Do I need to be born again?

[pipoluojo]

I have a problem with the ‘born again’ doctrine.
First, ‘born again’ christians claim that to be born again means to accept Jesus as one’s personal Lord and Savior. I consider it a sweet lie because sciripture nowhere gives that interpretation.

Nicodemus himself couldn’t understand what it meant to be born again, so Our Lord explained with the full statement, “unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit,”…(Jn 3:5). To stick to the incomplete statement is therefore rather fraudulent because it teaches half truth.
The Church teaches that we are born again of water in the sacrament of Baptism and of the Spirit in Confirmation. So it is.

Secondly, Our Lord declared many acts as pre-conditions for entering God’s kingdom. Being born again of water and the Spirit is one of them. Others include; not prefering father, mother, etc. to Him (Mk 10: 29-30), being poor in spirit, and suffering calumny for His sake (in the Beatitudes), doing the Father’s will and not just mouthing his name, (Matt. 7:21-23), living our divine filiation, (Lk. 18:17), not backsliding (Lk. 9:62) believing in God’s only Son (Jn. 3:16, 3:36, etc.), and the peak: eating His body and drinking His blood (Jn. 6 55).

How can half of one condition (revealed to one person in the night) be held sacrosanct against about nine others (taught to teeming crowds of disciples in broad daylight)?

I think the born-again doctrine fails to teach the whole truth as Jesus taught and should therefore not be allowed a foothold in the Church.
A good Catholic Christian is far more than born again.

 

[Apologia100]

If you were validly baptised, you were “born of water and Spirit” as commanded by our Lord. As Catholics, we believe in baptismal regeneration (regeneration literally means “born again”). SO, if you are asked by a Fundamentalist, “Are you born again?”, you can say , “Absolutely”. If they ask "Is Jesus your personal Lord and Savior., you can say, “Absolutely”. If they ask, “Are you saved?”, you should reply, “I have placed the hope of my salvation in my faith in Jesus Christ.”

 

[Melchior]

Apologia100:

If you were validly baptised, you were “born of water and Spirit” as commanded by our Lord. As Catholics, we believe in baptismal regeneration (regeneration literally means “born again”). SO, if you are asked by a Fundamentalist, “Are you born again?”, you can say , “Absolutely”. If they ask "Is Jesus your personal Lord and Savior., you can say, “Absolutely”. If they ask, “Are you saved?”, you should reply, “I have placed the hope of my salvation in my faith in Jesus Christ.”

I agree with you. But as a Catholic minded Protestant, I think what many people mean when they ask, if one is born-again, they should really be asking are you converted to Christ?

This is what I mean. Those who seperate Baptism form born-again are ingoring the clear teaching of scripture. But the principle of being converted is, imo, valid. We all know many baptized people who are essentially unbelievers. So to say they have been born-again in baptism may be accurate in space and time but they never followed Christ after that. But if by born-again someone means converted to Christ then it is valid. It is certainly the wrong use of the term but I think we all get what they mean. Does one have a personal, abiding faith in Christ as their Savior, beyond an abstract idea?

I have no doubt that my good Catholic mom is converted. But most of my Catholic siblings are not. Most don’t attend Mass or even really believe in the teachings of the church. So in a sense their baptism never took hold in their hearts (I am speaking figuratively as I know it is an act of God not man). They never walked in their baptism as Luther (forgive me) would say.

We all must acknowledge that we and our fellow co-religionists must be converted to Christ. Sometimes over and over again. And some baptized people need the Gospel preached to them so they will repent, believe and follow Christ. If not their Baptism will make things worse for them in the after life if the break the COvenant made in baptism. They would have been batter off if they were not baptized if they die without ever being truly converted.

I am sorry if this is muddled. It was difficult trying to convey these thoughts in writing.

Mel

 

[stbruno]

When my wife and I do baptism prep classes, we remind all the parents and Godparents present that the so-called “born again” Christians are more than 2000 years late coining that terminology. By our baptism, we are born again. We even receive a birthday candle lit from the Paschal Candle or the Easter candle as a reminder that Christ is the Light of the World. So we encourage them to start a new tradition, to relight their child’s or god-child’s baptismal candle on the anniversary of their baptismal day. That day is just as important as their birthday! God bless you.

