Are Catholics "born again"?

[rbarcia]

About a year or so before I became Catholic I went to a local fair that our county puts on every year. Some evangelical church had a booth with people outside saying, “take this test to see if you are getting into heaven.” I took the test and of course we all know how those things go, they give you a list of things and ask you what do you think will get you into heaven. They list all this stuff but the answer they have isn’t there on the list so everyone who isnt knowledgable about Christianity (like I wasnt) will get it wrong. I got it wrong and he went through this whole long thing about accepting Jesus Christ as you lord and savior. Then at the end he handed me a prayer that sounded a lot like the one you just read. He told me to say it, I asked why, he asked if I had a problem with praying. I said no and I said the prayer. Then when I was done he said I was saved. That was it. I was handed a prayer, didnt have any idea what it was for and I was “saved”. About a year later I joined the RCIA and became Catholic… Protestants have told me that I joined, “the whore of babylon” but why should they or even I care, I was after all “saved” at a county fair two years ago

This is a interesting story I must admit. There are a lot of misinformed people under the Christian and Protestant Label that think by reciting a sinner’s prayer, that they are saved, althought they have never really repented nor fully accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Jesus Himself said:

**
Matthew 7:22
Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’

**

This story reminds me of another story, at my sister’s wedding (my whole family is roman catholic), when one of the bride’s maid, ran and said I have to take the bread because I did not behave too well last night at the bridal shower, as she laughed. Then she proceeded to have just a good of time at the reception, cursing, blaspheming the name of God and such. When I asked her about what she said, she said, oh I ate the bread so I am fine.

Being a former catholic, even if I do not agree with Mass, I told her you are misrepresenting the idea. But she just laughed and said I was a crazy Evangelist. I queried many members of my families and friends and they have this belief as well.

This is a true story

Oh, well,I found this pretty interesting

 

[Mannyfit75]

This is a interesting story I must admit. There are a lot of misinformed people under the Christian and Protestant Label that think by reciting a sinner’s prayer, that they are saved, althought they have never really repented nor fully accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior.

The sinner’s prayer isn’t even Biblical. According to Acts 2:38 -
Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Here is no biblical evidence’s that a sinner’s prayer will save you. You can even look at Christian history, and text supporting that baptism is necessary for one to be saved. Since through baptism, Christians are born again.

 

[rbarcia]

The sinner’s prayer isn’t even Biblical. According to Acts 2:38 -
Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Here is no biblical evidence’s that a sinner’s prayer will save you. You can even look at Christian history, and text supporting that baptism is necessary for one to be saved. Since through baptism, Christians are born again.

I do not even use a sinner’s prayer nor attempt to walk one through such a prayer.

The point of my post is that in both protestant and catholic faith, their are many misinformed people. Walking through a sinners prayer is the same as someone with a misunderstanding of catholic doctrine, such a eating the bread, and sinning all week is ok. It is not a right approach to have a doctrinal debate. The easiest thing to do is to go after the misinformed people.

A great example of a repentant prayer is Psalm 51

**

Psalm 51

1 Have mercy upon me, O God,
According to Your lovingkindness;
According to the multitude of Your tender mercies,
Blot out my transgressions.
2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
And cleanse me from my sin.

3 For I acknowledge my transgressions,
And my sin is always before me.
4 Against You, You only, have I sinned,
And done this evil in Your sight—
That You may be found just when You speak,[a]
And blameless when You judge.

5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.
6 Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts,
And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom.

7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean;
Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
8 Make me hear joy and gladness,
That the bones You have broken may rejoice.
9 Hide Your face from my sins,
And blot out all my iniquities.

10 Create in me a clean heart, O God,
And renew a steadfast spirit within me.
11 Do not cast me away from Your presence,
And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.

12 Restore to me the joy of Your salvation,
And uphold me by Your generous Spirit.
13 Then I will teach transgressors Your ways,
And sinners shall be converted to You.

14 Deliver me from the guilt of bloodshed, O God,
The God of my salvation,
And my tongue shall sing aloud of Your righteousness.
15 O Lord, open my lips,
And my mouth shall show forth Your praise.
16 For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it;
You do not delight in burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,
A broken and a contrite heart—
These, O God, You will not despise.

