![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Sermon for Lent 2
Mar. 1st, 2026 09:23 pmMay I speak in the name of the living God who is Source of All Being, Eternal Word and Holy Spirit.
I wonder what your reaction to the phrase “born again”?
Maybe you’ve been asked “have you been born again?” by Christians – possibly in the street but also at church.
In the last 50 or so years it has become a phrase associated with a particular type of experience of the Holy Spirit, often involving speaking in tongues, and sometimes it seems to be used to imply people who have not had that exact experience are lesser Christians, or maybe not Christians at all.
Tonight we are heard the passage from which this phrase comes. The NRSV (the translation we use for our readings) opts for “born from above” but other translations go for “born again” – the Greek allows both interpretations. And it is “born again” that has entered our discussions of faith.
Here we have a Pharisee, Nicodemus, seeking out Jesus, who may have been a fellow Pharisee although one who was perhaps going further or in a different direction from his fellows. Nicodemus recognises Jesus as a teacher who has come from God, because of the signs that he has been doing.
Looking back at the first two chapters of John’s Gospel, we have so far seen Jesus being recognised by John the Baptist when he was baptised; calling disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip, Nathanael; then turning water to wine at the wedding at Cana; and at the Passover turning over the tables in the Temple, and maybe other signs – for John says “When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing.” Were there healings perhaps? Signs seems a bit broader than two actions.
Certainly enough to get Nicodemus’ attention. Who seeks him out, “at night”, when it was quieter and maybe less open to being observed by others. Some commentators read a spiritual significance into the “dark” but these make me uncomfortable both for anti-semitic implications (of the Jews being in spiritual darkness) and the way tropes of light and dark have fed white supremacy and the lie that people with darker skins are inferior to those who are fairer, a point made by the South Asian Bible commentary on this passage.
A friend of mine who is autistic has pondered whether Nicodemus might be autistic. In that reading, maybe seeking out Jesus by night was about being in a less sensory overwhelming environment – not in a large crowd and only the light of the moon – which was presumably still fairly full as we are at or just after Passover.
Nicodemus’ response to Jesus’ statement about being born again is a literal one – ‘How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother’s womb and be born?’ which is not what Jesus was talking about. He is talking about spiritual birth. “no-one can enter the kingdom of heaven without being born of water and Spirit” – does the reference to water here point to baptism? Jesus was himself baptised by John at the start of his ministry and it is the way that we are incorporated into the church. There are strands within Christianity which would say no this isn’t about baptism, that is an empty ritual which doesn’t guarantee spiritual birth. But that’s not been my experience of baptism. I was baptised as a baby at 2 months old and have grown up within the family of faith and come to claim that faith for myself. Others I know have been baptised after a conversion experience. Our journeys are different – the wind/spirit blows where she wills – but we encounter the spirit and something happens. For some that may involve signs such as speaking in tongues, but they are not compulsory. Paul writes about this in his first letter to the church at Corinth. He values tongues, but points to a more excellent way, the way of love. And Jesus here shows the cost of love as he points to his being raised up like the serpent in the wilderness so that that the world, the cosmos, is not condemned but saved. Something I talked more about when I preached on this passage on Holy Cross Day in September.
The passage we heard from Paul’s letter to the church in Rome has a similar theme. It’s not what Abraham did that was important but his belief/trust in God.
I struggle at times with Paul’s theology, or maybe with Calvinist readings of Paul which have dominated a lot how we read Paul. As with the language around being born again, there are those who use Paul’s words about faith and works to condemn other expressions of Christianity. To say claim that we’ve got it right and those people over there have got it wrong. But Christianity shouldn’t be about oneupmanship! We aren’t born again to smugness. The spirit blows where she will.
It’s hard to talk about this without ending up implying I’ve got it right and those people over their claiming their right are the ones who are wrong. But I think it’s about humility. It’s not about us, but about what God has done. We can tell others about the way in which Jesus’ death and resurrection has taken the pain and wrongness that we inflicted on the world and broken that cycle of violence.
And yet, we still see the cycle of violence continuing in our world. War is still happening. Christians support Trump who yesterday caused the bombing of a girls school in Iran. And Christians have been involved in horrors such as slavery and boarding schools for indigenous people and mother and baby homes.
So this Lent, what do these passages say to us, in 2026, in uncertain times? How do we build community that includes? That lives in the light of cross and the breaking of the cycle of violence? That says to those who would divide us that God came to save the world, not just Christian? That seeks to understand rather than hate?
