Bible Study Do we love the truth!

[Hopeful 2]

Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. Romans 6:12
Paul admonishing these baptized Christians to not let the sin in their mortal reign over them.

Of course he is.
It is an exhortation that most refuse to obey.
The disobedient have not given themselves to Christ.
It is written..."And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Gal 5:24)
Those who let sin reign in their vessels are not Christ's !

 

[donadams]

I first encountered "Salvation by water baptism" almost 40 years ago when a Church of Christ disciple objected to the idea that baptism by water is only symbolic of the real thing that happened when Jesus raised us from the dead. I thought I had heard every argument about water baptism saving us until yesterday when I read your post and remarked...

This is a new twist that I have never considered before. Is it possible that you are saying salvation comes, not by trusting in Christ that all your sins are forgiven, but by trusting in the institution He created plus participation in its sacraments? If so, this opens up a whole new world to me.​

​

Can you answer my question?

Yes the church and the sacraments instituted by Christ give grace, the merits of his passion and death

 

[JLB]

Of course he is.
It is an exhortation that most refuse to obey.
The disobedient have not given themselves to Christ.
It is written..."And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Gal 5:24)
Those who let sin reign in their vessels are not Christ's !

If Paul warned these water baptized believers to not let sin in their body rule over them, then obviously they had sin in the body after being water baptized.


JLB

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

Jn 3:5 what is the water for?

born from their mother after the water breaks

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

Please explain

Romans 13:11
And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

Obviously, there is a future aspect of our salvation, namely that we will shed the flesh and be given spiritual bodies to go with our redeemed spirits. But denying that for a saved person, his salvation started in the past, exists in the present, and continues for eternity requires the denial of many Scriptures.

 

[donadams]

born from their mother after the water breaks

No it does not say born of water
Born again of the spirit

It says born again of both water and the spirit

Try again please

 

[donadams]

Obviously, there is a future aspect of our salvation, namely that we will shed the flesh and be given spiritual bodies to go with our redeemed spirits. But denying that for a saved person, his salvation started in the past, exists in the present, and continues for eternity requires the denial of many Scriptures.

What about the denial of Mk 13:13 and Matt 24:13?

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

Yes the church and the sacraments instituted by Christ give grace, the merits of his passion and death

Thank you.

 

[JLB]

born from their mother after the water breaks

Yes sir.

Jesus explains it in the next verse.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:6

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

No it does not say born of water
Born again of the spirit

It says born again of both water and the spirit

Try again please

I wasn't "trying" anything. I was giving a concise and to the point answer.

 

[Tenchi]

You are either "in" Christ or you are not.

Yes, right.

One either walks in the light-God, or they walk in darkness-sin.

This isn't what John wrote in 1 John 1:5-10 or what is in evidence in the rest of the New Testament. As I explained in my last post to you, your false dichotomy just doesn't fit with what Scripture plainly indicates.

We are talking about sane folks of age who use their consciences to determine good from bad.
What other options are there ?

I explained from the apostle John's own words and from other instances in the NT what other option there is. You are so hardened in your error, however, that it seems you can't take in any other perspective and so reply to my posts as though I had written nothing to you. Interesting, that. Such hardness and blindness is part of the judgment of God upon those who persist in falsehood, I think.

Live, reside, act, exist.
To walk in the light is to walk in God.
To walk in darkness is to commit a sin.

Your terms above in definition of "walk" are essentially the same as what I wrote: to continue in a particular, persistent course of living. But as John clearly indicated, to "walk in darkness" is to make a practice of sin, to continue in a particular, persistent course of sinful living. This is different from the saint who is "walking in the light" but at times requires cleansing from sin (1 John 1:7, 9). Such believers fill the New Testament, as I've already shown.

There are no 'steps into darkness'.

Sure there are. Read the NT (1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11; Galatians 3:1-3, James 4, Revelation 2-3, etc.). And some born-again believers did more than merely step into darkness, however, they took a regular hike into it. I've already offered scriptural examples in earlier posts.

One sin manifests where the heart is based.
One sin illustrates from whom we are born...Adam or God.

This is silly. And unbiblical.