18 Do good in Your good pleasure to Zion;
Build the walls of Jerusalem.
19 Then You shall be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness,
With burnt offering and whole burnt offering;
Then they shall offer bulls on Your altar.

**

As for baptism,Peter phrased it best:

**

1 Peter 2

There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

**

 

[AlegreFe]

…
The point of my post is that in both protestant and catholic faith, their are many misinformed people. Walking through a sinners prayer is the same as someone with a misunderstanding of catholic doctrine, such a eating the bread, and sinning all week is ok. It is not a right approach to have a doctrinal debate. The easiest thing to do is to go after the misinformed people.

I agree. But I am more concerned with the Catholics being misinformed and just plain ignorant for their own lack of wanting to learn. But I think it’s more because of misinformation and/or under catechized.

rbarcia:

A great example of a repentant prayer is Psalm 51

That’s a great one!

rbarcia:

1 Peter 2

There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i85/Alegre-Fe/Emoticons/Duh2.gif Don’t you mean 1 Peter 3?

Two questions;
1. Which version of the bible are you using?
… nevermind… I found it, NKJV
2. What are you trying to say with that verse; that water baptism is no good or is not necessary?

1 Pet 3:19-21 (DR-V)
19 In which also coming he preached
to those spirits that were in prison:
20 Which had been some time incredulous,
when they waited for the patience of God in
the days of Noe, when the ark was a building:
wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were
saved by water.
21 Whereunto baptism being of the like
form, now saveth you also: not the
putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the
examination of a good conscience
towards God by the resurrection of
Jesus Christ

1 Pet 3:19-21 (NAB)
19 In it he also went to preach to the
spirits in prison,
20 who had once been disobedient while
God patiently waited in the days of Noah
during the building of the ark, in which a
few persons, eight in all, were saved
through water.
21 This prefigured baptism, which
saves you now. It is not a removal of
dirt from the body but an appeal to God
for a clear conscience, through
the resurrection of Jesus Christ

1 Pet 3:19-21 (RSV)
19 in which he went and preached to
the spirits in prison,
20 who formerly did not obey, when
God’s patience waited in the days of
Noah, during the building of the ark,
in which a few, that is, eight persons,
were saved through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to
this, now saves you, not as a
removal of dirt from the body but as an
appeal to God for a clear conscience,
through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ

1 Pet 3:19-21 (NIV)
19 through whom also he went and
preached to the spirits in prison
20 who disobeyed long ago when
God waited patiently in the days of
Noah while the ark was being built.
In it only a few people, eight in all, were
saved through water,
21 and this water symbolizes baptism
that now saves you also—not the
removal of dirt from the body but the
pledge of a good conscience toward
God. It saves you by the resurrection
of Jesus Christ

more…

 

[AlegreFe]

…cont

1 Pet 3:19-21 (ESV)
19 in which he went and proclaimed
to the spirits in prison,
20 because they formerly did not
obey, when God’s patience waited
in the days of Noah, while the ark
was being prepared, in which a few,
that is, eight persons, were brought
safely through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to
this, now saves you, not as a removal
of dirt from the body but as an appeal
to God for a good conscience,
through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ

1 Pet 3:19-21 (KJV)
19 By which also he went and preached
unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient,
when once the longsuffering of God
waited in the days of Noah, while the
ark was a preparing, wherein few, that
is, eight souls were saved by water.
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

Just when I was going to stop at the KJV, I decided to add one more, the New KJV. I’m glad I did. This is the version you used.

1 Pet 3:19-21 (NKJV)
19 by whom also He went and preached
to the spirits in prison,
20 who formerly were disobedient, when
once the Divine longsuffering waited in
the days of Noah, while the ark was being
prepared, in which a few, that is, eight
souls, were saved through water.
21 There is also an antitype which now
saves us—baptism (not the removal of the
filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God), through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ

anti-type: the NT real deal of the “type” or “shadow” in the OT.
The waters on which Noah’s ark was afloat, therefore saving the eight souls, was a “type” or foreshadowing or prefigurement in the OT for the “anti-type” or fulfillment in the NT which is Baptism that saves us.

