M
misslollipops
Guest
You really have to study Rom7 and 8 to understand it
- Status
G
Gamera
Guest
That’s fine, but the problem is that you worded the post in a way that made it seem you were misquoting Romans 8:1. If you think a verse MEANS such-and-such, feel free to expound on that. But it doesn’t go over well when you paraphrase a Scripture verse. What you posted was, “Rom 8:1 there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus who sin,” when in fact the text doesn’t contain the words “who sin.” That’s adding your own words to God’s word, which I’m sure you agree is unacceptable. I do realize that you probably didn’t mean to make it appear like a verbatim quote, but that was the effect.
G
Gamera
Guest
I have studied it and I do understand it. I just don’t agree with your interpretation.
M
misslollipops
Guest
If your point is that Zechariah was blameless so people today can live sinless I disagree.
If you are trying to prove that the bible is wrong because of a contradiction that is the subject for another thread.
This thread is about the need to be born again of the Spirit to put to death our fleshly sin nature. Let us try to keep on that topic.
G
Gamera
Guest
No. The Bible is God’s word. It is not wrong, and it does not contradict itself. You simply misunderstand Romans 3:23, that’s all.
And it is on topic because it proves that human beings can live without committing personal sin.
M
misslollipops
Guest
People who know the bible know exactly what Rom 8:1 is talking about. And the preceding chapt7:13-24. I made the assumption you would know exactly what I was refering to. Sorry my mistake.
G
Gamera
Guest
You cannot sloppily misquote Scripture and then just say, “Well, if you know Scripture you’ll know what I’m talking about.” That’s how you get sloppy theology, like your assertion that ‘being born again means born of the spirit’ when the Bible actually says is “born of WATER AND the Spirit,” John 3:5.
If you wish to cite a Scripture verse then please use Scripture’s exact words, not an approximation. We treasure every precious word of Scripture here and we don’t like to see it altered. Thanks.
M
misslollipops
Guest
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Right!
One of the biggest problems (IMO) is that to many evangelicals and fundamentalists, what she described to you is unofficially a sort of litmus test of one’s rebirth, and though a lot of them run around “witnessing” to others, only a small percentage of them are any better at their faith sharing than most of the faithful Catholics that I know.
If I had to rate the quality of faith sharing efforts that I have seen here on CAF by n-Cs (and this is my opinion as someone who was n-C for many years, as well as someone who has always loved to share my faith with others), I’d have to grade them at about a “C” at best, but with a similar grade for most of the Catholics as well, though that would be a per capita grade for the Catholics since I know and hang out here with more of them than n-Cs.
That is changing though as more of us get into apologetics. It’s mostly about effective communication. I started this poll to kinda start cultivating a group of apologists and effective faith sharers. Poll: Converts/Reverts Conversion Stories and Fellowship
C
Church_Militant
Guest
I’m sorry but the man is absolutely right.
The scripture passage in question does not use those words.
It actually says, “1 There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh.”
I’m afraid you’re reading your personal theological interpretation into the text instead of agreeing with what it precisely says (and therefore means).
Catholics will readily agree with everything that that verse says…but we will not agree with your expressed interpretation of it.
J
juliamajor
Guest
Yeah but if Protestants believe each person can interpret scripture why isn’t anybody else’s understanding just as correct as yours?So if one interprets"born again" or Romans differently why is your interpretation the valid one.? Actually that’s why Protestantism has 30,000 plus sects. Which one got the scripture right?
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Good point Julia.Yeah but if Protestants believe each person can interpret scripture why isn’t anybody else’s understanding just as correct as yours?So if one interprets"born again" or Romans differently why is your interpretation the valid one.? Actually that’s why Protestantism has 30,000 plus sects. Which one got the scripture right?
Catholics find it odd and very confusing that there are so very many different interpretations of any given passage of scripture by all the different n-Cs. I’ve heard some wildly weird teachings in n-C churches that made me look at the Bible there in my lap and go, “Where in THE WORLD did he get that from this passage!???” I still listen to n-C preachers on the radio a little and sometimes they do it there too, and that’s generally when I change to the local Catholic radio station.
M
misslollipops
Guest
When I quoted Rom8:1, I assumed the reader would know that Paul is describing his own battle with sin in 7:13-25.I’m sorry but the man is absolutely right.
The scripture passage in question does not use those words.
