Born-again Christians

[ltwin]

Here is the problem I have with that. Romans 10-14 is used in anticipation of Romans 10-9, in other words that was not the way it was written. The other problem is that the letter to the Romans was written to Christians

Paul is quoting Moses and continues that dialogue until he gets to Romans 11 and asks this question

Referring to the dialogue that commenced with

The question is then who is “they” he is talking about, because all that follows applies to “they did not know” and “they did not subject themselves”. This is where these words that are used for the formula are directed.

The letter was not written as a way to convert Greeks, barbarians or Gentiles as Paul then says who they are that these words were written to.

This is why I find this Scripture ensemble difficult to swallow as a formula for conversion.

The letter was written to Christians, but chapters 9 through 11 are speaking about the Israelites who have rejected Christ. Romans 9:30-32 says, “What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone …”

Then he says in 10: 1-4, “Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”

Then in verse 5-7 he contrasts “the righteousness that is based on the law” with “the righteousness based on faith.” Then he says verses 8-13, “‘The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, ‘Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.’ For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For ‘everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’”

And then we have verses 14 through 21 which talks about how are they to call if they don’t believe, etc. They have heard, but they have not understood and have been contrary and disobedient people. But 11:1 says God has not rejected his people, Israel.

So he says to Christians “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim).” And that salvation comes form confession of the mouth and belief in the heart. Those who continually confess and believe will be saved. Then he says how can those in Israel call on him they have not believed in, and they cannot believe in the one they have never heard, they cannot hear without someone preaching, and the preachers must be sent. Then he says “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” Then he says they have heard but they have not understood and disobeyed.

So yes this particular passage is talking about Israel, but I think the underlying principle is the same for Israel and gentiles. Hear, believe, call upon the name of the Lord, continue to confess and believe and you will be saved.

I may have misunderstood the point you were trying to make, and if I have I apologize for the long winded response that did not address the point you were making.

 

[guanophore]

I joined a dialogue about born again christians. Charism… are uninteresting and not productive for me.

This has become abundantly clear.

 

[guanophore]

In keeping with the born again topic, do you feel that Jesus requires one to have faith because of these miracles?

I think it would be more accurate to say that the miracles, also called “signs” are the reflection of faith that is present, and also serve to bring about faith when it is not present.

John 2:23-24

23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs which he did;

They also testify to the nature of the one doing them:

John 3:2
This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.”

John 9:16
“How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?”

Mark 16:19-20
20 And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it. Amen.

 

[guanophore]

What you are saying is that you are applying your definition to others as am I. The historicity of those definitions is open to discussion. I have declared what I believe as taught by my Church, that I believe to be the Church Christ founded. What we have here is a failure to communicate.

How would you be able to tell if communication happened? Do you expect others to agree with your point of view? If communication happens, and parties agree to disagree, is it a “failure”?

 

[guanophore]

I'm just curious about Catholic beliefs. Let me lay this out, and where I'm wrong please tell me. Catholics believe that when one is baptized, that one is born again. And that this person is in the Church.

Yes. This is the faith we have from the Apostles.

So if a person is a baptized and confirmed but non-praciticing Catholic and he dies, would he (theoretically) go to hell or spend time in purgatory and then go to heaven.

No, but where you are getting hung up I think is your notion of salvation. Catholics don’t assume that anyone who has been born again will be saved. This is not what the Apostles believed and taught.

Heb 6:3-8
. 4 For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. 7 For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. 8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

A person can become a member of the Body of Christ, then reject Christ, and become cursed.

  I know only God knows what the final destination of any person is. However, this is the only way I can think of to ask this question. What does baptism actually do and what does the person have to do themselves.

I’m trying to understand this in light of these comments:

What baptism does is probably grist for another thread. You can search for a baptism thread, or open a new one. It is one of my favorite topics, and I would be happy to join you.

 

[CopticChristian]

This has become abundantly clear.

crystal

 

[CopticChristian]

How would you be able to tell if communication happened? Do you expect others to agree with your point of view? If communication happens, and parties agree to disagree, is it a “failure”?

I operate from the point of view, as stated in the suppositions of how our brains work based on NLP, we cannot not communicate. You have your point of view. I have mine. My point of view allows for communication absent judgement.

