Origins of 'born again'
Letters to the Editor
Related Story:
A born-again what?
We certainly do encounter a variety of usages for the term "born again" do we not? The term has been popularized and redefined to the extent that it has, for many, lost its original meaning.
To learn what this term originally meant, we can fortunately go to the actual source of the "born again" expression - Jesus Christ himself. If one locates in their Bible the New Testament Book of John, chapter 3 and reads verses 1-21, Jesus introduces the "born again" concept and explains what He means by it. The last six verses of this short portion of Scripture are considered by many to be the finest nutshell version of the message Jesus came to share and die for. But along with the explanation of God's incredible gift of His Son to mankind, we find that the term "born again" originally was not as ambiguous or all-inclusive as we might wish.
The Creator God worshipped by Christians the world over is this historical figure, Jesus Christ. Evidence of Jesus' claim to full and exclusive triune deity with His Father and the Holy Spirit is found throughout the New Testament. This claim was part of the reason He was sentenced and crucified. When we read the New Testament, we learn that Jesus is not the same Creator known by "all other religions throughout the world," as was suggested in a Sunday Juneau Empire editorial regarding the term "born again."
Authentic, personal acceptance of Jesus and His claims leads one to invest his or her life in loving service that truly benefits man and glorifies God. But that does not mean they believe that the claims of Jesus are equal in truth with all world religions. Sincere study of the subject leads most to the discovery that the claims of Christ concerning who He was - and what He came to do - are either denied outright or by logical inference within other systems of belief. This certainly is not a popular message, but we would all likely concur that the degree of a creed's popularity in any given generation does not indicate truth or falsehood.
It is important and normally beneficial for people to understand their heritage, as indicated in the Sunday editorial. The various heritages represented in our state and country deserve respect and freedom to function within the boundaries of sensible moral laws. We can gain wisdom as we acquaint ourselves with the various traditions. But these statements do not connote any concept of oneness of all world religions. We should probably resist the temptation to redefine distinctive terms from other religions in order to take advantage of those expressions or to make them fit differing perspectives and beliefs. If we are interested in knowing what this "born again Christian" thing was originally about, we can go to its source, which is a very special privilege.
Randy Beaverson
Auke Bay
The "editorial" to which Randy Beaverson refers was a Nov. 10 opinion column by Yakutat writer Bertrand Adams Sr. - Editor