How do I know if I'm born again?

  • Thread starter Thread starter misslollipops
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So Romans carries more weight with you than the very words of Christ?

Romans 3 - the words “born of the spirit” do not appear anywhere in that chapter.

Romans 4 - not there either

Romans 5 - nope

Romans 6 - not there

Romans 7 - still nothing…

Romans 8 - ah, here we have what someone who is already walking in the Spirit should be doing, but that means that being born of the Spirit is something that’s already happened to them - according to Jesus, at baptism. 👍

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to search the Scriptures to see if what you say is true. I feel more like a Berean every day. 🙂
I’m glad you read it.
Chap 8 really sums it all up.
3 states we are all sinners(that is why we need to be born again)
4We are justified by faith
5 Sin came from Adam. Grace comes through Jesus
6 we put to death our sinful flesh become slaves to righteousness
7We are free from the law of sin and death. Paul talks about the war between the flesh and the spirit.
8No condemnation for those walking in the spirit.

Open up a new thread and we could go into it deeper.
 
Yes. Exactly. Since an infant is incapable of repentance, then either (1) infants cannot be saved; or (2) there is a method of being born again which does not require repentance for those incapable of it — a method like baptism.
Actually after searching around I found something somewhat explaining the state of children of believers. They are holy.
1cor7:14
It seems to suggest that the children are holy because of the belief of either parent. It does not say they become holy through a sacrament but throught the belief of the parent.
 
Jesus Himself was presented at the Temple, in a similar but different rite…

asaninfant.

Follow the Leader! 🙂
But we can actually see the Holy Spirit descending on Him when as an adult He is baptized
 
Actually after searching around I found something somewhat explaining the state of children of believers. They are holy.
1cor7:14
It seems to suggest that the children are holy because of the belief of either parent. It does not say they become holy through a sacrament but throught the belief of the parent.
Okay, good. Let’s start there. You said earlier that we are all born as filthy sinners. I took that to mean that you agree with the doctrine of original sin, right? So a baby is born in sin but can be made holy through their parent’s faith, correct?

That’s exactly how we see infant baptism. “Faith” is required for the baptism to be valid, but it is the faith of the parents, not of the baby. Make sense?
 
Okay, good. Let’s start there. You said earlier that we are all born as filthy sinners. I took that to mean that you agree with the doctrine of original sin, right? So a baby is born in sin but can be made holy through their parent’s faith, correct?

That’s exactly how we see infant baptism. “Faith” is required for the baptism to be valid, but it is the faith of the parents, not of the baby. Make sense?
It makes even more sense when one recalls that Jewish males were circumcised as a sign of the covenant with God when just 8 days old.

Clearly, their informed consent was NOT desired—it was that of their parents.

We don’t speak of Isaac’s great faith in being laid down as a potential sacrifice to God, but of his father Abraham’s, despite the fact that Abraham wasn’t the one who would die.

It is a pernicious and late fiction that baptism is for adults only. From the perspective of the apostles, to refrain from baptizing one’s children with Christ’s return imminent was to cast them into the pit. They believed the end of the world was nigh; why dither? To make Protestants 1,500 years later feel better?
 
1: Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2: Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3: Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
4: The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
5: Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
6: But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.
7: For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8: I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
9: But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
10: And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12: But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13: And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
**14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. **
15: But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16: For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
17: But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
18: Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
19: Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
20: Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.
21: Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
22: For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.
23: Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men.
24: Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.
25: Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.
26: I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be.
27: Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.
28: But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.
29: But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;
30: And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not;
31: And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away.
32: But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:
33: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.
 
34: There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
35: And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.
36: But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.
37: Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.
38: So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.
39: The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.
40: But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

So Paul here is addressing the concern of mixed marriages; one being a Christian, the other not. Were we to extract the bolded portion from this passage, absent that context, and add some wishful thinking, perhaps yours would be a reasonable interpretation.

As we can see above, it is not.

But thanks for highlighting where the Catholic prerequisites for valid infant baptism come from—as usual, from Scripture.

Thanks be to God!
 
The above also affords another example of why we ought to be careful when someone tries to play “Bible Bingo” to lend a “Biblical” imprimatur to their favored traditions of men—Scripture must be considered in its full context, and understood as a coherent whole, not fragmentary verses which can be strung together in support of virtually any heresy, and indeed, have.
 
Okay, good. Let’s start there. You said earlier that we are all born as filthy sinners. I took that to mean that you agree with the doctrine of original sin, right? So a baby is born in sin but can be made holy through their parent’s faith, correct?

