ECT The Real Most Miisunderstood Passage in the Bible John 3

[glorydaz]

Is Paul not referring to the same thing about being born here?:

"For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel" (1 Cor.1:15).​

Paul was the instrument which the LORD used so that the gospel would bring forth the Spirit to those who believed:

"For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake" (1 Thess.1:5).​

As the Lord Jesus said, His words are spirit and they are life:

"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (Jn.6:63).​

Again, if your ideas are correct then Peter must have placed an entirely different meaning on the words "born again" than did the Lord Jesus. And if you are correct then the words "born of the Spirit" mean something other than the words "born of God." That is because we know that people were born of God at the moment when they believed the gospel.

Can you give me one verse where anyone in the Bible using the words being "born of the Spirit" to refer to anyone putting on a glorious body like the Lord Jesus' glorious body?

You're determined...I'll give you that, brother.

I think there must be a difference...Paul is comparing himself to a father. I'm not trying to prove you are incorrect, because I know believers are indwelt with Spirit, but I'm concerned that the terms are not the same. Even as the term "begotten" is used by Paul isn't the same as how Jesus or Peter used it.

Perhaps the difference is that we are sons by adoption. The Spirit is our seal until our body is redeemed on that future day.

Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.


2 Corinthians 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:​

We have the "firstfuits of the Spirit" because we have been created IN HIM. In fact, we have been baptized by the Spirit into Christ. That doesn't seem the same as being "born of the Spirit" to me.

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.​

 

[Tambora]

You make some excellent points, Jerry. The problem for me is that Paul never uses the term. Instead of saying we must be born again, he tells us we are "created" in Christ Jesus. Paul knew what Jesus said, but the closest he came to explaining it, as I see it, would be in this chapter.

1 Cor. 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.​

Since the kingdom promises where to Israel, and not the BOC, then why would the BOC even need to be born again to enter that kingdom?
The BOC is gone by the time Jesus returns to restore the kingdom.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You're determined...I'll give you that, brother.

I can say the same for you, sister. Earlier you said:

The problem for me is that Paul never uses the term.

In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).​

Here Paul uses the word "regeneration" in regard to his salvation. This word is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

When we combine the meaning of the two words we have a "repetition of a birth."

It is obvious that the reference is not to a "physical" rebirth, or the repetition of one's physical birth. Paul could only be speaking of a repetition of a spiritual birth. And the words that follow make it certain that the "birth" of which Paul is referring to is a "spiritual" birth--"renewing of the Holy Spirit."

Since a person is "regenerated" by the Holy Spirit then that means that one must have previously been born of the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, if a person is regenerated and renewed by the Holy Spirit then that must mean that this represents his being brought back to his original condition of being born of the Holy Spirit. That is exactly what the Lord Jesus is referring to here:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again" (Jn.3:3,5-7).​

Paul certainly was not resurrected previously so when he spoke of his repetition of a birth he was referring to a repetition of a spiritual birth, not a repetition of a resurrection.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Since the kingdom promises where to Israel, and not the BOC, then why would the BOC even need to be born again to enter that kingdom?
The BOC is gone by the time Jesus returns to restore the kingdom.

Yes, but once we meet Him in the air we will always be with Him so we will be with Him when He returns to the earth to set up His earthly kingdom:

"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:16-17).​

 

[Interplanner]

Yes, but once we meet Him in the air we will always be with Him so we will be with Him when He returns to the earth to set up His earthly kingdom:

"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:16-17).​

Or, Tam's assumption is the problem! Over and over and over, two programs does not work.

Where else in John did he pit "above" against "below?" That will shed light on being born "from above." That is much closer etymologically to 'anothen' than another author and another letter. Because it will identify people being addressed that way by Christ.

 

[Nihilo]

Yes, the Scriptures speak of a resurrection which will occur when the Lord Jesus returns to the earth. But none of those verses which speak of that resurrection say anything about a time when living saints will put on glorious bodies like the body of the Lord Jesus.

