What to be born again for

[Arial]

I don't separate being born again from the resurrection.
It's another one of those things in scripture that we can say:

is, but isn't​

done, but not yet​

Salvation is about our complete self which incudes both body and spirit, so we can say we our salvation is done, but not yet.

Yes, resurrection is a promise of the new birth, but it isn't the new birth, not the way I read the scriptures. And indeed, we do live in a right now not yet condition.

 

[Arial]

The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

And as ye go, preach,
saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Matthew 10:7


There have been some that have seen it.

And He said unto them, Verily I say unto you,
That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
Mark 9:1

That scripture is not talking about the resurrection or the new birth.

 

[Arial]

I don't believe I said that Nicodemus didn't know about the resurrection.

Nicodemus should have known about the resurrection for it had been prophesied in the OT.

 

[Arial]

Or, "in the midst of you." Jesus thought it was close.

"within you". Obviously since He said we couldn't see it and pretty much said that it was not a physical kingdom of THIS earth. And is this one of the times where you claim Jesus didn't know what He was talking about?

Not yet. The world is a train wreck, and getting worse.

You simply do not understand His Kingship or what He is doing now and have presupposed what He is going to do and what it will look like.

You're confusing the rapture with the first resurrection.

No, I am not. I don't even believe in the rapture so how could I confuse it with something? The new birth is a type of resurrection for in it one is burried with Christ and raised to life with Him, through faith in Him. This is the first resurrection. The second resurrection is the resurrection of the body to new life. Rev 20:6

Disagree. Born from above is resurrection.

Not the resurrection of the body. It is being quickened to spiritual life of the spiritually dead.

 

[MatthewG]

From my understanding being born again is to be born again from above, to have new spiritual life with new spiritual eyes in a sense to see that all people are in need of rest and comfort but that rest and comfort that comes to the soul is by and through the good and great news about the Lord Jesus Christ.

As Jesus stated John 3:3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

No one can even see the kingdom unless they are born again, and one becomes born again by and through faith in Christ becoming a child of God, and being renewed in their mind becoming a living sacrfice to allow God to use that individual by the spirit.

 

[Arial]

John 3 is about resurrection, not the Christian new birth.

You said that already but have not established its truthfulness.

Isa 26:19 Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For your dew is a dew of light, and the earth will give birth to the dead.

So? I am not denying the resurrection of the dead.

Wanting to know who Jesus was would have been a question.

Did you see a question mark after what Nicodemus said? That is obviously why he said what he did to Jesus as the conversation opener.

The Jews' assumptions were correct, but their timing was off. They did not understand the two comings of Christ. Even after Christ's resurrection the disciples still did not understand:

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

They didn't believe or understand His first coming. The second coming had nothing to do with it. And what did Jesus answer when the disciples asked Him about the kingdom?

It's not about the Christian new birth at all. The Pharisees, including Nicodemus, had adopted the Greek belief of the immortality of the soul (Cp the parable in Luke 16:19ff). Jesus was talking about the coming kingdom and the first resurrection, when dead OT believers and believers who died before the day of Pentecost will be resurrected into the kingdom. At that time, everyone thought it was coming soon (Matt 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; Mark 1:15). Christianity was still God's secret (mystery). Nobody knew about it yet. Jesus Christ himself thought it would be soon (Matt 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27). It didn't come soon, and in fact it still hasn't come. God intervened with His secret, which was Christianity (Rom 16:25; 1 Cor 2:7-8; Eph 3:2ff; more), the details of which were revealed to Paul by revelation.

I think you forgot we were talking about John 3.

 

[Comingfrom]

That scripture is not talking about the resurrection or the new birth.

When I was brought into God's kingdom, it was like being born into a new land.
And it was the resurrection of my soul, and of my life.

