[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

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.

Surely you don't believe that I adhere to full salvation or the New Birth to be a product or fruit of our efforts.

There is conception, there is delievery there is evidence of birth. I know I was there for all 3 events in my son's life. Any analogy breaks down at some point, but it is clear that we must recapture Biblical language and refute unbiblical language etc. Sinners prayer, decision for Christ are unbiblical words and have no place in this intiation. Repentance (to think 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.

I don't undermine what God has done in other denoms, I don't believe it to be a all or nothing sum game.

I validate and appreciate those powerful encounters that those with a lesser experience have had, all I know is that whenever the Apostle encountered someone or someone who had some faith experience there was a inquiry to see what their experience was, and if there was something lacking then that was addressed.

I also don't address who is or isn't in the body of Christ. I just know there to be a normative intiation, that is what I contend for. I don't want to be an apologist for those who seek something else.