what is the meaning of John 3:3 ?

DAN P

Well-known member
John 3:5 says , except a man be " born again " he cannot see the kingdom of God .

there are many that they have been born again , even , say it is for today and they mean it !!

# 1 is it speaking of salvation for today ?

# 2 is it for Israel only ?

# 3 is it speaking only about Israel in the future ?

# 4 is it for the new covenant , some say it is ?

dan p
 

Bradley D

Well-known member
It is for everyone! In John 3 Jesus speaks of being born again of the spirit not the flesh. Having a new outlook on God and salvation as taught by the Lord.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
It is for everyone! In John 3 Jesus speaks of being born again of the spirit not the flesh. Having a new outlook on God and salvation as taught by the Lord.
and you say , that you have born , once already !!

and how were you born again , ?

dan p
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Temp Banned
Why cannot "born again" be the resurrection, the new birth from corruptible to incorruptible?

John 3:3 KJV​
(3) 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.​
Luke 13:28 KJV​
(28) There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.​


Don't see how they could see Abraham in the kingdom of God unless they are resurrected.

Peter even connects "born again" with resurrection.

1 Peter 1:3 KJV​
(3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,​
(4) To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,​
.​
.​
(23) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.​
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Why cannot "born again" be the resurrection, the new birth from corruptible to incorruptible?

John 3:3 KJV​
(3) 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.​
Luke 13:28 KJV​
(28) There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.​


Don't see how they could see Abraham in the kingdom of God unless they are resurrected.

Peter even connects "born again" with resurrection.

1 Peter 1:3 KJV​
(3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,​
(4) To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,​
.​
.​
(23) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.​
He connects it with Christ's resurrection!

Last time I checked that happened at some point in the past.

And why do you ignore Jesus' response to Nicodemus in John 3?

5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Is it really your belief that we are somehow "born of water" when we resurrect from the dead? Also, verse 8 is stated in the present tense.

In short, the reason "being born again" cannot be talking of the resurrection is because there isn't anything in the bible to support such a notion.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Why cannot "born again" be the resurrection, the new birth from corruptible to incorruptible?

John 3:3 KJV​
(3) 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.​
Luke 13:28 KJV​
(28) There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.​


Don't see how they could see Abraham in the kingdom of God unless they are resurrected.

Peter even connects "born again" with resurrection.

1 Peter 1:3 KJV​
(3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,​
(4) To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,​
.​
.​
(23) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.​
And I sys that John 3:3 speaking to Israel , only

and Eze 36 : 24-38 is showing all how all of Israel will be saved .

Eze 37:15-19 Christ will bring the stick of Israel and the sick of Judah and make them one stick and one nation .

then the Millennial kingdom will beginning with Christ a priest for ever after the order od Melchisedec as written is Heb 5:6

the b o c is a new creation and in 1 Cor 12:15-17 , the b o c will be Christ's foot , will be his ears , his eyes , his hearing , his sense of smell .

this why we are not the bride of Christ .

dan p
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Temp Banned
And I sys that John 3:3 speaking to Israel , only
Hi, Dan P.

John 3:3 KJV
(3) 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.

Jesus is speaking to Nicodemus in John 3:3.​
Who all it can apply to can be much broader than just Nicodemus.​
As Jesus says in John 3:3, one cannot see the kingdom of God without being born again.​
So do you exclude yourself from ever being able to see the kingdom of God since you believe He was was only speaking about those of Israel?​

1 Peter 1:3 KJV
(3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
(4) To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
.
.
(23) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.


Do you also exclude yourself from ever changing from corruptible to incorruptible since you believe he was only speaking about those of Israel?​
 

Lon

Well-known member
John 3:5 says , except a man be " born again " he cannot see the kingdom of God .

there are many that they have been born again , even , say it is for today and they mean it !!

# 1 is it speaking of salvation for today ?

# 2 is it for Israel only ?

# 3 is it speaking only about Israel in the future ?

# 4 is it for the new covenant , some say it is ?

dan p
I think it fairly straight-forward: It is a need for Nicodemus to be a spiritual being.

