Regeneration/Born-Again

[gardenswithkids]

Kendy:

I realize that we are continually transformed and sanctified, but I want to focus on that first dispensation of grace. What opens the flood gates of grace? If it were grace alone, then God could just freely dispense regeneration to all of humanity. Oviously that doesn’t happen. So in a sense, under what circumstances does God dispense regenerative grace?

If there’s anything “alone” that saves us, I’d say it’s grace. A favorite quote of mine from St. Theresa says, “it’s all grace.”

What opens the floodgates of grace? I don’t know. Is it God’s mercy? Prayers of the righteous? Prayers of the repentent sinner? I don’t know the clear answer. I believe God wants to regenerate all of humanity, but as CARose mentioned He wants our cooperation in this.

I do like to reflect on the mystery of where His grace meets our will. I’ve felt it before, times when I knew I needed to accept His grace of my own free will so He could transform me. I wonder if I’ll learn in heaven who prayed for me to get to that point. I strongly suspect–well I’m actually certain–my mom was heavily involved. She started it by bringing me for baptism, but I know she kept praying for me all her life. And what about you Kendy? Did His grace for you begin at an infant baptism about two decades before your will responded to His grace?

 

[Kendy]

gardenswithkids:

And what about you Kendy? Did His grace for you begin at an infant baptism about two decades before your will responded to His grace?

Oh, that’s a good question. Honestly, I think God’s grace for all of us transcend time. God is always prepared to dispense grace and the redemption of the cross is available whether one is aware of it or not. It doesn’t need my consent to be available, but I do think my cooperation is necessary for it to be active in my life. I cannot be transformed by grace “regenerated” unless I desire to be.

So, is grace was available before, during, and after my baptism. I do not, however, believe that my infant baptism was in anyway transformative. Now, I have no way of knowing that since I have no memories of these times. However, I remember as a child have a real detachment to my parent’s faith. I said the hail Marys, went to communion (first communion was a biggest party I have ever had thrown in my honor), but I don’t have any recollection of an honest prayer as a child. I have no memories of asking God for something and expecting to receive it. My parents use to make us pray outloud and I impatiently counted the number of “our fathers” until it was all over. When I was about eleven years old, I decided that there was no God, that it was all a myth, like Santa so I was even more upset about having to go to church because it was a real waste of time talking to a God who didn’t even exist.

Of course during those times grace was available to me, but I don’t believe that it had ever touched me in a transformative way.
I think I was transformed by grace when I came to believe in God as a teenager. This happened after a series of conversation with a priest (who taught me a lot of erroneous things, like homosexuality is not a sin), but whom God used nonetheless to reveal His Love. I remember the day that it all finally clicked and I knew it was true. I took a slow walk home that day because I was just awed by the beauty of God’s creation. The words of Psalm 19 seemed very true— “The heavens declared the glory of God.”

I never walked to the altar, I never said the sinner’s prayer (had never heard of it at that point), but I do believe that I was born again that day. I got baptized again over two years later to make a personal confession of my faith.

BTW, I may have said this before, but I don’t believe one has to remember being born again to be born again, but I do remember mine very vividly.

Kendy

 

[CARose]

While Grace is available outside the sacraments, the Sacraments have been given to us as the normative form of receiving Grace, the manner we intended to utilize to receive the Grace necessary for salvation. Christ initiated these sacraments and gave the authority to perform each of them to the Apostles. Each can be found in the Gospels, with further references in the remainder of scripture.

At baptism, we are given gifts of the Holy Spirit, including our Charism(s) which are special talents given for the building up of the Body of Christ. These special gifts cannot be used for purposes of evil or in a self gratifying manner. In this way they differ from more mundane talents, but they far outstrip our other talents. Unfortunately, some people never realize what their charisms are, and fail to fulfill their fullest role in life.

We receive additional gifts of the Holy Spirit at confirmation, when we, as young adults, are meant to accept our responsibility to defend the body of Christ. These gifts of the Holy Spirit are meant to fortify us in this role. As with any other Grace, we need to be open to utilizing it, or it remains present by unaccessed.

