Pt.2 Ernest Angley's teaching of the divine and heavenly Blood in Jesus
Before I go further into the teachings of Ernest Angley on the blood, let me define my position so no one will misunderstand what I believe the Bible is teaching. That Jesus was born of a virgin. That Christ is the only way to be saved – by his crucifixion, by the gospel- the death and resurrection. That he bled and died for our sins and the blood continually cleanses us. We are brought back into a relationship by being born again, our human spirit being regenerated to life by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit who indwells us works “in us” because we have been cleansed and restored in a relationship to God. Grace is given to those that are in the new covenant. I need to say this because Angley will say these same things. Yet when he defines what he means and explains some of these topics they have a very different substance and meaning.
The Bible gives us specific explanation of what the Blood of Jesus and his death did. Ernest Angley believes the blood is miraculous and can do far more than forgive sin. He is so focused on the blood that he changes the application to accommodate nearly everything in the Christian life.
“Divine blood” is a constantly mentioned in Angley’s teaching vocabulary, but is not found in the Bible. I can understand using the term to make a distinction in respect to Jesus being God but this is not what he is doing. He insinuates that it is the blood that makes Jesus divine (and Adam as well.) His emphasis is on the blood for nearly everything instead of the person of Jesus.
“Divine blood was in the veins of Christ; He never had human blood. As far as the flesh was concerned, He was human; but as for the blood, it was divine, not human. Blood comes from the father, and His Father was the Holy Ghost.”
“Divine blood flowed in the veins of this only begotten Son of the Lord. He had flesh like we have but not blood like ours. Because it came from the Holy Ghost, the blood of Jesus was divine.’ (The Miracles in the Blood of Jesus April 1998 Issue By Ernest Angley)
He is not saying the Holy Ghost made it in Mary's womb but that it was in heaven with the Son before he had a human body.
“Since Eden, only a very few had abundant life. Then Jesus came with the divine blood that He had long before the first man walked the earth” (April 2006 Issue “the divine blood of Jesus controls” By Ernest Angley)
The Holy Ghost was the Father? This is confusing the persons of the Godhead. The Holy Spirit energized the human egg to life and the Son who is Spirit was incarnated inside Mary.The Holy Ghost prepared and protected Mary during her pregnancy but he is not his father. This is confusing the persons of the Trinity.
The virgin conception and birth is also confused. Which is it, did he come with the blood before he was a man or did the blood come from his Father who he says is the Holy Ghost? Neither. To have blood means one is physical and Jesus is God, and God is Spirit (until he incarnated).
Angley repeats his assertion of Jesus not having human blood continuously through his writings “Although He took on human flesh like ours, He had no human blood in His veins; His blood was divine” (April 2009 Issue abide with me, by Ernest Angley) [all underlines mine]
The bible makes it clear that Jesus humanity came from his mother. If he was not fully human he could not have taken our place as a sacrifice. Angley is unable to prove any of his assertions except to convince people by repetition.
“First you must know the mystery of the blood, know without a doubt how divine blood came to planet earth, and where it came from. You must know that it is divine blood.” (How To Plead The Blood By Ernest Angley Volume 21 The Mysteries of God) [underline mine]
“He had an earth mother, but the blood comes from the father, not the mother. Divine blood flowed in His veins, for it was the Holy Ghost who overshadowed Mary” (The Powers In The Blood By Ernest Angley Vol.7 the Mysteries of God) [underline mine]
Angley also states "…Leaving His divine life in heaven with the Father” (The Blood Of Jesus By Ernest Angley)
He says the blood is divine; so then how is Jesus deity? According to Angley, by the blood that is divine:
“To really know Jesus, you must recognize His divine blood, the divinity of Him. You haven't accepted Jesus unless you accept His divinity. If you don't recognize His divinity, you have seen just another man, not the divine one. Trusting in His divinity, you know He lives on the inside of you when you are born again, that His divine blood flows in your soul” (The Miracles in the Blood of Jesus April 1998 Issue By Ernest Angley)
Several things need to be addressed. Angley claims this is a requirement – to believe his blood is divine, from heaven; that is his divinity- by his blood.
