KFC POSTS:

True, the word "Limbo" itself is not found in Scripture just as the word "Trinity" itself isn't there.

So, just as the Church expounded the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity,  a term not found in Scripture, the Church defined the doctrine of the Limbo of the Just, as a place, a state or abode in which are detained the souls that have not obtained the happiness of heaven and beatific vision of God. While the actual term Limbo isn't found, the doctrine of Limbo is taught in Scripture.

In the first Creed, not found in Scripture, but given to us by the Apostles, Catholics profess, "He (Christ) descended into Hades, (Hell), the third day He rose again from the dead" Our Lord descend into this place to liberate the Just souls.  St. Peter taught...that Christ after His death went down to the souls that were in prison to announce their redemption. 1St.Peter 3:19; Acts 2:24; 31. Who were these souls? Now we come to understanding Abraham's bosom.

Just as you said, Abraham's bosom is a Jewish idiom that signifies Paradise. It's a place where departed souls of the Just of the OT, from Adam to the thief on the cross, go after death. Some exegetes understand Abraham's bosom in the sense that Abraham received Lazurus as a loving father would take his small son upon his lap or hold him close to him to his heart. Others say Lazurus received a place of honor at the banquet reclining at the right hand of Abraham, St.John 13:23. Jesus Himself frequesntly refers to the Limbo of the Fathers where the Just were detained until Ascension Day under the figure of a banquet or of a marriage feast St. Matt. 8:11; 25:10. He also calls it Abraham's bosom in His parable of Lazurus and Dives, the rich man, where after Lazurus died, his reward "was carried away by angels into Abraham's bosom."  

The deliverance of the Just was predicted by Osee 13:14, "O death, I will be thy death; Oh hell, I will be thy bite; and Zacharais 9:11, "thou also by the blood of the testament has sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water." And also the same was expressed by St.Paul, Despoiling the principalities and powers, he hath exposed them condifently in open show, triumphing over them in himself." Col. 2:15.  

The Limbo of the Just souls of children also existed in the OT. Those who died in Original SIn and without personal sin were gathered there. Unlike the Just who had died in the state of grace and were waiting the Redeemer, these souls had not been been born into the life of grace. This place is also called "Limbo of the regenerate." Based upon St.Paul's Rom. 3:25, St.Thomas taught that children who died with Original Sin were no sharers in the faith in Christ. Therefore they didn't receive the fruits of Christ propriation, so as to be delivered.  St.Thomas holds that while the children not being born of water and the Spirit and cannot enter Heaven, they do enjoy happiness being united to God by a knowledge and love proportionate to their capacity.

No it's not the same.   True the word Trinity isn't used but not only is the principal found all thru scripture you can see that all three are not only named but are referred to as God.  Limbo just isn't there......unless you want to say Limbo and Paradise are the same.  If so, I guess the question begged to be answered is why is it called "limbo" and not Paradise?  Also, if Limbo is Paradise and using the scriptures you did give above, why would the RCC still say there's others going to Limbo AFTER Christ opened the door and set the captives free? 

There are diff words for hell.   Gehenna is the real genuine hell. No one is there yet.   Hades is a waiting place for unbelievers until the day of judgment.  It's sort of like going to the county jail awaiting trial.  Separated by a great gulf was Paradise where the believers or the just went.  That compartment is now empty because what you mentioned about the creed was that Christ set them free....the unbelievers are still in Hades ( not Gehenna). 

So Christ did NOT descend into hell (hades) but into Paradise like he said he would.  I think the confusion is the two compartments were  near each other with that gulf between them.  See Luke 16. 

when the term "bosom" is used it usually means "intimate; heart to heart."  So I'd agree with those you say have exegeted this passage.   Here's another found in John 1:

"No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him."

you've said this twice now with no prooftext.  I already asked you in my last posting if you could show me where.  I'd be most interested in which scripture you're referring to.  Are you saying Zech 9:11?  The pit?  Cuz that's not limbo. The pit where there is no water were cisterns used as dungeons during the babylonian captivity. 

