Search results

The problem with your analysis is that the principle "flesh gives birth to flesh" extends to Gentiles as well--they, too, are only flesh, and need to be born again in order to enter the Kingdom--and, again, if "John's water baptism of repentance" was the way "fleshly sons of Abraham" were...

What do you mean "the" water birth? What are you importing to the text?

John's Gospel. Shocking you don't know that. The Old way was the Law, the New way is the Spirit writing the laws of God on our minds and hearts Jeremiah 31:31-34 Romans 2:14-15 Romans 2:26-27. 1. Above given. 2. The Apostles received the Spirit on Pentecost, the same day as it is...

The references you had never substantiated your claim "natural birth was normally referred to as born of water--that's how they said it in ancient Israel, you just don't understand with your Western mind". Since you admit you're "out of ammo" though I'll take it you're admitting you have no...

You can't drink of the Spirit except by faith in the Word. Drinking the Word of the Spirit is drinking the Spirit. As Christ told the woman at the well. Then later "whoever believes from his belly will flow rivers of living water this He spoke concerning the Spirit". You're just denying the...

Paul expands on John's unwritten thought (John wasn't written yet)... in Romans... this should be "interesting". No, as it turns out, he doesn't. 1. That's all well and good but you didn't show "natural birth" was referred to as "born of water" which was the consequential claim (the rest is...

The Spirit is not only closely associated with water in John's Gospel but also compared to wind and fire. Elementals. Also literally "water... spoke of the Spirit" but yeah just throw that in the trash doesn't matter what the author thought you have better ideas.

Sounds good. Well, the, very same book tells you "water... spoke of the Spirit" but yeah just throw that in the trash so you can insert any meaning you please. Sounds good man. Enjoy.

Am I correct that you would not see "Unless one is born of water and Spirit" as a positive statement about what is actually needed to "enter God's Kingdom"--that "water" would not have to do with the new birth? Why would you not see the connection between water and Spirit given us in Scripture...

What's "awesome" is that fish he caught (avatar). LOL

So, still no answer for why you insist on blinding yourself to the connection between water and Spirit--"water... spake of the Spirit", "we have all been made to drink of one Spirit".

Well, the Spirit had also worked among them quite a bit, so that couldn't be in view by your reasoning. The reality is that they weren't born of the Spirit nor the Word--and, yes, we are explicitly told we are "born of incorruptible Seed", so Nicodemus, despite all his learning, did have to be...

Show where "born of water" was a normative phrase for "natural birth" in Jesus's time and place.

In the first statement, Christ clarifies what is necessary for entering ("...no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit."), which is the positive, in the next, He disabuses Nicodemus of his misunderstanding ("Can a man reenter his mother's womb and be 'born...

No, I meant IF I WERE YOU I would just write something like a paraphrase so as not to run afoul of copyright.

All right.

No, you're not going by the material provided by the author. You're importing definitions. I'm going by his material "water spake of the Spirit".

I stand by "living water... this He spake concerning the Spirit" as having been the author's intended referent. Even it is stated "drink of one Spirit". Not a problem for me if you want to reject what seems plain to me--the readers can decide. I'll wait for you to pull out the proof for...

1. Where "in the Bible" did "born of water" mean "natural birth"? 2. I'm going by the material provided me by the author. You find fault with that?

It is rude to intrude on others' discussions and dump your off topic material. Start your own discussion on those matters.