From what I've garnered talking to Mid Acts, there is a cross-over in the sense that we all need spiritual regeneration. As I understand it, their only caveat here is "born-again" was going to be different for Nicodemus than for us today. I don't believe, even from a Mid Acts perspective it has to be: The Lord Jesus Christ knew He was the only way to the Father and Spiritual renewal and indwelling is all our need. He had known His purpose in coming in the flesh. Is it possible in Mid Acts to see this as an all-inclusive passage? My reasoning: John 3:16 "whole world." In John 3 "That which is born of Spirit is Spirit...therefore, you must be born again." Something important for me (see if it rings true): We could not 'born' ourselves such that we cannot 'born again' ourselves either. 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 2 Corinthians 5:16-17

It'd seem to me that the need is the same: Spiritual regeneration. True?
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Temp Banned
I think it fairly straight-forward: It is a need for Nicodemus to be a spiritual being.
Hi Lon.
Hope you don't mind me asking you to clarify.

When you say "a spiritual being" are you speaking of a being that is of the spirit realm or just a flesh man with spiritual thoughts?

It'd seem to me that the need is the same: Spiritual regeneration. True?
Regeneration of your whole body or just your mind?

In other words, do you think "born again" is only speaking of a renewing of the mind now, and the renewing of the body comes later; or is Jesus speaking of it as the renewing of the whole body?

Me, personally, thinks a case can be made for both, as some scholars would reference it as an "already, but not yet" scenario.
Case in point would be when scripture says we can already be a new creature even though we will also become a new creature in the resurrection.

So I can agree with either way one wants to express it and do not feel the necessity to be forced to only choose one or the other as truth.
 

Lon

Well-known member
Hello Tambora!
Hope you don't mind me asking you to clarify.

When you say "a spiritual being" are you speaking of a being that is of the spirit realm or just a flesh man with spiritual thoughts?
1Co 2:9 But as it is written, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard," nor has it entered into the heart of man, "the things which God has prepared for those who love Him."
1Co 2:10 But God has revealed them to us by His Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, yea, the deep things of God.
1Co 2:11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man within him? So also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God.
1Co 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one.
1Co 2:16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.
2 Corinthians 5:17 Ephesians 2:5

The doctrine of regeneration, namely.


Regeneration of your whole body or just your mind?
We await new bodies 2 Corinthians 5:1-10
We are identified positionally in Christ. He gives us His Spirit and a new nature that 1) Wants to follow Christ and 2) the Holy Spirit's indwelling and prompting; starts to mold us toward God (godliness) Ephesians 2:10
In other words, do you think "born again" is only speaking of a renewing of the mind now, and the renewing of the body comes later; or is Jesus speaking of it as the renewing of the whole body?
It seems fitting Mark 12:30-31 'all of us' in the sense that we are inundated at the core of our being with a desire to be godly and love the body.
Me, personally, thinks a case can be made for both, as some scholars would reference it as an "already, but not yet" scenario.
🆙 Positionally we are fully 'in Christ' as believers. Baptism in water (not debating the do or don't, it happens spiritually/positionally at regeneration) is symbolism for the idea of being 'in' Christ by saturation, change, cleansing. He starts saturating us, changing us this side of glory to conform to His image. We aren't fully 'wet' until Glory 1 John 3:2
Case in point would be when scripture says we can already be a new creature even though we will also become a new creature in the resurrection.
🆙 Agree. We cannot judge another's salvation, by how much they are saturated in Christ (works mainly). We can encourage growth however. Ultimately, those who love Jesus, love His body according to the two great commands. I reckon some of the angst we see in debates such as on TOL, is one kind of 'gift' to exhort the body to righteousness. Teaching and dialogue is another. Our gifts will encourage proximal walk of others with Jesus. 1 and 2 Timothy talk about degrees of saturation with the more mature helping the lesser etc. We can become more malleable by 'renewing our mind' in scripture study, fellowship, and exhortation. Revelation 3:20
So I can agree with either way one wants to express it and do not feel the necessity to be forced to only choose one or the other as truth.
I think I'm following: You mean now 'in Christ' fully (saturation degree) Philippians 3:12-14
and future fully saturated? 1 Corinthians 13:11,12? When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Temp Banned
Hello Tambora!
Thanks for clarifying what you mean by "spiritual" in your above post.

There are some things in John 3 that present a crossroads where one needs to make a decision on the interpretation, and that will in turn form their doctrine.

Example:
John 3
(3) 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.
.
.
(10) Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?


Was Jesus indicating to Nicodemus that he should have already known that it was already possible for him to be a born again person and already see the kingdom of God,
or was it that Nicodemus should have already known about some future event when it would become possible for him to be a born again person and only after that future event could anyone see the kingdom of God?
 

