A certain religious fellow by the name of Jan Wilbourn said to me regarding the post I did on the new birth:
“God Rightly Divide's how the term " born again " was to be used and God used this term to Israel! God used the term " regeneration " with the church the body of Christ and we go by the way God Rightly Divides!”
“God wrote one term to Israel " born again " and another term " regeneration " to the Church the Body of Christ.”
“The word " regeneration " comes from the Greek word " palingenesia " translated twice " regeneration " nothing about birth????? The greek word " palingenesia " comes from another Greek word "palin " which is translated " again " (142x). [ nothing about birth ]
Probably from the same as πάλη (G3823) (through the idea of oscillatory repetition) which is the Greek word " palē " which is translated " wrestle (1x). [ nothing about birth ? ] And all of these Greek words come from the root Greek word " ballō " which is translated : cast (86x), put (13x), thrust (5x), cast out (4x), lay (3x), lie (2x), miscellaneous (12x). [ nothing about birth ]
If you have noticed NONE of the translated work from the inspired Greek translators of the KING JAMES use " birth " in connection to this word!”
And also he added…
“Regeneration " is not " generation? " You cannot see that they are even spelled different? These are two different words! Eli, you have a computer or phone because you are on here? Go to Blue Letter Bible and use the [ tools ] to look up words and how the King James translators translated the words and how they differ. Be honest do you see the difference in the two words above? " Re " and no " Re " in the words above? STUDY! Words that are spelled different are different?”
Now as I said in the post on new birth, there are certain people who try to police the terminology new birth, born after the Spirit, etc. because their religion tells them that it is the same thing as Israel being born again as a nation at the Second Coming (Isa. 66:8). This is a religious tradition and not scripture, for Paul wrote to the Body of Christ that they were “born after the Spirit” and had received the washing of “regeneration” and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Gal. 4:29; Titus 3:5).
My post acknowledged and shared many scriptures on the distinction between Israel being born again at the Second Coming and the new birth of the believer in the Body of Christ. But just as I said in my post on the new birth, people would try to make this an issue of whether you are rightly dividing the word of truth or not. That is not the issue. Jan Wilbourn wants to make it sound like if you believe the members of the Body of Christ experience a new birth upon salvation then you are not rightly dividing the word of truth. That is because his religious denominational mentality dictates that we not question his assumptions (that Israel is the only one that experiences a new birth) and if anyone does question his religious beliefs then he gets mad, accuses you of not rightly dividing, and says not to use that phrase (“born again”).
Mr. Wilbourn reminds me of the very religious Jews in Acts chapter 22 that got so offended at Paul’s use of one word.
Acts 22:
[21] And he said unto me, Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles.
[22] And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live.
Religious people hate for you to question their traditions. Bible believers encourage others to search the scriptures and check to see if what they are saying is true (Acts 17:11) and “prove all things” (1 Thes. 5:21). Jan Wilbourn does not like for people to question his religious traditions that make the word of God of none effect (Mark 7:13). In fact, though Jan Wilbourn professes to be a King James Bible believer, he said above that “regeneration” does not really refer to a new generating (birth) because his Blue Letter Bible app tells him that the same Greek word can be translated other ways. He would never admit to this, but in essence he thinks it is okay to change Titus 3:5 to a different word because the KJB translators translated it differently in other places. The reason he wants to say “regeneration” does not really mean generating again is because it disagrees with his religious system. He wants to change the word of God to (in the name of the KJB translators, how pious!) fit his theology just like all the Bible perverting Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodist, Campbellites, and JWs. The Grace Movement is supposed to be opposed to religious tradition and denominationalism, but Jan Wilbourn is still very much in bed with them. As for his claim that the root Greek word is not associated with a birth or generation, he points out that it is translated as “cast forth”, “cast”, “thrust”, etc. Is not a baby cast out of the mother’s womb? Thrust out? Born. I believe that the KJB translators use of “regeneration” is accurate and is the word God put in His book.
Jan Wilbourn and I have been to the same Bible conferences and probably agree with each other on almost everything dispensationally (Mid Acts Dispensationalism). Yet because I said at the end of my post that the Body of Christ does experience a new birth, he deleted me from his online “Rightly Dividing Explained” forum and got very offended (I have the correspondence saved if anyone would like proof).
But as for the issue at hand. Paul said that we are “born after the Spirit”…
Galatians 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
Everyone on Earth has been born at least once (obviously)
#1 physical birth
And per the apostle Paul, believers are “born after the Spirit”.
#2 spiritual birth
Therefore, despite all of Jan Wilbourn’s Strong’s concordance Blue Letter Bible perverting smokescreen, the Body of Christ does experience a new birth. A second birth. Therefore we are born “again”. The word “again” means “a second time”. So if you have been physically born and then get saved and are “born after the Spirit” then you have been “born again”.
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Now as for “regeneration” the scriptures are clear. A “generation” is a birth (Gen. 10:1, 17:12; Matt. 1:1, etc). So a “RE”generation would be a new birth. I am sure Jan Wilbourn would agree that a refill of water is a second cup of water, a rerun is a second airing of a show, a rewrite is a second writing, etc. But because Jan Wilbourn’s religious tradition does not allow him to believe that the Body of Christ experiences a second birth, he has trouble figuring out what “re” and “generation” mean when put together and tries to change the word of God to fit his religion.
Also, Jan Wilbourn made the statement that “born again” is for Israel and “regeneration” is for the Body of Christ. He seemed to be ignoring Matthew 19.
Matthew 19:
[28] And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
[29] And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
As I pointed out in the post on being born again, Israel’s regeneration at the Second Coming is different than a member of the Body of Christ being regenerated upon salvation. My point here is not that they are the same, only that the words “regeneration” and “born” are used of both groups (yet to describe different things).
Like I said in the previous post on being born again, John 3 was not written to the Body of Christ. What I have said is that the Body of Christ is born a second time (spiritually) based on Titus 3:5 and Galatians 4:29. It is okay for both Israel and the Body of Christ to have a spiritual birth. Just like they both have their own rapture/resurrection, destination, salvation, etc. There is no reason to be afraid of the term “born” as if it will make you no longer a dispensationalist “rightly dividing the word of truth”.
I would challenge Jan Wilbourn to demonstrate from the King James Bible, without changing the words because of the “Greek” he learned from Blue Letter Bible app, that “regeneration” does not mean a new generating. Or can he prove that somehow being “born after the Spirit” is not a new birth or being born “a second time”? Also, can he show what is the danger of both terms being applied to Israel and the Body of Christ? Because the Bible uses “resurrection” for both groups, “saved” for both groups, etc. and it causes no confusion as long as you rightly divide the word of truth.