 

[guanophore]

And I also missed the scripture that said the WHOLE body must be dunked in the water,

There is also no evidence that Jesus was fully immersed. On the contrary, he was baptized in a region that has an average of 4 inches in the river. It is possible that the Baptist was pouring water from his hands.

 

[ltwin]

Yes. This is the faith we have from the Apostles.

No, but where you are getting hung up I think is your notion of salvation. Catholics don’t assume that anyone who has been born again will be saved. This is not what the Apostles believed and taught.

Heb 6:3-8
. 4 For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. 7 For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. 8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

A person can become a member of the Body of Christ, then reject Christ, and become cursed.

What baptism does is probably grist for another thread. You can search for a baptism thread, or open a new one. It is one of my favorite topics, and I would be happy to join you.

So being born again and a member of the Church does not automatically make you saved. Ok I get that.

 

[CopticChristian]

The letter was written to Christians, but chapters 9 through 11 are speaking about the Israelites who have rejected Christ. Romans 9:30-32 says, “What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone …”

Then he says in 10: 1-4, “Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”

Then in verse 5-7 he contrasts “the righteousness that is based on the law” with “the righteousness based on faith.” Then he says verses 8-13, “‘The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, ‘Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.’ For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For ‘everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.’”

And then we have verses 14 through 21 which talks about how are they to call if they don’t believe, etc. They have heard, but they have not understood and have been contrary and disobedient people. But 11:1 says God has not rejected his people, Israel.

So he says to Christians “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim).” And that salvation comes form confession of the mouth and belief in the heart. Those who continually confess and believe will be saved. Then he says how can those in Israel call on him they have not believed in, and they cannot believe in the one they have never heard, they cannot hear without someone preaching, and the preachers must be sent. Then he says “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” Then he says they have heard but they have not understood and disobeyed.

So yes this particular passage is talking about Israel, but I think the underlying principle is the same for Israel and gentiles. Hear, believe, call upon the name of the Lord, continue to confess and believe and you will be saved.

I may have misunderstood the point you were trying to make, and if I have I apologize for the long winded response that did not address the point you were making.

I cannot agree to that.

Paul starts this discussion in Romans 3

1Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Romans 4:1-6 Paul use the word works at least 4 times. He then makes a transition, he then Romans 9-12 uses the word Circumcsion at least 10 times to point out to the Judaizing Christian that Circumcision, the work that put you into the Old Covenant won’t justify you.

He then points out to the Judaizing Christians, trying to impose circumcision and the Old Covenant on the Gentiles that Abraham is their father not by circumcision but by Faith and that they are in fact descendants not of Abraham but of Adam.

He makes that point in Romans 5,6 and then concludes to tell them that the Old Covenant is dead in Romans 7

1Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives? 2For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. 3So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
4Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.

He is indirectly addressing all of Israel that includes the Judaizing Christians that want to impose circumcision and the Old Covenant. He points out that they are just as stubborn when moses talked to them.

21But as for Israel He says, “ALL THE DAY LONG I HAVE STRETCHED OUT MY HANDS TO A DISOBEDIENT AND OBSTINATE PEOPLE.”

Recall the first in 3, to you were given the utterance of God, he then takes up the question again in 11

1I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

He too is an Israelite, like them, and all he said from 3-11 was about the Judaizing Christian and he like they are one.

 

[guanophore]

I just thought to add another verse which is quoted for more on the subject of salvation than any other I’ve heard in evangelical churches. That is John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” Verse 17 and 18 continue, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

Please be aware that Catholics believe the NT is a collection of books written by Catholics, to Catholics, about Catholicism. As a result, there is nothing in the NT that contradicts the Catholic faith that produced it.

 And of course, verses 1-15 of that chapter recounts Jesus meeting with Nicodemus where Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

The Apostles taught this is a reference to Baptism, also called “the bath of regeneration”.

I'm not trying to convince anyone, just giving one explanation of how this passage is explained by an evangelical that I've read.

Thanks. Please be sure to post your references so that the readers can read more.

 

[guanophore]

So he says to Christians “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim).” And that salvation comes form confession of the mouth and belief in the heart. Those who continually confess and believe will be saved. Then he says how can those in Israel call on him they have not believed in, and they cannot believe in the one they have never heard, they cannot hear without someone preaching, and the preachers must be sent. Then he says “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” Then he says they have heard but they have not understood and disobeyed.