It is true that if you are a Bible believer, you believe in the power in the blood of Jesus. But there is a qualification: what is it and for what is its use. Angley: “If you don't believe in the divine nature of His blood, you don't believe in Jesus.” “…you won't believe in its divinity unless you believe in His virgin birth.”
Statements like these are repeatedly used to challenge people to faith but they also present a different doctrine than the Scripture. The Bible does not say the blood is divine. One can certainly believe in the virgin birth and in Jesus without believing this. Angley is emphatic as he is rigid on his position that one must believe this.
He is saying if you don’t believe what he believes on the blood (which is wrong) then you are not a true Christian, you are not saved.
Whenever a doctrine is brought to an extreme it can become heresy. We should not edit the words of scripture and neither should we add to them and change its meaning. We should not go beyond the words of Scripture in these matters, especially making it a cornerstone of our teaching.
“Divine blood from heaven was in Jesus” (Divine Healing through the Blood of Jesus Feb.1996 Issue)
“Jesus had divine blood from heaven in His veins. He was more than a man; He was divinity” (The Remedy By Ernest Angley).
“Divine, victorious blood came to earth with the virgin birth of the Son of God. Jesus brought divine blood from heaven. Purged Through The Blood By Ernest Angley).
“Put your faith in the blood of Jesus, in the holy, sacred blood from heaven” (The Blood Of Jesus By Ernest Angley)
Angley is claiming the blood was in heaven before it was put in Jesus’ veins. How is there blood in heaven in what creature. Did Jesus have blood in His spirit (non physical) in heaven before he came to earth? Because that is what God is- uncreated Spirit. How did this blood exist since blood is the life of flesh? Since this is the blood of God it must belong to God. Who created this blood or did it exist like God, is it God? These questions are not answered by anything Angley teaches, one just has to accept what he is saying.
“The divine blood measured exactly the same when it was taken back to heaven as it had before it left. Divine blood was spilled on Calvary for us; it can never be destroyed. … That blood is God-life, it's like God Himself.” (The Powers In The Blood By Ernest Angley) [underline mine]
On Mary: ”that which was conceived within her was holy; holy blood from heaven flowed in the veins of Christ” (The Judgment At Calvary By Ernest Angley)
How can Jesus who is God have blood before he became man, when God is Spirit? This is a modification on the docetic error, an ancient christological heresy of the first century where Jesus physical properties only appeared to be human. Angley separates the blood from his humanity. Instead of saying as the Gnostics that Jesus was pure spirit and not a flesh and blood human being. Angley's slant is that his blood is spiritual and not human. His blood is like the rest of his body, 100% human (but without sin) and he is 100% divine Spirit in the human body. Though his blood would be liken to Adam before the fall of man (as 'the last Adam') Angley overlooks that his Spirit alone is deity. 1 Tim. 3:16 “the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh” To become man, flesh means to be fully human. God was revealed in his flesh and life.
Many say the life is in the blood, no that is not what it says –the Bible states “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” The life of the flesh is in the blood which requires Jesus to have human blood. Also if this blood preexisted it would require Jesus to have a physical flesh body. Angley’s Biblical error is claiming that Jesus blood was not literal blood but heavenly blood (even though God required the blood from the animals before this final sacrifice). There is no remission of sins unless it is the shedding of literal blood. Jesus’ blood completed the sacrificial system because it was pure, sinless. The whole concept of sacrifice is based on the life of the flesh of the animal being bled and the body expired. The blood was physical, otherwise it could not be an acceptable sacrifice.
The Passover motif has real blood from a lamb put on the door. An animal sacrifice had to die not just bleed.
Animal blood sacrifices were temporary, they covered sin, but the final sacrifice had to be human blood or it would not suffice. The difference is Jesus blood was sinless. Being sinless and incorruptible blood does not make it divine and existing in heaven before it came to earth.