It's bizarre that you're saying "a resurrection" and "that resurrection" Jerry. There's only one Resurrection left now, and that's the general resurrection of all the dead. There aren't any other resurrections, such that there are more than one, and we have to specify which resurrection we're talking about.

In fact, the evidence suggests that those living at the time when the Lord Jesus returns to the earth will remain in their natural bodies.

:AMR: No it doesn't Jerry. What's the deal with these people who keep their old bodies, and who can still get sick and die? That's going to keep happening after the Resurrection and the Lord's Second Coming?

That's so bizarre. I don't really know what to say to try not to offend you here. I'm not trying to, that's just how it's hitting me; reading your thoughts on this.

 

[glorydaz]

I can say the same for you, sister. Earlier you said:



In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).​

Here Paul uses the word "regeneration" in regard to his salvation. This word is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

When we combine the meaning of the two words we have a "repetition of a birth."

It is obvious that the reference is not to a "physical" rebirth, or the repetition of one's physical birth. Paul could only be speaking of a repetition of a spiritual birth. And the words that follow make it certain that the "birth" of which Paul is referring to is a "spiritual" birth--"renewing of the Holy Spirit."

Since a person is "regenerated" by the Holy Spirit then that means that one must have previously been born of the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, if a person is regenerated and renewed by the Holy Spirit then that must mean that this represents his being brought back to his original condition of being born of the Holy Spirit. That is exactly what the Lord Jesus is referring to here:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God...Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again" (Jn.3:3,5-7).​

Paul certainly was not resurrected previously so when he spoke of his repetition of a birth he was referring to a repetition of a spiritual birth, not a repetition of a resurrection.

I can't find a thing to disagree with you on, but I can't guarantee I won't stop searching.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

That's so bizarre. I don't really know what to say to try not to offend you here. I'm not trying to, that's just how it's hitting me; reading your thoughts on this.

What's really bizarre is the fact that you are unable to distinguish between an appearing of the Lord Jesus that is described as being imminent and one which is not.

Since you think that you know all about the event when the saints will be caught up to meet the Lord Jesus then tell me if the ones "taken" in this passage are the saints who will be caught up:

"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left" (Mt.24:37-41).​

 

[Nihilo]

What's really bizarre is the fact that you are unable to distinguish between an appearing of the Lord Jesus that is described as being imminent and one which is not.

Since you think that you know all about the event when the saints will be caught up to meet the Lord Jesus then tell me if the ones "taken" in this passage are the saints who will be caught up:

"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left" (Mt.24:37-41).​

Look, it's a good question Jerry. I'm just saying that I've never heard of anything resembling or hinting at two Second Comings. That's all. It's bizarre.

 

[Wick Stick]

Hi WS, you might also notice that what Nick wrote and what was actually quoted from the YLT do not say the same things. If herein you read pneuma as Spirit, (entity), then the remainder of the statement also reads accordingly, for instance, "την φωνην αυτου" becomes "His voice" as opposed to "the sound of it", and so on and so on; and both ways of reading the passage are acceptable, (which means, as was suggested, that the debate over this is not resolved just because most English renderings follow suit with the KJV way of rendering the statement).

John 3:8 YLT
8 the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.'

Like Father, like sons? Like Elder brother, like younger brethren?
Like the Heir, so with the joint-heirs? :think:

I think we spoke about this a bit when discussing vowel pointings?

I am fully on board with the idea that the ambiguities of Scripture are no flaw. These are intentional, and all possible meanings are intended (though perhaps we need to apply them in the right time and place).

One reading of Scripture is not a counter for another reading, even of the same passage. Everything in its appointed time.

 

[daqq]

I think we spoke about this a bit when discussing vowel pointings?

I am fully on board with the idea that the ambiguities of Scripture are no flaw. These are intentional, and all possible meanings are intended (though perhaps we need to apply them in the right time and place).

One reading of Scripture is not a counter for another reading, even of the same passage. Everything in its appointed time.