 

[Gratias_Grace]

The “born-again-people” want you to answer yes or no to if you are close to Jesus.

I think Melchior is trying to explain, that often non-catholics mean something different than babtism, when they ask their questions.
If I shall try to go with these thoughts I will say that they ask about if you are a person who don’t think much about your faith or if you have been “waken up” to really understand that Jesus are there for you.

They don’t understand catholic teaching and many of them even think that the catholic church isn’t Gods Church. So when asking their questions about being born again, there is buried a hidden question, and that question is like this: “Since you are a catholic you are not really a christian, will you like to come to our church and learn to love God (be born again)?”

Therefore it is impotant that you are not trapped in the question. Put your smile on and say something like this: “Yes, I was born again in my infant baptism and I still love God!”

Stop the discussion after that or be the one in the posision that wonder about how they can feel born again since they are not catholic. Show interest for their stories, but never forget to tell them that as you respect their choice of a protestant church you are to remain catholic and you want them to respect that.

(If they don’t respect that they are not really friends)!

G.G.

 

[Apologia100]

stbruno:

When my wife and I do baptism prep classes, we remind all the parents and Godparents present that the so-called “born again” Christians are more than 2000 years late coining that terminology. By our baptism, we are born again. We even receive a birthday candle lit from the Paschal Candle or the Easter candle as a reminder that Christ is the Light of the World. So we encourage them to start a new tradition, to relight their child’s or god-child’s baptismal candle on the anniversary of their baptismal day. That day is just as important as their birthday! God bless you.

We had our son baptised on his first birthday so we wouldn’t get confused. :whacky:

 

[DaveBj]

Just out of curiosity, what would the Catholics on the forum call it when someone in a Protestant tradition comes to a realization of his/her sinfulness and the need to repent and “ask Christ into his/her life,” does so, and lives the rest of his/her life as a changed person, rejecting sin and serving God in the best way he/she knows?

And what would you call it when a person who was infant-baptized and raised into adulthood jumping through all the Catholic hoops, but lives his/her life as if God did not exist, only going through the motions of Catholicism, and then suddenly comes to the same realization, repents, and starts living for God?

I understand the point of the Catholic doctrine of “baptismal regeneration,” but the whole point of “born again”/“regeneration” (those two terms mean the same thing) is that there is a new life; “old things are passed away, and all things are become new,” as Paul said.

I had such an experience in 1979, and it changed my life. However, I also know Catholics who can claim to have been born again by their baptism, but live like the devil.

DaveBj

 

[Apologia100]

Isn’t it Martin Luther who said, “Not even if I commit murder or adultery a thousand times a day can I be separated from the Lord(paraphrase). So sin boldly, but trust in the Lord more boldly.” Not the words of someone who has “old things passed away and been made new”. Someone who has accepted Christ avoids sin and is genuinely remorseful when he is aware of it.

 

[Didi]

DaveBj:

Just out of curiosity, what would the Catholics on the forum call it when someone in a Protestant tradition comes to a realization of his/her sinfulness and the need to repent and “ask Christ into his/her life,” does so, and lives the rest of his/her life as a changed person, rejecting sin and serving God in the best way he/she knows?

And what would you call it when a person who was infant-baptized and raised into adulthood jumping through all the Catholic hoops, but lives his/her life as if God did not exist, only going through the motions of Catholicism, and then suddenly comes to the same realization, repents, and starts living for God?

DaveBj

I would call the first one a spiritual awakening and acceptance of Jesus in their lives; until they are baptized they are not truly born again.

I would call the second scenario a reconversion, as they were born again through water and The Spirit in baptism; then chose not to follow Jesus; then came back to Him again.

The thing is, we are all in a process of continual conversion. There are times we are close to Jesus and truly trying to follow Him; there are times we fall away; there are times our spiritual lives are dry. All are part of this spiritual journey.

Our spiritual lives do not consist of a single moment in time of accepting Jesus as our Savior and a one-time born again experience; our spiritual lives consist of doing this every moment of every day of our lives on earth. Each day, each moment, we must bring to Our Lord. It is constant and continual. Sometimes we fail, so we come back to Him asking His forgiveness.