The view that Jesus’ blood was divine results from an overemphasis on the deity of Christ. This theory can be traced to the error of Apollinaris of Laodicaea in the late 4th century. The Christology of Apollinaris was monophysitic, that Christ had only one nature as opposed to the orthodox position of two natures in one person. (They believed Christ had a human body and the Divine Logos had taken the place of the nous, or thinking, what we call the mind in our day). One of the results of Apollinaris’ teaching is that the true humanity of Christ was eclipsed by his deity. Concluding that his blood is divine is the same error, certainly separating a main human component from his humanity and making it deity. To say Jesus’ blood was not human diminishes the fact that he as a human gave his body as sacrifice to die for mankind.
Scripture speaks of our redemption by a physical death, shed physical blood. John 6:51, Jesus states he is, “...the living Bread which came down from heaven, and the bread which I shall give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” If he gave his blood and his flesh is human, what does that make his blood? Human. Leviticus17:11: for “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” Co.1:22 He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death. A sacrifice is dependent upon a physical death. “Without the shedding of blood there is no remission.” Rom 6:10 “For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all”
1 Cor. 15:3: “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures”
Heb. 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death”
So according to the bible, it is not just his blood that purchased our redemption but the death of the son of God. Jesus redeemed us not just by his blood but by who he is. If he was not eternal God then his sacrifice would not have applied to all. Jesus also suffered for our sins not just bled for them, 1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,
The Bible does not call Jesus’ blood divine – For such an important facet of his nature the Bible would make this point more than once, but it does not contain it at all. The Bible calls his blood (and Him) holy, pure and incorruptible but nowhere does it call it divine. Divine means more than just sacred it means to have the nature of deity. Only God can be called divine in the correct sense. It’s not that God has any blood, but that the blood in the Son was pure, sinless. Only His blood can cleanse. Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14: “In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” Revelation 1:5 “...To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood.”
Unbelievers like Judas said it was “innocent blood.” Matt 27:4 Pilate said, “Jesus was a “ just Person. (Matt 27:24).
1 Peter 1:19 it is called the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.”
I John 3:3 He is pure. But the Bible never makes a distinction of his flesh and his blood being divine.
1 John 3:5 says, “And you know he appeared to take away our sins, and in him, THERE IS NO SIN”
The definition of divine:
Divine- of or pertaining to a god, esp. the Supreme Being. (Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, 2009).
Divine- b: being a deity -the divine Savior- (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
Divine- 1. Having the nature of or being a deity. Of, relating to, emanating from, or being the expression of a deity: Being in the service or worship of a deity; sacred. 2. Superhuman; godlike. (American Heritage Dictionary).
God has divine names, divine attributes but to say he has divine blood is wrong. God does not have blood, creatures do; humans do. God as Jesus Christ took a human nature on earth by a virgin conception and added it to his deity but these two natures did not intermingle. He did not make his human nature deity.
Being sinless is not just because of the blood in him, it is because of who He is- God. The blood has to do with his humanity, God has no blood. His humanity and Deity are two completely different natures that made up his person. It is called the hypostatic union.
Human- Hebrews 10:10: “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”
Deity- 2 Cor.5:19: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.”
Nowhere does the Bible say the blood is divine, this is going beyond what is written. Calling Jesus the Divine Saviour or divine healer is appropriate; calling his blood divine, coming from heaven is not.
The power of Christ's blood is connected to His death, they are not to be separated. “… that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Hebrews 2:14).
That Jesus conquered the one who introduced death by sin by his dying in our place. It wasn’t just the shed blood that bought our sins forgiveness. Otherwise he could have bled and walked away from dying. It is the event of his death as the Passover lamb, the day he was sacrificed and “who” he was. It was because of who he was that the sacrifice was accepted by the Father. Heb 9:14: “how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God.”
We need to define what it means when it says he took on flesh. Jesus made the distinction John 3:6 “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” These are two different properties, one is physical the other is immaterial. The importance of this doctrine of human nature cannot be lessened or modified when it refers to the Son of God.
Romans 8:3 “sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh”. In the likeness of sinful flesh, means he had a human body, the nature of man, but not sinful, he was man without any of its sinful properties.
