Crypto2015
Active Member
The key word here is acceptance. Acceptance isn't as black and white as as your strand of thinking whats to insist upon. The Catholic teaching is a little more nuanced, because it acknowledges the myriad of human circumstances which make the world so complex.
On the surface, baptism and a state of grace are required for salvation. To be in a state of grace is to be regenerated by baptism and free from unrepentant mortal sin. Anyone who though their own volition refuses either regeneration and or repentance cannot be saved. In effect you must accept the Christian revelation. However, (and this is vital to understanding my position) sin is always an act of the will. You sin, when you make the decision to do what you know to be wrong. To choose to reject Christ will result in perdition.
The problem is that not all of those who are non-Christian, are non-Christian because they have chosen to reject the Gospel for something else. A Muslim in an Islamic country has inherited his creed from his circumstances as much as I inherited mine and you yours. He truly, and in sincerity pursues the will of God. Although misled, he cannot in reason be said to be guilty of "choosing" non-Christian convictions. (Unless you really want to commit to the idea that being raised in circumstances which make Christian belief extremely unlikely is itself a sin). I am not exempting the Muslim, Jew or Hindu from the Gospel. One way or the other they all must accept it, but this acceptance may be in such a way that it is known only to God; that because the obstacles to an explicit Christianity were circumstantially insurmountable they are not fully culpable for rejecting the Gospel. (Although they may well still be guilty of any other numerous sins and thus damned). The possibility for the salvation of said non-Christians, does not imply any certainty of it whatsoever.
No, because the Gospel is the means in which God designs to bring all men to salvation. And because of that, it must be preached to all. But the fact is that despite this obligation, it is not clearly available to all. God is just, and will not blame those who hold no blame for this fact lest you claim God to be arbitrary. (Which is reprehensible for anyone but the most committed Calvinist).
Hence why we have the sacrament of penance. All of us sin, and sometimes we sin so grievously that we risk our salvation. Mortal sin is always a wilful act, (this is really, really key to my whole position). But it can always be repented from. Either though confession or through perfect contrition. Again I'm saying that dying as a non-Christian doesn't always imply mortal (wilful) sin. Although for those who have had the Christian message fairly presented to them, it is.
Brother, most of the things that you said are not supported by the scriptures. The word of God is clear: in order to be saved you must accept Jesus' sacrifice for your sins and believe that Jesus is the Son of God. There is no other way. Claiming that people can be saved without accepting Jesus' propitiatory sacrifice is tantamount to asserting that Jesus' sacrifice is void and useless. If someone can be saved without resorting to Christ, Christ died in vain. Also, it seems to me that it is not reasonable to believe that people who have never heard the Gospel will have a chance to accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour after their death. This would make the preaching of the Gospel pointless. Why did Paul exposed himself to so many dangers in his missionary journeys if the people to whom he was trying to preach did not need the Gospel to be saved (or were going to hear the Gospel after their death)?
Also, your example about the Hindus and Muslims is patently wrong. Both Hindus and Muslims persecute Christians just because the latter are Christians. This happens all of the time. Are you going to tell me that both Hindus and Muslims are going to be saved anyway? It makes no sense. It is like saying that Saul did not need to turn to Christ and become the apostle Paul in order to be saved. After all, Saul was sincere in what he believed and certainly tried to live a holy life.
Last edited: