Born Again, and again, and again, and again,

[TheRealJuliane]

I am sad because a friend got rebaptized this weekend. It’s like she wasn’t confident that God got it right the first time, in making her his daughter. Those people have chipped away at her faith and made her insecure. She doesn’t believe in rebaptism but did it anyway to make her boyfriend happy, and those people are now lovebombing her. It’s a sick game if you ask me.

A baptism that doesn’t have God’s power in it, that is just a sign for the community, is the emptiest of rituals, and less powerful than the circumcision it was supposed to surpass.



I guess she must really love him to be willing to do this.

No, that’s being delusional, not love.

indeed.

 

[IanGE]

coptic,

You are making an issue when there is not. Born anew means the same as born again. Scripture says born again and so protestants took that terminology. What is the surprise? Jesus invented it and not the Methodists or anyone else.

I know exactly what it means. Jesus speaks of being born of water and the spirit in the same conversation with Nicdemus. This phrasology comes directly from Ezekiel 36:25. I dont even have to look it up. Protestants see that as applying to anyone who accepts the gospel message. since Ezekiel meant it applied when the messiah came. That is why Jesus referenced it.

Born of the spirit means being physically born by a God who gives life through his breath.

Born of water means the sprinkling of God giving the Spirit of God to the person. Peace, JohnR

In Acts 19, Paul arrived at Ephesus, where he found some disciples “2: and asked them " Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “no, we have not even heard of the Holy Spirit.” 3: So Paul asked, "what baptism did you receive? “John’s baptism.” They replied.
4: Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5: On hearing this, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6: When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied…
This is exactly what happened to me at age 45 when a Born Again priest placed his hands on me in the name of Jesus. Not only I, but countless others. If this is the Born Again EXPERIENCE as many have derisively put, then so be it. When I was baptised at eight days old, I was my Mother’s gift to God and experienced nothing. When I was 7 years old I was confirmed and experienced nothing. Even watching others receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of Born Again hands is a moving experience in itself as witness the explosive JOY as the baby Christian (Adult person, baby Christian!) weeps tears of beautiful joy through newly-given tongues. Was the Bishop who confirmed me born again? Please read Mark 16: 17 & 18: Jesus describing the signs that follow a Believer! Its in the book! But the events are not two thousand years ago for me: I am standing there in the Spirit, listening to Jesus, watching and worshipping.

 

[Roy5]

Roy,

But almost all protestants take the principles of the Reformation as their guide to theology. Certainly all mainstream protestants do that. And all that I am aware of believe that the act of baptism by itself has no effect without faith.

Rob

Yes and no. Most mainline Protestants allow a wide variation when it comes to doctrine. There are Episcopalians who are almost Roman Catholic in their doctrines and liturgical practices while others reflect the freedom exercised by Unitarians. Bishop Spong’s books represent them, for example. Ditto for the Presbyterians and Methodists.

While Presbyterians trace their history to Calvin, few today would believe strictly in predestination. The issue would not interest most of them. Methodists have high respect for certain ideas promoted by John Wesley, but the majority would not reflect the Methodism of the frontier days when it was an unusual mix of its Anglican roots and  evangelical and even pentecostal characteristics. 

 As for Lutheranism, it ranges from strict Lutheranism still much alive in such segments as the Missouri and Wisconsin Synods to a much more liberal Lutheranism that probably represents the majority among ELCA Lutherans.

 Certainly the United Church of Christ differs enormously from its Calvinist (Puritan) forefathers. It may be the most liberal of all Protestant churches today, except the Unitarian Universalists who may or not not view themselves as Protestants - depending upon which UUer you ask. What a contrast between the New England Congregationalist Churches today (most of them UCC) and their Pilgrim and Puritan antecedents. 

 What Catholics don't always understand is that mainline Protestantism is more-or-less an umbrella under which many varying forms of theology and liturgy are exist with little controversy. The attitude generally is 'think and let think'. Doctrinal conformity is not required. You may be, for example, a fundamentalist Methodist or a Methodist very much on the liberal side theologically. Ditto for Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc, Attend a Bible sudy in most of these churches and you will discover that many different opinions will be expressed in an atmosphere of acceptance and mutual respect.

  Now, evangelical Protestants, such as Southern Baptists, are a different lot, most of them much more likely to conform to a very conservative thology.

 Actually, if truth be told, Catholicism is something of an umbrella, too. While it preaches the importance of doctrinal conformity this doesn't exist among the rank and file. Millions are cultural and/or cafeteria Catholics who stick with their faith because of tradition or family or emotional ties but who don't accept a number of basic Catholic teachings, whether on such matters as birth control or such doctrines as transubstantiation.