Huh?  Thomas taught this?  Where?  Can you show me this using scripture?  Or do you have to go outside of scripture to prove this? 

Yes.  Sorry about the lack of reading comprehension.....think I read it too fast after reading the sentence before it. 

euphemism or ???

Yes, I understand that Abraham's bosom, Paradise and Limbo are the same place.  

I think the short answer is becasue we have different epochs of salvation history. Salvation came about one way before Christ and a different way after Christ's Death, Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven.

The Apostle's Creed is a statement of truths the Apostle's believed and the Creed states, "He (Christ) descended into Hell"...

We agree "Hell" here does not mean the place where the damned are, but a place come to be known as Abraham's Bosom or Paradise, as you say separated by a great, impassable gulf...in the parable of Lazurus and Dives, Lazurus went to Abraham's bosom and Dives (gulp) went to Hell, (so Hell existed and he was at least one of those who God condemned there, KFC.)

You know that when our first parents committed Original Sin, death came into the world, Heaven was closed against them and us, (all their prosperity) and no human could be admitted into Heaven till after the death of Our Lord for by His death He redeemed the world and by His resurrection from the dead, would once more open the Gates of Heaven.

During the time that Adam sinned and Christ, 4,000 years, some good people, like Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob, David, and others, who tried to serve God by keeping the divine laws known to them and believing the Messias would some day come to redeem them. When they died, they couldn't go to Heaven, becasue it was closed....and not to Hell becasue they died in a state of goodness and not to Purgatory becasue they would have to suffer there for a while. Where would they go?

God in His goodness provided a place called Abraham's bosom, Paradise, Limbo...where they would stay in happiness and peace until Our Lord reopened Heaven. So, while Our Lord's Body lay in the tomb, His soul "descended into Hell" to tell them that at His ascension He would take them into Heaven with Him. 

While hanging on the Cross, Our Lord promised the pentitent Thief "This day you will be with Me in Paradise." The thief's soul did not go into Heaven until Our Lord's Ascension but rather to the place where the Just awaited there release. By Our Lord's descent on the day  He died, that portion of Hell was turned into Paradise. In 258, Saint Cyprian wrote, "He went like a great King who delivers His subjects from a prison where they have been kept in durance."

It all boils down to Original Sin. Since Adam's sin, every person born, save the Blessed Virgin Mary, Immaculately conceived without Original comes into this world with the guilt of OS.  The major effect of OS is the deprivation of sanctifying grace. St.Paul explains in Rom. 5:12 that we are all sinners and have incurred the penalty of death.  

With OS, we inherit our fallen human nature from Adam. The Council of Trent taught ex cathedra that no one is innocent by nature, that it's necessary that we recognize and confess that all lost their innocence in the prevarication of Adam, Rom. 5:12; 1Cor.15:22, having become unclean, Is. 64:6, and as by nature children of wrath. Eph. 2:3.

The Church teaches that every one  must be cleansed from this state of Original Sin, which makes one a child of the wrath. OS must be wiped away so that the soul that was spiritually dead can come to life. OS is removed by the laver of regeneration, and in the NT according to Christ's own words, it is by Baptism alone, that puts one of the path to Heaven. "Unless a man be brn again of water and the Holy Spirit, he shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven." St. John 3:5.

It follows then that infants are to be baptised since OS falls on all and must be expiated by the laver of regeneration. This leads to the question of where do the souls of the unbaptized children go...and as far as the Catholic faith is concerned, it is that unbaptized souls do not go to Heaven. But yet, these babies have not the use of reason cannot commit actual sin and therefore can't be punished with the torments of Hell, yet OS deprives them of the Beatific Vision which is only enjoyed by the Blessed souls in Heaven.

According to the Chruch, the souls of the unbaptized, preborn or born babies,  go to a place, Limbo, where they are in a state of perfect natural happiness without any suffering, etc.