I know this was the case for me, as after confirmation I continued to drift further and further from the Church until I formally left it all together. But to this day, I am convinced that the Holy Spirit, and the gifts I had already received, was waiting for me to show any sign of interest in the fullness of the Truth, and when I saw a glimmer of the truth known as Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit swooped in and touched me at my moment of receptivity.

I thank God that He never gave up on me, even when I was so completely lost.

CARose

 

[Kendy]

CARose:

While Grace is available outside the sacraments, the Sacraments have been given to us as the normative form of receiving Grace, the manner we intended to utilize to receive the Grace necessary for salvation. Christ initiated these sacraments and gave the authority to perform each of them to the Apostles. Each can be found in the Gospels, with further references in the remainder of scripture.

At baptism, we are given gifts of the Holy Spirit, including our Charism(s) which are special talents given for the building up of the Body of Christ. These special gifts cannot be used for purposes of evil or in a self gratifying manner. In this way they differ from more mundane talents, but they far outstrip our other talents. Unfortunately, some people never realize what their charisms are, and fail to fulfill their fullest role in life.

We receive additional gifts of the Holy Spirit at confirmation, when we, as young adults, are meant to accept our responsibility to defend the body of Christ. These gifts of the Holy Spirit are meant to fortify us in this role. As with any other Grace, we need to be open to utilizing it, or it remains present by unaccessed.

I know this was the case for me, as after confirmation I continued to drift further and further from the Church until I formally left it all together. But to this day, I am convinced that the Holy Spirit, and the gifts I had already received, was waiting for me to show any sign of interest in the fullness of the Truth, and when I saw a glimmer of the truth known as Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit swooped in and touched me at my moment of receptivity.

I thank God that He never gave up on me, even when I was so completely lost.

CARose

CaRose,

I believe that all believers should be baptized, unless they get hit by a bus on their way there.

I have more ambivalent feelings about confirmation, but I think that’s another thread.

Kendy

 

[CARose]

I thank God for my confirmation, as I am personally convinced that it led me back to the bosom of the Lord when I was later receptive to the truth. But I have nothing specific to “prove it” to you or anyone else. It’s just something I feel in my gut and I know it to be true.

CARose

 

[Church_Militant]

bene7:

Has nothing to do with “Dispensationalism,” but everything to do with the literal Biblical

covenants. Although Dispensationalists rightly recognize the Biblical Covenants.

You should too, it would help you to get the faith straight, i.e., according to the revealed Word of God, not the traditions and the imaginations of mere men.

Blessings,
BeneGosh bene7 what are ya tryin’ to say there? Can ya elaborate upon that highlighted part for me so that I’m perfectly clear as to what you mean.

What are you tryin’ to say about the Catholic Church’s teachings?

 

[bene7]

Church Militant:

Gosh bene7 what are ya tryin’ to say there? Can ya elaborate upon that highlighted part for me so that I’m perfectly clear as to what you mean.

What are you tryin’ to say about the Catholic Church’s teachings?

I’m saying having an accurate understanding of the literal Biblical Covenants causes one to have a more correct understanding of God’s Word, and that of salvation itself. It’s what true Christianity is based on: Divine Revelation.

Blessings,
Bene

 

[Redbandito]

Kendy:

Sandusky said: Thank you. It is obsolete, and not transformed. It no longer exists, as it is abolished.

QUOTE=Redbandito]Sandusky, this is why it is a waste of time to respond to your posts. You have no desire to seek truth. You have a desire to be right. This is not only a poor way of evangelization, it also flies directly in the face of the Gospel. Good luck to you Partner. If you are unwilling to yield, to logic and reason, then I can’t help you. God bless!

This argument is very silly. The old covenant is obsolete because Jesus fulfilled it. I think most protestant theologians would agree with this.

Kendy

I agree Kendy. Unfortunately, we have Bene and Sandusky who are unwilling to see reality.