So yes this particular passage is talking about Israel, but I think the underlying principle is the same for Israel and gentiles. Hear, believe, call upon the name of the Lord, continue to confess and believe and you will be saved.

I may have misunderstood the point you were trying to make, and if I have I apologize for the long winded response that did not address the point you were making.

I think you address it well. For Catholics, the confession of faith is to embrace all that Jesus taught. During the Reformation, certain persons jettisoned parts of the Apostolic Faith that they found objectionable. To the extent these parts of the Apostolic message are rejected, a truncated gospel has resulted.

I have had some of my separated brethren here on CAF tell me that Jesus did not really have much to say about salvation - that the doctrines of salvation are systematically laid out by Paul after the resurrection. Such an assumption leaves one with a warped perspective of the message.

 

[guanophore]

I operate from the point of view, as stated in the suppositions of how our brains work based on NLP, we cannot not communicate. You have your point of view. I have mine. My point of view allows for communication absent judgement.

Yes, mine does too. So, are you referring to the lack of prudence during communication, or communicating in such a manner that is non-judgmental of others? I think both types of communication are possible.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes, mine does too. So, are you referring to the lack of prudence during communication, or communicating in such a manner that is non-judgmental of others? I think both types of communication are possible.

You made a statement, asked a question and then answered it proposing only two alternatives. Insofar as there are many alternatives to speak of communication in this regard I have no opinion. I refer you to Users Manual of the Brain Volume I & II, L. Micheal Hall, Phd. There you may find other options.

 

[ltwin]

Please be aware that Catholics believe the NT is a collection of books written by Catholics, to Catholics, about Catholicism. As a result, there is nothing in the NT that contradicts the Catholic faith that produced it.

I’m aware, but since it seemed we were citing scriptures that self described “born again Christians” use to explain salvation, I thought it worth mentioning the all time favorite.

Thanks. Please be sure to post your references so that the readers can read more.

It was an article by Anthony D. Palma. It doesn’t go into any specifics, and only one paragraph discusses baptism.

 

[rinnie]

I agree with you and appreciate your insight. Be aware that Greg Laurie and other Protestants use this same verse to evangelize as well. The Sheep hear, the word is preached, the sheep hear, they say a prayer and are saved.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, John 10:27

14How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed?** How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard**? And how will they hear without a preacher? Romans 10:14

But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; Romans 10:8-9

This is basically my understanding of the Scriptural support for this Protestant practice. I have heard Matt Slick say, convince them of their sin, bring them to the knowledge of their inadequacy and the righteousness of Christ, and have them accept Jesus.

The only problme here is the Protestant Preacher is going to have a REAL hard time convincing me that he is in direct succession with Peter. Jesus was speaking to Peter when he said this.

THe Pope has a direct tie to St Peter he has the keys that were passed down. If the Pro. Preacher can show me that he took them off the Pope we are in business. Until then, I will stick with the Pope.

And the last time I saw him, he was still leading the RCC.

 

[rinnie]

So being born again and a member of the Church does not automatically make you saved. Ok I get that.

Wouldn’t it be great if thats all it took. But No, Jesus left us more things to do then be Baptised and be a member of the Church.

We have to lets see, Be Baptised, confess our sin, receive the Eucharist, obey his commandments. Oh geeze I could go on forever.

But personally I like your way best.

 

[CopticChristian]

The only problme here is the Protestant Preacher is going to have a REAL hard time convincing me that he is in direct succession with Peter. Jesus was speaking to Peter when he said this.

THe Pope has a direct tie to St Peter he has the keys that were passed down. If the Pro. Preacher can show me that he took them off the Pope we are in business. Until then, I will stick with the Pope.

And the last time I saw him, he was still leading the RCC.

Agreed. You may want to listen to Greg Laurie on YouTube, how to lead someone to Christ. It works and fills stadiums. He sounds convincing. Every Protestant preacher I have listened to sounds convincing. The listener, the hearer, needs to discriminate or will be convinced.

 

[rinnie]

Agreed. You may want to listen to Greg Laurie on YouTube, how to lead someone to Christ. It works and fills stadiums. He sounds convincing. Every Protestant preacher I have listened to sounds convincing. The listener, the hearer, needs to discriminate or will be convinced.