That’s exactly how we see infant baptism. “Faith” is required for the baptism to be valid, but it is the faith of the parents, not of the baby. Make sense?
At some point the baby has to make a conscious decision to accept Jesus. A person is not born again until he makes the decision for himself. parents can’t do it for him.
That is what I’ve been saying from the beginning.
 
34:

So Paul here is addressing the concern of mixed marriages; one being a Christian, the other not. Were we to extract the bolded portion from this passage, absent that context, and add some wishful thinking, perhaps yours would be a reasonable interpretation.

As we can see above, it is not.

But thanks for highlighting where the Catholic prerequisites for valid infant baptism come from—as usual, from Scripture.

Thanks be to God!
Where does this passage mention infant baptism?
 
At some point the baby has to make a conscious decision to accept Jesus. A person is not born again until he makes the decision for himself. parents can’t do it for him.
That is what I’ve been saying from the beginning.
And where are the Scriptural references for THAT?

As we’ve already seen, even under the old Covenant the consent of the child was not required for entry into the fold through circumcision.

What you’re talking about sounds a lot more like works than anything Catholics have to say.
 
Where does this passage mention infant baptism?
Where does it refute Original Sin? Do you claim that Paul did not believe in Original Sin?

For the child to be made holy, he or she has to be a Christian. That is, you know, the whole point of the New Testament.

Paul did make quite a big deal of the fact that Baptism REPLACED circumcision in his ministry, given that there was some controversy over the matter.

We have quoted the evidence for infant baptism elsewhere in this thread, which you have apparently ignored.

Must Paul quote it everywhere?

Would you have listened to him had he done so, or simply grasped at the straw of every out-of-context verse to invent something new?
 
Misslollipops, I raised a few point earlier that you have failed to address. In fact, it seems that you only reply to posts that don’t ask for anything new. And you reply to them with the same old, same old. Are you struggling to rationalise your own unique beliefs?
 
Misslollipops, I raised a few point earlier that you have failed to address. In fact, it seems that you only reply to posts that don’t ask for anything new. And you reply to them with the same old, same old. Are you struggling to rationalise your own unique beliefs?
What she appears to be doing is the mark of what Mark Shea calls “the insincere questioner.”

Ask for evidence. Receive it. Ignore it. Ask for evidence of something else.

She makes many claims, but when rebutted, simply makes new ones, until it comes time to repeat the old ones, now buried in the thread.

But let’s give her a break—it’s awfully hard to argue against a widespread practice employed since the dawn of the Church, and harder still to argue with Christ, who commanded it.

Or is my Bible’s translation off and what Christ REALLY meant was, “Keep those little buggers away from me until they reach puberty at least?”
 
At some point the baby has to make a conscious decision to accept Jesus. A person is not born again until he makes the decision for himself. parents can’t do it for him.
That is what I’ve been saying from the beginning.
Jesus said to plant the seed, & bring the children to Him…

& if the ground is fertile the seed would grow.
 
I should also note that not only was I myself born again in my infant baptism, which good Protestants call “christening” (hmmm, wonder why they call it that?), but I was born again anew when I rejoined Christ’s Church this past Easter, and received at last the full complement of sacraments Christ himself intended us to have.

It was quite an emotional moment, and one I shall never forget, as I fully devoted myself to God by overcoming my prideful refusal to take part in His Church, led by His chosen men.
 
At some point the baby has to make a conscious decision to accept Jesus. A person is not born again until he makes the decision for himself. parents can’t do it for him.
That is what I’ve been saying from the beginning.
What is the situation then for a mentally handicapped adult? He/she cannot make a conscious decision to accept Jesus either.
 
Baptism, First Communion, Confirmation…

These are the steps we take (sacraments we receive) when we’re born as Catholics, at different times of our lives.
 
At some point the baby has to make a conscious decision to accept Jesus. A person is not born again until he makes the decision for himself. parents can’t do it for him.
That is what I’ve been saying from the beginning.
Yes, later in life that baby will need to make a conscious decision to follow Jesus. Catholics agree! But suppose that baby doesn’t live that long. Suppose that precious baby dies today. You agree that baby will enter heaven, so by definition, you’re agreeing that the baby has been born again (since only those who have been born again can enter heaven).

How did that baby get born again without exercising personal faith? Through baptism. Baptism is what constitutes being born again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top