Salvation is a process and a daily acceptance of Jesus as Our Savior.

 

[Melchior]

Apologia100:

Isn’t it Martin Luther who said, “Not even if I commit murder or adultery a thousand times a day can I be separated from the Lord(paraphrase). So sin boldly, but trust in the Lord more boldly.” Not the words of someone who has “old things passed away and been made new”. Someone who has accepted Christ avoids sin and is genuinely remorseful when he is aware of it.

Go back and read Luthers letter to Melachton in context and see the briader point he was making by using, as he lied to do, extreme exaggeration to make a point. Once you understand his retorical style you will understand him much better. The man very prone to biting sarcasm.

Be that as it may, Dave did not seem to be referring to Luther. And his point deserves addressing. He is reffering to people who are striving to live a faithful, holy life in Christ. Not those who believe in cheap grace.

Mel

 

[BayCityRickL]

DaveBj:

I also know Catholics who can claim to have been born again by their baptism, but live like the devil.
DaveBj

…and you don’t know of any protestant backsliders like that?

 

[Melchior]

Melchior:

Go back and read Luthers letter to Melachton in context and see the briader point he was making by using, as he lied to do, extreme exaggeration to make a point. Once you understand his retorical style you will understand him much better. The man very prone to biting sarcasm.

Be that as it may, Dave did not seem to be referring to Luther. And his point deserves addressing. He is reffering to people who are striving to live a faithful, holy life in Christ. Not those who believe in cheap grace.

Mel

Let me rewrite the above without the numerous typos.

*Go back and read Luther’s letter to Melachton in context, and see the point he was making by using, as he liked to do, extreme exaggeration to make the point. Once you understand his rhetorical style you will understand him much better. The man wasvery prone to biting sarcasm.

Be that as it may, Dave did not seem to be referring to Luther. And his point deserves addressing. He is referring to people who are striving to live a faithful, holy life in Christ. Not those who believe in cheap grace.*

 

[gsaccone]

DaveBj:

Just out of curiosity, what would the Catholics on the forum call it when someone in a Protestant tradition comes to a realization of his/her sinfulness and the need to repent and “ask Christ into his/her life,” does so, and lives the rest of his/her life as a changed person, rejecting sin and serving God in the best way he/she knows?

And what would you call it when a person who was infant-baptized and raised into adulthood jumping through all the Catholic hoops, but lives his/her life as if God did not exist, only going through the motions of Catholicism, and then suddenly comes to the same realization, repents, and starts living for God?

I had such an experience in 1979, and it changed my life. However, I also know Catholics who can claim to have been born again by their baptism, but live like the devil.

DaveBj

Dear Dave,
Blessings to you. May I point out a couple potential errors in your reasoning. The first one is that you are trying to argue from the imperfect (man and his behavior) back to the perfect (God and His teaching). Our perfect Creator can and never should be judged by the behavior of His imperfect creations. Just because there are many Catholics who do not live Christian lives (as any open minded person would acknowledge, however there are equally as many Protestants), doesn’t mean the Church’s teaching is wrong. The following is an anology I’ve used before on this forum but it’s worth repeating:

If you had a math teacher who couldn’t balance his checkbook, does that make math untrue?

Of course not, that teacher just couldn’t put what was true into practice, but it doesn’t make the subject matter any less true. But some students might say “why should I go to math class when the teacher can’t even take care of his own affairs?”. We can all see that they would be making a terrible mistake because to function effectively they’ll need that information later on. We can even bet that they are just saying that as an excuse because they don’t like something about math or they’d rather ditch class and avoid a responsibility that requires something of them they do not want to do, which again doesn’t affect the truth of mathematics. It’s more likely they’re chosing self-will over the will of One who knows what’s best for him.

The other point I would make is this. A Master chef creates the perfect meal and leaves the recipe. Now 10 other chefs all use his recipe to make a meal but some follow it only vaguely while others more exactly. When all the meals are prepared, which one are you going to say “this tastes like the Master chef’s meal”? The one who followed it most perfectly. So, if we are going to look at members of a community to evaluate that communities belief system (keeping in mind it is not for us to judge), then it would be by the SAINTS that we consider a religion, not by the sinners!

Peace in Christ,
Greg

 

[Todd_Easton]

DaveBj:

what would the Catholics on the forum call it when someone in a Protestant tradition comes to a realization of his/her sinfulness and the need to repent and “ask Christ into his/her life,” does so, and lives the rest of his/her life as a changed person, rejecting sin and serving God in the best way he/she knows?

Catholic tradition seems to call this experience is interior repentance and conversion of heart. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
1431. Interior repentance is a radical reorientation of our whole life, a return, a conversion to God with all our heart, an end of sin, a turning away from evil, with repugnance toward the evil actions we have committed. At the same time it entails the desire and resolution to change one’s life, with hope in God’s mercy and trust in the help of his grace. This conversion of heart is accompanied by a salutary pain and sadness which the Fathers called animi cruciatus (affliction of spirit) and compunctio cordis (repentance of heart).

 

[RNRobert]

I think the problem that pipoluojo has with “born-again” Christians is that they boil salvation down into a simple formula of basically saying a “sinner’s prayer” and “accepting Jesus as your personal savior.” However, there is more to Chrisitianity than that. There was a member of my KofC council (God rest his soul) who would send these inspirational letters to his fellow Knights. One of them (which I still have) begins:

Did you ever stop and think and therefore realize there is a difference between salvation and holiness? Salvation is easy. To become a truly holy person,now that is something else. You must obey his commands and do His work here on earth.

We are not called merely to be saved, but to become holy, as our Lord is Holy (Leviticus 20:7, Matthew 5:48). Christianity is more than saying a sinners prayer, but a LIFESTYLE. The sacraments and church teachings are not man-made doctrines that interfere with our worship of God, but God-made tools that help us to avoid sin and live the holy life.

 

[DaveBj]

BayCityRickL:

…and you don’t know of any protestant backsliders like that?

Oh, do I ever!!! Less so among the Church of God crowd I was brought up in (Arminian, believed in losing salvation, so tended to walk a tighter line), but among the once-saved-always-saved crowd–don’t get me started!!!

Mel, you were right; I was not specifically thinking of Luther, although I have actually heard OSAS people use that line of reasoning. On the other hand, I have a book by John MacArthur (*The Gospel According to Jesus/]) that argues that people who do not strive toward holiness are not really saved. That’s one of my Protestant books that I’m keeping.

Gsaccone, I wasn’t “reasoning” anything; I was simply describing what appears to be the same experience from two different traditions and wondering what terminology was used in Catholocism. I am aware that we aren’t perfect until we reach perfection (which is not a town in a TV ad), but on the other hand there is a difference between stumbling and falling down on the road and turning completely off the road to play in the pigpen for a while.

Thanks, Todd, for the quote. I haven’t gotten that far yet in my study of the CCC.

DaveBj*

 

[Melchior]

DaveBj:

Oh, do I ever!!! Less so among the Church of God crowd I was brought up in (Arminian, believed in losing salvation, so tended to walk a tighter line), but among the once-saved-always-saved crowd–don’t get me started!!!

Mel, you were right; I was not specifically thinking of Luther, although I have actually heard OSAS people use that line of reasoning. On the other hand, I have a book by John MacArthur (*The Gospel According to Jesus/]) that argues that people who do not strive toward holiness are not really saved. That’s one of my Protestant books that I’m keeping.

Gsaccone, I wasn’t “reasoning” anything; I was simply describing what appears to be the same experience from two different traditions and wondering what terminology was used in Catholocism. I am aware that we aren’t perfect until we reach perfection (which is not a town in a TV ad), but on the other hand there is a difference between stumbling and falling down on the road and turning completely off the road to play in the pigpen for a while.

Thanks, Todd, for the quote. I haven’t gotten that far yet in my study of the CCC.

DaveBj*

Gotcha. I should point out that Luther did not believe in OSAS. He did believe apostacy was a very real possibility.

As for MacArthur. He takes the Calvinist/Reformed position on this. Which is the Perseverence of the Saints. It is really very different than OSAS. Because it takes the position you mentioned from MacArthur. If you are not living like a Christian you should have no confidence you really are one. Or something like that.

