[jacqui2411]

But do a word search and you only find the words born again spoken of concerning Israel it is found only in the books of those who taught Israel the Gospel of Grace. Paul never taught that we were born again in any of his writings and the closest he would have come was Ga 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now. we the body of Christ do become new creatures in Christ. And though we may have been born with a dead spirit we were brought to life by Christ's Blood and resurrected life, not by being born again. I am not making any kind of doctrine against using the term born again I only am pointing it out it was never used by Paul consernig the body of Christ

Just a comment in regards to your statement about not everybody being born again. Peter talks about this and he is not talking just to Israel.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1 Peter 1:1-2

He is writing to the strangers scattered all over the place.

1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Then in the process of describing their condition, he calls them born again.

I understand that Peter preached mainly to Israel but in fact he was the first one to share the gospel with those outside of Israel, look at Cornelieus. Plus this letter states who it is addressed too. It does not follow that those who were strangers were necessarily members of Israel.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by jacqui2411

But do a word search and you only find the words born again spoken of concerning Israel it is found only in the books of those who taught Israel the Gospel of Grace. Paul never taught that we were born again in any of his writings and the closest he would have come was Ga 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now. we the body of Christ do become new creatures in Christ. And though we may have been born with a dead spirit we were brought to life by Christ's Blood and resurrected life, not by being born again. I am not making any kind of doctrine against using the term born again I only am pointing it out it was never used by Paul consernig the body of Christ

Just a comment in regards to your statement about not everybody being born again. Peter talks about this and he is not talking just to Israel.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1 Peter 1:1-2

He is writing to the strangers scattered all over the place.

1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Then in the process of describing their condition, he calls them born again.

I understand that Peter preached mainly to Israel but in fact he was the first one to share the gospel with those outside of Israel, look at Cornelieus. Plus this letter states who it is addressed too. It does not follow that those who were strangers were necessarily members of Israel.

Jacqui, I am a Grace Dispensationalist, sometimes called a "hyperdispensationalist", and it is being taught within the Grace Movement and there is a minor contention at this time in the Grace Movement, regarding "born again" applying to Israel only. If the New Birth is applied to Israel only I don't see what Paul's "new creatures" are. I believe we(Jew and Gentile today), as they(Israel) both need to be born again. I'm at odds with some of my Grace brethren on that topic, I'm at odds with my Grace brethren on several topics.

My belief and teaching is that the people Peter wrote to were the "strangers" of Acts Two and cross-refers there:

I Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

They are "strangers" becasue they are not within the physical commonwealth of Israel and are strangers in their birth or adopted homelands.

Paul wrote to Jewish churches as well as Gentile:

2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

There were Jews in the Roman church, the church at Corinth was primarily Jewish, and as discussed in another thread, I believe internal evidence of the Scriptures make it clear to me that Paul wrote Hebrews. As Paul claimed to be, a wise masterbuilder, if we let him be a wise masterbuilder, we can see he was involved in both churches stretching through 3 dispensations.

As a member of the Grace Movement, I do reject water baptism, tongues, signs, and wonders as doctrines for the Body of Christ today, but I am not so nit-picky as to reject the New Birth. I believe it is heresy to do so.

Grace and peace to you, welcome to the forum, and your testimony on the Scriptures with relation to the KJV has made waves and knocked teeth out in venues far removed from this forum. Great is thy faith sister, for He has dealt you a massive measure because you believed Him, not the world.

grace and peace.

Tony

[Kiwi Christian]

Originally Posted by jacqui2411

But do a word search and you only find the words born again spoken of concerning Israel it is found only in the books of those who taught Israel the Gospel of Grace. Paul never taught that we were born again in any of his writings and the closest he would have come was Ga 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now. we the body of Christ do become new creatures in Christ. And though we may have been born with a dead spirit we were brought to life by Christ's Blood and resurrected life, not by being born again. I am not making any kind of doctrine against using the term born again I only am pointing it out it was never used by Paul consernig the body of Christ

Just a comment in regards to your statement about not everybody being born again. Peter talks about this and he is not talking just to Israel.

Also, Paul did refer to those Corinthians as "babes" in 1 Cor 3:1:

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

This compliments what Peter said to those believers in 1 Peter 2:2 "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:"

A general rule when rightly dividing the scripture to understand Church Age doctrine, is to use Paul's writings to the church as a measuring stick, and where another writer contradicts Paul you stay with Paul. The above examples from 1 Corinthians & 1 Peter demonstrate that there is no contradiction between what both men wrote in reference to those believers being babes/newborn babes fed with milk. This fits in with what John said about being born again, because when you are born again you start off as a baby again. That's my take on it anyway.

Just because John and Peter coined the phrase "born again", and Paul didn't mention it, doesn't mean that Church Age Christians are not born again. Those who teach such are called hyper-dispensationalists in my circles, they go overboard in their dividing of the Bible.

[jacqui2411]

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

Jacqui, I am a Grace Dispensationalist, sometimes called a "hyperdispensationalist", and it is being taught within the Grace Movement and there is a minor contention at this time in the Grace Movement, regarding "born again" applying to Israel only. If the New Birth is applied to Israel only I don't see what Paul's "new creatures" are. I believe we(Jew and Gentile today), as they(Israel) both need to be born again. I'm at odds with some of my Grace brethren on that topic, I'm at odds with my Grace brethren on several topics.

My belief and teaching is that the people Peter wrote to were the "strangers" of Acts Two and cross-refers there:

I Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

They are "strangers" becasue they are not within the physical commonwealth of Israel and are strangers in their birth or adopted homelands.

Paul wrote to Jewish churches as well as Gentile:

2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

There were Jews in the Roman church, the church at Corinth was primarily Jewish, and as discussed in another thread, I believe internal evidence of the Scriptures make it clear to me that Paul wrote Hebrews. As Paul claimed to be, a wise masterbuilder, if we let him be a wise masterbuilder, we can see he was involved in both churches stretching through 3 dispensations.

As a member of the Grace Movement, I do reject water baptism, tongues, signs, and wonders as doctrines for the Body of Christ today, but I am not so nit-picky as to reject the New Birth. I believe it is heresy to do so.

Grace and peace to you, welcome to the forum, and your testimony on the Scriptures with relation to the KJV has made waves and knocked teeth out in venues far removed from this forum. Great is thy faith sister, for He has dealt you a massive measure because you believed Him, not the world.

grace and peace.

Tony

Thanks Tony for your encouragement about my testimony and for explaining about the born again thing. I had never heard of a Christian not believing that we had to be born again and when I read this, I was shocked. I didn't understand that it was part of some sort of doctrinal dispute.

The things you miss when you keep to yourself. lol

Now to go look up that word hyperdispensationalist.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian

.....
A general rule when rightly dividing the scripture to understand Church Age doctrine, is to use Paul's writings to the church as a measuring stick, and where another writer contradicts Paul you stay with Paul. .....

This reminds me of Paul's words of rebuke to those who would say, "I am of Paul..." )1 Cor. 1:12

Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? (vs. 13).

This dispensationalism/hyperdispensationalism doctrine sounds very strange to those of us not indoctrinated into it. Some of us just read our Bibles as the straightforward Word of God.

Tony even rejects water baptism??

Shalom,

Tandi

[Brother Tim]

First off, I am not a dispensationalist in the common definition used, that is, separating out the Jews, the Church, etc., so that will place me at odds with a number of folks here.

I would be curious, however, to see how many dispensationalists here support the rejection of water baptism by believers today (the church). I will start a new thread on the topic. (since it is waay off topic here )

Originally Posted by chette777

If thee, thou or thine is used it is speaking to you as an individual.

If ye, or you it speaks to you as a group

i.e. John 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. Thee is speaking to the Individual Nicodemus and the Ye is speaking to all Israel. some say Ye is speaking to all men.