It but we will not agree with your expressed interpretation of it.
The post did not come out clearly and I assumed he would know what Iwas talking about. I apologized.
P
Prayer_Warrior
Guest
I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that your claim is that the Holy Spirit guides you to understanding scripture. Could you please ask Him what “clothed in Christ” means and get back to me? It is relevant to the discussion and I would really be interested in your understanding of Gal 3:27 which uses the expression ‘clothed in Christ’ (or, in older translations like DRV and KJV it says “put on Christ”).
M
misslollipops
Guest
clothed in Christ look at: eph 4:24-25 put on the new self
rom13:14 make no provision for the flesh
col3:10 put on renewed self
M
misslollipops
Guest
The whole point of the thread is for the reader to ask himself whether he/she is born again.
It is a litmus test.
‘Born again’ is not some crazy new religion filled with annoying zealots
Every christian must be born again. Jn3:3
I was trying to provoke the questions: what does it mean to be born again, what are the outward signs that one is born again, what type of changes take place, and such.
I did my best. But to many catholics the words ‘born again’ are like an attack signal.
Also As you probably know prosletyzing in not allowed on this sight for anyone but catholics.
That is probably why you hear any n-cs giving a good ‘witness’
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Hey, I understand.
I never alleged that “‘Born again’ is…some crazy new religion filled with annoying zealots”.
What you don’t seem to understand that a faithful Catholic has no problem with the term born again, we do sometimes have problems with n-Cs who seek to interject errant theology into discussions.
For instance, in answer to your questions, “what does it mean to be born again, what are the outward signs that one is born again, what type of changes take place, and such”, I would offer a response from the Gospel that I believe not only sums up the answers to all your questions but also is exemplary of what we believe as Catholics. Here you go, Matthew 25:31-46
[31] “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
[32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,
[33] and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left.
[34] Then the King will say to those at his right hand,
Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; [35] for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, [36] I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' [37] Then the righteous will answer him, Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?[38] And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?
[39] And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’
[40] And the King will answer them,
Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.' [41] Then he will say to those at his left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’
[44] Then they also will answer,
Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?' [45] Then he will answer them, Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’[46] And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Oh, I’d beg to differ on this. I think we see no end of n-Cs here who give what they would call a good “witness”. I think of my friend Zooey (a Methodist!) and the wonderful way she shares her faith and the two beautiful Rosaries that she sent my wife and I. I would listen to Zooey because she has earned the close friendship that I know I can trust and doesn’t see me and my Catholic friends here as some sort of “mission field” just because we are Catholic, though I feel pretty sure that when someone comes along who isn’t a Christian, she’s all about sharing the Gospel with them. Her faith shows in her love for me and my friends here, and the fruits of the Holy Spirit that she shares with us all here every time she’s on. She’s just one.
MyFavoriteMartin is another who has earned my respect even though he says he does not agree with some of the things that we Catholics believe. Oh he had a rough time at first I guess, but as he’s gotten to know us (and Lord knows that he and I are often on opposite sides of debates and discussions) I think we’ve become friends who expect the best from each other, and by and large, he delivers. I like that about him.
Lemme just offer one other thing on this topic.
[SIGN]Any of You Catholics Here NOT Know if You’re Born Again?[/SIGN]
I’m born again. Next!
G
Gamera
Guest
Yes, I do know what St Paul was talking about in his letter to the Romans. He doesn’t say that we can sin and still remain “in Christ Jesus.” On the contrary, he says the very opposite three chapters later: “See then the kindness and the severity of God; severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, PROVIDED you continue in His kindness; OTHERWISE YOU TOO WILL BE CUT OFF,” Rom. 11:22.
St Paul made it clear to the Romans that we can lose our grace by sinning.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Part 2
Catholics will agree that a person living in sin will not inherit the kingdom. However, we do not believe that (except in the case mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-6 which I avoid only because it is a thread in and of itself) our sin expels the Holy Spirit. We are just choosing to not listen to Him. We believe that the Holy Spirit is relentlessly calling us to repentance and never gives up on us. Furthermore, we reject that your Baptism “didn’t work”. Proof that it is working in you is your desire to follow Christ. Because of the graces of your Baptism, you had your Damascus moment.
Catholics believe that your Baptism was also miraculous. And, it made you more receptive to the call of the Holy Spirit later in your life.