My wife has gotten cross with me and I with her. Does her anger toward me mean she has ceased to love me? Has her heart grown cold and dead toward me, or mine toward her? Of course not. This would be a ridiculous thing to assume - just as it is ridiculous to say that a saint who falls into sin has manifested a heart not born-again of God. Now, if my wife remained fiercely angry with me for months or years, her anger never cooling, her love completely absent from her interactions with me, if she "walked in anger" toward me all the time, then I would have some grounds to wonder seriously about the state of her heart toward me. But brief moments of temper from my wife no more mean her heart was never truly mine, than my brief moments of disobedience to God mean my heart has never truly been His.

That this isn't obvious to you illustrates part of the terrible penalty you're paying for willfully persisting in error.

Whose spirit is revealed by sinning ?
The devil's.

No. Sin arises ultimately from the "Old Self" (Romans 6:6), the person we are apart from God, fleshly, temporally-focused, and selfish, not the devil. Satan merely takes advantage of those times when the "Old Self" is in control and tempts the born-again believer to indulge the sinful, self-centered interests of the "Old Self." But the devil is not the primary source of the sin we commit; we are. We have a sin-nature, inherited from Adam, that remains with us 'til we die and are finally liberated from it completely.

So, then, when a saint sins, s/he is merely revealing who is in charge in that moment: the Old Self. If the Spirit is in control, the life of the Spirit increasingly manifests in the believer. This is what Paul wrote about in Galatians 5.

Galatians 5:16-17
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.
17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do.

Why would Paul say what he did in verse 16 to the born-again believers to whom he was writing? Obviously, because they were, at least at times, gratifying the desires of the flesh, that is, they were sinning. His advice to these sinning saints was to "walk in the Spirit" which is to live constantly under the Spirit's control.

Galatians 5:18
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

This is the essence of "walking in the Spirit": being led by him, being always under his direction and control. See: Romans 6:13-22, Romans 8:14, Romans 12:1, James 4:6-10, 1 Peter 5:6.

In any case, Paul continued in verse 17 to describe the common state-of-affairs of the born-again person in which the flesh and the Spirit are at war with one another, just as Paul had described of himself in Romans 7:14-24.

Romans 7:21-24
21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.
22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being,
23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.
24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?

As I pointed out before, Paul writes in the present tense here, describing his current condition, not a past one. What was true of Paul is true of all born-again believers: we all battle every day against the "Old Self-nature." And sometimes, we lose the battle. When we do, there is, thankfully, the direction of 1 John 1:9.

The word 'practice' was added by the devilish to accommodate sin in supposed believers.

Yes, you've said this same facile and silly thing before. Repeating it doesn't make this statement true, however. Prove this assertion. Show that what you claim here is actually true. And show how your mistaken reading aligns with the rest of Scripture that plainly describes saints who sin. So far, you've just asserted this false idea as though doing so by itself makes it true. Well, it doesn't. I understand, though, that your reflex is to just blurt out these unfounded remarks; you can't help yourself, it seems. Again, this is the penalty you pay for persisting in falsehood. Your capacity to see out of the error you've wilfully sustained has dissolved. Scary.

Sin cancels out any work of the Spirit, as sin is of the devil.

Nope. This is patently silly. See above.

Continued below.

 

[Tenchi]

True !
So does sin prove ?
It proves one's heat is not 'towards' God.

It proves who has control: the Old Self. Does his control mean one doesn't any longer love God, that one's heart was never His? Of course not. See above.

John is simply stating a fact.
The blood of Christ Jesus cleanses the repentant/baptized's past sin.

This isn't what John wrote, as I showed. You're twisting his words, here.

1 John 1:7
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

See? No mention of past sins by John in this verse. Instead, he speaks only of present and on-going cleansing from sin by the blood of Christ which is only necessary for present and ongoing sin. Do you see how your false view has forced you to contort John's actual words? I suppose not, being hardened as you are into your error...

And, again, just so no one takes the false view you have, Hopeful 2, John excludes your view in the very next verse:

1 John 1:8
8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

If they are disobedient to God, they are not Christians.
They are still children of Adam, and servants of sin.

Nope. See above. John says nothing like what you have here.

Nobody walking in God commits sin.

1 John 1:8
8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Galatians 3:1-3
1 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.
2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?
3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

1 Corinthians 3:1-3
1 But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ.
2 I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready,
3 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?
Revelation 2:19-20
19 “‘I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first.
20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.

And so on. It is obvious that those saints who sin are not walking in obedience to God, but they are still His own, nonetheless, as the above passages/verses plainly indicate.

So true...for those walking in sin.

