Happy Holy Saturday.
The Roman Catholic Church's doctrine that baptism is a “holy” sacrament that frees a person from sin and makes them a child of God (Catechism 1213) is problematic from a biblical perspective, especially given the Church’s history of doctrinal additions and commandments that diverge from Scripture.
Firstly, according to biblical teaching, holiness comes from obedience to God’s commandments and receiving the Holy Spirit—not from external rituals or works alone. Jesus emphasizes this in John 14:15-17, saying,
“If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter... the Spirit of truth.”
Here, Jesus links obedience and receiving the Holy Spirit, which enables true holiness. However, the Catholic Church has historically established teachings and practices—such as the veneration of Mary, the saints, and the observance of man-made holy days—that don’t align with God’s commandments, such as the Sabbath (Exodus 20:8-11).
Secondly, if an institution repeatedly breaks commandments, it’s inconsistent to claim that it can make others holy through sacramental acts, as holiness cannot come from a source in rebellion against God’s word. Romans 3:23-24 states,
“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”
Justification, then, is solely the result of grace through faith—not any particular institution or action. Acts 10:34-35 reinforces that holiness is granted to those who fear God and work righteousness, rather than by ritual.
Additionally, the notion that baptism alone makes one a child of God contradicts
John 1:12-13, which says,
“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
Here, becoming a child of God requires receiving Christ personally and being born spiritually by God’s will—not through rituals instituted by humans.
The doctrine that "water baptism is necessary for salvation" is often based on a misinterpretation of John 3:5, where Jesus says,
“Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”
However, Jesus is not referring specifically to water baptism here, but to two distinct births—physical birth ("born of water") and spiritual rebirth ("born of the Spirit").
The “water” Jesus mentions in John 3:5 is generally understood to symbolize natural birth, not baptism. The verse highlights the necessity of both being born naturally (from the womb, where water plays a vital role) and then experiencing spiritual rebirth. This interpretation aligns with John 3:6, which says,
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”
Here, Jesus clarifies the distinction between the fleshly (natural) birth and the spiritual transformation required to enter God’s kingdom.
Numerous scriptures emphasize that salvation comes through faith in Christ alone, not through any external ritual. For example:
Ephesians 2:8-9 states,
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
Here, salvation is explicitly linked to faith and grace—not to any ritual like water baptism.
Romans 10:9 says,
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
There is no mention of baptism as a requirement for salvation, only a confession of faith.
While baptism is a meaningful step of obedience and a public profession of faith, it is not portrayed as necessary for salvation. Consider 1 Peter 3:21, which clarifies that baptism is “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.”
This verse indicates that baptism does not cleanse sin but serves as a response to salvation already received through faith.
Acts 11:16 provides a significant perspective. In this verse, Peter (the alleged first pope) recalls a moment of divine revelation, saying,
"Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost."
So why does the Roman Catholic Church ignore the teachings of it's "first pope".
This passage underlines the idea that the act of baptism itself—specifically, water baptism—does not confer salvation. Instead, it is the Holy Spirit's work within a believer that brings about true transformation and eternal life. If the act of baptism were sufficient for salvation, Peter would not have made this distinction.
A striking example is the thief on the cross next to Jesus. In Luke 23:42-43, the thief asks Jesus to remember him, and Jesus replies,
“Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”
The thief was not baptized, yet he was assured of eternal life based on his faith alone, demonstrating that salvation does not hinge on baptism.
Jesus’s reference to being “born of water and of the Spirit” is best understood as referring to both physical birth and spiritual rebirth, not to a requirement for water baptism. The broader scriptural message consistently reveals that salvation is a gift of grace through faith in Jesus Christ, and that while baptism is an important act of obedience, it is not a requirement for salvation.
To counter the argument that baptism is required for salvation, we can also examine
1 Peter 3:21
"The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
This verse clarifies that baptism is symbolic and not a literal means of salvation. Here, Peter (the alleged first pope) explains that baptism represents a response to God—
"the answer of a good conscience"—not a ritual that washes away sin or "the filth of the flesh." In other words, baptism does not directly cause salvation; instead, it symbolizes a person’s inner response to God’s grace, already received through faith in Christ.
