted enter Heaven might just put her over the wrong edge.<br /> <br /> No, I think we had better stick with the teaching about Limbo.<br /><br />P.S. Good, thoughtful website.<br />P. O'Brienhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03184466434314298715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-63955287815010288702019-01-28T18:45:04.417-08:002019-01-28T18:45:04.417-08:00@clarity
Thank you for a charitable and thoughtful...@clarity<br />Thank you for a charitable and thoughtful reply. <br /><br />Points on which I must disagree:<br /><br /><br />1. I don’t believe that anyone would get the idea that unbaptized infants can be saved apart from (a) entrance into the Church and (b) sanctifying grace. That is what both the Sacrament Of Baptism and its substitutes effectuate. The title is in the form of a question and does not attempt an answer. A person who reads this post will not think I’m advocating lack of Church membership or sanctifying grace for salvation.<br /><br />2. Please remember that these theories are discussed by theologians Pohle and Ott, who wrote under Pope Pius XI and Pius XII. They declared the theories “possible” and not heretical. Klee and company were also pre-V2 and never censured or condemned. <br /><br />3. I have the greatest respect for the individuals you list, yet they would be the first to admit they are not approved theologians or canonists. Their opinions bind no one—nor do mine. <br /><br />4. Cardinal Cajetan did believe in his theory. He spoke and wrote of it well before Trent.<br /><br />5. I am not “taking on” any teaching. I’m simply bringing to light an interesting topic that has a moral for us.<br /><br />Finally, you ask if God would allow anyone in to Heaven without having to consciously choose Him, my opinion is “yes” for baptized infants. Those who contract original sin have done so without their fault (no conscious decision) so it can be remitted also without conscious decision in Baptism which makes the soul pleasing to God so it can achieve its supernatural end.<br /><br />—-Introibo Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-7411357122150630052019-01-28T18:00:24.762-08:002019-01-28T18:00:24.762-08:00I certainly understand your being busy with work a...I certainly understand your being busy with work and family (working a 90-hour week, commuting, and raising a family, I don’t know when you sleep), but you shouldn’t put this out if you do not have time to do the in-depth research and analysis that this topic demands. This can create great confusion in the minds of the readers. <br /><br />Dyer’s work was written after the eclipse of the Church began on October 28, 1958, the day that Angelo Roncalli usurped the Papal Throne, and therefore should not be considered approved theology, even if he was a valid theologian and his jurisdiction had not yet expired. <br /><br />Please pay attention to the lexical nuances. You are introducing the word “sacrament.” You say “the sacrament of baptism” versus “baptism.” By “the sacrament of baptism,” I presume you mean the act of a person having water poured over his head by another person and the pourer pronouncing the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father…and of the Son…and of the Holy Ghost.” <br /><br />I did not say it was heretical to deny that the sacrament of baptism was necessary to enter Heaven. I did say that it is heretical to deny that baptism is necessary to enter Heaven. Denzinger 861 states, in the 1955 English-language edition, “If anyone shall say that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation: let him be anathema.” Notice it used the term, “baptism,” not “the sacrament of baptism.” Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire may not be formal sacraments, but they are baptism and satisfy the requirement of baptism in order that a person may enter Heaven. To presume that someone enter Heaven without some kind of baptism (sacramental, blood, desire, or another form that God has not revealed to us) is heresy. Your wording is dangerous, because someone may read this and think “Oh, infants can enter Heaven without baptism.”<br /><br />As late as 1905, Pope Saint Pius X was affirming, although not infallibly, that unbaptized infants go to Limbo. Modern scholars on the subject, Harrison, Sanborn, Dr. Droleskey, and Novus Ordo Watch, who have all studied the Church’s teachings extensively, all scowl on the idea that the infants who do not receive Sacramental Baptism or Baptism of Blood can be saved and assert that the Church has always implied that such infants go to Limbo. Here is NOW’s commentary on Antipope Francis praying at the graves of the unbaptized infants and how that stunt was an attack on the faith (Tradcast Express 71): https://traffic.libsyn.com/preview/secure/tradcast/express071.mp3 <br /><br />Did Cardinal Cajetan actually believe that unborn infants’ parents could make a vicarious desire on the infants’ behalf, or was he just floating the idea in order to have the council determine its veracity? Surely council attendees are allowed to present ideas to the council to have their correctness determined.<br /><br />Even if it is possible that infants not receiving Sacramental Baptism or Baptism of Blood can somehow receive a form of baptism and be saved, the Church has never taught it. If you are going to take on the traditional teaching (although not doctrinally-defined position) of the Church, you are going to have to do some extensive research and analysis, far more than can be done in a blog post. <br /><br />And I suppose the question has to be asked, if infants without Sacramental baptism are given a “moment of choice,” are infants who die with sacramental baptism also required to make a choice rather than being immediately admitted to Heaven? Would God let anyone into Heaven without their having consciously to choose Him?