What's the point in simply repeating these sorts of statements that have been shown to be false? Stubbornness and contradiction don't prove your sinless-perfection view, nor do they defeat what I've pointed out, they just show how hardened in your error you are.

No, that implication is based on a false circumstance.
Verses 7, and verses 5 and 9, address those walking, or about to start walking, in the light.
Verses 6, 8, and 10, address those walking in darkness-sin.
John is using an A-B, A-B, A-B, style of writing...a style also used by Paul, in Romans 8

See? Just more stubborn contradiction rather than dealing with what's been pointed out to you. Nothing you've said here actually supports your view or defeats mine. These statements of yours just repeat plainly false assertions about what John wrote, despite the fact that they've been shown to be in error. It seems you've got nothing more than blind, unheeding repetition of your error in support of it. Yikes.

If all our unrighteousness can be cleansed, why can't the cleansed say they have no sin ?
They can.

??? Because saying, "All sin can be cleansed by the blood of Christ," is not the same as saying, "All sin has been cleansed by the blood of Christ." All cavities in my teeth can be fixed by my dentist but this does not mean all cavities are fixed by my dentist (at least, not always immediately). This is obvious.

Your short sightedness led you down the wrong path.
You have based this entire post on a word added by evil, accommodators of sin.

This is such a silly objection; it's just a facile, unfounded deflection of facts your view can't defeat. Throwing out this stuff by no means defends your view; it just makes your error seem, not only false, but foolish, too. At bottom, you've employed what is called the ad hominem fallacy in your reply above. It's an attack, not on the argument that shows it is mistaken, but on the character of the person(s) making it, which proves nothing about validity of the argument itself. If Hitler said 2+2=4, he'd be correct even though he was a genocidal scumbag. His character has no bearing on the truth content of his statement. In the same way, it makes no difference to the facts of what John wrote that "evil accommodators of sin" have translated his words using the term "practice," and verb tenses that speak of a believers present need of cleansing from sin, and pronouns that include John himself in his statements.

You say nobody can say they have no sin, and then show how their sin can be washed away...thanks.

??? Do you actually stop and think about these bizarre remarks before you make them? I can say that nobody can claim that their entire house is perfectly clean, but this doesn't mean that their house can't be cleaned at all. Obviously.

He also used the word "IF".
Using alternating verses, he has illustrated both the walks in the light-God, and the walks in darkness sin.

Nope. See above. And my last post to you.

All you're doing here is contradicting my remarks rather than rebutting them. This isn't constructive argument, establishing your view; it's just repeating your error, assuming it's true on the basis of demonstrably mistaken and superficial ideas about the scriptures in question and stubbornly refusing to step outside your structures of defense of your error and wrestle with what I've shown you from the biblical text. As you persist in this mere contradiction and repetition of obviously erroneous ideas, your view doesn't prove itself but is revealed to be what it is: false doctrine.

I guess it is because you believe those in God commit sin, that you continue to refer to sinners as Christians.
I don't make that mistake.

1 John 1:8
8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Your accommodations for sinning are unsound.
And not of God who desires all me to be as holy as He is holy. (Lev 11:44, 1 Peter 1:16)

We have been born with the ability to choose whether or not to follow God.
Choose wisely.

??? It is a strange thing to hear someone Scripture calls deceived and without truth urging me to "Choose wisely." Brother (I hope), please take your own advice.

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

What about the denial of Mk 13:13 and Matt 24:13?

Both of those are talking about the great tribulation. What does that have to do with everyone who died before us? And what does it have to do with us if the great tribulation starts after we die?

But even if it were applicable to our salvation, I would apply the principle which Peter wrote about in 1 Peter 1:6-9...

6 In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, 7 that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, 8 whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls. (1 Pe 1:6–9)​

The principle, of course, is that genuine faith does not fail when tested by trials.

It is not coincidental that in this passage is one of many instances where the inspired writers of the NT point to salvation that is currently posssessed by true Christians. Peter wrote verse 9 with one main verb ("you rejoice") in the present tense with three supporting participles ("not seeing", "believing", and "receiving) also in the present tense. The significance of the participles being in present tense is that the time of action of present participles is coincident with the timing of the main verb, which in this case is present tense. This passage says that those whose faith is genuine and holds up under trials have already received the end of their faith which is the salvation of their souls.

 

[donadams]

I wasn't "trying" anything. I was giving a concise and to the point answer.

