Born Again

Mat 17:4Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

Then why was Moses already with Him?

 

Moses is a type. A picture of what has happened and will happen with Christ. Moses was rejected by his bretheren the first time and left. When he returned he was accepted by his bretheren. So Christ was rejected by His bretheren during His first appearance, and just like Moses He will be accepted upon His return to His bretheren.

Hope that clears up the matter a little more.

 

When Christ came all of Israel did not reject Him and also, when Moses appeared with him on the Mt., they knew who he was along with Elias.

If it is to be done all over again, the Messiah coming. What about those who did receive Him over 2000 years ago? I mean when He first sent His Apostles out it was to Israel and some received Him and have continued to be more over the years?

What about Lazarus going to Abraham's bossom? I know it was a type and figure of God, but some don't go here and some there.

 

Correct. However the offer of the kingdom was a national offer and it was rejected as a national offer. When Christ returns the entire nation will accept Him.

I'm not sure what this has to do with our conversation ?

Those folks have already lived and died and will have a place in His coming kingdom just as He promised. Nothing different will happen to them. They will receive exactly what was promised to them just as we will if we accept the offer of the kingdom and follow through until the end.

This is true. And unfortunately the closer we get to the return of the King the fewer that are accepting the gospel of the kingdom. :tear:

I guess I'm unclear as to what your point is here with this statement?

 

Thank you, Brother Bob. Let's stick to the NT.