All the commandments which I command thee this day shall ye observe to do,
that ye may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the Lord sware unto your fathers.
Deuteronomy 8:1

Ye shall walk in all the ways which the Lord your God hath commanded you,
that ye may live, and that it may be well with you,
and that ye may prolong your days in the land which ye shall possess.
Deuteronomy 5:33

 

[patience]

I don't believe I said that Nicodemus didn't know about the resurrection.

patience said:
Nicodemus should have known about the resurrection for it had been prophesied in the OT.

Jesus also reprimanded Nicodemus - "Are you a teacher of Israel and don't know these things?" Nicodemus should have known about the resurrection for it had been prophesied in the OT.

Meaning: Jesus must have been speaking about the resurrection, re: the question he asked Nicodemus. Something Nicodemus should have recognized and known about because of OT scripture regarding the resurrection.

 

[shroom]

"within you".

Or “in the midst of you.”

Obviously since He said we couldn't see it and pretty much said that it was not a physical kingdom of THIS earth.

It will be a physical literal kingdom on this renovated earth. That’s what all the OT prophecies are about. Animal nature changing, no more war, plenty of food, everyone will know the Lord, etc.

And is this one of the times where you claim Jesus didn't know what He was talking about?

He was talking about resurrection into the coming kingdom. He did not know about Christianity, it was still God’s secret (KJV mystery).

You simply do not understand His Kingship or what He is doing now and have presupposed what He is going to do and what it will look like.

You simply do not understand that the kingdom isn’t here yet. I do know what Jesus is doing now, or at least I have a good idea. He’s seated at the right hand of God making intercession for us. The Bible tells us what he is going to do and what the kingdom will be like, at least some aspects of it.

No, I am not. I don't even believe in the rapture so how could I confuse it with something?

That’s why you’re confused.

The new birth is a type of resurrection for in it one is burried with Christ and raised to life with Him, through faith in Him.

In one sense, yes.

This is the first resurrection.

No it isn’t. The “first” resurrection will be after Armageddon when Christ sets up his kingdom (Rev 20:4-6). Dead OT believers will be raised from the dead and enter the kingdom.

The second resurrection is the resurrection of the body to new life. Rev 20:6

Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

The second resurrection happens at the end of the MK (Rev 20:12-15). That’s when the white throne judgment will take place.

Not the resurrection of the body. It is being quickened to spiritual life of the spiritually dead.

John 3 is talking about the resurrection of PEOPLE, not just their bodies.

 

[Sissy]

Yes, resurrection is a promise of the new birth, but it isn't the new birth, not the way I read the scriptures. And indeed, we do live in a right now not yet condition.

It's the same new birth, unless you are counting two new births.

 

[Arial]

It will be a physical literal kingdom on this renovated earth. That’s what all the OT prophecies are about. Animal nature changing, no more war, plenty of food, everyone will know the Lord, etc.

It is not a renovated earth. It is a new heaven and a new earth.

He was talking about resurrection into the coming kingdom. He did not know about Christianity, it was still God’s secret (KJV mystery).

It is His church. Pretty sure He knew about it. Christianity isn't the mystery. The mystery is that God will unite Israel and the Gentiles as His people in Christ, which is prophesied, but the manifold wisdom of God revealed in exactly how He would do this was not. Jesus and His crucifixion and resurrection and through faith, is how it was done. He knew what His mission was. Not only that, but He understood the OT completely.

You simply do not understand that the kingdom isn’t here yet. I do know what Jesus is doing now, or at least I have a good idea. He’s seated at the right hand of God making intercession for us. The Bible tells us what he is going to do and what the kingdom will be like, at least some aspects of it.

The fulness of the kingdom is not here yet, any more than is the fulness of our redemption. That does not mean it is not here at all, anymore that our redemption not being fully consummated means that we aren't saved. And if you weren't so locked into Revelation being about the last seven years before Christ's return, and Christians having been spared these last seven years, you would see that Jesus is not sitting down, but is very active as a warrior of magnificence, fighting on our behalf.

That’s why you’re confused.