Let’s hear from Bible Scholars that know Greek on this subject:
(Romans 8:3 [In the likeness of sinful flesh], [en (NT:1697) homoioomati (NT:3624) sarkos (NT:4508) hamartias (NT:263)]-literally, `in the likeness of the flesh of sin.' a very remarkable and pregnant expression. `It is not in the likeness of flesh'-for truly He “was made flesh” (John 11:14)-but `in the likeness of the flesh of sin;' in other words, He was made in the reality of our flesh but only in the likeness of its sinful condition. (See the excellent observations of DeWette.) [Similitudo-says Tertullian, quoted by Meyer-ad titulum peccati pertinebit non ad substantioe mendacium; referring to the Docetic heresy of our Lord's having assumed only an apparent Humanity.] (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary)
Romans 8:3 In the likeness of sinful flesh en (NT:1697) homoioomati (NT:3624) sarkos (NT:4508) hamartias (NT:263). For “likeness” see Philippians 2:7, a real man, but more than man for God's “own Son.” Two genitives “of flesh of sin” (marked by sin), that is the flesh of man is, but not the flesh of Jesus. (from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)
Romans 8:3since He was really and entirely human; but, “in the likeness of the flesh of sin:” really human, conformed in appearance to the flesh whose characteristic is sin, yet sinless. “Christ appeared in a body which was like that of other men in so as it consisted of flesh, and was unlike in so far as the flesh was not flesh of sin” (Dickson). (from Vincent's Word Studies of the New Testament).
For his humanity to come from Mary he had to be part of her lineage.
Rom 1:3 “Concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” He could not be considered the Son of David without being part of the lineage which would have to do with the blood line not just appearing in human form. He was a descendant of David in his human nature, as a man. Of course, that he had another nature besides his humanity, that was not descended from David, his deity from heaven (Romans 9:5; Micah 5:2).
The Messianic line (2 Samuel 7:12, etc.; Psalms 89; Isaiah 9:6-7; 11:1; 55:3; Jeremiah 23:5), had the descent from David. He was a descendant of David. The posterity or lineage of David makes him the rightful heir to the kings throne.
The covenantal promise: 2 Samuel 7:12-14 “When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.”
This ancient promise refers to the Messiah, and in the New Testament he is called the descendant of David; the son of David. (Luke 1:27; Matthew 9:27; 15:22; 12:23; 21:9,15; 22:42,45; John 7:42; 2 Timothy 2:8). The Jews believed that the Messiah would be descended from David and the bible records that Jesus of Nazareth was of that line and family. Acts 2:30 “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, (human nature) he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” (KJV)
[According to the flesh] in Greek kata sarka -is His human nature: The word “flesh,” sarx , is used in the Scriptures in a variety of ways, for brevity sake its refers to the literal flesh of any living being; in Jesus case the parts that make up man, as being human. The point of making it certain that he came in the flesh, descended from certain ancestors according to the flesh.
John 1:14, “The Word was made flesh” (or `became man'); one is not considered man without being FULLY human, which includes our blood which is essential to the human nature.
Heb 2:14 “Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same.” We learn from this that Jesus was full humanity, he had human blood just as he had human flesh.
If his flesh was human then so was his blood according to the Bible. He partook of BOTH flesh and blood. To deny this is a most serious docetic error of which John addresses in I Jn. 4:2-3: “By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.” To come in the flesh (incarnate) means to be FULLY human. This is a denial of His true and proper humanity. It is a Christ that is not fully human. If He does not have all the necessary elements of our human nature then the redemption could not be take place.
The Virgin birth-What child is this?
One is hard pressed to find in the Bible much of what Angley attributes to the blood. Many evangelists like to take liberty to express themselves but his doctrinal position that permeates his teachings is completely wrong.
The blood is not from heaven but was produced with Jesus’ humanity on earth at the time of the virgin conception. For Jesus to have blood in heaven he would have a human or physical body which is something that is completely wrong- God is Spirit. God does not have any blood for his life, he does not have a body like ours. Blood is a property creatures have for their life. The life blood that was in the Son was pure and sinless because the Spirit, who is God indwelt the body. If Jesus did not have human blood in his veins than could he be 100% human. In the same way if he was fully God, if he left his deity in heaven could not be 100% God on earth.