But do a word search and you only find the words born again spoken of concerning Israel it is found only in the books of those who taught Israel the Gospel of Grace. Paul never taught that we were born again in any of his writings and the closest he would have come was Ga 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now. we the body of Christ do become new creatures in Christ. And though we may have been born with a dead spirit we were brought to life by Christ's Blood and resurrected life, not by being born again. I am not making any kind of doctrine against using the term born again I only am pointing it out it was never used by Paul consernig the body of Christ

Get the booklet Bible companion by Chick Publication it has a simple explanation in it.

Like others here, I'm not sure what you're getting at.
It's very confusing to suggest that the term "born again" applies only to Israel and with all due respect, I consider that nonsense. The term "born again" applies to every person walking the earth today and most certainly to the body of Christ.

Jesus didn't say:
"Except a JEW be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

NO, Jesus said:
"Except a MAN be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

Furthermore, the context of Christ's comments in this same chapter on being "born again" are global in nature, not Israel-specific. Notice the terms in caps for emphasis:

15 That WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the WORLD to condemn the WORLD; but that the WORLD through him might be saved.

Being BORN AGAIN is a requirement, (John 3:7) it's a flesh vs. Spirit issue (John 3:6) not a Hebrew restricted issue.

1 Peter 1:23
Being BORN AGAIN, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1 John 5:1
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is BORN OF GOD: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

1 John 5:4
For whatsoever is BORN OF GOD overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by jacqui2411

Thanks Tony for your encouragement about my testimony and for explaining about the born again thing. I had never heard of a Christian not believing that we had to be born again and when I read this, I was shocked. I didn't understand that it was part of some sort of doctrinal dispute.

The things you miss when you keep to yourself. lol

Now to go look up that word hyperdispensationalist.

Jacqui, this website is one of the few I frequent within the grace movement. We are essentially fundamentalist independent Baptists who do not practice water baptism. We are more or less the same as any other fundamentalist group, while many speak of the "five" fundamentals, we put emphasis on the thousands of fundamentals.

Yes, sister, it is a doctrinal dispute, one I don't contend with friends and family in Christ, such as this forum.

Go forth and bear much fruit sister.

Grace and peace

Tony

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

Jacqui, this website is one of the few I frequent within the grace movement. We are essentially fundamentalist independent Baptists who do not practice water baptism. We are more or less the same as any other fundamentalist group, while many speak of the "five" fundamentals, we put emphasis on the thousands of fundamentals.

Yes, sister, it is a doctrinal dispute, one I don't contend with friends and family in Christ, such as this forum.

Go forth and bear much fruit sister.

Grace and peace

Tony

Sorry, Jacqui, I meant there is no doctrinal dispute in this forum with the New Birth, I meant the different flavor of fundamentalist I am in contrast to the majority

Grace and peace.

Tony

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian

Also, Paul did refer to those Corinthians as "babes" in 1 Cor 3:1:

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

This compliments what Peter said to those believers in 1 Peter 2:2 "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:"

A general rule when rightly dividing the scripture to understand Church Age doctrine, is to use Paul's writings to the church as a measuring stick, and where another writer contradicts Paul you stay with Paul. The above examples from 1 Corinthians & 1 Peter demonstrate that there is no contradiction between what both men wrote in reference to those believers being babes/newborn babes fed with milk. This fits in with what John said about being born again, because when you are born again you start off as a baby again. That's my take on it anyway.

Just because John and Peter coined the phrase "born again", and Paul didn't mention it, doesn't mean that Church Age Christians are not born again. Those who teach such are called hyper-dispensationalists in my circles, they go overboard in their dividing of the Bible.

Matt, I have found in my experience that when person A accuses person B of being a "hyerdispensationalist" it nearly always means that person B is just more dispensational than person A. I came from the Campbellites and they have 2 dispensations: The OT and NT, I have been very receptive to the dispensational teachings as it resolves ALL my questions I had, and other than a few mysteries personal to me that are of no real serious consequence. there Bible harmonizes perfectly, and I have made a few little discoveries of my own, one being that not only do we have to rightly divide the Scriptures as a whole, we have to rightly divide Paul as to times past, but now, ages to come.

Grace and peace brother.

Tony