The debate that's going on in the Church over Limbo is more focused on whether this state of happiness is like that perfect state of Adam and Eve before the Fall.  

St.Thomas' teachings come from his masterpiece, Summa Theologica.

My 281 post gives the Scripture behind it.  

if that's the case (are you sure?) then I have no problem other than the fact they should call Limbo...Paradise...as it says in scripture.  There's really no limbo really.  They were in good hands and just awaiting the redemption to be finished.  That's why when Christ said "it is finished" he meant the payment was given for the souls of the redeemed. 

There is no difference before the cross or after the cross.  Salvation IS the cross whether you're looking ahead or behind (like we are).  There is salvation in no other name it says in scripture.   Salvation is in Christ alone whether looking ahead or behind.  They either looked forward to the promise of the Messiah or backwards like we do.  We see that very clearly right in Genesis when it says that Abraham was declared "righteous" (saved) because of his belief in the coming Messiah. 

Did you know that Christ (Christos)  means oil?  Maybe that's where we get "Crisco" from?  It means "annointed oil." 

 So when King David was annointed with oil in the OT he was in effect "Messiahed?"  Oil on the head in the OT symbolized God's annointing on him.   The whole annointing in the OT was a picture of the one who would someday come and be THE genuine "annointed one."  He would come filled with God's spirit.  Unlike David who was annointed physically Christ came filled without measure. 

How do you know this?  Were you there?  There's no scripture on this at all.  All we know is that he went to Paradise with Christ by day's end.  We know Christ set the captives free.  We can assume he did it right then or we can assume he did it when Christ ascended 40 days later.  I'm not sure how we can know for sure.  Maybe Christ went to Paradise, visited with all the spirits (saints) that had died previously, and set them free right then and then descended back into his body?  That's what makes sense in my mind, but I can't know for sure because I'm going outside of scripture. 

Where are you getting this?  We see BEFORE Christ died that Abraham and Lazarus were in a different spot than the rich man was.  There was already a separation.  One side was Paradise, and the other Hades.   So nothing was turned into Paradise AFTER Christ died.  It was already there.  ????

Why would that "portion" of hell (Hades)  be turned into Paradise if afterwards "absent from the body is present with the Lord?"  There is no need of a waiting room anymore.  We go straight to God in heaven because the price has been paid. 

lula posts 171

As an addendum to our discussion, pgs.5,6 and 7, about condom education and AIDS, I offer the latest coming out of Africa where there has been an explosion of AIDS even though we've (through the UN) been pumping loads of money, condom education and condoms to these African people.

Ugandan doctor links African AIDS epidemic to Western sexual values 

Kampala, Uganda, April 1 (CNA).-Each day more scientists, researchers and doctors are voicing their support for Pope Benedict XVI's statement that condoms are not decreasing the spread of AIDS in Africa. Dr. Filippo Ciantia, a Ugandan doctor who specializes in tropical medicine, told CNA that, "In every African country where there has been HIV prevalence decline, this has been preceded by decline in casual and multi-partner sex."

Ciantia worked in Northern Uganda from 1980-1989, the critical years where an unidentified virus, now known to be AIDS, began to spread. He described in a 2006 paper, "The Victory of Reason," what he had documented.

"I began to notice some young adults … [who] were severely wasted, with chronic diarrhea, skin rashes and fever. Others were affected by disseminated tuberculosis. I still recall that I hardly believed the results of the biopsy…we were faced with a new disease." The name given to this disease in Uganda was "Slim Disease," but after it was identified as HIV/AIDS, Dr. Ciantia related that "it was clear that there was no cure."

The Ugandan Government eventually realized that this new deadly disease could quickly "wipe away our country," he recalled.  In order to prevent its spread early on, the government produced the booklet, "Guidelines on Control of AIDS," which stressed the need for behavioral change instead of marketing condoms.

Regarding condoms, Ciantia clarified that he has found "limited or no direct evidence" that the societal promotion of condoms has contributed to "the reduction or slowing down of HIV in generalized epidemics."