Catholics have no disagreement here.
We know the Bible quite well thank you. In fact, our interpretation has been known and practiced since the Apostles and those who knew the Apostles. And, we don’t agree that your interpretation is inspired nor that the Holy Spirit would allow mankind for 2,000 years to live in errancy.
And when Cradle & Revert Catholics answered at their Baptism, Confirmation and each time they go to Confession, you dismissed the response without charity. Just because the experience wasn’t like yours, you gave it no credence. That, my friend was an attack. I think the references of many to see the plank in your eye was referring to this attitude and lack of charity.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Wow. I step away from the computer for 16 hours and there are 100+ post. As I got caught up on the posts, I was struck at how much people were talking past each other based upon their divergent experience of being "born again’. Catholicism is made of up six subsets:
Cradle Catholics who were baptized as an infant and born again as a child of God, renewed their birth with additional graces from the Holy Spirit, and have lived a life with ups and downs trying to follow their call and following Christ.
Revert Catholics who were baptized and Confirmed but fell away from their faith for a period. In many cases, they spent part of their life worshipping in another Christian faith.
Convert Catholics who experienced the Sacrament of Confirmation after having a personal conversion experience. They may or many not have been baptized earlier in their life.
Baptized Catholics who either were baptized in the Church as an infant and never accepted the call in their life or were baptized in a proper Trinitarian denomination but have never lived life as a Catholic Christian.
Fallen-away Catholics who were baptized and confirmed but have left the Church. They may be living their life worshipping in another Christian faith, another faith or may not be worshipping at all. Misslollipops is one of these. And despite being raised Catholic, she showed an amazing lack of knowledge about Catholicism, its terminology, and its theology. She is an obvious example of the effects of poor catechesis. As practicing Catholics, we have to ask God for forgiveness for our collective participation in this.
Each of these different experiences and perspectives cause people to use terms and vernacular that isn’t exactly clear to the the other. And sometimes, it leads to divergent interpretations of Scripture.
With this said, I’d like to address a few items.
See below for Part 2
Cradle Catholics who were baptized as an infant and born again as a child of God, renewed their birth with additional graces from the Holy Spirit, and have lived a life with ups and downs trying to follow their call and following Christ.
Revert Catholics who were baptized and Confirmed but fell away from their faith for a period. In many cases, they spent part of their life worshipping in another Christian faith.
Convert Catholics who experienced the Sacrament of Confirmation after having a personal conversion experience. They may or many not have been baptized earlier in their life.
Baptized Catholics who either were baptized in the Church as an infant and never accepted the call in their life or were baptized in a proper Trinitarian denomination but have never lived life as a Catholic Christian.
Fallen-away Catholics who were baptized and confirmed but have left the Church. They may be living their life worshipping in another Christian faith, another faith or may not be worshipping at all. Misslollipops is one of these. And despite being raised Catholic, she showed an amazing lack of knowledge about Catholicism, its terminology, and its theology. She is an obvious example of the effects of poor catechesis. As practicing Catholics, we have to ask God for forgiveness for our collective participation in this.
Each of these different experiences and perspectives cause people to use terms and vernacular that isn’t exactly clear to the the other. And sometimes, it leads to divergent interpretations of Scripture.
With this said, I’d like to address a few items.
Yes, Catholics believe that at their baptism they were born again of water and Spirit.
Yes, Catholics believe that through the exercise of free will, we can choose to live a life that is not reflective of our calling as children of God.
No, Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is always in us and has been since God breathed life into us. Baptism (and later Confirmation) are Sacraments where we are born again and greater graces to follow Christ are indelibly granted to us by God.
Your interpretation is contrary to the Church’s interpretation. The Church’s interpretation is a subject of another thread for a full explanation. For the sake of the subject of this thread, I’d like to just leave it at that because the answer to your preceeding question was negative. That is not what we are saying.
Our general problem is that it encompasses only one specific example of being “born again” and any and all other examples of Catholics is rejected out of hand. You yourself have done it throughout this thread. In your mind, if they don’t have a “Damascus moment”, they are not truly “born again.”
Generally, Catholics agree with this. We also add the caveat that the Holy Spirit is in us from the moment He breathed life in us. However, without being “born again” (through Baptism and repentence), we have impediments or insufficient graces that diminish our capacity to hear Him.
See below for Part 2
- Status