Thanks for your consideration.
"You also mentioned John 3:5-6 regarding being "born of water and the Spirit." I agree that this is a key teaching about spiritual rebirth. However, it seems there might be a mixing of different concepts in your argument. The process of being born again is not simply about physical birth from a mother, as John 3:6 distinguishes between the "flesh" and the "spirit." Yeshua is clearly emphasizing the need for spiritual regeneration, not just natural birth."
3:5 - Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
"Except a man be born of water" -> if that never happened, you obviously have zero chance of the 2nd.
It is sown a natural, it is raise a body spiritual. (1st Adam to 2nd Adam ex)
If there is a natural, there is a spiritual -> We are to get into the latter Now, stage 2 of 3, beginning from Gen, finishing in 3.
(without branching into it, as it's a whole new subject, this sowing of the natural and what it means, is perhaps looking like, it was planned to be that way, before Gens ??)
--------------
"You quoted Titus 1:2, which speaks of God's promise of eternal life made "before time began." This is a profound statement about God's eternal purpose and plan. However, I don’t see how it negates the importance of correctly understanding Greek prepositions or the broader points we are discussing. Rather, it emphasizes that God's eternal purposes unfold through His Word, and understanding the precise meaning of that Word matters in grasping His plan fully."2 Tim 1:9 His OWN, singular purpose.
"unfold through His Word" EXACTLY -> 1 Peter 1:23 - having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,
John 3:6 - That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit (father) is spirit.
John 6:63 - It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak (fathers) to you are spirit, and they are life.
Born of the Spirit or of the word -> John 1:13 - who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Psa 2:7 - I will declare the decree: Yehowah has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.
Matt 3:16,17 - And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.Mark 1:1 The beginning of the goodnews =(Flesh) of Jesus Christ, the Son of God
The Flesh Jesus was born again, and from John 1:13 to 1:14 And the Word Man (begotten) became = arrives and dwelt
And God was/is the Word
Word God image of Word Man, you become a Word of Him, deemed as, your expressed words are your person express, spirit person expressed.
----------------
. Logos) is the unexpressed thought, plan, reason, or mind of God. In the beginning, the Word was toward (unto) God, not as a distinct person but as God himself—pertaining to God as much as a man’s word pertains to him.
Therefore, pros is used to show the direction of action towards the noun, ‘God.’
The Word was in the company of God, or associated toward (unto) God in existence as the unexpressed thought.
This thought was His great plan to redeem lost humanity, which He foreknew. The Word ‘toward (unto) God would later become expressed through His divine purpose and plan to humanity in redemption -> as 1 John shows and which was then expressed into the scriptures."PROSOPON", which means "FACE", comesfrom the two words PROS (towards) + OPS (the eye). So in Greek the word"face" is "that which is towards the eyes"
"PROSKAIROS", which means "TEMPORAL",comes from the words PROS (to or for) + KAIROS (a season). So in Greeksomething that is "temporal" is "for a season".
Toward -> one thing is going to become another thing, inview of or in light of = 1:3
Even though John's word order is " Godand God," we are expected to accept the notion that the first instance ofthe word "God" means "the Father" but the second instancemeans just the opposite: "not the Father." It is highly unlikely thatJohn would join two instances of the word "God" with the conjunction"and" and expect readers to assume that each instance of the word"God" has different, and even opposite, meanings.
Is it reasonable to suppose John wouldexpect his readers to suppose the first instance of Theon means"the Father" but the second instance means "not theFather"? It is an
extremely far-fetched proposition.
Toward in a process that is intended to produce or achieve (something
-----------------"