 God bless them all - people of every creed, color, culture and country. Christ would want our religion to be a bridge and not a barrier.

 

[guanophore]

In Acts 19, Paul arrived at Ephesus, where he found some disciples “2: and asked them " Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “no, we have not even heard of the Holy Spirit.” 3: So Paul asked, "what baptism did you receive? “John’s baptism.” They replied.
4: Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5: On hearing this, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6: When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied…
This is exactly what happened to me at age 45 when a Born Again priest placed his hands on me in the name of Jesus. Not only I, but countless others. If this is the Born Again EXPERIENCE as many have derisively put, then so be it. When I was baptised at eight days old, I was my Mother’s gift to God and experienced nothing. When I was 7 years old I was confirmed and experienced nothing. Even watching others receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of Born Again hands is a moving experience in itself as witness the explosive JOY as the baby Christian (Adult person, baby Christian!) weeps tears of beautiful joy through newly-given tongues. Was the Bishop who confirmed me born again? Please read Mark 16: 17 & 18: Jesus describing the signs that follow a Believer! Its in the book! But the events are not two thousand years ago for me: I am standing there in the Spirit, listening to Jesus, watching and worshipping.

Congratulations on your born again experience, Ian, and your new life in the Spirit.

However, it is inaccurate to say that you did not expereince anything when you were sacramentally baptized and confirmed. Changes occur on the Spiritual plane whether the recipient has a felt experience of them, or not.

If you deny what the Church teaches about these Sacraments of Initiation, then you are not Catholic.

 

[mackbrislawn]

Yes and no. Most mainline Protestants allow a wide variation when it comes to doctrine. There are Episcopalians who are almost Roman Catholic in their doctrines and liturgical practices while others reflect the freedom exercised by Unitarians. Bishop Spong’s books represent them, for example. Ditto for the Presbyterians and Methodists.

While Presbyterians trace their history to Calvin, few today would believe strictly in predestination. The issue would not interest most of them. Methodists have high respect for certain ideas promoted by John Wesley, but the majority would not reflect the Methodism of the frontier days when it was an unusual mix of its Anglican roots and  evangelical and even pentecostal characteristics. 

 As for Lutheranism, it ranges from strict Lutheranism still much alive in such segments as the Missouri and Wisconsin Synods to a much more liberal Lutheranism that probably represents the majority among ELCA Lutherans.

 Certainly the United Church of Christ differs enormously from its Calvinist (Puritan) forefathers. It may be the most liberal of all Protestant churches today, except the Unitarian Universalists who may or not not view themselves as Protestants - depending upon which UUer you ask. What a contrast between the New England Congregationalist Churches today (most of them UCC) and their Pilgrim and Puritan antecedents. 

 What Catholics don't always understand is that mainline Protestantism is more-or-less an umbrella under which many varying forms of theology and liturgy are exist with little controversy. The attitude generally is 'think and let think'. Doctrinal conformity is not required. You may be, for example, a fundamentalist Methodist or a Methodist very much on the liberal side theologically. Ditto for Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc, Attend a Bible sudy in most of these churches and you will discover that many different opinions will be expressed in an atmosphere of acceptance and mutual respect.

  Now, evangelical Protestants, such as Southern Baptists, are a different lot, most of them much more likely to conform to a very conservative thology.

 **Actually, if truth be told, Catholicism is something of an umbrella, too. While it preaches the importance of doctrinal conformity this doesn't exist among the rank and file. Millions are cultural and/or cafeteria Catholics who stick with their faith because of tradition or family or emotional ties but who don't accept a number of basic Catholic teachings, whether on such matters as birth control or such doctrines as transubstantiation.**
 God bless them all - people of every creed, color, culture and country. Christ would want our religion to be a bridge and not a barrier.

Catholicism is something of an umbrella, but not in the same way. I don’t think it is right to compae the umbrella of Protestantism to that of Catholicism. The “umbrella of Catholicism” as you define it refers to the beliefs of individuals, but the umbrella of Protestantism refers to the multitude of different sects and denominationsunder it. A different thing.

Now there are different rites that come under Catholicism, but I don’t think that is what you meant. The Roman rite we are most familiar with, but there are other Catholic rites that more resemble Orthodox, but hold the same Catholic teachings.

 

[guanophore]

What Catholics don’t always understand is that mainline Protestantism is more-or-less an umbrella under which many varying forms of theology and liturgy are exist with little controversy. The attitude generally is ‘think and let think’. Doctrinal conformity is not required.

I think you are right. there is less controversy because when there is a conflict, the disputants can just walk down the street with their Bible and open a new storefront Church, and print up papers to say what they believe.