But it don’t fit the verse

And grace & reconciliation MUST be administered to us by the apostles
2 pet 1:11
2 cor 8:19
Acts 16:17

Thks

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

But it don’t fit the verse

Jesus was talking about two different births. Nicodemus understood it. That's why he asked if a person could go back into the womb and be born a second time. He thought Jesus was talking about two physical births. That was the impetus for Jesus explaining second birth was not physical, but spiritual. When He said that a person must be "born of water and the Spirit", he was differentiating between the first birth (of water) and the second birth (of the Spirit) in the same way that He explained in the next verse where He said, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn 3:6). Turning John 3:5 into a statement that God giving birth to a person by His Spirit is congent on them being sprinkled with water is the concept that does not fit the verse.

And grace & reconciliation MUST be administered to us by the apostles
2 pet 1:11

"for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Pe 1:11)​

This is another wild goose chase. 2 Peter 1:11 has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles.

2 cor 8:19

I am beginning to doubt whether you understand what you are saying.

"and not only that, but who was also chosen by the churches to travel with us with this gift, which is administered by us to the glory of the Lord Himself and to show your ready mind" (2 Co 8:19)​

This verse has to do with taking money that was collected for a church in need, and has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles.

Acts 16:17

16 Now it happened, as we went to prayer, that a certain slave girl possessed with a spirit of divination met us, who brought her masters much profit by fortune-telling. 17 This girl followed Paul and us, and cried out, saying, “These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation.” 18 And this she did for many days. But Paul, greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And he came out that very hour (Ac 16:16–18).​

Acts 16:17 has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles. It only relays part of what a demon-possessed slave girl did to annoy Paul and lead him to cast the demon out of the girl.

Thks

The fact that you do not know these very simple things about the Bible passages you refernce is of some concern. Can you explain how you determined these three verses carried the message you were trying to convey?

 

[Hopeful 2]

If Paul warned these water baptized believers to not let sin in their body rule over them, then obviously they had sin in the body after being water baptized.


JLB

You have misread it, in order to continue saying that there is sin in your skin and bones.
That is a false doctrine
Were there still sin in the vessels of the reborn, God would not dwell in them.

“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.For he that is dead is freed from sin.” (Rom. 6:6-7)
"Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." (Rom 6:18)
"But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life." (Rom 6:22)
Paul says that some are free from sin.
Why do you fight against that truth ?

 

[Hopeful 2]

Yes, right.



This isn't what John wrote in 1 John 1:5-10 or what is in evidence in the rest of the New Testament. As I explained in my last post to you, your false dichotomy just doesn't fit with what Scripture plainly indicates.



I explained from the apostle John's own words and from other instances in the NT what other option there is. You are so hardened in your error, however, that it seems you can't take in any other perspective and so reply to my posts as though I had written nothing to you. Interesting, that. Such hardness and blindness is part of the judgment of God upon those who persist in falsehood, I think.



Your terms above in definition of "walk" are essentially the same as what I wrote: to continue in a particular, persistent course of living. But as John clearly indicated, to "walk in darkness" is to make a practice of sin, to continue in a particular, persistent course of sinful living. This is different from the saint who is "walking in the light" but at times requires cleansing from sin (1 John 1:7, 9). Such believers fill the New Testament, as I've already shown.



Sure there are. Read the NT (1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11; Galatians 3:1-3, James 4, Revelation 2-3, etc.). And some born-again believers did more than merely step into darkness, however, they took a regular hike into it. I've already offered scriptural examples in earlier posts.



This is silly. And unbiblical.

My wife has gotten cross with me and I with her. Does her anger toward me mean she has ceased to love me? Has her heart grown cold and dead toward me, or mine toward her? Of course not. This would be a ridiculous thing to assume - just as it is ridiculous to say that a saint who falls into sin has manifested a heart not born-again of God. Now, if my wife remained fiercely angry with me for months or years, her anger never cooling, her love completely absent from her interactions with me, if she "walked in anger" toward me all the time, then I would have some grounds to wonder seriously about the state of her heart toward me. But brief moments of temper from my wife no more mean her heart was never truly mine, than my brief moments of disobedience to God mean my heart has never truly been His.

That this isn't obvious to you illustrates part of the terrible penalty you're paying for willfully persisting in error.



No. Sin arises ultimately from the "Old Self" (Romans 6:6), the person we are apart from God, fleshly, temporally-focused, and selfish, not the devil. Satan merely takes advantage of those times when the "Old Self" is in control and tempts the born-again believer to indulge the sinful, self-centered interests of the "Old Self." But the devil is not the primary source of the sin we commit; we are. We have a sin-nature, inherited from Adam, that remains with us 'til we die and are finally liberated from it completely.