The true saving power, Peter emphasizes, lies in "the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Baptism serves as a “like figure” or representation, illustrating the believer’s unity with Christ in His death and resurrection. It confirms that the transformative aspect of salvation is rooted in faith and God’s grace, not in the act of baptism itself.
1 Peter 3:21 reinforces that baptism is a meaningful symbol, reflecting an internal change that faith in Christ brings, and is not the mechanism of salvation itself.
Acts 16:30-31 provides a strong counter to the doctrine that baptism itself is required for salvation:
"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."
In this passage, when the Philippian jailer asks Paul and Silas what he must do to be saved, their immediate answer is to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." There is no mention of baptism as a requirement for salvation here. Instead, Paul and Silas emphasize faith alone in Jesus as the sole condition for salvation, indicating that salvation comes by faith, not through any ritual or external act.
While Acts 16:33 shows the jailer and his household were baptized later that night, the focus of salvation remains on belief in Christ as foundational. Baptism in the New Testament is often performed as a public testimony of faith, not as a means to achieve it. Therefore, baptism follows as an outward sign of an inner transformation that has already occurred through faith.
Romans 10:13-14 reinforces the essential role of belief in the gospel for salvation:
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"
This passage emphasizes that salvation comes through calling on the name of the Lord, which presumes genuine belief in the gospel. Verse 14 further challenges the idea that salvation could occur without understanding or faith: how could anyone be saved if they haven’t first believed the truth about Christ? This would directly counter doctrines suggesting that salvation comes through ritual alone—such as baptism—since Paul makes clear that belief and knowledge of the gospel are foundational.
In other words, unless someone first believes the gospel, outward acts like baptism hold no power to save. Paul highlights that faith is a prerequisite for calling on the Lord, which aligns with Romans 10:17:
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
Without faith in the message of Christ, the outward signs are empty; salvation rests on a heart that believes and responds to the truth of the gospel.
Acts 10:44-48 provides a powerful example of salvation and the work of the Holy Spirit occurring before the act of baptism:
"While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord..."
In this passage, the Gentiles receive the Holy Spirit through belief in Christ as Peter (the alleged first pope) preaches, "before" they are baptized with water. This challenges the doctrine of baptismal regeneration because it clearly shows that the Holy Spirit can come upon believers through faith alone, without the intermediary of water baptism. Their reception of the Holy Spirit is evident from their speaking in tongues and magnifying God—signs of divine indwelling that occur without any ritual.
Peter’s reaction further affirms that the Gentiles had already received the fullness of salvation: he asks rhetorically if anyone could refuse them baptism, noting that they had “received the Holy Ghost as well as we.” Here, Peter acknowledges that these Gentile believers have the same standing before God as the Jewish believers, having been justified by faith and not by any ritual act. This moment also aligns with Paul’s later teaching in Romans 10:13-14:
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?"
If, as Acts 10 illustrates, individuals are receiving the Holy Spirit and salvation through belief alone, it undermines any notion that baptism itself is necessary for salvation. Acts 10:44-48, therefore, serves as a compelling counter to the idea that baptism regenerates the soul or is essential for salvation, emphasizing instead that salvation is initiated by faith and granted by the Spirit independently of water baptism.
The RCC's approach, by revising core gospel principles to fit its doctrine, has established a system that binds its followers to a cycle of dependence on the sacraments and, crucially, the priesthood. In a world saturated with societal temptations—pornography, alcoholism, substance abuse, infidelity, pride, materialism, and other lusts—individuals are encouraged to rely on confession and absolution rather than on the inner transformation that the Holy Spirit offers. As a result, people often continue in patterns of sin, frequently returning to confession, which reinforces the authority of the clergy rather than fostering personal spiritual growth.
This cycle of sin and confession keeps the laity dependent on earthly systems rather than on divine grace. Financial and moral struggles—such as debt, addiction, and gluttony—fuel dependence on institutions like banks and pharmaceuticals. This system can be seen as a meticulously constructed structure, benefitting various worldly systems while drawing people further away from true reliance on the Holy Spirit for righteousness. The outcome is a form of spiritual entrapment, where dependence on material and institutional solutions overshadows the transformative power of faith and spiritual rebirth that the gospel advocates, revealing a system that many would argue aligns more with worldly control than with divine freedom.