Wow, amen to that.

 

[Interplanner]

Look, it's a good question Jerry. I'm just saying that I've never heard of anything resembling or hinting at two Second Comings. That's all. It's bizarre.

The Mt 24 passage has nothing to do with the 2nd coming. The 'taken' ones are ruined. It is about the destruction of Jerusalem that was going to happen in that generation. Dan 9 had mentioned that the end (of the city and country) would happen 'like a flood', which is why Jesus used that imagery.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The Mt 24 passage has nothing to do with the 2nd coming. The 'taken' ones are ruined. It is about the destruction of Jerusalem that was going to happen in that generation. Dan 9 had mentioned that the end (of the city and country) would happen 'like a flood', which is why Jesus used that imagery.

So are you saying that it already happened in the first century and no one even saw the Lord Jesus even though the Scripturessay that every eye will see Him?

 

[Tambora]

Since the kingdom promises where to Israel, and not the BOC, then why would the BOC even need to be born again to enter that kingdom?
The BOC is gone by the time Jesus returns to restore the kingdom.

Yes, but once we meet Him in the air we will always be with Him so we will be with Him when He returns to the earth to set up His earthly kingdom:

"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:16-17).​

I'm not convinced that verse means we are always right by the side of the Lord physically.
I mean, we are told we are already raised up and seated in heavenly places (Eph 2:6), but here you and I are sitting physically miles apart from each other.

And since being in Christ means that we have HIS righteousness imputed to us (ie. GOD sees Christ when He looks at us), then was Christ born again?

 

[Wick Stick]

Look, it's a good question Jerry. I'm just saying that I've never heard of anything resembling or hinting at two Second Comings. That's all. It's bizarre.

You've never heard of the second second coming? I'm pretty sure it's right there in Revelation 23...

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The Mt 24 passage has nothing to do with the 2nd coming.

:doh:

Poor delusional soul.

 

[Nihilo]

You've never heard of the second second coming? I'm pretty sure it's right there in Revelation 23...

No, would you care to explain it a bit for me?

 

[daqq]

You've never heard of the second second coming? I'm pretty sure it's right there in Revelation 23...

I love that chapter with the modern verse numbering!

23:14-17
14 For the love of Messiah compels us, because we judge thus; that one died for all, therefore the all died:
15 and that he died for all so that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but should live unto him which died for them, and rose again.
16 Thus from now on we know no one according to the flesh: even if we have known Messiah according to the flesh, contrariwise, from now on we do not know him so (according to the flesh) anymore.
17 Therefore if anyone (truly) be in Messiah, it is a new creation: (as it is written) Behold, the old things are passed away, all things are become new! (Rev 21:4-5).

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I'm not convinced that verse means we are always right by the side of the Lord physically.

Let's look at this verse:

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:16-17).​

Here we can understand the the words "meet the Lord in the air" are speaking of being in the vicinty of the Lord or in His proximity. Therefore, to maintain a logical consistency the words about always being with Him can only be referring to being in His vicinity.

I mean, we are told we are already raised up and seated in heavenly places (Eph 2:6), but here you and I are sitting physically miles apart from each other.

The verses which speak of that are doctrinal in nature and use figurative language in order to demonstrate the Christian's total identification with Christ. In reality we are living on the earth and not in heaven.

On the other hand, the passage at 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 is not doctrinal in nature and instead is a narrative describing the events which will happen when the Christian will meet the Lord in the air and what will happen afterwards. There certainly is no reason to insert a doctrinal teaching into the narrative.

And since being in Christ means that we have HIS righteousness imputed to us (ie. GOD sees Christ when He looks at us), then was Christ born again?

No, He was not born again. He never sinned so He never died spiritually. But Christians are born again the moment when they believe the gospel (1 Pet.1:23-25).

 

[Nihilo]

In reality we are living on the earth and not in heaven.

I believe that the Holy Spirit Who dwells within us brings heaven with Him to us. :idunno: