Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea (Post 709625)

Obviously, Keith you have retained the Water and Spirit message ... even now ... which I believes still hinders your view of the entire Body of Christ ...

After reading your statement I can only infer that somehow only those who have gone through the birth process properly are the MOST HEALTHY...

Are you suggesting a person filled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit ... but has not been "unified w/ Christ" through a properly administered baptism, is not dressed with all of Christ????

I am all for making a parallel with natural birth when we speak of our spiritual birth ... Christ did ....but since when is the baby the catalyst ...? Where does God call us mid-wives?

Max Lucado makes a great point when he says:

Born again. Birth, by definition, is a passive act. The enwombed child contributes nothing to the delivery. Postpartum celebrations applaud the work of the mother. No one lionizes the infant. (“Great work there, little one.”) No, give the tyke a pacifier not a medal. Mom deserves the gold. She exerts the effort. She pushes, agonizes, and delivers.

When my niece bore her first child, she invited her brother and mother to stand in the delivery room. After witnessing three hours of pushing, when the baby finally crowned, my nephew turned to his mom and said, “I’m sorry for every time I talked back to you.”

The mother pays the price of birth. She doesn’t enlist the child’s assistance or solicit his or her advice. Why would she? The baby can’t even take a breath without umbilical help, much less navigate a path into new life. Nor, Jesus is saying, can we. Spiritual rebirthing requires a capable parent, not an able infant.


Who is this parent? Check the strategically selected word again. The Greek language offers two choices for again:

• 1. Palin, which means a repetition of an act; to redo what was done earlier

• 2. Anothen, which also depicts a repeated action, but requires the original source to repeat it. It means “from above, from a higher place, things which come from heaven or God.” In other words, the one who did the work the first time does it again. This is the word Jesus chose.

The difference between the two terms is the difference between a painting by da Vinci and one by me. Suppose you and I are standing in the Louvre, admiring the famous Mona Lisa. Inspired by the work, I produce an easel and canvas and announce, “I’m going to paint this beautiful portrait again.”

And I do! Right there in the Salle des Etats, I brandish my palette and flurry my brush and re-create the Mona Lisa. Alas, Lucado is no Leonardo. Ms. Lisa has a Picassoesque imbalance to her—crooked nose and one eye higher than the other. Technically, however, I keep my pledge and paint the Mona Lisa again.

Jesus means something else. He employs the second Greek term, calling for the action of the original source. He uses the word anothen, which, if honored in the Paris gallery, would require da Vinci’s presence. Anothen excludes:

• Latter-day replicas.

• Second-generation attempts.

• Well-meaning imitations.

He who did it first must do it again. The original creator recreates his creation. This is the act that Jesus describes.

• Born: God exerts the effort.

• Again: God restores the beauty.

We don’t try again. We need, not the muscle of self, but a miracle of God.

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith (Post 709641)

Repentance (to TURN again), faith (trust that leads to obedience) baptism (immersion in water) and the reception of the life of the Spirit is the biblical language, for that I commit myself to and that I try and teach.
.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea (Post 709587)

Absolutely ... as this prisoners have.... but again ... it is a baptism that identifies with the person of Jesus Christ .... calling upon the name of the Lord ... an idiom for placing faith in Him ...

Lives submitted to Christ ... will be baptized ... and follow ALL OF HIS COMMANDMENTS, LIZ but to make this transformation as being caused by a properly administered baptism ... as you are obviously suggesting .... is a slap in the face of scores of prisoners who have had their lives TOTALLY TRANSFORMED by the power of God's Spirit and have not had the same baptismal experience as you, Liz.

Your suggestion to Margie that somehow they've had a nice experience but don't have all God has for them ... is based only on your perception ... and not the obvious, VISIBLE testimony of their own lives.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea (Post 709644)

Most of Christianity agrees with you, Keith ... it's the assertion being made that somehow there is a spiritual defectiveness if it doesn't look the way we interpret Scripture .....in the life of a BLOOD-BOUGHT, SPRIRIT FILLED, SON OF GOD.

Born of God ... means just that ... born of Him. It's not inferior from one believer to another.

This is how you and Liz are articulating it ... initially.

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea (Post 709644)

Most of Christianity agrees with you, Keith ... it's the assertion being made that somehow there is a spiritual defectiveness if it doesn't look the way we interpret Scripture .....in the life of a BLOOD-BOUGHT, SPRIRIT FILLED, SON OF GOD.

Born of God ... means just that ... born of Him. It's not inferior from one believer to another.

This is how you and Liz are articulating it ... initially.

Originally Posted by revrandy (Post 709659)

There is a question of Doctrine... but it's probably not important... :)

Originally Posted by Elizabeth (Post 709654)

Yes I do think a properly adminstered baptism could absolutely make a difference.

If did not matter how a baptism was adminstered then why would have Paul
rebaptized the believers in Acts. 19

Daniel you are injecting things into this conversation that are not entirely true. I am sure what Margie is saying is true, but we have men out of prison are some are still struggling. -Lets be true to the word of God, not necessarily my experience in baptism as you put.

But you can not take my experience away from me Daniel. I have been clean and sober for 25 yrs! I been to other churches had other baptisms-but nothing like Acts 2:38. Sorry I am going to tell my testimony over and over again! Guess what, we will baptize someone again on Sunday-in a way that you do not seem to agree with anymore, Daniel.


Ok, what is confusing me as an admin and a poster is why are we having to defend Jesus Name baptism on this forum? This should be a given.

As far as 'slapping' other prisoners in face as you put it--you are looking at the wrong way entirely. Baptism in Jesus name does not take away from what a person already has but adds to it.

Originally Posted by Elizabeth (Post 709663)

Randy do you think we realy think that?