This brings to light the unsettling reality that Satan himself is referred to as the "god of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4). His influence permeates the very systems that humanity has established, leading many astray from the truth of God's word. In a world where spiritual deception abounds, it becomes increasingly important to discern between true worship and the empty rituals that can so easily ensnare the unwary. By allowing themselves to be guided by the doctrines of men rather than the Word of God, many find themselves unwittingly aligned with the very forces that oppose divine truth.
Romans 10:17 clearly states,
“So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
This verse emphasizes that true faith originates not from human efforts or self-righteousness but through engagement with God’s Word. For Roman Catholics who prioritize tradition and ecclesiastical authority over direct access to Scripture, this teaching raises a fundamental question: how can faith truly flourish if it isn’t rooted primarily in the word of God?
Catholics often receive Scripture only as it is filtered through the clergy and within the framework of longstanding Church traditions. This setup means that, rather than coming directly to faith through a personal encounter with God’s Word, many may experience a faith shaped predominantly by Church teachings, sacraments, and rituals. Relying on these as pathways to faith can create a dependence on the Church’s interpretation and traditions, potentially sidelining the individual relationship with God that Scripture advocates.
Further, if faith is to come by "hearing" God's Word, then substituting personal engagement with the Bible for the Church's interpretations limits believers’ exposure to the full and transforming power of the gospel message. This approach may foster a faith that aligns more with institutional expectations than with the personal conviction and freedom in Christ described in the Bible.
To argue against the Roman Catholic doctrine of confession and absolution, one must first consider the inherent contradictions in the idea that mere mortals, who are themselves sinners, can forgive sins. The Bible clearly states in Isaiah 64:6,
"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags,"
highlighting that human righteousness falls drastically short of God's standards. If priests, who are just as susceptible to sin, can forgive sins, how can this act hold any validity?
Cardinal John Henry Newman, an influential figure in the 19th century, acknowledged the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, emphasizing that this transformation was an act of the Church’s authority. He stated,
"The Catholic Church made a sacred day of Sunday largely because it was the weekly festival of the sun... and to give them a Christian significance".
Newman expressed a certain arrogance in this acknowledgment, as he presented the Church's authority as superior to that of Scripture, implying that adherence to Sunday worship signifies acceptance of the Church's power.
This change raises profound questions about the nature of authority and the interpretation of divine commandments. How can mere mortals, who themselves have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory, assume the power to alter God’s laws? The assertion that the Church, through its clergy, can redefine divine commandments contradicts the biblical understanding of human sinfulness. The Bible clearly states that "all our righteousness is as filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6), highlighting the inadequacy of human efforts to achieve holiness.
Moreover, the idea that priests can grant absolution for sins raises concerns, especially considering the moral failures that have come to light within the clergy. If those tasked with offering forgiveness are themselves living in sin, how can they genuinely act in the name of God? The weight of such an accusation points to a broader issue: if individuals venerate saints and seek intercessions beyond Christ, are they not further straying from God’s commandments, which warn against idolatry?
This conundrum deepens when considering 2 Corinthians 4:4, which describes Satan as "the god of this world," suggesting a pervasive influence over earthly matters, including religious practices that may deviate from biblical truth. This perspective reinforces the notion that human traditions, like the observance of Sunday,
The act of venerating the sun god Baal, known as a prince of demons, raises significant issues, particularly when we consider that the saints Catholics pray to are no longer living and, as stated in Ecclesiastes,"know nothing". This begs the question: who are Catholics truly honoring with their prayers and reverence?
Such practices warrant careful reflection on the sources of spiritual guidance and the implications of directing devotion toward figures who, according to scripture, are incapable of intercession or knowledge of earthly matters.This perspective underscores the potential misalignment with biblical teachings, where the dead are described as having no awareness or ability to intercede on behalf of the living.