Just because we’re baptized, which is Catholic for “born again” and/or “saved,” does not mean we don’t have to do anything else but believe. We have to keep the commandments, make a good examination of conscience to make good confessions after we commit personal sin so that we can be “born again” even after baptism. hmm… that sounds a lot like verse 21 where we have to have a good and/or “clear conscience toward God” but we know we received the saving Sanctifying Grace at Baptism through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That however, does NOT negate “water” baptism. So if that’s what you were trying to say with the way that you put that verse in your post, well then you are one of the misinformed.

Catholics and all of us really, still have to be baptized by water in the name of the Father & of the Son & of the Holy Spirit and we, or our parents, have to renounce Satan and all of his pomp & circumstance at the time of our baptisms. We also have to profess our faith or in most cases our parents profess their faith to God. We have to receive that initial saving Sanctifying Grace at Baptism but after that we have to still work out our salvation so that we can stay afloat. If we don’t work out our salvation we will sink and die. I don’t want to sink, so I choose to stay on the bark of Peter thank you. And that is exactly where I am. Thank you Jesus!

And they say Catholics aren’t “Bible Christians.”

 

[djrakowski]

And they say Catholics aren’t “Bible Christians.”

I wish that more Catholics would pour themselves into sacred scripture like you have.

Excellent series of posts, by the way!

 

[runandsew]

Has anyone ever wondered why some Christians use Noah and Moses’ crossing the red sea as examples to show that baptism should be by immersion only?
It seems to me that the only people “immersed” in those situations were the wicked people in the case of Noah, and the Egyptian charioteers in the case of Moses

.

 

[AlegreFe]

I wish that more Catholics would pour themselves into sacred scripture like you have.

Excellent series of posts, by the way!

Oh they’re around. They’re probably just too busy pouring themselves into Sacred Scripture to post here. http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i85/Alegre-Fe/Emoticons/Giggle.gif

And thanks… all for the Glory of God.

 

[JohnWilliams]

You can not merit God’s grace. Psalms 49:6-9, You can not give God ransom for your brother. Read the whole thing for yourself. You MUST read Romans 10:1-13. I just want people to know that the road to Christ is simple to follow. Religion makes that road have “rules”. If you follow the written word of God, you will never go wrong.

Amen Bro. I just read “Peace Child” by Don Richardson. Great read and a great book to evangelize with. Don and wife and 5 month old got dumped off in Irian Jiya Indonesia in a village of full of headhunters, without guides, language, or any other cultural knowledge.

 

[lak611]

Has anyone ever wondered why some Christians use Noah and Moses’ crossing the red sea as examples to show that baptism should be by immersion only?
It seems to me that the only people “immersed” in those situations were the wicked people in the case of Noah, and the Egyptian charioteers in the case of Moses

.

For Catholics, whether they get baptized by pouring water or immersion doesn’t matter. It’s still baptism. However, a friend of mine who converted as an adult chose immersion just because that’s how it was done in the Bible.

 

[lak611]

…cont

1 Pet 3:19-21 (ESV)
19 in which he went and proclaimed
to the spirits in prison,
20 because they formerly did not
obey, when God’s patience waited
in the days of Noah, while the ark
was being prepared, in which a few,
that is, eight persons, were brought
safely through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to
this, now saves you, not as a removal
of dirt from the body but as an appeal
to God for a good conscience,
through the resurrection of Jesus
Christ

1 Pet 3:19-21 (KJV)
19 By which also he went and preached
unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient,
when once the longsuffering of God
waited in the days of Noah, while the
ark was a preparing, wherein few, that
is, eight souls were saved by water.
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

Just when I was going to stop at the KJV, I decided to add one more, the New KJV. I’m glad I did. This is the version you used.

1 Pet 3:19-21 (NKJV)
19 by whom also He went and preached
to the spirits in prison,
20 who formerly were disobedient, when
once the Divine longsuffering waited in
the days of Noah, while the ark was being
prepared, in which a few, that is, eight
souls, were saved through water.
21 There is also an antitype which now
saves us—baptism (not the removal of the
filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God), through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ

I’ll add one more translation (although I haven’t figured out how to get the nice blue font you use, Sandy!

