Angyson

George Lamsa, in a footnote to his translation of the Aramaic bible, explains away this idiomatic expression as meaning one must change one's thoughts and habits.

The evangelical movement worldwide is founded on the lie that this passage means a third form of baptism, namely : baptism by water, baptism by fire and baptism by joining their movement.

I am hoping someone with credibility comes along to expose these scoundrels for the fraudsters they really are.

spin

If you can't, then why do you believe someone else can?


spin

Amaleq13

It would be helpful if, in the future, you provided the specific biblical passage(s) you are addressing.

The 12th post (and a couple subsequent posts) from this thread argue that the phrase "born again" is a mistranslation of "born from above".

Peter Kirby

No, the Greek phrase carries both or either connotation ("from above" and "again").

best,
Peter Kirby

Amaleq13

So, rather than a "poor translation", the argument would be "an inaccurate choice of connotation"?

Perry5

Why does America need a president who needs to be born twice???

Peter Kirby

One could say that; however, I woudn't. The author must have known about the double meaning, and the expression has the most force understood as an intentional double entendre, which is how most scholars of John [proficient in Greek] see it (and find that the author of John has a liking to using words where both meanings fit). In any case, I don't know how such a person could argue and not just claim that it is inaccurate that the author had "again" in mind.

best,
Peter Kirby

Amaleq13

I agree that the author knew of the double meaning but he seems to me to make it clear that the "born again" understanding is incorrect in the depicted exchange with Nicodemus. While Nic takes it a step further by taking this meaning ridiculously literally, the contrast offered is with being "born of the Spirit". That, alone, would seem to suggest that the "from above" connotation is closer to what was intended by the author.

In addition to the contextual answer suggested above, the post I linked to offers another answer to your question, I think. The poster suggests that the "from above" connotation is supported by the author of the Gospel, elsewhere, where he has Jesus identify "himself ek ano-- 'from above' --whilst his critics are ek kato--'from below'."

spin

I don't really understand the logic here. Is it that when you are born, you are either born from above, ie born of the spirit, or you're not and you don't get a chance to change the situation, or is it that you do get a chance at the cherry by being born again, bringing a close to the old life and allowing yourself to be born of the spirit and become a spiritual being?

I don't see any problem with the verse. What have I missed out on?


spin

Peter Kirby

Amaleq13,

I will be looking at this verse more closely when I turn to the Gospel of John, chapter three, in the group discussion of John that I am leading. Why not join in?

Rick,

I am currently reading Grant R. Osborne's Hermeneutical Spiral (part of the NT recommended reading list at Ebla), which has some discussion, although I don't know if it is better than discussions elsewhere. I also Gordon D. Fee's New Testament Exegesis and Thiselton's New Horizons in Hermeneutics, which I will read in the future.

best,
Peter Kirby