I'm not the least bit confused. I have investigated the primary views of the book of Revelation, and rather than simply following the crowd, have determined that there is another way of viewing it that is much more likely all things considered.

No it isn’t. The “first” resurrection will be after Armageddon when Christ sets up his kingdom (Rev 20:4-6). Dead OT believers will be raised from the dead and enter the kingdom.

So, you say. Can you prove it as an absolute?

Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

The second resurrection happens at the end of the MK (Rev 20:12-15). That’s when the white throne judgment will take place.

Only if one is married to the idea that the thousand years is literal, even though the entire book of Revelation is made up of symbols and types, and the Bible is notorious for using numbers symbolically. And only if you view all the Bible through a central dogma of dispensationalism, which views scripture as moving from one distinct program to another and back again. In doing this they divide salvation into two distinct programs, one for the Jews and another for the Gentiles. Whereas covenant as a framework, not a central dogma from which all else is interpreted, begins with continuity rather than discontinuity. Which would place the 1000 years not as a distinct program, but the long time period, but unspecified as to length, between Jesus' first and second coming.

John 3 is talking about the resurrection of PEOPLE, not just their bodies.

John 3 is talking about the quickening to spiritual life those who are spiritually dead. Born from above. Your religion only changes this from the obvious in order to hang onto freewill with all their might.

 

[shroom]

It is not a renovated earth. It is a new heaven and a new earth.

The MK will be on this renovated earth, the new heaven and earth comes after the MK.

It is His church.

There's a difference between the church Jesus was, and is, building and the Christian church.

Pretty sure He knew about it.

He didn't. Nobody did except God.

Christianity isn't the mystery.

Christianity was the secret.

The mystery is that God will unite Israel and the Gentiles as His people in Christ, which is prophesied, but the manifold wisdom of God revealed in exactly how He would do this was not.

If it was prophesied, the devil would have known about it, and the Bible says if the devil had known about it he would not have crucified Christ.

Jesus and His crucifixion and resurrection and through faith, is how it was done. He knew what His mission was. Not only that, but He understood the OT completely.

Yes he did. Christianity is not in the OT.

The fulness of the kingdom is not here yet, any more than is the fulness of our redemption. That does not mean it is not here at all, anymore that our redemption not being fully consummated means that we aren't saved. And if you weren't so locked into Revelation being about the last seven years before Christ's return, and Christians having been spared these last seven years, you would see that Jesus is not sitting down, but is very active as a warrior of magnificence, fighting on our behalf.

The kingdom isn't here at all. If it was, this world would be a much better place. The kingdom will be paradise on earth

I'm not the least bit confused. I have investigated the primary views of the book of Revelation, and rather than simply following the crowd, have determined that there is another way of viewing it that is much more likely all things considered.

You followed covenant theology, and amillennialism.

So, you say. Can you prove it as an absolute?

If I understood you correctly, you claimed the new birth is the first resurrection.

Rev 20:
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

I hope you would agree that Rev 20:4 is not talking about the new birth... Then verse 5: "This [verse 4] is the first resurrection."

Only if one is married to the idea that the thousand years is literal, even though the entire book of Revelation is made up of symbols and types, and the Bible is notorious for using numbers symbolically. And only if you view all the Bible through a central dogma of dispensationalism, which views scripture as moving from one distinct program to another and back again. In doing this they divide salvation into two distinct programs, one for the Jews and another for the Gentiles. Whereas covenant as a framework, not a central dogma from which all else is interpreted, begins with continuity rather than discontinuity. Which would place the 1000 years not as a distinct program, but the long time period, but unspecified as to length, between Jesus' first and second coming.

You hold to covenant theology. I hold to dispensationalism.

John 3 is talking about the quickening to spiritual life those who are spiritually dead. Born from above.

John 3 is talking about resurrection.

Your religion only changes this from the obvious in order to hang onto freewill with all their might.

Your religion sees it as God spiritually birthing people to believe the gospel in order to hang on to Calvinism with all their might.