Blessings,

Mel

 

[Highwayman]

I believe that we recieve the Holy Spirit at Baptism and have the potential to be born again. The stain of original sin is removed thus taking away all (name removed by moderator)ediment to going to Heaven. In baptism we join in the death of Christ but without a active responce we may be a sleeping Christian like Lazarus till we hear the voice of Jesus call on our lives to come forth. We are dead to sin but alive in Christ and when we are baptised into Christ we then have the ability to be use by him. What many do is to start to do Christian things or just good works and fail to wait on God. Anyone baptised into Christ will have a calling on thier life but going and trying to do something to be Holy is just repeating the original sin.
When Jesus called Lararus forth he said to the Church “Loose Him and let him go”. He did not say to the Church give him a 12 step program and a ministry not ordained by God. If we think we are the Holy Spirit and try to micromanage the Born Again we are no beter than Satan who said “Did God truly say” or “If you eat of this friut you will be like God”.
No Jesus said, loose him and let him go!, but what does this mean?
In our increasingly secualar world being born again seems to mean the church will get you a reservation with a srink, at least that was the church’s responce to me when I began to follow the leading of Jesus through His Holy Spirit.
How many Christian I wonder are so abused by the Church, who would rather leave the grave rapings on the born again and have them try to suffer for sins that God has already forgiven.
Jesus did not weep at the tomb of Lazarus because he was dead. Obveously this was not a problem for Jesus to over come, rather what he weep about was the fact that everone around him was blind to the great mystery he was revealing to them in this. He was showing that the 4 thousand years of mankind living in Spiritual death was almost over by Lazarus laying down 4 days. That the Marthas of this world who think God can only be pleased by our works will someday stop pulling away the Marys of this world who are just trying to understand and listen at the feet of the Master. What the world could hardly grasp was that the Spiritual side of mankind was about to appear, that He would join to the soul of mankind, that has always been looking for peace,and satisfy the flesh of mankind that was always unfulfilled by works. It is this Lazarus side of us that hears God because it is a portion of His Holy Spirit married to our souls, and His name Lazarus means “God’s Helper”.
This is how the early Church drew the whole world to itself and to Christ in the way it was mentioned in John 12, 19. God Bless

 

[pipoluojo]

Is it not a misnomer to be a born again catholic?

Whoever calls himself a christian surely recognises Jesus as Lord and savior. The depth of this conviction is what may vary from person to peson. What then is the substance in saying that to be born again means to accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior? Some perversion of divine truth?

A deepest realisation of oneself as a christian is an experience that is given by the Lord Himself at a particular time. While this may be facilitated by human factors like reasoning, education, spiritual formation, and so on, it may be a spontaneous gift as in the case of St. Paul.

Even at the peak of this realisation, we are prone to lose grace due to sin. The sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist make us regain lost graces and spiritual vigor. We also struggle to live our faith daily. How does the born-againer who does not recognise and avail himself of these means of grace claim greater spiritual strength? Are we not mistaking activism for spirituality?

That’s why I think it is all a farce. To be born again of water and the spirit is SOMETHING. To be ‘born again’ is NOTHING.

 

[Melchior]

pipoluojo:

Is it not a misnomer to be a born again catholic?

Whoever calls himself a christian surely recognises Jesus as Lord and savior. The depth of this conviction is what may vary from person to peson. What then is the substance in saying that to be born again means to accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior? Some perversion of divine truth?

A deepest realisation of oneself as a christian is an experience that is given by the Lord Himself at a particular time. While this may be facilitated by human factors like reasoning, education, spiritual formation, and so on, it may be a spontaneous gift as in the case of St. Paul.

Even at the peak of this realisation, we are prone to lose grace due to sin. The sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist make us regain lost graces and spiritual vigor. We also struggle to live our faith daily. How does the born-againer who does not recognise and avail himself of these means of grace claim greater spiritual strength? Are we not mistaking activism for spirituality?

That’s why I think it is all a farce. To be born again of water and the spirit is SOMETHING. To be ‘born again’ is NOTHING.

The whole point is faith. Certainly if you are a Christian you are born-again. Born-Again Christian is redundant. But for the baptized you certainly must believe in Christ to be a Christian in any real sense.

So if one is baptized and does not trust in Christ then how are they born-again even though they are baptized?

The theme of this entire thread should be about belief. That is the crux of the matter.

Mel