DAN P

Well-known member
I think it fairly straight-forward: It is a need for Nicodemus to be a spiritual being.

From what I've garnered talking to Mid Acts, there is a cross-over in the sense that we all need spiritual regeneration. As I understand it, their only caveat here is "born-again" was going to be different for Nicodemus than for us today. I don't believe, even from a Mid Acts perspective it has to be: The Lord Jesus Christ knew He was the only way to the Father and Spiritual renewal and indwelling is all our need. He had known His purpose in coming in the flesh. Is it possible in Mid Acts to see this as an all-inclusive passage? My reasoning: John 3:16 "whole world." In John 3 "That which is born of Spirit is Spirit...therefore, you must be born again." Something important for me (see if it rings true): We could not 'born' ourselves such that we cannot 'born again' ourselves either. 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 2 Corinthians 5:16-17

It'd seem to me that the need is the same: Spiritual regeneration. True?
and Paul only speaks about regeneration , in Titus 3:5 one time .

Matt 19:28 also speaks about regeneration , seem different to me and will have to look at the Greek text .

and the gospels and old testament were written to Israel and Paul wrote 13 letters and Hebrews .

I have not seen where Paul speaks of the words " born again " and if you have a verse that I missed , please write where it can be found

and as 1 Cor 11:1 says , you become imitators of me , just as I also am of Christ .

and a strong believer on what Paul wrote in Eph 3:9 , and to make all as to what the dispensation of the mystery the one having been kept secret from the ages in God , the one having created " the all things " is the Greek word " ta panta " and that means means the whole b o c .

dan p
 

Lon

Well-known member
and Paul only speaks about regeneration , in Titus 3:5 one time .
Agree, I know of no other either.
Matt 19:28 also speaks about regeneration , seem different to me and will have to look at the Greek text .

and the gospels and old testament were written to Israel and Paul wrote 13 letters and Hebrews .
I think so. Here is a question for MidActs: Was 'born again' future for Nicodemus? From Theology class, the Holy Spirit came 'upon' men and women prior to the Lord Jesus Christ's DBR. If not, then I'd have to agree that 'born again' isn't the same as it is for us because there is no way we can 'born again' ourselves.
I have not seen where Paul speaks of the words " born again " and if you have a verse that I missed , please write where it can be found
I do not. There is no 'born again.' 1 Corinthians 2 intimates a similar ideology. Compare:
Spoiler

1Co 2:10 But God has revealed them to us by His Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, yea, the deep things of God.
1Co 2:11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man within him? So also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God.
1Co 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one.
1Co 2:16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Then look with me at John 3


and as 1 Cor 11:1 says , you become imitators of me , just as I also am of Christ .

and a strong believer on what Paul wrote in Eph 3:9 , and to make all as to what the dispensation of the mystery the one having been kept secret from the ages in God , the one having created " the all things " is the Greek word " ta panta " and that means means the whole b o c .

dan p
Some have called me "Mid Acts" but on this, Jesus was talking about His DBR. It may be if you are also an Open Theist, that there may be some unknowns, but I'm guessing even they see the Lord Jesus Christ as dying for all mankind as John 3 says 'world.' It'd be a huge thing if Open Theists didn't think John 3 meant whole world, such that I believe there is the same promise of eternal life and needing to be saved John 3:16 "...So that the world might be saved..."
 

Lon

Well-known member
Thanks for clarifying what you mean by "spiritual" in your above post.

There are some things in John 3 that present a crossroads where one needs to make a decision on the interpretation, and that will in turn form their doctrine.

Example:
John 3
(3) 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.
.
.
(10) Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?


Was Jesus indicating to Nicodemus that he should have already known that it was already possible for him to be a born again person and already see the kingdom of God,
It is possible, but I read it as Jesus explaining what all Pharisees and other Jewish teachers should have picked up from Isaiah 53, for instance.
or was it that Nicodemus should have already known about some future event when it would become possible for him to be a born again person and only after that future event could anyone see the kingdom of God?
That tends to be how I read it because Jesus says:
Spoiler

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless a man is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Joh 3:7 Do not marvel that I said to you, You must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The Spirit breathes where He desires, and you hear His voice, but you do not know from where He comes, and where He goes; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.
Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, How can these things be?
Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said to him, Are you the teacher of Israel and do not know these things?
Joh 3:11 Truly, truly, I say to you, We speak what we know and testify what we have seen. And you do not receive our witness.
Joh 3:12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
Joh 3:13 And no one has ascended up to Heaven except He who came down from Heaven, the Son of Man who is in Heaven.
Joh 3:14 But even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
Joh 3:15 so that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God So Loved the World
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him.
Joh 3:18 He who believes on Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
Joh 3:21 But he who practices truth comes to the Light so that his works may be revealed, that they exist, having been worked in God.

Realize I'm either not Mid Acts, or not versed well enough on the coincidence. For me, if even Mid Acts, I'd say I still see Jesus as pointing to a future that culminates in the Gospel of His DBR through Paul, fleshed out. John 3:20,21

There are quite a number of mysteries, but surely Romans 10:9&10 was the most revealing? No Jew/Messianic Jew knew that salvation was fully in Christ, because until this period, to be 'saved' you had to be "Jewish" (court of the Gentiles). Any we see that were prophets apart from Israel, yet had strong interaction in the seat of Israel, I think. I'm not sure where this all comes in, but was my theology class. Would appreciate inspection/correction/addition. In Him -Lon
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Temp Banned
It is possible, but I read it as Jesus explaining what all Pharisees and other Jewish teachers should have picked up from Isaiah 53, for instance.

That tends to be how I read it because Jesus says:
Isaiah 53 telling of the Righteous Servant (a reference to Christ) who bore the sin of many and makes intercession for the transgressors.
And John 3 telling of the Son of Man (a reference to Christ) in Daniel 7 having everlasting dominion of all people, nations, languages.
Daniel 7​
(13) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.​
(14) And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.​

John 3 also telling of the Son of Man being lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent on the pole (a reference to the cross) and all that would have eternal life because of it.
John 3​
(13) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.​
(14) And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:​
(15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.​


All of that appears to be speaking of the future time of the resurrection of which all believers would be "born again" (ie. risen with Him to new life).

Realize I'm either not Mid Acts
I don't care.
We're discussing perspectives on scripture.


No Jew/Messianic Jew knew that salvation was fully in Christ, because until this period, to be 'saved' you had to be "Jewish" (court of the Gentiles).
Well, not really.
There were Gentiles that put their faith in YHWH who did not join Israel, did not keep any Jewish feast days, did not get circumcised, etc. etc. etc.
Namaan, for example. (2 Kings 5)
Of whom Jesus referenced as a man of God to put Israel to shame in Luke 4:27 which angered them so much they tried to throw Him off a cliff.


Would appreciate inspection/correction/addition.
As we all should.

Been a pleasure discussing with you, Lon, and sharing perspectives.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
and Paul only speaks about regeneration , in Titus 3:5 one time .

Matt 19:28 also speaks about regeneration , seem different to me and will have to look at the Greek text .

and the gospels and old testament were written to Israel and Paul wrote 13 letters and Hebrews .

I have not seen where Paul speaks of the words " born again " and if you have a verse that I missed , please write where it can be found

and as 1 Cor 11:1 says , you become imitators of me , just as I also am of Christ .

and a strong believer on what Paul wrote in Eph 3:9 , and to make all as to what the dispensation of the mystery the one having been kept secret from the ages in God , the one having created " the all things " is the Greek word " ta panta " and that means means the whole b o c .

dan p
There is no reason to believe that Paul wrote Hebrews.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Yes, every book that Paul wrote begins with his name.
Every epistle (letter) THAT WE HAVE that Paul wrote happens to begin with his name, yes, but that isn't a determinative piece of evidence because it isn't impossible for him to have written a letter that started with something other than his name.

It is the context of the the book of Hebrews, as well as the doctrine taught in it, that makes it impossible that Paul wrote it.

(I didn't post the above because I think you'd disagree with it, by the way. Just typing out my thoughts.)
 

Right Divider

Body part
Every epistle (letter) THAT WE HAVE that Paul wrote happens to begin with his name, yes, but that isn't a determinative piece of evidence because it isn't impossible for him to have written a letter that started with something other than his name.
I agree.
It is the context of the the book of Hebrews, as well as the doctrine taught in it, that makes it impossible that Paul wrote it.
No, it doesn't make it impossible... just extremely unlikely (and it would be extremely confusing if he did).
(I didn't post the above because I think you'd disagree with it, by the way. Just typing out my thoughts.)
Same here.
 
Top