So, then, when a saint sins, s/he is merely revealing who is in charge in that moment: the Old Self. If the Spirit is in control, the life of the Spirit increasingly manifests in the believer. This is what Paul wrote about in Galatians 5.

Galatians 5:16-17
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.
17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do.

Why would Paul say what he did in verse 16 to the born-again believers to whom he was writing? Obviously, because they were, at least at times, gratifying the desires of the flesh, that is, they were sinning. His advice to these sinning saints was to "walk in the Spirit" which is to live constantly under the Spirit's control.

Galatians 5:18
18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

This is the essence of "walking in the Spirit": being led by him, being always under his direction and control. See: Romans 6:13-22, Romans 8:14, Romans 12:1, James 4:6-10, 1 Peter 5:6.

In any case, Paul continued in verse 17 to describe the common state-of-affairs of the born-again person in which the flesh and the Spirit are at war with one another, just as Paul had described of himself in Romans 7:14-24.

Romans 7:21-24
21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.
22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being,
23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.
24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?

As I pointed out before, Paul writes in the present tense here, describing his current condition, not a past one. What was true of Paul is true of all born-again believers: we all battle every day against the "Old Self-nature." And sometimes, we lose the battle. When we do, there is, thankfully, the direction of 1 John 1:9.



Yes, you've said this same facile and silly thing before. Repeating it doesn't make this statement true, however. Prove this assertion. Show that what you claim here is actually true. And show how your mistaken reading aligns with the rest of Scripture that plainly describes saints who sin. So far, you've just asserted this false idea as though doing so by itself makes it true. Well, it doesn't. I understand, though, that your reflex is to just blurt out these unfounded remarks; you can't help yourself, it seems. Again, this is the penalty you pay for persisting in falsehood. Your capacity to see out of the error you've wilfully sustained has dissolved. Scary.



Nope. This is patently silly. See above.

Continued below.

If you aren't interested in walking in the light-God, why don't you just ignore me ?
Your arguments are pointless.

 

[Hopeful 2]

It proves who has control: the Old Self.

The old self was destroyed at its "immersion" into Christ and into His death and burial. (Rom 6:3-7)

Does his control mean one doesn't any longer love God, that one's heart was never His?

Yes, that is what it means.
Servants of sin hate God. (Matt 6:24)

 

[Hopeful 2]

Yes sir.

Jesus explains it in the next verse.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:6

Why do you keep saying that those reborn of the Spirt still have sin on/in them ?

 

[donadams]

Jesus was talking about two different births. Nicodemus understood it. That's why he asked if a person could go back into the womb and be born a second time. He thought Jesus was talking about two physical births. That was the impetus for Jesus explaining second birth was not physical, but spiritual. When He said that a person must be "born of water and the Spirit", he was differentiating between the first birth (of water) and the second birth (of the Spirit) in the same way that He explained in the next verse where He said, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (Jn 3:6). Turning John 3:5 into a statement that God giving birth to a person by His Spirit is congent on them being sprinkled with water is the concept that does not fit the verse.

"for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Pe 1:11)​

This is another wild goose chase. 2 Peter 1:11 has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles.

I am beginning to doubt whether you understand what you are saying.

"and not only that, but who was also chosen by the churches to travel with us with this gift, which is administered by us to the glory of the Lord Himself and to show your ready mind" (2 Co 8:19)​

This verse has to do with taking money that was collected for a church in need, and has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles.

16 Now it happened, as we went to prayer, that a certain slave girl possessed with a spirit of divination met us, who brought her masters much profit by fortune-telling. 17 This girl followed Paul and us, and cried out, saying, “These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation.” 18 And this she did for many days. But Paul, greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And he came out that very hour (Ac 16:16–18).​

Acts 16:17 has nothing whatsoever to do with grace and reconciliation needing to be administered to us by the apostles. It only relays part of what a demon-possessed slave girl did to annoy Paul and lead him to cast the demon out of the girl.

The fact that you do not know these very simple things about the Bible passages you refernce is of some concern. Can you explain how you determined these three verses carried the message you were trying to convey?

Sorry for the confusion

Jn 3:5

Point 1) cannot enter the “kingdom”
Point 2) must be born again

You ok with this so far?