KH believes the Light Doctrine??

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Adino

This is a silly statement. That baptism was an important part of the early church does not prove it is the topic of Christ in John 3. It most certainly does not prove it was considered by the Apostles as part of the new birth. There are important non-salvific reasons for the practice. I would like you to exegete John 3 for us as well. Do not give us your interpretation of the purpose of baptism. I personally think your interpretation of its purpose falls under the teachings of the "false prophets" you mentioned.

Please, exegete, John 3 as if it was the only text you had available. What do the words "born of water" mean in textual context? Show me why you feel the author means baptism in this passage. Why do you reject the possibility that the author simply uses the word "water" metaphorically as he does soon afterwards in chapters 4 (v10-16) and 7 (v37-39)? Why not allow the author to define his own terms?

Originally Posted by pelathais

The thing that gets me is that the importance, even the essentiallity of water baptism still has a strong case from other passages of scripture. There's really no need to force a "water baptism" into John 3:5.

And there's certainly no need to call people "pigs and swine" because they disagree with the awkward PAJC exposition of John 3:5. But if it's really that important, I'm sure "Light" is concerned enough and capable enough to show me where I'm wrong. All I ask is that we focus on John 3:5 and its context when discussing John 3:5. Don't make grand and presumptuous statements about everything else while ignoring what's right in front of us.

Light?

Adino and Pelathais have laid down the gauntlet.... perhaps Mizpeh, Light, Steve Epley or another 3 stepper can meet the challenge?

[Barb]

Jesus is comparing the natural birth with the supernatural birth "from above." When he says, "You must be born again of the water and the Spirit..." he is comparing the two. "The water" is the amniotic and natural birth from the womb. "The Spirit" is the supernatural birth from above.

My understanding of John 3 has ALWAYS been that Jesus is comparing the natural with the spiritual.

In the natural birth, there is a water break...in the spiritual birth, the water break is baptism in water.

And just as in the natural birth and the baby cries out with the breath of life, so it is in the spiritual birth.

[tbpew]

Taking water baptism out of the John 3:5 witness is foolish. To do so, one would have to bring the words of the one who is the wisdom of all the ages to mean:
...you must be born before you can be born again. That is an interpretation I fully reject. To accept it, one would have to understand that a leader among the Jews was struggling with wondering if he needed to be born to be born again. He was not.

If there is edification in the words of John 3:5 it is in the understanding that new birth requires an operation of death pertaining to the former condition.

We need to understand:
Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone.

Our understanding of a seed's transformation from a former state to newness is a direct witness of the operation of death and burial's essential, inescapable role with new life.

A person who teaches leaving water out of the new birth is leaving the former things alive.

Any one who teaches this view ought to teach about the wineskins and fabric patches as well, so that the folks they are leading can be prepared.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by tbpew

Taking water baptism out of the John 3:5 witness is foolish. To do so, one would have to bring the words of the one who is the wisdom of all the ages to mean:
...you must be born before you can be born again. That is an interpretation I fully reject. To accept it, one would have to understand that a leader among the Jews was struggling with wondering if he needed to be born to be born again. He was not.

If there is edification in the words of John 3:5 it is in the understanding that new birth requires an operation of death pertaining to the former condition.

We need to understand:
Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone.

Our understanding of a seed's transformation from a former state to newness is a direct witness of the operation of death and burial's essential, inescapable role with new life.

A person who teaches leaving water out of the new birth is leaving the former things alive.

Any one who teaches this view ought to teach about the wineskins and fabric patches as well, so that the folks they are leading can be prepared.

So according to the PAJC view of John 3, have I explained correctly what I have believed for lo these many years?! I don't want to appear to be ignorant in articulating among the great minds here.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by tbpew

Taking water baptism out of the John 3:5 witness is foolish. To do so, one would have to bring the words of the one who is the wisdom of all the ages to mean:
...you must be born before you can be born again. That is an interpretation I fully reject. To accept it, one would have to understand that a leader among the Jews was struggling with wondering if he needed to be born to be born again. He was not.

If there is edification in the words of John 3:5 it is in the understanding that new birth requires an operation of death pertaining to the former condition.

We need to understand:
Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone.

Our understanding of a seed's transformation from a former state to newness is a direct witness of the operation of death and burial's essential, inescapable role with new life.

A person who teaches leaving water out of the new birth is leaving the former things alive.

Any one who teaches this view ought to teach about the wineskins and fabric patches as well, so that the folks they are leading can be prepared.

SO the death of corn ... and not water symbolizes water baptism?

Interestingly, Romans 6 compares baptism to to death, burial and resurrection ... all 3 being the Work of the Lamb ... he did this ONCE AND FOR ALL. Baptism is a visual representation of this.

Romans 6:3-4 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

-----------------------------------

One writer refutes the sacramentalist interpretation of Romans 6, which also lacks CONTEXT, as follows:

Some insist that this passage teaches that water baptism is the means of getting into Christ. [10] But does it really teach this? There are several reasons why it does not.


First, the Greek word here translated "into" would be translated better "in" or "unto." Thus Robertson wrote regarding Romans 6:3:

Better, "were baptized unto Christ or in Christ." The translation "into" makes Paul say that the union with Christ was brought to pass by means of baptism, which is not his idea, for Paul was not a sacramentarian.... Baptism is the public proclamation of one's inward spiritual relation to Christ attained before the baptism. See Galatians 3:27 where it is like putting on an outward garment or uniform. "Into his death"... So here "unto his death," "in relation to his death," which relation Paul proceeds to explain by the symbolism of the ordinance. [11]

Therefore we see that the Greek grammar itself does not teach that the baptism here spoken of is actually the means of getting "into Christ."

Second, Paul is speaking in figures and symbols throughout the first half of this chapter. Would the proponents of baptismal regeneration take verse 6 ("our old man was crucified with Him") literally, or will they recognize it as symbolic? It is symbolic, and it paints a vivid picture of dying to self and being alive to Christ. But this gives us precedent to interpret "baptism" in this passage as symbolic, too.


Another key to the fact that this passage is to be interpreted symbolically is verse 11, which reads:

Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

All along, it is this "reckoning" that is emphasized. The "also" tells us that we reckon ourselves not only dead to sin, but also reckon other things of ourselves. These are expressed in the two symbols of being baptized in Christ and being crucified with Him (verses 3, 4, 6).


Thus Paul is simply using baptism as a symbol to paint a vivid picture of what happens when one is identified with Christ: that is, when one has "put on Christ," and has been "born again." Baptism gives an excellent picture of what it is to become a Christian, for it pictures the burial and resurrection. But the baptism itself is not that burial or resurrection. As Robertson put it, "[A] symbol is not the reality, but the picture of the reality." [12] Baptism, therefore, symbolized identification with Christ.

Third, that baptism symbolizes identification can be shown by two studies. In I Corinthians 10:2-4, Paul wrote of the Israelites:

All were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.

This clearly shows that "baptism into Moses was a symbolic way of speaking of their identification with him: they ate the same meat, and drank the same drink: they were identified with him.


Furthermore, a careful reading of Romans 5:12-6:11 shows clearly that identification with Christ, on the one side, or with Adam, on the other, was Paul's theme. It is by our identification with Adam that death passed upon all men (5:12); it is through his offense that the many are dead (5:15); and by the judgment of him that all stand condemned (5:16); and because of his offense death reigns over all men (5:17) until they are saved (7:25, 8:1); by his offense judgment came on all (5:18); by his disobedience many were made sinners (5:19). But on the other hand, it is by our identification with Christ that we have life: Adam pre-figured Christ in this sense, that identification with him brings on us the things which apply to him, and identification with Christ brings on us the things which apply to Him (5:14). Yet the benefits of identification with Christ far outweigh the tragedies of identification with Adam (5:15); by identification with Him God's grace abounds to those who are identified with Him (5:15); by identification with Him the gift of justification comes to us (5:16); identification with Christ brings abundant righteousness in life (5:17); identification with Him brings justification and righteousness unto life (5:18); identification with Him applies His obedience to us (5:19).



Paul uses baptism often as a symbol of identification. He does it in 1 Corinthians 10:2. He follows the tremendous passage on identification with Christ on the one hand and with Adam on the other with a more in-depth passage on identification with Christ (Romans 6:1-11). As Christ died for our sins, and "became sin for us" (II Corinthians 5:21), so He died to sin because He had taken on our sins (Romans 6:10). Thus when we are identified with Him, we too are "dead to sin" (Romans 6:2); we are identified with His death (verse 3), with His burial and resurrection (verse 4), with His newness of life because of this resurrection (verses 4-5), in His crucifixion (verse 6), in living with Him (verse 8), and in dominion over death forevermore (verse 9). Paul concluded this line of thought by writing:

For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all, but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord (verses 10-11).

