This was Catholic theologians' attempt to show that God would be merciful and not violate His word, i.e. put the unbaptized into an OK place rather than damn them to Hell.
If Protestants really believed in Sola Scriptura then they wouldn't advocate for baptism after the age of reason. So many children died early in the ages before modern medicine, and since there is no Limbo, I guess they're all burning in Hell.
where does is say one must be baptized? You mean water? By Holy Spirit?
The Bible clearly states that if a man not be baptized he cannot be saved.
What about the thief on the cross?
No baptism for him....saved or not?
If Protestants really believed in Sola Scriptura then they wouldn’t advocate for baptism after the age of reason. So many children died early in the ages before modern medicine, and since there is no Limbo, I guess they’re all burning in Hell.
If you believe baptism works “that way” shouldn’t you run around like a sociopath forcing people into water?
I suspect you don’t believe it works “that way” but you really are trying to “win the debate” and truth is irrelevant to your argument.
God is a God on our side. God didn’t put this in place to keep people from being saved, rather so that people would understand and admit they needed God to save them, namely through Jesus Christ, aka the Good News.
God also says He will save who He wants to save. If He wants to save a little child, who is able to tell God He cannot save that child? Or anyone, for that matter.
The thief on the cross couldnt be baptized but Jesus saved Him. People can be saved without being baptized. Its n9t that they are rejecting baptism, they just are not yet baptized.
What of the concept of a Loving God?