 

[Redbandito]

bene7:

You’re confused with the Biblical Covenants. The Abrahamic Covenant is not the “Old” Covenant. The “Old” Covenant is the Mosaic Covenant made with national Israel at Mt. Sinai. It included the Decalogue as well as the Temple sacrifices along with civil and religious ordinances. It was a conditional Covenant God made with the nation of Israel, and it was temporary - until Messiah who would inaugurate the New Covenant in His blood.

Technically, circumcision was not a part of the “Old” Covenant (Mosaic) but actually belongs to the Abrahamic Covenant of promise, made with Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 17), established 400 years prior to the Mosaic (Old) Covenant given at Mt. Sinai (Exe. 20).

Jesus does fulfill the Messianic “blessing” portion of the Abrahamic Covenant, i.e., that “in him” (Abraham) all the families of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 12:3). In other words, in him (and through his descendants) would come the Messiah according to the flesh, bringing in redemption through His blood. Read chapter three of Galatians again.

In Paul’s day circumcision actually became an identity. By submitting to circumcision the Galatians were buying into the false notion (teaching), presented to them by the Judaizers, that they (Gentiles) needed to first become Jewish (the “circumcision” = Jewish; “the uncircumcised” = Gentiles, see Rom. 3:30), and as a Jew observe the requirements of the Mosaic Law in order to be saved. Hence, they fell from GRACE (unmerited, unrecompensed, undeserved favor, through faith in Christ alone). Spiritually speaking they were “severed from Christ.” That didn’t mean those who had believed had lost their salvation, but they’d cut themselves off from experiencing the blessing of Abraham (Gal. 3:14), especially their freedom in Christ. They instead gave themselves over to a “yoke of slavery” (see Gal. 5:1).

Of course by submitting to the Law the Gospel message of salvation through faith in Christ alone would be lost to the next generation. And literally, that generation would be “severed from Christ:” Remember Paul’s spiritual principle: “A little leaven leavens the whole lump” (Gal. 5:9). For this reason Paul took their situation VERY seriously using strong language such as:

GAL 1:6-9 "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.

You might want to think about Paul’s warning, Red.

Now to be sure Jesus Himself did fulfill the sacrifices prescribed in the Mosaic (Old) Covenant. They prefigured His “once for all” redemptive work on the cross (1 Pet. 1:18). But that “Old” Covenant was more than sacrifices, it was a rule of life for the Jews. But faith, according to grace, is now the rule of life, this side of the cross, for both Jews and Gentiles who are now, through faith, “in Christ Jesus” - in other words, “born again.”

Blessings,
Bene

Bene, I just can’t keep up with your massive posts. I don’t have that kind of time. Your assertions are AGAIN, begging the question, and a lot of what you have written in your last several posts has already been answered. I don’t have the time or desire to continue to revisit the same questions over and over again. You continue to assume what it is you are trying to prove. NOWHERE in Galatians does it say that it will just be a “spiritual separation”. On the contrary it says, “will not inherit the kingdom of Heaven”. This is clearly speaking of salvation. If you want to continue to fool yourself in to thinking he is not speaking about salvation, fine. However, it is clearly not Scriptural. You continue to read your theology back onto the text, and it just isn’t there bro. I would like to take more time to answer you again, but I am way behind in the thread and I want to catch up. The “Grace Gospel” argument is another wonderful instance of this. There is no way, unless one already assumes this, that one could come to the conclusion that Paul is speaking of the “Grace Gospel” when he says “Fall from Grace”. Nice try, but no cigar. You need to stop listening to so much James White and R.C. Sproul and start reading the Church Fathers. I can’t even really debate somebody who is not willing to admit obvious truths that even most Evangelicals will.

 

[Redbandito]

bene7:

Has nothing to do with “Dispensationalism,” but everything to do with the literal Biblical covenants. Although Dispensationalists rightly recognize the Biblical Covenants.

You should too, it would help you to get the faith straight, i.e., according to the revealed Word of God, not the traditions and the imaginations of mere men.