In 1991, Ugandan President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni rejected "condom social marketing" and instead emphasized a behavioral change approach at an AIDS conference in Florence, Italy. He said, "…I have been emphasizing a return to our time-tested cultural practices, which emphasized fidelity and condemnation of pre-marital or extra-marital sex. Young people must be taught the virtues of abstinence, self control and postponement of pleasure and sometimes sacrifice..."

Museveni and others in the medical and social work community in Uganda urged this approach, which "led to an impressive mobilization of the entire society, single persons, groups, the Church and other religious organizations and associations," said Dr. Ciantia.

The "epic of the people of Uganda," as Ciantia called it, awakened "people to discover the full dignity and value of human life and love." Though difficult at times, it was through the virtue of hope and the support of friends and family that behavioral change was able to occur, he said.

The three behavioral changes encouraged by the Ugandan plan--known as the ABC behaviors--are: abstinence, faithfulness and lastly, condom use by casual partners. Out of these three changes, Ciantia reported that the behavioral change that made the greatest impact appears to be "faithfulness or partner reduction behaviors by Ugandan men and women, whose reported casual sex encounters declined by well over 50 percent between 1989 and 1995."

Overall, the result of this approach has been the dramatic reduction of HIV/AIDS in the adult population from about 18% in the late 1980s to 6.4 % in 2005.

Dr. Ciantia explained that there are three major lessons we can learn from Uganda.  First of all, we see that development occurs when the people are the subject of change.  It cannot be accomplished by just handing over "technical or scientific tools," there needs to be a real involvement of the persons and communities.

We can also learn that fighting HIV/AIDS needs to be based on evidence and proper verification of facts. The evidence shows that the "Ugandan experience provides, in the time of the evidence-based medicine, an African lesson to the whole world," the tropical medicine specialist said.

Finally, we see that the solution must focus on the human person and her/his responsibility and not just a general addressing the "masses" approach, Dr. Ciantia emphasized.

The opposition to these lessons "is really ideological," he charged, pointing out that "we are facing smoking and alcoholism with strong primary behavior campaign[s] and seriously limiting personal choices (for a public and personal health benefit). But sexual behavior cannot be touched! This is real Western taboo."

He closed by noting that the Holy Father "has been realistic, reasonable and evidence-based. All criticize him, but actual empirical [data] support his position."

Dr. Ciantia has also published a letter along with several African colleagues further detailing the evidence for their postion. It can be read at http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=810

Lula you said this: 

I replied with this:

and you give me this? 

That's it?  Not good enough Lula.  You made a claim but have not backed it up with scripture.  Your post 281 does NOT give the scripture behind what you said Thomas taught.  If you know the truth, a lie stands out straight and bold when it comes up.  I immediately recognized what you said as a lie because it's so contrary to the WHOLE of scripture.   In fact, it's very foreign like reading another language. 

I'm glad you qualified this with "according to the church."  This is NOT in scripture.  Remember David and Bathsheba's baby?  He did not go to Limbo.  Neither was he baptized.  He was Jewish afterall.  This is where your RCC church and scripture contradict each other and why people get so confused.  The bible says plainly..."absent from the body is present with the Lord."  2 Cor 5:8.  (just like the unbaptized thief on the cross).  Can you show me in scripture where babies go into limbo? 

I'm going to skip all the other stuff you said about baptism because we've been down that route before. 

Most of your posting in #281 which you know I don't buy into so I'll leave it at that. 

Kfc #283

Yes, we are in full agreement. 

To be more clear, by different epochs of salvation history and salvation coming about one way before Christ and a different way after Christ, I was referring to the two Covenants of God...the one before Christ was with Abraham...circumcision then was instituted by God as a religious rite and as a sacred sign (sacrament) of admission among the people of God. According to its deeper meaning, it pointed backward to our fallen nature (which I've already mentioned) and vitiated origin of life.... and salvation forward after Christ, comes to us through the New Covenant of Grace, and new birth through Christ....instead of circumcision, it's the sacrament of Baptism instituted by Christ as a religious rite and a sacred sign of admission among the new people of God.

God told Abraham what it would take to get into the Kingdom of Heaven, and Our Lord Jesus Christ told us what it would take to get into Heaven...saying,  "Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God....and when asked how this would be done, Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven." St.John 3:3,5

Well, if Jesus meant what He said, and Catholics believe Him literally, then unbaptized babies who die do not see or go directly to Heaven....they go to a place God created that you know as Paradise and I know as Limbo.

All of St.Thomas' teachings on the place called Limbo are based on Scripture and when teaching on the part of the Apostle's Creed which states that Christ, "descended into Hell"...St.Thomas writes:

"As soon as He died , the soul of Christ descended into hell. The hell of which we speak here is limbo, the place in which the souls of the just were awaiting deliverance. He hastened to limbo to announce to the just the reopening of the gates of Heaven. Through His Passion, He had made it possible for them to find glory in the vision of God. He did not descend into Hell of the devils and the lost human souls. There was nothing He could do for them. By their own free decision, they had cut themselves off from God forever. Only those united to Himself in faith and charity could obtain the benefits of His Passion."

"But Sacred Scripture seems to insinuate that both the demons and the souls of men are assigned by God to particular places: to Heaven, Hell, Purgatory or Limbo. Since the fate of the angels and men differs according to their merits or demerits, it seems fitting that God would assign different places in which angels and men will be rewarded or punished. The souls of the Just go to Heaven to be rewarded; the souls of the damned go to Hell to be punished; the souls of those who die in grace but are not yet ready for heaven go to an intermediate place called Purgatory where they will be purified or cleansed for Heaven; and the souls of infants who die without Baptism...will be sent to a place of purely natural happiness called Limbo."     

With respect, these were the fevered written inventions of mortal men.  Religion and politics being de facto fused at the time of their writing, there were political reasons for these constructs.  Sacred Scripture can apparently be subject to 'insinuation' or 'literal interpretation' depending on the subject of discussion.

I choose to believe that God, should he exist, accepts all creation, if made by his hand, into the heavenly afterlife, should there be one.  That 'seems fitting' to me.

Indeed, and the discussions led by the subjects; the personal agendas of men take precedent over most else. (i.e. the First Council of Nicaea I/II, Constaninople I/II/II, Ephesus, and Chalcedon)

Precisely, you have your interpretation. Good points.

~Alderic

Mea culpa, I should have said the thief's soul did not go directly into Heaven...for he couldn't as the gates were still closed and and would be closed until Christ ascended into Heaven 40 days after His Resurrection from the dead. Acts 1.

No, smarty pants, I wasn't there, but I do read the whole of Scripture and like the Ethopian eunuch with Philip, have the Church to guide me in its correct meaning.

After his death, the soul of the Pentitent thief went directly to Abraham's bosom St.Luke 16, aka Paradise aka Limbo of the Just.  And we know that after dying on the Cross, Christ descended into hell, where according to St.Matt. 12:38-41 He was for 3 days and nights preaching to the captive spirits (souls) 1St.Peter 3:18-19, those souls would have been all the Just of the OT as well as the Pentitent thief.

We know from St.Matt. 12:40, that Christ, "the Son of man was in the heart of the earth three days and three nights" and Eph. 4:8-10 tells us the rest of the story.....that "when He ascended on high He led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men. In saying, "He ascended, what does it mean but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10He who descended is He who also ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things."

My previous post 289 addresses this; we don't have to assume anything KFC.

The souls in Abraham's bosom, Paradise or Limbo of the Just didn't go into Heaven before Christ...Whom Scripture tells us went 40 days after His Resurrection. Having received the Good News directly from Christ, they remained in Paradise during this time awaiting Christ's Ascension.

LULA POSTS:

I think the confusion is becasue there are lots of terms for Hell in Scripture.  

Yes, Abraham and Lazurus were in Abraham's bosom and the rich man, Dives, was in Hell, the place of the damned. Big separation...Big diff, as you would say.  

Abraham and Lazurus were in the place that Scripture also calls the abode of the dead, same place where Christ descended, called Hell, Sheol in Hebrew, or Hades in Greek. Separate place from the HELL of the damned. Lazurus was received into Abraham's bosom...St.Luke 16; also referred to in Ps. 88 (89):49; 1Kings (Sam.) 28:19;Ezek. 32:17-32. It is these souls who awaited Christ in Abraham's bosom who Christ delivered when He descended into Hell.

Abraham's bosom was turned into or became known as Paradise when Christ told the Pentitent thief today you will be in Paradise...Once Christ descended and preached the Gospel, 1St.Peter 4:6,  Abraham's bosom became Paradise as Christ had called it.

After studying this book for quite some time I am still continually amazed at what I find between the pages.  There is absolutely no way mere man could make this up.  No way.  Oh, there are people who try to rip apart the scriptures...happens all the time.  The trouble is, you need to read it yourself and make up your own mind.  The problem is, nobody reads anymore and can't seem to take the time to research the book for themselves.

My challenge:  Give the book one year of total study.  What's one year in comparison to all of eternity?  If you live to the average of 75 or so, what's one year? 

I saw my father in law a very "religious" man who had no use for the scriptures or any "God talk"  die in terror on his deathbed.  All those years of going to church and being a deacon but not living one day for Christ got him nowhere.  On his deathbed, all that mattered was, he was dying and he wasn't prepared for the trip.  He was scared out of his mind.  Deep down he knew exactly where he was headed.   But it was too late.  Take a year.  Investigate this yourself in a fair manner like you would any other work of antiquity.  See if it stands up. 

what if you're wrong?   What you just said totally contradicts  all of scripture and Christ's own words.   Have you ever been wrong before?  If I'm wrong...no biggie.  I go into a cold dark grave and sleep like all the rest of humanity.  But if I'm right, like God's word reveals to us, and which has withstood every test thrown at it, then I will be reunited with the God who created me out of love and mercy. 

our interpretation is coming from God's word directly....even if Lula and I disagree on some things we are in agreement on many essentials.  So my question to you is.....where is your interpretation coming from and can it be trusted?  Has it withstood the test of time?  Is there any chance of error? 

yes.......I agree with this.  But can't still shake that this is all Limbo means to the Catholics? 

there was NO church guiding the Eunuch.  It was Philip, the Eunuch, the Holy Spirit and scripture.  That's it.   Yes I would consider Philip part of the church but not the same way as you do I guess.  You're saying the RCC, correct? 

could be but not sure if I can or you can say for sure.  There's only one scripture I'm thinking about that could prove you right here.  I'll have to check it out. 

yes and don't forget Gehenna....because that's the real genuine HELL.  Hades (it's gotta be hell if you're sent there) is really only a waiting room for the convicted and awaiting trial. 

and yes......we are agreed!! 

I'm not even going to get into that scripture Lula but I don't think we're on the same page with it.  Yes, that's the first time that I can remember Paradise being used. 

KFC POSTS:

The scripture in post 281 is St.John 3:5 and the explanation is with it....

I further explain it in post 286.

God told Abraham what it would take to get into the Kingdom of Heaven, and Our Lord Jesus Christ told us what it would take to get into Heaven...saying,  "Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God....and when asked how this would be done, Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven." St.John 3:3,5

Well, if Jesus meant what He said, and Catholics believe Him literally, then unbaptized babies who die do not see or go directly to Heaven....they go to a place God created that you know as Paradise and I know as Limbo.

lula posts:

kfc posts:

Yes, it is according to Scripture...Our Lord told us what it would take for infants born with Original Sin to get into Heaven....unless they are born (given new spiritual life) of water and the Spirit (by being Baptized), they cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven. Read, meditate and study what Jesus is saying in St.John 3:3,5;

And in Acts 2:38, "But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized everry one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

And in Romans 6:1-6, "What shall we say, then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. For we that are dead to sin, how shall we live any longer therein? 3 Know you not, that all we, who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in His death? 4 For we are buried together with Him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we may also walk in newness of life."

And this is understandable becasue Catholic theology of Limbo of Infants and Children is tied to Original Sin and the Sacrament of Baptism, which we insist is necessary to salvation.

ok let's put that verse on the table: 

"Jesus answered: I tell you the truth no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit." 

You're ASSUMING because you've been taught that this water means "water baptism."  Makes no sense with the rest of scripture including Eph 2:8-9 (been over this before).  This has NOTHING to do with "water" baptism. 

Even Nicodemus said:  "How can a man be born (with water at birth) when he is old?  Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born." 

The water has to be something else.  That's why Nicodemus asked:

"how can this be?"  If it were as simple as water baptism then why would he ask that question? 

To be "born again" means born from above the second time.  The first time we are born physically, the second we are born spiritually.  Neither time did we do anything in the birthing process....that's what Nic was having a hard time with.  His training (see Christ's admonition about being a teacher) taught him that if we do certain things (like works ie.,water baptism) we can get into heaven.  Now Christ is saying to Nic that the birth comes from heaven and nowhere else. 

Jesus was asking for something that was humanly impossible (to be born again).  The only way to making entrance into the Kingdom was contingent on something that could not be obtained thru human effort.  If spiritual rebirth like physical rebirth was impossible from a human standpoint then where did that leave this Pharisee? 

Jesus said later "Children how hard it is to enter the Kingdom of God!"  (Mark 10). He said that because we can't enter by our own human effort.  Can't be done.   By calling him to be born again Jesus challenged this most religious Jew to admit his spiritual bankruptcy and abandon everything he was trusting in for salvation.  That is, precisely what Paul did.  He wrote about it in Philip 3:8-9 when he said this:

"More than that, I count all thngs to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the losss of all things and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ and may be found in Him not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law (works) but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God (Grace) on the basis of faith." 

As a Pharisee himself, Paul did all the right things he thought would gain him entrance.  He thought he was pretty high and mightly like all the other Pharisees. Thought he had his one way ticket.   Now he counts it all rubbish.  Christ was calling us away from religion and into a relationship with him. 

"born of water" has a number of diff interpretations.  Some see 2 births here, one natural and the other spiritual.  This view would interpret water as the amniotic fluid that flows from the womb just before childbirth.  But the phrase "born of water and the Spirit" parallels the phrase "born again" so only one birth is in view.  Some (like you) see the phrase born of water a reference to baptism but Nic would not have understood Christian baptism (which did not exist).  Nor would Jesus have refrained from baptizing people 4:2 if water baptism were necessary for salvation. 

Some see the phrase as a reference to Jewish ceremonial washings which being born of the Spirit transcends.  Since Jesus expected Nic to understand this truth (v10) it must have been something which he was familiar (not Christian baptism). 

Water and Spirit ofen refer symbolically in the OT to spiritual renewal and cleansing (Num 9:17-19, Isa 4:4; 32:15, 44:3, 55:1, Joel 2:28-29, Zech 13:1) A great passage in all of Scripture describing Israel's restoration to God by the New Covenant God said thru Ezek.....

"For I will take you from the nations, gather you from all the lands and bring you into your own land. (1948)  Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.  Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.  I will put My spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.  36:24-27

Notice who is doing the work?  I gave you hints

Surely this passage that Jesus had in mind showing regeneration (new birth) to be an OT truth which which Nic would have been acquainted.  His point was unmistakable.  Without the spiritual washing of the soul a cleansing accomplished ONLY by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5) thru the Word of God (Eph 5:26), no one can enter God's kingdom.  Has nothing to do with water baptism. 