This notion challenges the foundation of praying to saints and highlights the necessity of seeking a direct relationship with God, rather than relying on figures who, according to scripture, are unable to provide spiritual insight or assistance. The implications of these practices warrant a thorough examination in light of scriptural teachings. can distract believers from the original intent of God’s commandments and lead them astray from genuine faith and repentance.
Furthermore, the notion that a priest, who could be living in sin—whether through personal moral failings or the grave sin of child abuse—can impart divine forgiveness is deeply troubling. If those who serve as intermediaries are not living in accordance with God's commands themselves, how can they genuinely offer reconciliation to God on behalf of the penitent?
Moreover, the practice of venerating saints and praying to intercessors like Mary directly contradicts the commandment against idolatry (Exodus 20:3-4).

Statue of Virgin Mary in the Cathedral of Strasbourg
A well-known prayer that explicitly addresses Mary as the "Mother of God" is the "Salve Regina" (Hail Holy Queen), which emphasizes her maternal role and invokes her intercession:
"Hail, Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy, our life, our sweetness, and our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn, then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us; and after this our exile show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus."
This prayer not only acknowledges Mary as the Mother of God but also attributes significant roles to her, such as "our life," "our sweetness," and "our hope." The language used can suggest a level of reverence and dependence on her intercession that some interpret as crossing into worship.
Additionally, prayers like the "Litany of Loreto" call her various titles such as "Queen of Angels," "Queen of Prophets," and "Mother of Mercy," further emphasizing her exalted status in Catholic theology. This portrayal can lead to concerns that Mary is venerated to a degree that resembles worship, as she is invoked with titles and honors traditionally reserved for God alone.
How is this not idolatry?
How can Mary be considered the Mother of God when God is self-existent and eternal? If that were the case, it would imply that she existed before God, which is not accurate. Mary, a sinful human being, gave birth to a divine person, Jesus Christ, but she did not precede God in existence. The belief that Mary is the Mother of God must be understood within the context of her role in the incarnation, where she bore the human aspect of Christ without compromising His divine nature.
This leads to a situation where adherents are not only breaking God’s commandments but are also relying on their efforts and rituals to attain salvation, rather than seeking God's grace through faith.
If the Church's leaders are in a state of sin, how can they act as conduits for God's mercy? True repentance requires acknowledgment of one’s sins and a sincere effort to turn away from them, not a reliance on an institution that may itself be mired in sin.
Ultimately, the RCC's system of confession, while framed as a means of reconciliation, may in fact perpetuate a cycle of sin, as adherents lean on rituals rather than seeking a genuine relationship with God through the Holy Spirit.
In light of this, it is crucial for believers to critically examine the doctrines they follow and ensure they align with the truths presented in Scripture, rather than relying on traditions that may lead them astray.
First, consider Romans 3:10-12, which states,
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."
This passage underscores the inherent sinfulness of all humans, including priests, making it clear that no mortal has the right to absolve others of sin.
If all human righteousness is fundamentally flawed, how can any sinner, including a priest, claim the authority to forgive sins?
In 1 John 1:8-10, we read,
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
This suggests that it is God, not man, who forgives sins, reinforcing the idea that true confession must be directed toward God alone.
Furthermore, Matthew 9:6 shows Jesus asserting His authority to forgive sins, saying,
"But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins..."
This indicates that forgiveness of sins is a divine prerogative, not a human one.
Romans 10:9-10 also clarifies the means of salvation:
"That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
This direct relationship with God contrasts sharply with the need for intermediaries, such as priests.
Additionally, Acts 4:12 states,
"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
This emphasizes that salvation is found solely in Jesus Christ, not through any church or sacramental system.
The practice of venerating saints and praying to them also violates God's commandments. In Exodus 20:3-4, God commands,
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image..."
This admonition makes clear that any act of veneration that diverts attention from God violates His commandments.
Finally, 1 Timothy 2:5 declares,
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
This highlights that Jesus is the sole mediator, further negating the role of priests in confession and absolution.
In summary, the doctrine of confession and absolution in the Roman Catholic Church stands in stark contrast to the biblical teachings that emphasize the direct relationship between individuals and God for forgiveness and salvation. These scriptures collectively argue that reliance on human intermediaries is misplaced and that true faith and salvation come solely through Jesus Christ.
Comments