Thank you, JDale, for introducing some clarity into this unusual thread (see the rest of his post for insight.)

~~~~~~~~~

JJump is clearly dispensational, just needs to say that. He gets confused with this "soul" thing that he advocates, but nothing wrong with classic (or normal) dispensationalism.

Clearly, we are born again into God's family as His children by the Holy Spirit upon our profession of faith in Jesus Christ, and that salvation is sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of our redemption, an instantaneous event en toto. Without the New Birth, we are lost. Doomed. It is true that Jesus was talking to a Jew (Nicodemus in John 3), but it was a basic spiritual truth, a truth that emphasized that He (Jesus) must die for our sins.


This thread is an example of what happens when intellect rules, instead of standing aside as the Holy Spirit provides spiritual insight into understanding God's Word.

 

Because the OT is useless to us today? Do you really believe that?

Never denied that, so I'm not sure why I just to need to say it, but okay...I do believe in dispensationalism.

Just advocating what Scripture says, so by all means please show us how Scripture is in error.

Just curious do you believe Nicodemus to be saved or unsaved during this conversation?

 

Didn't say it was useless. One cannot build doctrine based upon the OT alone, of course, and when one jumps to the OT to prove a point (as reformed / Calvinists so often do in their "elect" doctrine), one has jumped too far.

Scripture is clear. This "spirit goes to Heaven, soul goes to Hell" doctrine muddies the waters unnecessarily.

Learned Nicodemus was a Jew who did not understand and had not received the New Birth found only in Christ. Could he have confessed Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord? Of course. There is no indication that he did in the John 3 reference.

 

Glad to hear that.

I would agree with that.

Yes it certainly is.

I don't know that I can recall that anyone has promoted this idea as you have stated it here. But I think what muddies the water even more is trying to combine the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace through faith apart from works. That does a terrible disservice to Christendom and has led to MUCH confusion.

So let me ask you this question. How were people saved prior to the start of Christ's public ministry?

 

Yeah, we'd hate to actually let the Scriptures get in the way of good doctrine, wouldn't we?

BTW, I'm still on pain meds, but I will try to respond shortly. But, it may not happen this evening. I'm very sleepy.

 

DQuixote

Three things,

1. I have seen nothing but a biblical view of the soul as given by Brother Jump. Have you any scripture to refute His biblical argument?

2. Your other statement concerning intellect ruling and not havingthe Holy Spirit provide insight............ I'm suprised to see this statement. We are to STUDY to shew ourselves approved. There is nothing wrong with guidance from the Holy Spirit as we STUDY. Maybe I am missunderstanding your statement but it sounds a lot like the statements one might hear from Pentecostal charismatics on the Devilvision. We are to worship in SPRIRT and TRUTH. I know this verse doesn't apply to studying but there are many who rely on "feelings" and what "seems" right and call it the Holy Spirit direction.

Do you have any scripture to refute the study that has been made by Brother Jump or any other that teach a literal accountability and biblical view of what a Christian is?

3. Why do you want to move away from the Old Testament and only use the New? To understand anything in the New we must have a proper understanding of the Old. God wrote us a beautiful letter, the Bible. If the President of the United States wrote you a letter, I guarantee we would pay close attention to every word, starting at the beginning. Why would we start at any other place than the beginning? It is all inspired and given by God. Also, a good portion of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were recorded pre death, burial and ressurection. Should we then stop looking at those scriptures and move soley to the Epistles to seek gleamings into God's plan? The Epistles are full of the gospel of the Kingdom. Much more than the Gospel of Grace.



Than you for your soon response.

Preaching and Teaching the Word in Mexico,
Accountable

 

Hope of Glory,

Just a note to let you know you have been in our prayers today. We pray all went well with your surgery. Thank you for your bold stand for the Kingdom.

God Bless!

 

Dquixote

 

Good Grief. I cannot believe this has gone this far.

 

What has gone this far?

 

I didn't read all the threads just the first one.

Being born again has nothing to do with works or our behavior. It has to do with God coming to LIVE IN us. Being FILLED with the Holy Spirit.

When Jesus told Nicodemous he must be born again he meant he must have a new nature...his spirit was dead, he and all of us are born spiritualy dead and only God make his spirit alive again, by faith in Christ.

I didn't know this was such a hard doctrine to understand?

 

It is not a hard doctrine to understand. In fact, all who posted agree to your definition, and all who posted agree that the New Birth is a necessary part of one's Christianity.

However, the issue, if you only read the posts, is per the question: is it necessary to be born again in order to be saved. In other words, do you have to be born again so that you can be saved.

This issue was addressed and the discussions were on whether born again and saved are one and the same, and the other cannot happen without the other.

Some of us are of the stand that Jesus saved unregenerate sinners (not born again) and then, in His own due time, regenerates each sinner, but each saved sinner will definitely be born again.

Some say that there can be no salvation without the experience of rebirth first.

 

If a tree falls in the forest, is there a sound?

If a simple, straight-forward item is posted on the BB, does anyone read it?

:wavey: <---Hello?

 

I only read the 1st page and that was enough to see that many missed the obvious.

Of course the two go together you can't have one without the other. Being Born Again means you are saved.

You were once spiritually DEAD and being Born Again means you are now spiritually ALIVE = SAVED!

 

Pinoy:

FTR --

I don't disagree with what you've said -- in fact, I think you missed my point.

First, I think this thread just proves that Christians (and Baptists in particular) can argue about anything - even settled Biblical Truth. Like the old Baptist Preacher used to say, "it might be in the Bible, but it ain't so til we Baptists vote on it."

Second, I sought to point out the obvious -- if someone says the New Birth is not necessary. then they ARE heretics. I WAS NOT pointing a finger at alyone in particular, nor was I saying anyone was making that argument. Not EVEN a "hint."

Christians can differ on the particulars of the Ordo Salutis -- as some are doing here -- and not be heretics. (The Calvinists can be wrong if they want -- they are not automatically heretics :-D ) I couldn't resist...

I guess my view is that this argument -- other than for the sake of arguing -- becomes tiresome and serves no purpose beyond a certain point. If you like beating a dead horse, more power to ya.

JDale

 

There will be none who are unsaved in the Kingdom, but there will be many who are saved who will be denied an entrance.

Entering the Kingdom requires preparation. It requires work. It requires diligence. It requires running the race.

There are 5 main passages that those who promote the fallacy of a spiritual Kingdom use to "prove" that it's not real and literal, and Luke 17:20-21 is one of them.