You know to be honest I think I could fill a stadium. I am not bragging I know I could. First I would use my wit. People LOVE to laugh. But I would have to be careful and watch I don’t insult ANYONE with it.

Next I would go for the grieving widows and lonely, They would do anything just to get attention, And I would be the perfect one to give it to them. Expecially the rich one, the more money you have the more attention you will get from me. Using the word of God of course.

Then I would go for the lost, searchers. And remember I will tell the ALL what THEY want to hear. Remember what our lord said those with ears itching to hear what they want.

Then I would go to the people living in sin, and say its okay, Oh the sinners would LOVE me, I would tell them its okay, the more you sin, the closer you are to GOd. He loves you. You are ALL getting IN, I LOVE YOU.

Those 3 words can get you ANYTHING you want.

Here is the funny thing, I would never tell the sinners that they MUST REPENT and are living in a state of Mortal sin. I mean come on who am I, the POPE. Why do I want to put my self on the line and be hated for telling the truth.

Heck no. I am telling them they are ALL GETTING IN. Funny how you can’t play God and judge sin and tell them if they do not come clean and repent they are going to hell.

BUT, BUT BUT BUT. I can play GOD and tell them they are ALL SAVED!! Getting IN, Just believe. Just Confess Jesus Christ is my personal friend and Savior. Then go home, keep living the way I want, in sin, whatever. Because I believe. MY FAITH my belief will save me. Do all the evil works I want. GOD DIED FOR US ALL, and we are all saved.

Oh yeah, I could play them LIKE a FIDDLE!! And the devil would be my best friend dancing beside me, wishing me nothing but the best!:nope: But when you KNOW the truth, and most of these people do, they just don’t want to hear it.

Hey lets be honest. WHO DOES:shrug:

 

[CopticChristian]

:nunchuk:

You know to be honest I think I could fill a stadium. I am not bragging I know I could. First I would use my wit. People LOVE to laugh. But I would have to be careful and watch I don’t insult ANYONE with it.

Next I would go for the grieving widows and lonely, They would do anything just to get attention, And I would be the perfect one to give it to them. Expecially the rich one, the more money you have the more attention you will get from me. Using the word of God of course.

Then I would go for the lost, searchers. And remember I will tell the ALL what THEY want to hear. Remember what our lord said those with ears itching to hear what they want.

Then I would go to the people living in sin, and say its okay, Oh the sinners would LOVE me, I would tell them its okay, the more you sin, the closer you are to GOd. He loves you. You are ALL getting IN, I LOVE YOU.

Those 3 words can get you ANYTHING you want.

Here is the funny thing, I would never tell the sinners that they MUST REPENT and are living in a state of Mortal sin. I mean come on who am I, the POPE. Why do I want to put my self on the line and be hated for telling the truth.

Heck no. I am telling them they are ALL GETTING IN. Funny how you can’t play God and judge sin and tell them if they do not come clean and repent they are going to hell.

BUT, BUT BUT BUT. I can play GOD and tell them they are ALL SAVED!! Getting IN, Just believe. Just Confess Jesus Christ is my personal friend and Savior. Then go home, keep living the way I want, in sin, whatever. Because I believe. MY FAITH my belief will save me. Do all the evil works I want. GOD DIED FOR US ALL, and we are all saved.

Oh yeah, I could play them LIKE a FIDDLE!! And the devil would be my best friend dancing beside me, wishing me nothing but the best!:nope: But when you KNOW the truth, and most of these people do, they just don’t want to hear it.

Hey lets be honest. WHO DOES:shrug:

I understand your sentiment. I am not in agreement with your formula. I could never be Protestant. Protestantism is on the decline. The reality is that there is only one EWTN. If you compare and contrast that with I don’t know how many television shows that have people like Greg calling people to commit to Christ, even if incompletely, they are succeeding to some extent.

If you have not heard Greg Laurie on YouTube, how to lead someone to Christ, you ought to if for no other reason than to understand the passion that you or I could have about a complete message.

People are hungry to know more than they know. They listen to who takes the time to talk to them.

I believe that we should do as Thomas Aquinas did, know as much about your opponent as possible to be able to understand and then explain how those opponents are wrong. Paul did the same thing. This is why he was so effective. He knew Torah and those who listened to him explain the Old Covenant in light of the New Covenant had to listen because he knew, understood and spoke their language.kpeople: