The question has been of late elaborately re-argued by Mr.McClellan [Endnote 283:2], who decides in favour of 'again.' But, without taking sides either way, it is clear that Justin would have had abundant support, in particular that of his own national version, if he intended [Greek: anagennaethaete] to be a paraphrase of [Greek: gennaethae anothen].
It is obvious that if he is quoting St.John the quotation is throughout paraphrastic.

And yet it is equally noticeable that he does not use the exact Johannean phrase, he uses others that are in each case almost precisely equivalent.

He does not say [Greek: our dunatai idein--taen basileian ton ouranon], but he says [Greek: ou mae eiselthaete eis--taen basileian ton ouranon], the latter pair phrases which the Synoptics have already taught us to regard as convertible.

He does not say [Greek: mae dunatai eis taen koilian taes maetros autou deuteron eiselthein kai gennaethaenai], but he says [Greek: adunaton eis tas maetras ton tekouson tous hapax gennomenous embaebai].

And the scale seems decisively turned by the very remarkable combination in Justin and St.John of the saying respecting spiritual regeneration with the same strangely gross physical misconception.