Jesus further emphasized to Nic that this spiritual cleansing is wholly a work of God and not the result of human effort; "that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."  Just as only human nature can beget human nature so only the Holy Spirit can regenerate spiritually.  Even if a physical rebirth were possible it would produce only flesh.  Only the Spirit can produce the spiritual birth required for entrance into God's kingdom. 

Regeneration is entirely His work (as shown above) unaided by any human effort. 

You actually put forth a good verse when you put in Eph 4.  That was the one I was thinking about ( I think) but couldn't recall where exactly it was.  Good job. 

Another one (which we both agree to)  would be John 3:13......"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven, the Son of Man." 

Then, apparently, your God will be pleased.

not my God, maybe yours? 

"Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked shall die?  says the Lord God and not that he should return from his ways and live? 

"For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies says the Lord God; wherefore turn yoursleves (to God)  and live." 

Ezekiel 18

Lula posts:

LULA POSTS:

By these words, "Unless a man be born again"...Christ was declaring the necessity of Baptism. And by saying the word water, it is evident that Christ meant the application of it is necessary together with the words of St. Matt. 28:19. "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."

Sorry KFC..there is Scripture that refutes your claim...

We know water was involved by what we read in the command  "...Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name." Acts. 22:16. Further this command makes a clear connection between Baptism and salvation, as stated in 1St.Peter 3:20-211 "....ark was a building wherein a few, that is eight souls, were saved by water. 21 Whereupon Baptism being of the like form, now saves you also, not the putting away of dirt from the body but the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Christ."

"And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." 1Cor. 6:11, Three words here, washed, sanctified and justified sum up the effects of Baptism. In addition to erasing Original Sin and any personal sin, Baptism through the Holy Spirit gives us sanctifying grace and the infused virtues.

Titus 3:4-7, "but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 He saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, 6 which poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.

 St. Matt. 28:19, Acts. 22:16; 1St.Peter 3:20-21 and all the rest support St.John 3:5 in which Jesus Himself connects rebirth with water and the Holy Spirit. Water is the mode of Baptism, being regenerated or "born again" is the effect of Baptism.  

Actually, Nicodemus, a Pharisee and apparently a member of the Sanhedrin, was interested in and seemed open to Jesus' message and that's why, for fear of the Jews, this discourse was in secret at night.  

The Jews thought the kingdom of God was to be an earthly one, in which the Jews would reign supreme, but Nicodemus finds out it's a spritiual kingdom and mere blood descent from Abraham goes not give admission to it. For entering the kingdom of God, Jesus says one must be created anew, this spiritual birth being given by the Holy SPirit by means of water. Christ spoke to Nicodemus about man's new interior condition, new spiritual life..it is no longer about being born of the flesh, of the line of Abraham St.John 1:13, but of being reborn through the action of the Holy Spirit, by means of water.

 Christ taught Nicodemus one must be "born again" in a spiritual birth, through water and the Holy Spirit...words referring to the Sacrament of Baptism. After that, He instructed Nic on the mystery of the Redemption and a whole new world is opened up to him. This teaching was not thrown away on Nic becasue he we see later that he spoke in Christ's defense and when Jesus was taken down from the Cross, he helped in preparing the body for burial.

Anyone who has been baptized has been regenerated, been reborn. The mode of application of Baptism is a human effort in that the priest, minister or person immerses or pours water over the forehead of the person being Baptized while calling in the name of the Father, SOn and Holy Spirit, but the effect of grace upon the soul of the baptised person is by the Holy Spirit...so from this pov, I agree, it is entirely His work.

The teaching that Baptism does regenerate the soul, cleanse it from both Original and actual sin, and infuses into it the graces and gifts of the Holy SPirit was universal in the early Chruch as demonstrated in the writings of the Didache 69-70AD. It states the actual sacramental practice of Christians in the Apostolic age...there is just no denying what Baptism is, it's necessity and it's effect....rebirth...through water and the Holy Spirit.

Good job with the naysayers, KFC.