Blessings,
Bene

“The revealed Word of God”, eh? Paul stated, “And for this reason we too give thanks to God unceasingly, that, in receving the WORD OF GOD from HEARING US, you received not a HUMAN WORD but, as it truly is, THE WORD OF GOD, which is now at workin you who believe” (1 Thess 2:13). Paul also stated, “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by word of MOUTH or by letter’” (2 Thess 2:15). So, what was that you were saying again? Of course, if you really cared to try to understand what the Catholic Church actually taught instead of arguing against a strawman, you might know that the Catholic Church does not claim to operate on man-made tradition but on the Apostolic Tradition that Paul speaks of, which he, himself, considers the “Word of God”. The irony is that it is YOU, who operates on the “man-made tradition” of faith alone. It is you whose theology has been developed within the past 500 years. Catholic theology is the only fully true Biblical theology, because it is Catholic’s who wrote the Bible. And yes, you are a dispensationalist. Just come out with it already. Honesty is important in apologetics.

 

[Redbandito]

Re. Matt. 5:17 Jesus did fulfill the sacrifices of the Mosaic Covenant (the Law) when He became the once for all, final sacrifice, the “Lamb of God,” taking away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Also as a Man, born of a woman, born under the Law (Gal. 4:4-5), he abided in it perfectly. Hence, He “fulfilled it.” And according to the Book of Hebrews, God’s written Word, by bringing in the New Covenant in His blood, He made the “Old” “obsolete.”

But what He did not do was "transform it"!!!

Blessings,
Bene

Okay, very nice. Before, Sandusky and you were unwilling to admit that he even “fulfilled” it. We’re making progress. And you continue to assume that making the OC as it was, obsolete, means he could not have “transformed it”. Would that not essentially accomplish the same thing? I am not using that as a definitive argument for why He did transform it, but solely to refute your claim that because the OC is obsolete, that essentially means he couldn’t have transformed it. It really is a silly argument and nowhere near logical. You continue to fall into these false dichotomies and simple logical errors. A+C=D and B+C=D, then A and B are equal. You seem to be saying that only A+C=D. That’s just not logical bro.

Now, it is time for you to study up on the Passover. What did the Passover require of the Israelite?

 

[Redbandito]

Kendy:

Well, I am sorry if I am not being clear, but I am not concerned about why God doesn’t save us all. First, I think I know why (I only brought it up in the Marian thread because I thought it was relevant at the time). Second, it is a different conversation.

Kendy

God does give us all the opportunity for salvation. He has opened the gates of Heaven. We must still freely choose Him. Everything God does, comes from who God is. God is love. Love itself must be free. Therefore, God cannot force anyone to be saved without contradicting His very nature. C.S. Lewis addresses this in Problem of Pain, pages 16-19. I know this isn’t where you were hoping to take the thread, but I couldn’t resist.

 

[Redbandito]

bene7:

I’m saying having an accurate understanding of the literal Biblical Covenants causes one to have a more correct understanding of God’s Word, and that of salvation itself. It’s what true Christianity is based on: Divine Revelation.

Blessings,
Bene

Begging the question, AGAIN. You like to do that don’t you. We agree that true Christianity is based on “Divine Revelation”. It seems you have a tough time locating where the argument is. The question comes in when we ask “what is divine revelation”. You believe the Bible is divine revelation. We agree. The difference is, we believe what the Bible teaches, that divine revelation is both oral and written. So, you continue to assume the unproven, which is that the Bible is our sole rule of authority. That’s fine for you to believe. Now prove it with the Bible.

BTW, I agree that there were several different covenants made in OT times. However, I believe they built on one another, not solely made the others obsolete. God continued to bring Himself closer to His people, and He continued to bring more people into His people. That is the point of a covenant. One that I believe you fail to grasp.