Here’s the NASB:
“in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you–not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

 

[runandsew]

For Catholics, whether they get baptized by pouring water or immersion doesn’t matter. It’s still baptism. However, a friend of mine who converted as an adult chose immersion just because that’s how it was done in the Bible.

The water in the Jordan River where Jesus was baptized is only knee deep, I guess he could have lied down to get immersed, or maybe John poured water over him.
I don’t see anywhere in the bible where it actually says that they were immersed. It just says that there were baptisms because there was a lot of water around.
I am sure that there was immersion, but I would assume that in some of the cases it was pouring. The Bible just doesn’t say exactly how they were baptized. It says they came out of the water, but that doesn’t mean immersion.
The Didache, which was written around 70 AD, before last of the books of scripture were written, talks about the choice of water being poured in necessary.
The earliest tile mosaics show baptism as water being poured from a shell, either that is how they baptized sometimes, or the artist could draw people being underwater.
I just have an issue with the notion that full immersion was the ONLY way they baptized.
It is just not true, sorry…

 

[lak611]

I just have an issue with the notion that full immersion was the ONLY way they baptized.
It is just not true, sorry…

Oh, I agree. Baptism is necessary, but full immersion isn’t.

 

[AlegreFe]

I’ll add one more translation (although I haven’t figured out how to get the nice blue font you use, Sandy!

Here’s the NASB:
“in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you–not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

1 Pet 3:19-21 (NASB)
19 in which also He went and made
proclamation to the spirits now in
prison,
20 who once were disobedient, when
the patience of God kept waiting in the
days of Noah, during the construction
of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight
persons, were brought safely through
the water.
21 Corresponding to that, baptism
now saves you–not the removal
of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to
God for a good conscience–through
the resurrection of Jesus Christ

I guess rbarcia either left or he/she does not have an answer for my original question.

rbarcia:

1 Peter 2

There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God

), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i85/Alegre-Fe/Emoticons/huh.gif Don’t you mean 1 Peter 3?

-]Two questions;/-] now just one question.
-]1. Which version of the bible are you using?
… nevermind… I found it, NKJV/-]
2. What are you trying to say with that verse; that water baptism is no good or is not necessary?

Do you have an answer for me rbarcia?

 

[lak611]

Based on all of the translations given, including the KJV, NKJV, NIV, and NASB, which are all Protestant translations, water baptism IS necessary.

 

[AlegreFe]

The water in the Jordan River where Jesus was baptized is only knee deep, I guess he could have lied down to get immersed, or maybe John poured water over him.
I don’t see anywhere in the bible where it actually says that they were immersed. It just says that there were baptisms because there was a lot of water around.
I am sure that there was immersion, but I would assume that in some of the cases it was pouring. The Bible just doesn’t say exactly how they were baptized. It says they came out of the water, but that doesn’t mean immersion.
The Didache, which was written around 70 AD, before last of the books of scripture were written, talks about the choice of water being poured in necessary.
The earliest tile mosaics show baptism as water being poured from a shell, either that is how they baptized sometimes, or the artist could draw people being underwater.
I just have an issue with the notion that full immersion was the ONLY way they baptized.
It is just not true, sorry…

I agree. It seems that protestants only want to be, in a sense, literal but yet when it comes to John 6, it’s out of the question to be literal; not to generalize here, I know some protestants do take John 6 at its word.

I wouldn’t say that baptism was literally done by immersion, on the contrary; “immerse” is not even in the bible. So I don’t know why they think that people were literally being immersed in the water when baptized. Not saying that they weren’t either. We just don’t know for sure because it never specifically describes it either way.

Matt 3:16 (KJV)
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized,
went up straightway out of the
water: and, lo, the heavens were
opened unto him, and he saw the
Spirit of God descending like a dove,
and lighting upon him:

Matt 3:16 (ESV)
16 And when Jesus was baptized,
immediately he went up from the
water, and behold, the heavens
were opened to him, and he saw
the Spirit of God descending like
a dove and coming to rest on him;

Matt 3:16 (NAB)
16 After Jesus was baptized, he came
up from the water and behold, the
heavens were opened (for him), and he
saw the Spirit of God descending like
a dove (and) coming upon him.