It was necessary that God enter the world by being born like anyone else so that He could be a genuine human. Just because a human father is missing does not mean his blood is not human. If he had come with no relation to human parentage then He could not claim to be an authentic human nor be part of the Davidic lineage. The solution was prophesied in Gen.3:15, the “the seed of the woman,” a virgin conception. This was not a normal conception, but a supernatural act of God in planting the life of His already existent Son into Mary’s womb. Isa 7:14 says that the messiah was to be born of a virgin, born without a mans seed, making his birth supernatural.
Angley says of the Blood-”…you won't believe in its divinity unless you believe in His virgin birth. The father furnishes the blood for his children, not the mother. Any good medical doctor can tell you that the blood comes from the father, not the mother, when the child is conceived.’ (The Blood Of Jesus By Ernest Angley)
Angley says the blood comes from the Father – The Bible makes it clear it is the seed of the woman and says nothing about blood coming from the Father or being divine from heaven, a separate entity from Jesus’ humanity.The virgin birth became the means to birth the sinless Son of God. This is why the Apostles creed and the Nicene Creed included the virgin conception and Birth in its creed. It was necessary to preserve his humanity from the pollution of sin and harm so the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary during her pregnancy. This sin nature is passed as the seed (egg) of the woman is fertilized by the seed of the man. This is why it was not passed on to Jesus: Since He had no human Father to be part of His conception. But Angley believes his deity had to be passed on by the blood of the Father.
Again let me remind the reader of Angley’s position. That one must believe his doctrine and if you don’t believe what he believes on the blood, the virgin birth (which is wrong) then you are not a true Christian, you are not saved.
“If you have one doubt about the virgin birth of Christ, you are not saved” (The Blood Of Jesus By Ernest Angley)
Doubt about this kind of virgin birth? That blood existed in heaven and came from the Father who is the holy ghost and placed it in his veins (because it did not come from Mary). Where is any of this taught in the Bible?
“He had flesh like we have but not blood like ours. Because it came from the Holy Ghost, the blood of Jesus was divine. Jesus, very God and very man, showed us how the divine and the human would come together to make a wonderful being in the image of God. …. Keep in mind that the blood of Jesus is divine blood. (The Miracles in the Blood of Jesus April 1998 Issue By Ernest Angley)
“…but as for the blood, it was divine, not human. Blood comes from the father, and His Father was the Holy Ghost” (The Divine blood of Jesus controls April 2006 Issue By Ernest Angley)
There are 2 times the virgin birth is mentioned in the Old Testament once in Gen.3:15, the other time
Isa 7:14 “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel- this is fulfilled in Matt 1:23.
Luke 1:27 the angel Gabriel is sent “to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin's name was Mary.”
In Jesus’ ministry we read what the people were asked to believe in:
Mark 1:15 “believe in the gospel.” John 6:29 “believe in Him whom He sent.” John 12:36 ‘believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” John 14:1 “you believe in God, believe also in Me.” John 17:20 Jesus prayed “for those who will believe in Me through their (apostles) word.” I John 5:13 “believe in the name of the Son of God.”John 8:24 they were to” believe that I am He, [or] you will die in your sins.” John 10:38 “believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” John 11:27 “believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God.” John 11:42 “believe that You (the Father) sent Me.” John 13:19 Jesus spoke the future that “you may believe that I am He.” John 17:21 the church being united that “the world may believe that You sent Me.” John 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.”
In the New Testament 2 of the gospels do not even mention his virgin birth. Nowhere did Jesus require people to believe that he was born of a virgin or that he had divine blood in him from heaven “If you don't believe in the divine nature of His blood, you don't believe in Jesus” (The Blood Of Jesus By Ernest Angley)
“Jesus did not have human blood: He was born of the virgin Mary with the divine blood of His Father” (How To Plead The Blood By Ernest Angley)
“believe completely in the virgin birth, that no human blood is mixed in with divine blood” (The Blood Of Jesus Is Our Possession By Ernest Angley)
John 3:16: “Whosoever believeth in His blood shall not perish. Those who believed Jesus came down from heaven got results when He was here because they knew He had divine blood, believed He was born of a virgin. He had the flesh of a human being, but the blood of divinity.” (The Powers In The Blood By Ernest Angley) [underline mine]
When a person is saved, he may not know that Jesus was born of a virgin or understand the Tri-une nature in every aspect. When he does learn it, he will readily accept it. If he denies or rejects this truth, he is rebelling against the word of God teaching.To actively and consciously refuse the facts of Scripture of the Son of God’s birth is to bring havoc to ones theology. But to go beyond what the Scripture says is just as dangerous as denying it.