 

[Redbandito]

Okay Kendy, time to look at how we become regenerate. We will look at both the CCC and the Scriptures to do this. For starters, Peter stated, “Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledgee] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,” (1 Pet 3:21). Peter starts off by telling us that just as Noah was saved through water, so baptism saves us now. Not baptism apart from the grace received from Christ’s death and resurrection, but rather because of and through these things. Next John teaches, " 3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.a]” 4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!” 5Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth,** no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.” Hmmmmm. Water and spirit? Where have I heard that before? Oh, that’s right, baptism. Later in this chapter, we see the only Biblical account of Jesus baptizing (Jn 3:22). I think this speaks for itself. Next we flip to Titus 3:5 which states, “he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit”. We stated earlier that be “regenerate” or “born again” was essentially a rebirth into God’s family. This again highlights that Scripture teaches that this “bath of rebirth” happens through “water and Spirit”. 1 Cor 6:11 teaches what happens after our baptism, “That is what some of you used to be; but now you have had yourselves washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God”. This verse connects our baptism to our sanctification and our justification. Finally, Romans 6:4 tells us, "WE were indeed buried with him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live in newness of life**". When we look at Jesus’ baptism we see the perfect symbolism of what happens to us in baptism. These episodes occur in Jn 1:32-33 and Mt 3:16-17. This ties John’s baptism to the new type of baptism (baptism of water AND Spirit).

Now, baptism presupposes faith. Whether it be the faith of the newly baptized, or the faith the parent has for the child, faith must be there. This is obvious by the fact that someone must say “I do” to all the parts of the baptismal vows. So, we know that faith is obviously a huge part of our initial justification and regeneration. Furthermore, we know repentance is part of this formula as well. Thus, with these three, we become “born again” or “born from above”. This is the Biblical way of regeneration.

Finally, as the CCC states, “Baptism seals the Christian with the INDELIBLE spiritual mark (character) of his belonging to Christ. No sin can erase this mark, even if sin PREVENTS BAPTISM FROM BEARING THE FRUITS OF SALVATION” (1272). And, “TheChurch affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Convenant are necessary for salvation. “Sacramental grace” is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament. The Spirit heals and transforms those who receive him by conforming them to the Son of God. The fruit of the sacramental life is that the SPIRIT OF ADOPTION makes the faithful PARTAKERS OF THE DIVINE NATURE by uniting them in a living union with the only Son, the Savior” (1129). This is re-emphasized by Paul in Galatians. “For in Christ Jesus you are all SONS OF GOD, through faith. FOR as many of you as were BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST have PUT ON CHRIST” (Gal 3:26-27). Again, we are born into Christ and become partakers of His divine nature (2 Pet 1:4) through faith, repentance, and BAPTISM. Hopefully, combined with the rest of the last two threads, this answers some questions. Let me know if you have any specific questions about this. God Bless!

 

[sandusky]

Contarini:

Sandusky,

You’re evading the Biblical evidence. How do you reconcile Matt. 5:17 with Hebrews?

Edwin, the two speak for themselves.

Christ fulfilled the law: the moral, and the ritual/sacrificial.

As I stated in an earlier post, it is the ritual/sacrificial that is abrogated; the moral law is still in effect and still binding; however, no one can keep it perfectly, that is why no salvation comes through law, but grace.

That poses an insurmountable problem for Catholics, IMHO.

No need for a sacrifice or offering of sin the writer of Hebrews says; from where does the sacrifice of the mass come?

No need for sacrifice, no need for a priesthood to offer a sacrifice; from where does the Catholic priesthood come?

There is no need for either.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Note to all: Different issues require different threads!
The 2 points in the above thread are good examples.

 

[Kendy]

Red,

Thank you for you very thorough answer. I am not having difficulty with baptism as an intergral part of regeneration. I think I am just having trouble with in fant baptism. In Acts 2: 38, after Peter had had preached and been asked what we we do he said, “Repent and be baptize.” And in Acts 16:31, when Paul and Silas are asked, “Sirs, what must I do to the saved?” They replied, " Believe on the Lord Jesus and You will be saved. You and your household."

