P
you conclude the conversation is just about birth but it is about seeing and entering the kingdom of God.....you like Nicodemus miss the point.... there is no reference to natural birth by Jesus concerning born again. The moment someone says born again it is obvious they understand you are born already. Nicodemus thought he was speaking about another natural birth that is why he ask the question...
How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
and
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God!
He explains ...this is the birth I am speaking about...Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God!
Then he goes on to show the difference between what he was talking about and what Nicodemus was talking about
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
and
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God!
He explains ...this is the birth I am speaking about...Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God!
Then he goes on to show the difference between what he was talking about and what Nicodemus was talking about
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
newbirth, here is something for you to explain.
We should also not lose sight of the fact that when Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus, the ordinance of Christian baptism was not yet in effect. This important inconsistency in interpreting Scripture is seen when one asks those who believe "water baptism is required for salvation (newbirth)
why the thief on the cross did not need to be baptized to be saved.
A common reply to that question is: “The thief on the cross was still under the Old Covenant and therefore not subject to this baptism. He was saved just like anyone else under the Old Covenant.”
So, in essence, the same people who say the thief did not need to be baptized because he was “under the Old Covenant” will use John 3:5 as “proof” that baptism is necessary for salvation.
They insist that Jesus is telling Nicodemus that he must be baptized to be saved, even though he too was under the Old Covenant.
If the thief on the cross was saved without being baptized (because he was under the Old Covenant),
why would Jesus tell Nicodemus (who was also under the Old Covenant) that he needed to be baptized?
Something to Think about , newbirth