Need interpretation

[God_I_Love]

''What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? God forbid.

15 For he saith to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17 For the scripture saith to Pharao: To this purpose have I raised thee, that I may shew my power in thee, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.

18 Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will; and whom he will, he hardeneth.

19 Thou wilt say therefore to me: Why doth he then find fault? for who resisteth his will?

20 O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction,

23 That he might shew the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory?
‘’

Essentially God is saying that ALL things occur by His hand. He hardens whom He hardens and showers mercy upon whom He wills. And are we the created to ask: Why? Why am I a seeming vessel of wrath? Or why am I a seeming vessel of mercy? No. But we must trust that even if I am ‘‘cursed’’ and all adversity and evil befalls me that it is for God’s will and purposes that we can not understand entirely that those have come upon us. So that when He showers the vessels of mercy with the riches of His own glory His glory is manifested but also ours as well. And all while remembering that it is ordained outside of our will. It is God’s will that effects salvation.

 

[bisco]

this is not catholic doctrine.

 

[God_I_Love]

this is not catholic doctrine.

What isn’t? What makes it Catholic doctrine? How does what I presented disagree with points in Catholic theology?

Also is it Christian doctrine?

 

[irenaeuslyons]

John 3:3 does not refer to baptism. If it did, how could Jesus say to Nicodemus, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?” How could Jesus expect Nicodemus to know about baptism?
Rather, Jesus was referring to scripture…which he would definitely expect a teacher of Israel to know. He was referring to Ezekiel 36: 25 - 27, " I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules"
This is the promise of the New Covenant, which is given to those with faith in Christ. The Spirit is not received through baptism. If it was, then that would contradict what Jesus says in John 3:7-8, “You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” No one can control the wind…not even the Catholic Church.
Also, if it meant baptism, that would contradict what Jesus says in John 3:14-15, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” and 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.” and John 3:18, "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."
If being born again means baptism, then everything Jesus says in His conversation with Nicodemus would be a contradiction.
By the time the subject of baptism comes up, it is after travelling, and is a change of subject, not a continuation of the same topic.

“No one can enter the kingdom of heaven unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
John 3:3-5

The Gospel is clear.

*“Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” *
1 Pet. 3:21

The Epistle is clear.

As St Paul says: Baptism is the new Circumcision. Therefore you must be baptized into the New Covenant. In Lev 12:3, the circumcision of eight-day old babies was the way of entering into the Old Covenant. In Col. 2:11-12, baptism is the new “circumcision” for entering into the New Covenant.

The reason Nicodemus should have known this as a teacher of Israel was because of the Flood. When people were baptized, they were dunked under water. They were symbolically drowned. This is because water represents the abyss. It symbolizes death. In order to be reborn, you have to die first. This is why in ancient christian iconography, baptism shows the water for baptism as this dark cavernous lake or abyss that looks like it is going to swallow the person. It is why Peter compares it to the Flood where Noah was saved through it (1 Pet. 3:20).

This is why Paul says:

“Buried with him in baptism, in whom also you are risen again by the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him up from the dead.”
Col 2:12

“For we are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life.”
Rom 6:4

“Know you not that all we, who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in his death?”
Rom 6:3

“And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name”.
Acts 22:16

If you don’t die, you cant be reborn in Christ. Baptism is essential.

 

[bisco1]

What isn’t? What makes it Catholic doctrine? How does what I presented disagree with points in Catholic theology?

Also is it Christian doctrine?

the magisterium makes catholic doctrine. there is no such thing as christian doctrine outside of the church, because, then it would just be whatever anybody wanted it to be.

 

[qui_est_ce]

the magisterium makes catholic doctrine. there is no such thing as christian doctrine outside of the church, because, then it would just be whatever anybody wanted it to be.

That’s good. It brings to mind 2nd Timothy 4:3-4
3For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity,* will accumulate teachers
4
and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.

 

[PJM]

=Gorgias;12594447]Agreed. The grace of baptism is purely gratuitous, a gift from God. You seem to have a problem with ‘asking’ for this gift, through the baptism which Christ himself instituted as a means of ‘discipling’ the world (Mt 28:20).

I’m not asserting this. I’m just asserting that it continues to be a possibility that they turn from Christ.

The man whom Paul rails against in 1 Corinthians – was he ‘born again’? Having an incestuous relationship certainly qualifies as ‘backsliding’, doesn’t it?

Your interpretation doesn’t hold up, here. If those who are born again must necessarily persevere, then why does John tell those who are ‘born again’ “my children, I am writing this to you so that you may not commit sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous one” (1 Jn 2:1)? Why does he constantly warn the ‘born again’ to “remain” in Christ and “not be deceived” over and again in 1 Jn 2? If the born again ‘automatically’ remained in Christ, then 1 Jn 2 would be the rantings of a madman! It would be like me exhorting you, “breathe! never stop remembering to breathe!”

That doesn’t make sense: in Eph 2:8, we see that “by grace you have been saved through faith.” The important words here are “through faith.” If the believer is ‘dead’, such that he cannot reach out to God in faith, then I guess that none of us are saved, since we don’t have the faith that’s a prerequisite for receiving God’s grace? :nope:

Or, perhaps, that the regenerate, too, can backslide. Your ‘proof’ doesn’t exclude that possibility…

“Born Again” dear friend is a non-catholic term and philosophy. IT’s rightful meaning pertains the Sacramental Baptism, where in the Soul is made Perfect, ready for heaven, until one sins and destroys that effect of Baptism

Baptism CAN lead to salvation .if one were to die without any further sinning. However the Protestant understanding of OSAS is not “God Approved.” and is not biblically grounded. Which is why Christ instituted Sacramental Confession for the forgiveness of sin as the WAY Christ intends it to be accomplished. READ 1 John 1:8-10; 1 John 5:16-18 and John 20:19-23:thumbsup:

God Bless you, Merry Christmas
Patrick