The entire passage of Romans 5:12-6:11 is concerned with our identification first and naturally with Adam, and second and by spiritual rebirth with Christ (John 3:3-6). It is correct, therefore, especially in the light of Paul's usage of the term in I Corinthians 10:2, to understand "baptism" in Romans 6 as symbolic of identification. Therefore it is not water baptism which actually puts us "Into Christ" or is necessary for our salvation, but identification with Christ: dying with Him to sin, rising with Him to life, living with Him to dominion over death and sin.

Romans 6:3-4, therefore, does not prove the necessity of baptism for salvation.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/ic...2.html#romans6

--------------------------
Yet the challenge of John 3 persists ...

Adino:

Please, exegete, John 3 as if it was the only text you had available. What do the words "born of water" mean in textual context? Show me why you feel the author means baptism in this passage. Why do you reject the possibility that the author simply uses the word "water" metaphorically as he does soon afterwards in chapters 4 (v10-16) and 7 (v37-39)? Why not allow the author to define his own terms?

Pelathais:

All I ask is that we focus on John 3:5 and its context when discussing John 3:5. Don't make grand and presumptuous statements about everything else while ignoring what's right in front of us.

[tbpew]

wow dan-o,
was all that a rick ross paste effort?

just wondering?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by tbpew

wow dan-o,
was all that a rick ross paste effort?

just wondering?

I've delineated and cited what is his ... you still get in F in your exegesis of John 3. oloroid Maybe if you spoke on the wind in John 3 it'll jive/click for us.

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I've delineated and cited what is his ... you still get in F in your exegesis of John 3. oloroid Maybe if you spoke on the wind in John 3 it'll jive/click for us.

dan-o,
I'll leave you with your teaching on a dry, no-burial, new birth.

I don't want to provide your view any extra air time for the causal reader.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by tbpew

Taking water baptism out of the John 3:5 witness is foolish. To do so, one would have to bring the words of the one who is the wisdom of all the ages to mean:
...you must be born before you can be born again. That is an interpretation I fully reject. To accept it, one would have to understand that a leader among the Jews was struggling with wondering if he needed to be born to be born again. He was not.

He was.

You seem to have missed the whole point of John 3. A "leader among the Jews" (Nicodemas) emphatically was "struggling with wondering if he needed to be born to be born again."

That's why Nicodemas makes the statement: "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?"

He was struggling so hard Jesus pointed it out to him: "Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?"

Originally Posted by tbpew

If there is edification in the words of John 3:5 it is in the understanding that new birth requires an operation of death pertaining to the former condition.

We need to understand:
Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abides alone.

Our understanding of a seed's transformation from a former state to newness is a direct witness of the operation of death and burial's essential, inescapable role with new life.

A person who teaches leaving water out of the new birth is leaving the former things alive.

Any one who teaches this view ought to teach about the wineskins and fabric patches as well, so that the folks they are leading can be prepared.

Again, concerning the New Birth itself, I said "The thing that gets me is that the importance, even the essentiallity of water baptism still has a strong case from other passages of scripture. There's really no need to force a "water baptism" into John 3:5."

Were talking about John 3:5 and my point is, tbpew- you make it harder for me to evangelize "those other denominations" like Brother Haney exhorted us to do. You make it harder by insisting that John 3:5 is about water baptism when that is not the case.

We'll convince them on the importance of water baptism with other verses. But when they prove you wrong about John 3:5, it kind of hard to get their respect and attention again.

Let's clean up our message. That's my point.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by tbpew

dan-o,
I'll leave you with your teaching on a dry, no-burial, new birth.

I don't want to provide your view any extra air time for the causal reader.

Dry? MMM ... Jesus defines his terms in the same book ... written by the same author ... gives us all the moisture you desire ...

John 4

10 Jesus answered her, If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water. 11 Sir, the woman said, you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water?
12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?
13 Jesus answered, Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again,
14 but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.
15 The woman said to him, Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.
16 He told her, Go, call your husband and come back.
17 I have no husband, she replied. Jesus said to her, You are right when you say you have no husband.
18 The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.
19 Sir, the woman said, I can see that you are a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshipped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.
21 Jesus declared, Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.
22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews.
23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks.
24 God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth.


John 7

37Now on (BB)the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, "(BC)If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. 38"He who believes in Me, (BD)as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of (BE)living water.'"
39But this He spoke (BF)of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for (BG)the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet (BH)glorified.