I wonder what your reaction to the phrase “born again”?
Maybe you’ve been asked “have you been born again?” by Christians – possibly in the street but also at church.
In the last 50 or so years it has become a phrase associated with a particular type of experience of the Holy Spirit, often involving speaking in tongues, and sometimes it seems to be used to imply people who have not had that exact experience are lesser Christians, or maybe not Christians at all.
Tonight we are heard the passage from which this phrase comes. The NRSV (the translation we use for our readings) opts for “born from above” but other translations go for “born again” – the Greek allows both interpretations. And it is “born again” that has entered our discussions of faith.
Here we have a Pharisee, Nicodemus, seeking out Jesus, who may have been a fellow Pharisee although one who was perhaps going further or in a different direction from his fellows. Nicodemus recognises Jesus as a teacher who has come from God, because of the signs that he has been doing.
Looking back at the first two chapters of John’s Gospel, we have so far seen Jesus being recognised by John the Baptist when he was baptised; calling disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter, Philip, Nathanael; then turning water to wine at the wedding at Cana; and at the Passover turning over the tables in the Temple, and maybe other signs – for John says “When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing.” Were there healings perhaps? Signs seems a bit broader than two actions.
Certainly enough to get Nicodemus’ attention. Who seeks him out, “at night”, when it was quieter and maybe less open to being observed by others. Some commentators read a spiritual significance into the “dark” but these make me uncomfortable both for anti-semitic implications (of the Jews being in spiritual darkness) and the way tropes of light and dark have fed white supremacy and the lie that people with darker skins are inferior to those who are fairer, a point made by the South Asian Bible commentary on this passage.
A friend of mine who is autistic has pondered whether Nicodemus might be autistic. In that reading, maybe seeking out Jesus by night was about being in a less sensory overwhelming environment – not in a large crowd and only the light of the moon – which was presumably still fairly full as we are at or just after Passover.
Nicodemus’ response to Jesus’ statement about being born again is a literal one – ‘How can anyone be born after having grown old? Can one enter a second time into the mother’s womb and be born?’ which is not what Jesus was talking about. He is talking about spiritual birth. “no-one can enter the kingdom of heaven without being born of water and Spirit” – does the reference to water here point to baptism? Jesus was himself baptised by John at the start of his ministry and it is the way that we are incorporated into the church. There are strands within Christianity which would say no this isn’t about baptism, that is an empty ritual which doesn’t guarantee spiritual birth. But that’s not been my experience of baptism. I was baptised as a baby at 2 months old and have grown up within the family of faith and come to claim that faith for myself. Others I know have been baptised after a conversion experience. Our journeys are different – the wind/spirit blows where she wills – but we encounter the spirit and something happens. For some that may involve signs such as speaking in tongues, but they are not compulsory. Paul writes about this in his first letter to the church at Corinth. He values tongues, but points to a more excellent way, the way of love. And Jesus here shows the cost of love as he points to his being raised up like the serpent in the wilderness so that that the world, the cosmos, is not condemned but saved. Something I talked more about when I preached on this passage on Holy Cross Day in September.
The passage we heard from Paul’s letter to the church in Rome has a similar theme. It’s not what Abraham did that was important but his belief/trust in God.
I struggle at times with Paul’s theology, or maybe with Calvinist readings of Paul which have dominated a lot how we read Paul. As with the language around being born again, there are those who use Paul’s words about faith and works to condemn other expressions of Christianity. To say claim that we’ve got it right and those people over there have got it wrong. But Christianity shouldn’t be about oneupmanship! We aren’t born again to smugness. The spirit blows where she will.
It’s hard to talk about this without ending up implying I’ve got it right and those people over their claiming their right are the ones who are wrong. But I think it’s about humility. It’s not about us, but about what God has done. We can tell others about the way in which Jesus’ death and resurrection has taken the pain and wrongness that we inflicted on the world and broken that cycle of violence.
And yet, we still see the cycle of violence continuing in our world. War is still happening. Christians support Trump who yesterday caused the bombing of a girls school in Iran. And Christians have been involved in horrors such as slavery and boarding schools for indigenous people and mother and baby homes.
So this Lent, what do these passages say to us, in 2026, in uncertain times? How do we build community that includes? That lives in the light of cross and the breaking of the cycle of violence? That says to those who would divide us that God came to save the world, not just Christian? That seeks to understand rather than hate?