<br />Claritynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-13175012616534404372019-01-28T03:10:39.536-08:002019-01-28T03:10:39.536-08:00As I stated last week, to attain salvation one req...As I stated last week, to attain salvation one requires some form of baptism. Be it water, desire, or blood. On that we should all agree. Tom A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13680594973982446985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-21559802558798270252019-01-27T18:11:32.658-08:002019-01-27T18:11:32.658-08:00Is the inherited punishment something that you or ...Is the inherited punishment something that you or other humans understand or just accept? I ask because I do not understand as I would not understand putting a 7 year old in prison because his dad killed a person. It is not my pride that I wouldn’t punish the 7 year old it is just what is deeply within my conscience. <br /><br /><br />If I must accept inherited punishment as an article of faith than I will, but I cannot pretend to understand it. I believe this is why God did what he did (didn’t just stop at the inherited punishment, but sent a savior). I also think it is why BOD and BOB are necessary as if only Baptism by water were the option it wouldn’t seem just for all those who never had the opportunity. An unborn baby dying getting a similar test like the angels is a nice though and I could see that making sense although I could also see God choosing to apply BOD in a sense if it would have been so, but I guess the two may be the same thing in a way.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-67748985586500914132019-01-27T16:13:28.957-08:002019-01-27T16:13:28.957-08:00@clarity
First, this is a terse post, not a doctor...@clarity<br />First, this is a terse post, not a doctoral thesis. I'm merely exploring a possibility written about by theologian Dyer. Hence, there is no "strong thesis." I do not endorse or oppose the possibility of unbaptized infants (at least some) obtaining salvation by the extraordinary grace of God.<br /><br />1. The idea that unbaptized infants can go to Heaven without the sacrament of baptism is NOT heretical as Baptism of Blood clearly proves. <br /><br />2. That God could provide grace as indicated by the theologians is clearly a possibility, as they were never censured or condemned. Other approved theologians who didn't agree with them, such as Ott and Pohle, wrote that the theories were "possible" and not heretical. <br /><br />3. As explained above, I am not "entertaining heresy." As to Canon 5 of the Council of Trent, the sacrament of Baptism (water) is not optional as the Canon clearly states. A person can not "opt out" of the sacrament of Baptism and be saved. However, the Baptism of Desire (BOD) and Baptism of Blood (BOB)are for those who weren't given an option. If such were heretical Cardinal Cajetan would have been excommunicated at the Council of Trent and his proposition condemned. Neither took place.<br /><br />4. The citation for Cardinal Cajetan's teaching being removed by the editor and not Pope St Pius V is theologian Dyer, "Limbo: Unsettled Question" pg. 145<br /><br />5. I'm not claiming a "virtual life" nor did I state such. The infant would be given a test analogous to the angels. When lacking Church condemnation, and even lacking condemnation by peer-theologians, such theories may indeed be entertained even if not taught. The matter is up for deliberation and debate.<br /><br />6. You ask, "If you think this is possible, why not at least give a summary of Klee’s, Schell’s, and Glorieux’s theories, along with the names of the works in which they disseminated their theories so that we can read the original source. Why not give some analysis of their arguments?" Answer: Because I'm a NYC lawyer working an average of 90 hours a week. I'm also a family man with duties and responsibilities. That's why my blog is composed of short posts in the (very few) hours of spare time in which I research and write for my blog. It is not my purpose to write a doctoral dissertation.<br /><br />7. You cite Dr. Droleskey's articles, yet the good Dr, does not deny BOD or BOB. The letter of Pope St Siricus and Cantate Domino were both promulagted prior to the Council of Trent, yet obviously did not settle the issue, or Cardinal Cajetan's theory would have been condemned as heresy. The fact that theologian Ott was still calling the theories of Klee, etc. as "possible" which would have put his writings under censure/condemnation had he contradicted Pope St. Pius X or Pope Sixtus V.<br /><br />8. The Vatican II sect is preaching universal salvationism at best, and contradicting itself at worst. Why pray FOR the stillborn if they are saved? These theologians are not teaching universalism--just that another way to join the Church MIGHT be possible for at least SOME unbaptized infants.<br /><br />9. You ask, "Lastly, will the souls of the unbaptized infants in Limbo be present at the Last Judgment and therefore have all history revealed to them? If so, they will know what they lost."<br />Answer: I don't know. That's why this topic was being debated by the theologians. Only the Church can answer that.<br /><br />---IntroiboIntroibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-1172009112912973822019-01-27T09:15:38.631-08:002019-01-27T09:15:38.631-08:00Very poorly titled and written article. Too discur...Very poorly titled and written article. Too discursive, no strong thesis backed by evidence, no firm analysis, and lacks important citations. You seem to be entertaining two different ideas: (1) that unbaptized infants can go to Heaven (this is definitely heretical), and (2) that unbaptized infants somehow can gain baptism by a miracle of God (something that has never been taught by the Church). <br /><br />Andrew de Vega’s proposition may not have been approved, but the Council of Trent, Canon 5, infallibly declared that baptism is necessary for salvation (Denzinger 861 from the 1955 English-language edition). Anybody who does not believe such is a heretic. The answer to the question “Can Unbaptized Infants Achieve Salvation?” is NO!!! Why even entertain such a heresy with your title?