Some Protestants appeal to the case of Cornelius as evidence that one can be regenerated without water baptism. On this, see, for e.g., Refuting Jeff McCullough ("Hello Saints") on Baptismal Regeneration, where I discuss Cornelius, show Luke in the Acts of the Apostles did not believe Cornelius was regenerated until he received water baptism, and how the earliest Christian discussion of Cornelius (Irenaeus of Lyons in Against Heresies) understood it in the same way, too. Another such purported example of someone being regenerated without water baptism is that of the thief on the cross, the proverbial "ragged doll" of much of Protestant eisegesis for many things, including a form of sola fide.
Contrary to one conscious fraud (see below), I have addressed the thief on the cross and whether it can be used as a proof-text against baptismal regeneration and/or in favor of sola fide a few times on this blog; for e.g.:
James
B Prothro (RC) on the Penitence of the Thief on the Cross
Jeff
McFadden, One Baptism (2006): The thief on the cross
Excerpts
from David C. Kimball, "On The Necessity of Baptism as a Means of
Salvation" (1846)
George
Reynolds on the Thief on the Cross and Water Baptism
Parley
P. Pratt Defending Baptismal Regeneration (June 1840)
Matthew
W. Bates on the Thief on the Cross
Contrast this with what this idiot who, on a daily basis, has to fight his conscience each day to justify his apostasy has to say:
Firstly, one can easily do a search of my blog to see I have addressed the thief on the cross and I have defended the "radical" view. Here you go Daniel:
site:scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com "thief on the cross"
Until I met Daniel, I honestly thought lawyers were intelligent. Daniel sure makes Lionel Hutz seem honest and competent.
Maybe we should ask what was the early Christian view of the thief on the cross vis-a-vis water baptism? On this, see the following from the Dimond Brothers (and before anyone dismisses them as being formal Sedevacantists and [pretty consistent] Feenyites (*), remember that is the genetic fallacy):
Jesus' Descent Into Hell & The Baptism Of The Good Thief
This allows me to share the following video from Lutheran Satire:
(*) on the topic of baptism of desire, a recent book has come out that is a must-read on the topic for those interested in the theology and history of baptism, sacramental theology, and related topics (e.g., extra ecclesiam nulla salus):
Anthony R. Lusvardi, Baptism of Desire and Christian Salvation (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2024)
Unlike Daniel Ortner, I have read scholarly books and articles on water baptism and its development in Catholic sacramental theology. He is out to lunch if he thinks he can Catholic-explain to me. As always, keep his poor kids who are the victims of spiritual abuse by Daniel and Jessica in your prayers.
One has to give Ortner credit: he makes bogus statement with a lot of confidence. However, for those who know him and his arguments how they are fraudulent, just like his man-made blasphemous Protestant theology. For other instances of his being called upon his deceptive claims, see, for e.g.:
Does Colossians 1:25-26 Teach Sola Scriptura?
Comments on Luke 24:44 and Luke 11:50-51//Matthew 23:35
Also see the following where Travis Anderson engaged both Daniel Ortner and Tim Jackson; you will see that Ortner's understanding of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon to be piss poor:
Daniel Ortner, Tim Jackson join a debacle.