      Actually, if truth be told, Catholicism is something of an umbrella, too. While it preaches the importance of doctrinal conformity this doesn't exist among the rank and file. Millions are cultural and/or cafeteria Catholics who stick with their faith because of tradition or family or emotional ties but who don't accept a number of basic Catholic teachings, whether on such matters as birth control or such doctrines as transubstantiation.

The Truth is not deteriined by those who depart from it. Those who reject Catholic doctrine have lost their Catholicity. Most of them have excommunicated themselves, and because they are so poorly educated in their faith, they don’t even realize they have done so. Those who willfully defy the Teachings of Jesus in the Church have fallen into grave sin.

Christ would want our religion to be a bridge and not a barrier.

Christ did not preach this humanistic claptrap.:dts:

 

[JonNC]

Roy,

But almost all protestants take the principles of the Reformation as their guide to theology. Certainly all mainstream protestants do that. And all that I am aware of believe that the act of baptism by itself has no effect without faith.

Rob

The Augsburg Confession

Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary 2] to salvation, and that through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that children are to be baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism are received into God’s grace.

Jon

 

[CopticChristian]

I am sad because a friend got rebaptized this weekend. It’s like she wasn’t confident that God got it right the first time, in making her his daughter. Those people have chipped away at her faith and made her insecure. She doesn’t believe in rebaptism but did it anyway to make her boyfriend happy, and those people are now lovebombing her. It’s a sick game if you ask me.

A baptism that doesn’t have God’s power in it, that is just a sign for the community, is the emptiest of rituals, and less powerful than the circumcision it was supposed to surpass.



I guess she must really love him to be willing to do this.

K,

I am a student of thought and just got a handle on the strength of these beliefs. Beliefs occur at what are called Submodalities. What is that? It is the first order of thought as we take in information and add value to it. No thought comes without emotion and no emotion comes without thought.

Strength of belief comes from Self Reflection and are a higher order of thinking. These love bombs attach to the thoughts however on self reflection in time become weakened because they make no sense.

The only solace is to know that these beliefs are not related to anything except a lower level of thinking and that the Meta levels or higher levels through self reflective thinking get questioned and that is how we see people self reflectively thinking and questioning their beliefs and modifying them.

It is sad…

 

[guanophore]

But almost all protestants take the principles of the Reformation as their guide to theology. Certainly all mainstream protestants do that. And all that I am aware of believe that the act of baptism by itself has no effect without faith.

Rob

There are probably a majority of Protestants that still retain the Apostolic teaching that baptism 1) is regenerative 2) can be applied to infants by the faith of their parents and 3) that it replaces circumcision as the entrance rite into the Kingdom of God thereby 4) joining the baptized to Christ and making them members of the Church.

the modern idea of “believers baptism” is a rather recent innovation.

 

[fbl9]

There is a tendency here on CAF to try to generalize abour Protestants. Not possible.

Protestants come in a wide variety of beliefs, liturgies and ethnical understandings. There are very liberal and very conservative Protestants on questions of doctrine,, very liturgical Protestants and very nonliturgical Protestants, very strict Protestants when it comes to say, drinking or gambling, and very permissive Protestants. 

 To many this is the weakness of Protestantism. To many Protestants, it means freedom from being told precisely what to believe, precisely how to worship, and precisely what lifestyle to follow. Herein is the liberty that most Protestants celebrate,

Did you ever notice that God’s chosen people all followed the same doctrines? It did not matter if they were in exile or in their home land or being Jews living outside of Isreal.There was no “liberty”

 

[IanGE]

Did you ever notice that God’s chosen people all followed the same doctrines? It did not matter if they were in exile or in their home land or being Jews living outside of Isreal.There was no “liberty”

Actually there were Pharisees, Saduccees, Essenes et al. Christianity very nearly ended up as yet another Jewish sect. The Christian church, centred in Jerusalem, were anti Paul and his Mission to the Gentiles and got stroppy with Peter, too, after Paul rebuked him into joining Paul’s club. The Jerusalem elders must have been dead chuffed when both troublemakers, Peter and Paul, were martyred. However, shortly after, Jerusalem was razed, all Jews (and Christian Jews) were kicked out and the centuries-long diaspora began. The church HQ shifted to Rome and possibly to Constantinople until the Greek Orthodox split from Western Christianity which slipped back to Rome. I often think isn’t our God clever, manipulating history to centre his church in Rome!
The Jews living outside Israel were precursers of the Christian Church. Gentiles observing Jewish morals were drawn to Judaism, but it was a closed shop: one had to be BORN a pure-blooded Jew, even circumcision wouldn’t make them Jews. Paul’s mission, then, was a beautiful breath of fresh air: they could become Christians (an off-shoot of Judaism as it was thought) by being baptised. Yes, there was a lot of Hoo-Ha from HQ in Jerusalem, who insisted on circumcision. But Paul and Peter won the day and all gentile Christians (including moi) breathed a sigh of relief!