<br /><br />What is your source that the book editor, and not Pope St. Pius V, ordered the teaching removed from Cardinal Cajetan’s work? Please include a citation when you make these claims. <br /><br />Are you also asking whether God can, by a miracle, give an infant who was not physically baptized by another person some kind of “virtual” life, through which the infant can gain some sort of baptism and whereby the infant can be judged based on how he/she would have lived if born and by that test be saved or damned? Has the Church ever entertained this notion? Is lacking Church condemnation the same as having Church approval? If you think this is possible, why not at least give a summary of Klee’s, Schell’s, and Glorieux’s theories, along with the names of the works in which they disseminated their theories so that we can read the original source. Why not give some analysis of their arguments?<br /><br />The Ordinary Magisterium and the statements of the Popes have always implied that unbaptized infants cannot attain salvation. See the sources cited in Dr. Droleskey’s articles:<br /><br />• Pope Saint Siricius in 385 <br />• The Papal Bull Cantate Domino of Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence in 1441<br />• The Papal Bull Effrænatam of Pope Sixtus V in 1588<br />• Pope Saint Pius X in 1905<br /><br />http://www.christorchaos.com/DoNOTGoForthandBaptize.htm<br /><br />http://www.christorchaos.com/ExposingSoulstoaFateFarWorsethanLimbo.htm<br /><br />http://www.christorchaos.com/NoNeedtobeinLimboAnyLonger.htm<br /><br />http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=73&catname=15<br /><br />http://www.personal.psu.edu/glm7/m256.htm<br /><br />I don’t endorse the writers of the last two articles (the first is a sedevacantist operating without jurisdiction and the second is a novus ordo), but their evidence is firm.<br /><br />The Vatican II sect, which promulgates every form of heresy and error, promotes the idea of salvation for unbaptized infants. The Catholic Church never gave Catholic burial to unbaptized infants nor buried them in consecrated ground. Surely, the Church would pray for unbaptized infants if they could be helped by prayer. By contrast, the Vatican II developed specific prayers and a funeral mess for unbaptized infants. Remember, back in 2007, when the Novus Ordo religion released the heretical document called “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptized” (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html) and the controversy it caused among the conservative novus ordo followers? And, last All Souls’ Day, Antipope Francis prayed at the graves of stillborn infants for their souls. <br /><br />Lastly, will the souls of the unbaptized infants in Limbo be present at the Last Judgment and therefore have all history revealed to them? If so, they will know what they lost.<br />Claritynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-80323944109369934552019-01-27T07:08:25.790-08:002019-01-27T07:08:25.790-08:00@anon8:59
I believe it happens very soon after fer...@anon8:59<br />I believe it happens very soon after fertilization, and in some cases, at fertilization. Since the zygote is being fashioned to hold a human soul, in my opinion, it would be considered the equivalent of murder by God even without a soul present. I do not subscribe to the 40 day, 80 day theory of Aquinas. I do think it’s highly probable frozen fertilized eggs have souls. Remember, that God creates the soul immediately, Ex nihil, but does not have to do so at the same time for each individual. For example, God knows whether there will be twins or not. If not, He may create the soul instantly, or if He knows it will be twins, He waits until they are clearly such. Just my opinion.<br /><br />God Bless,<br /><br />—-Introibo <br />Introibo Ad Altare Deihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11377479441601352059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-82033534396757700482019-01-27T04:44:50.145-08:002019-01-27T04:44:50.145-08:00In Genesis we see God banishing Adam and all his d...In Genesis we see God banishing Adam and all his descendants from Eden to a life of toil because of his sin. So we may not think it just that we suffer for Adam's sin but God thought it just. We do not think it just due to our pride. Tom A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13680594973982446985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-33226828782675455862019-01-26T20:59:53.635-08:002019-01-26T20:59:53.635-08:00Introibo,
What is your position on when the soul i...Introibo,<br />What is your position on when the soul is created? I don’t think it can be at conception as identical twins happen after that and also two separate conceived eggs can merge into one. Do you think frozen fertilized eggs have a soul? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-1570665145912108282019-01-26T20:59:33.303-08:002019-01-26T20:59:33.303-08:00Tom, I agree God made us and can do what he wants,...Tom, I agree God made us and can do what he wants, but he also made our innate instinct to normally think about creating something just to make it suffer permanently for all eternity being punished for something it didn’t do and had no chance to not do as something unjust. God is Just and loves us so I don’t know how to reconcile this. I think without BOD thins would not be just either, but with BOD is opens the door to those that were never given the opportunity for baptism by water.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-26478000603772515492019-01-26T06:31:03.684-08:002019-01-26T06:31:03.684-08:00God owes man absolutely nothing. We owe Him absol...God owes man absolutely nothing. We owe Him absolutely everything. Tom A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13680594973982446985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6466183320330735196.post-73726786265514367032019-01-25T17:44:22.089-08:002019-01-25T17:44:22.089-08:00Why would it be just for God to send all to hell d...Why would it be just for God to send all to hell due to Adam’s sin? This seems unjust to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com