So, it seems that in order for baptism to take have its effect, there must be repetence and belief, which an infant cannot engage in. Now, there is the household part, which would certainly imply that this gentleman can just use his repentence and faith to cover his whole family, but that seems very troublesome. I know that neither of us believes that if the husband/father has faith, then the rest of the gain can be covered under his umbrella.

Kendy

 

[sandusky]

Kendy:

The question is what sparks regeneration or as my prostestant friends my say the “born again” experience. Having discussed how regeneration is transformative, I only want to explore how it is initiated.

You ask, how is regeneration initiated?

The Catholic response is baptism. But, that is not what scripture says.

Here is what scripture says:

John 1:12-13
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 3:5
5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

James 1:18
18 In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures.

1 Peter 1:23
23 for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable [notice the imperishable nature of rebirth], that is, through the living and enduring word of God.

1 John 2:29
29 If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone also who practices righteousness is born of Him.

1 John 3:9
9 No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

There you have it, Kendy, God is the initiator.

And, He must be, as the sinner prior to regeneration is dead in trespasses and sin (Eph 2:1ff). Dead people cannot respond, they must first be made alive (Eph 2:4-7).

Another way of thinking of it is that the sinner is a radio tuned to the wrong frequency; God, the H.S., must tune the unregenerate to the frequency of regeneration, and then he has the ability to believe.

There are only two religions in the world. Just TWO.

The first is the religion of HUMAN ACHIEVEMENT: God does some, I cooperate and do the rest, which is the Gospel that Paul anathematizes in Galatians 1.

The second is the religion of DIVINE ACCOMPLISHMENT: God does it all. That is what the Scripture presents, and what Trent anathematizes, and Trent is still binding, and Trent says that works merit eternal life.

All of salvation is from God. The regenerate must believe, and the ability to believe is given to him (Eph 2:8ff).

 

[Kendy]

sandusky:

There are only two religions in the world. Just TWO.

The first is the religion of HUMAN ACHIEVEMENT: God does some, I cooperate and do the rest, which is the Gospel that Paul anathematizes in Galatians 1.

The second is the religion of DIVINE ACCOMPLISHMENT: God does it all. That is what the Scripture presents, and what Trent anathematizes, and Trent is still binding, and Trent says that works merit eternal life.

All of salvation is from God. The regenerate must believe, and the ability to believe is given to him (Eph 2:8ff).

Once one believes, should one be baptized?

Kendy

 

[bene7]

Redbandito:

Begging the question, AGAIN. You like to do that don’t you. We agree that true Christianity is based on “Divine Revelation”. It seems you have a tough time locating where the argument is. The question comes in when we ask “what is divine revelation”. You believe the Bible is divine revelation. We agree. The difference is, we believe what the Bible teaches, that divine revelation is both oral and written. So, you continue to assume the unproven, which is that the Bible is our sole rule of authority. That’s fine for you to believe. Now prove it with the Bible.

I’d get into this but not here. Plus it’s been discussed many times on this forum.

BTW, I agree that there were several different covenants made in OT times.

Ok, then name them and explain them if you agree they exist.

However, I believe they built on one another, not solely made the others obsolete.

I never said concerning the other Biblical Covenants that one made the other obsolete. But I did quote you from God’s written Word to the Hebrews that when Christ inaugurated the “New” Covenant in His blood He made the “Old” (Mosaic Covenant) “obsolete.” The reason being, Law and Grace cannot co-exist.

God continued to bring Himself closer to His people, and He continued to bring more people into His people. That is the point of a covenant. One that I believe you fail to grasp.

Actually, based on what you’ve just said above, I don’t think you’ve actually studied the Biblical Covenants and what each one states. I mean you have your own romantic idea of what a Covenant is, but it doesn’t conform to God’s Word which actually reveals those Covenants and His desired purpose for them. You even deny what the writer of Hebrews explicitly states regarding the abolition of the “Old” Covenant (Mosaic) as a rule of life, based on your own romantic definition of a covenant.

Blessings,
Bene