 

[IanGE]

Kentucky Liz wrote:
I am sad because a friend got rebaptized this weekend. It’s like she wasn’t confident that God got it right the first time, in making her his daughter. Those people have chipped away at her faith and made her insecure. She doesn’t believe in rebaptism but did it anyway to make her boyfriend happy, and those people are now lovebombing her. It’s a sick game if you ask me.

Some decades ago I was baptised again, a full immersion job. A group of us Born Agains decided individually and personally (no-one pushed us) that at our infant baptisms we were our parent’s gift to God. Now, as adults, we wanted to give God OURSELVES as gifts. And we wanted to be baptised as Jesus was: full immersion in water. We hired a hydro-therapy pool; It was a Spiritually joyous occasion, all of us dancing, the cold water grew warm as toast, being bombarded with agape love from our Lord and each other. My cloud nine joy lasted for ages and ages, despite the subsequent hate-bombing from fellow Catholics.
Decades ago, too, I made an open confession in a prayer group: “Lord, I’m having problems with Your First Commandment: please teach me how to love You.” For the next six months I gradually grew aware that I was being bombarded with love from GOD. I wept when I realised that our wondrous God was teaching me how to love Him by showing me His love FIRST!!!
BTW, one of the first experiences of being Born Again is what we call the “Honeymoon period” when you are cocooned in love from God. Born Againers tend to hug one another: if you see some people hugging and cheek-kissing at “peace” time in the mass, wonder no more! Roman persectors claimed that Christians had orgies at their services, hugging and kissing one another. And that Christians were also cannibals: they ate and drank the body and blood if someone called “Jesus”!

 

[Franklin33]

Just,

Now this is an interesting question. This is particularly interesting since you state you were former evangelical. Here I see someone that is on the inside looking out saying one thing that should be evident and someone formerly on the inside looking out having left asking someone that is still there to explain something that should be evident and is not. I look forward to the comments.

me too

 

[IanGE]

In the Nicene Creed it isne baptism FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. When Constantine made Christianity safe from persecution, several Christians came out of the woodwork, saying they just kept a low profile. But a host of others, including Eusebius, claimed they had denied Jesus. It was then believed that all all sins were washed away by baptism; but what about sins committed AFTER baptism? Constantine himself delayed his baptism cos he knew he had to commit dodgy acts as Emperor: once he handed on the mantle of Emperor on his deathbed he was baptised. People then recommended a second (and presumably third, fourth…) baptism to forgive later sins. The council at Nicea (chaired by the unbaptised Constantine) met to decide, among other things, the Divinity of Jesus and further baptism to forgive sins. For another two or three centuries, sinners had no get-out clause till someone read “whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven” and applied that to bishops only. This was impractical so forgiving sins was extended to all priests.
And Jharek, many people decided to re-DEDICATE their marriages later on. A number of us decided to re-dedicate ourselves in a full immersion baptism. Sorry, re-dedicate is perhaps the wrong word: at infant baptism I was my mother’s gift ( dedication) to God. We felt WE had to consciously and fervently dedicate OURSELVES to God.
At the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:13 -15), John tries to deter Jesus, saying: “I need to be baptised by you, and do you come to me?” Jesus replied: “let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfil all righteousness.” Then John consented. I am saddened that my fellow Catholics are so indoctrinated as to deny me and many others a most memorable, wonderful, Holy Spirit-led experience.
Some years later, a young woman came to me and said, “I’ve had a full immersion baptism at the weekend. It was horrible, the water was cold, so cold.” I discerned the problem, touched her forehead and commanded “In the Name of Jesus, LOOSE HER”. She was hurled backwards a dozen feet to be transfixed against the wall. I looked at my hands in awe: “I did that?” immediately astonished at the Power of Jesus! That was my first deliverance, I am now very careful, for i have learnt it is imperative that the person be immediately filled with the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, as Jesus warns, the evil spirit returns to find his old home clean and swept and re-enters, bringing seven others with him, so the condition of the person is worse than before. But I am immediately rebuked: I was led by (and discrened through) the Holy Spirit and obeyed. Who am I to view with hindsight using my stoopid, fallible brain.. She wasn’t hurt then and what happens afterwards is the Lord’s business.