We find this kind of teaching on the blood mostly in Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches.
Chaplet of the Precious Blood “Each bead of the Precious Blood Chaplet is, as it were, a chalice filled with Divine Blood of Jesus, uplifted by Our Lady to the Eternal Father, imploring every grace necessary for your soul and body.”
There were some in the early Catholic church that called the Eucharist the medicine of immortality, the food and drink of Jesus that gave immortality. Some Eastern Orthodox theologians refer to the Eucharist as a “divine blood transfusion.”
“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God (John 1:12). As many as receive His divine blood that came through the virgin birth become sons and daughters of God. When Jesus was here on earth, the people had to receive the virgin birth to become the sons of God. No disciple could become a son of God without accepting sinless blood, without accepting the claims Jesus made. Without faith in the virgin birth, I say again, there is no sinless blood to give you life.” (Purged Through The Blood By Ernest Angley)
While it is true that a Christian is to believe in the virgin conception and birth, they learn this afterwards along with many other doctrines. This was not required for those to believe in him while Jesus was on earth. There is no record of this in the Scripture. Jesus did not say believe in my divine blood nor my virgin birth but to believe that he is “I am,” the sinless Son of God, the Holy one. What Angley is teaching is not part of the gospel message that saves, which Paul succinctly explained in 1 Cor.15:1-4. If what Angley required were in the Scripture than this blind man could not be healed. “So they again called the man who was blind, and said to him, “Give God the glory! We know that this Man is a sinner.” He answered and said, “Whether He is a sinner or not I do not know. One thing I know: that though I was blind, now I see” (John 9:24-25).
Lets read the whole passage in context that Angley referred to: John 1:12-13 “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
Causes of Regeneration:
Born of God – John 1:12-13
Born of the Spirit – John 3:8
Born through the Word – I Peter 1:23-25
Our dead spirit is regenerated (Rom. 8:1; Gal. 5:24) by the Spirit of God. Our cleansing comes from His blood but our regeneration by his Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the principle agent for our regeneration Titus.3:5.
John 1:12-13, . . . of God.” The Greek preposition (“out of”) is never used elsewhere in connection anything else but its source which is God Himself. When describing the new birth, it is always the Greek word “dia” (by, with, or through) that is used. “EK” signifies the source, while “dia” signifies the means. The source is the Holy Spirit who actually gives the new birth and the means is the Word of God.
The Bible teaches that a man is “born of God” (Greek- EK - out of). Born of God is used by John to explain the Spirit as the source of our birth This description occurs four times in John’s epistle (1 Jn. 3:9, 4:7, 5:1,4). In all the instances where the source of the new birth is mentioned, the language is EK Him, EK God, or EK Spirit. Regeneration is always related to the work of the Holy Spirit who is God. The very essence of regeneration is by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, it is the Spirit who gives life.
Jesus is not God in the flesh because of his pre-existent blood from heaven in his human veins. Were this blood not real blood that bled for sin, it could not purchase humans who have real blood for their life. The life of the flesh was given to purchase the whole person. It was not “soul blood” as Angley teaches.
This concept of divine blood from heaven has more to do with mysticism than the teaching of sound doctrine. This is a metaphysical view of the blood. To say that Jesus had the “blood of God” flowing in His bloodstream, blood-type “G” is not substantiated with the Bible. Certainly if it was found there would be no argument, but it is not. The blood that has been shed is incorruptible, eternal, sinless, precious blood overcoming blood. Nothing whatsoever in the Scripture states Christ’s blood is Divine or a spiritual fluid of God. Christ’s blood was human; it was not divine blood.