Many people, such as amillennialists, point to the questionable translation of the Greek word “entos” which has been translated by the King James as “within you.” They say that the Kingdom of God is only spiritual or is somehow mystically inside a person. However, in this passage, Jesus is responding to the Pharisees not His disciples! Jesus is answering the Pharisees’ question, “When the Kingdom of God should come?” In the next verse, verse 22, it begins, “And he said unto the disciples”. In the same context, he turns and addresses his own disciples in verse 22. The Pharisees were not his disciples! In verses 20 and 21, he’s talking to the Pharisees, and then he turns to talk to his disciples.

The Pharisees rejected the signs that Jesus had given to prove that he was the Christ; the Messiah. How could God's spiritual kingdom be within them? If the kingdom of God were within anyone spiritually it surely would not have been in the unbelieving Pharisees.

This verse completely goes against the view that the kingdom of God is within the hearts of people that have accepted Jesus as the Messiah, because the only time in the Scriptures that it is used, it is used in reference to those that had rejected Jesus to be the Christ.

The English translation “within you” does not make any sense because the Pharisees had rejected Jesus as their Messiah. The 1611 KJV translators themselves were not sure how best to translate this word, so they included a marginal note with the alternate reading, "among you." This is obviously the true meaning of the word in this context. It is translated "among you" or "in your midst" in various other translations such as the NASB, RSV, BBE, NLT, NJB, NET and the Rotherham translation.

The Lord Jesus also used similar terms in other passages: [Matthew 12:28; Luke 10:9] John 1:49 tells us that Jesus, the Son of God, was the King of Israel. He was preaching to the Jewish people that the Kingdom of God was at hand. It was being offered to the nation of Israel on the condition of repentance and their acceptance of him as the Messiah. He was claiming to have the complete and absolute authority to establish the Kingdom in their midst, upon these conditions. He backed up his claims by demonstrating his authority with supernatural signs, wonders, and miracles. One of those signs was his full authority over the demonic realm.

In Matthew 10:7-8, Jesus commanded his apostles: And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

The signs of the Kingdom were given to the nation of Israel to demonstrate that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, the Son of God, the King of Israel, and the very God himself. (Matthew 11:2-5; John 3:2; 9:32-33; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22) The King was present (among them) and the Kingdom could be established on the fulfillment of its conditions, which was the repentance of Israel. In Matthew 12:28, Jesus as the King was referring to himself as being the embodiment of the Kingdom at that time. This kind of language is also found in other passages in the gospels, such as Mark 11:10 and Luke 19:39.

So, when Jesus the King came unto Israel it was the Kingdom offer that had come unto them. The signs proved it! You cannot have a Kingdom without a King. They did not have to wait any longer for the Kingdom to come. However, the unbelieving Pharisees were being antagonistic toward Jesus and to the suggestion that He would be the One to fulfill the prophecies of the OT prophets concerning the coming Messiah King that would sit on David’s throne and reign over the nation of Israel. By questioning, “when the kingdom of God should come”, they were seeking to trap Him by His words and discredit Him in front of the people. In other words they were saying, "If you're the Messiah, where is your Kingdom?"

The question was irrelevant and inappropriate because Jesus, the Messiah, who was standing in their midst, was the one who could set up the Kingdom and the signs He demonstrated proved or authenticated that. They did not have to go looking “Lo here! or, lo there!” The healing of ten lepers in Luke 17:12-19 that preceded their question should have been enough to prove the fact that he was the King of Israel and that they should not be going around looking for any other signs. Leprosy was looked at as a direct act of the finger of God, and as such, it was illegal to even try to cure it, because the one who could cure it would be the Messiah. That is why He said, "behold, the Kingdom of God is in your midst". He was basically saying, "hey, you're looking at the Kingdom of God!" All they had to do was look at the signs! The Messiah was present in their midst; He was the embodiment of the Kingdom, and all the miraculous signs He was doing should have proved to them His claim was true! In their case the kingdom of God was not going to come “with observation” because He had already shown them the signs of the kingdom and no other signs were needed. This was all the kingdom that they were going to see at His first coming.

By the statement “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation” Jesus did not mean the Kingdom of God will never "come with observation". That would completely contradict His words in other places where He plainly and clearly said that His kingdom would come with power and great glory (Matthew 24:30 is a good example of that). However, what He meant was that His Kingdom would not come in this manner yet; at His first coming. Jesus of course knew that His physical literal Kingdom would not come to this earth until His second coming, which would not happen until after His rejection at His first coming.

This is apparent from other statements by Jesus. For example: John 18:36: Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. The key word here is "now". Jesus was saying that at His first coming His Kingdom would not appear as a physical Kingdom. The implication is that it will come later. Jesus did not deny the coming of His literal, glorious Kingdom on the earth. Rather, He taught that its arrival was delayed until His second coming.

Revelation 11:15: And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.



This is further revealed in Luke 19 in the parable of the pounds, just two chapters after Luke 17.


Luke 19:11: And as they (his disciples) heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.


In the parable of the Talents that follows, Jesus indicated that He must go away for a time (approximately 2,000 years) leaving His servants in charge. But, He would return at some point "having received the Kingdom", and would then judge His servants. The rewards given to the faithful in His absence would be authority as rulers in His coming Kingdom. This would be at His second coming or at “His appearing”, as we are told in 2 Timothy 4:1, which says, “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom”. (It's also important to remember that Jesus' rule is only temporary, then he will be handing authority back over to the Father, as we're told in 1 Corinthians 15:4.)


His second coming will come with observation. That is clearly shown in Luke 21 when Jesus told His apostles about the signs of the end of this present age and His second coming to this earth in order to establish His kingdom. In Luke 17:20,21, Jesus was talking to the Pharisees, but from 17:22 onwards Jesus turns away from the Pharisees and begins to address His very own disciples.


Read Luke 17:22-26

But first !

Notice here Jesus did not tell His disciples “the kingdom of God is within you” but rather He tells them that days are coming when, you my disciples would want to see “the days of the Son of man, but will not be able to”, which means right then they could see the days but in future they will not be able to. The reason for this is in verse 25, because the Son of man “first must he suffer and be rejected of this generation”. “This generation” is the generation of Jews that Jesus offered the kingdom to in His first coming. Then He begins to reassure His disciples and to explain to them exactly when they will once again be able to see the days of the Son of Man, after he has been rejected. He gives them the signs of His second coming and the Kingdom all through chapter 17 up until Luke 18:8.