As Catholics, the only thing that matters is that water is used, no matter if poured or by immersion. What’s just as important if not more, at Baptism is that the Faith is professed, Satan is denounced, and that it is done in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. That is what is important because baptism infuses Sanctifying Grace on our souls therefore wipes all sin and makes our souls clean again. It’s not just a “cover up” as in the protestant denominations. And baptism doesn’t even do that anyway for Protestants if I’m not mistaken. The “cover up” of their sins happens when they confess who Jesus is and that they accept Him into their heart by saying a prayer, is that right for the most part? I know there are so many, I don’t know who does what anymore. Nothing wrong with accepting Jesus, I do that myself everyday. As a matter of fact I go one step further and I actually receive Jesus at least once a week on Sundays and on some weekdays too

I just know and believe that Baptism is very important for the forgiveness of sins but it is just the start of a long journey into the Kingdom of God.

 

[AlegreFe]

Based on all of the translations given, including the KJV, NKJV, NIV, and NASB, which are all Protestant translations, water baptism IS necessary.

:yup: Sure looks that way to me.

 

[lak611]

I agree. It seems that protestants only want to be, in a sense, literal but yet when it comes to John 6, it’s out of the question to be literal; not to generalize here, I know some protestants do take John 6 at its word.

I wouldn’t say that baptism was literally done by immersion, on the contrary; “immerse” is not even in the bible. So I don’t know why they think that people were literally being immersed in the water when baptized. Not saying that they weren’t either. We just don’t know for sure because it never specifically describes it either way.

Matt 3:16 (KJV)
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized,
went up straightway out of the
water: and, lo, the heavens were
opened unto him, and he saw the
Spirit of God descending like a dove,
and lighting upon him:

Matt 3:16 (ESV)
16 And when Jesus was baptized,
immediately he went up from the
water, and behold, the heavens
were opened to him, and he saw
the Spirit of God descending like
a dove and coming to rest on him;

Matt 3:16 (NAB)
16 After Jesus was baptized, he came
up from the water and behold, the
heavens were opened (for him), and he
saw the Spirit of God descending like
a dove (and) coming upon him.

As Catholics, the only thing that matters is that water is used, no matter if poured or by immersion. What’s just as important if not more, at Baptism is that the Faith is professed, Satan is denounced, and that it is done in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. That is what is important because baptism infuses Sanctifying Grace on our souls therefore wipes all sin and makes our souls clean again. It’s not just a “cover up” as in the protestant denominations. And baptism doesn’t even do that anyway for Protestants if I’m not mistaken. The “cover up” of their sins happens when they confess who Jesus is and that they accept Him into their heart by saying a prayer, is that right for the most part? I know there are so many, I don’t know who does what anymore. Nothing wrong with accepting Jesus, I do that myself everyday. As a matter of fact I go one step further and I actually receive Jesus at least once a week on Sundays and on some weekdays too

I just know and believe that Baptism is very important for the forgiveness of sins but it is just the start of a long journey into the Kingdom of God.

And also, if one has been a Protestant and already baptized in the Trinitarian formula, whether by pouring or immersion, and one converts to the Catholic faith, baptism is not repeated. Baptism makes one a Christian, and there is no re-baptism. “One Lord, one faith, one, baptism.”

 

[AlegreFe]

And also, if one has been a Protestant and already baptized in the Trinitarian formula, whether by pouring or immersion, and one converts to the Catholic faith, baptism is not repeated. Baptism makes one a Christian, and there is no re-baptism. “One Lord, one faith, one, baptism.”

Yes this is true and I have stated that in several different posts of mine.

The opposite however does not hold true. Cradle Catholics demean their first baptism (my bro describes his Catholic baptism as something he can wipe his * * * * with ). And when they enter a protestant church (if church baptizes) the church requires that they be baptized again. That second baptism does absolutely nothing for them, so why even bother? :whacky:

 

[Mannyfit75]

Yes this is true and I have stated that in several different posts of mine.

The opposite however does not hold true. Cradle Catholics demean their first baptism (my bro describes his Catholic baptism as something he can wipe his * * * * with ). And when they enter a protestant church (if church baptizes) the church requires that they be baptized again. That second baptism does absolutely nothing for them, so why even bother? :whacky:

Protestants are kookoo because they think Catholics need to be rebaptized…