Water/Spirit

[Sam]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Jhn 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
Jhn 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
Jhn 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Jhn 3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
Jhn 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Jhn 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Jhn 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.


In todays modern English

There was this dude named Nic, a boss man of the Jews.

Nic came scoping out Jesus one night, and said "Dude, I know you got connections, cause no body without connections can bring it on the way you do

Big J said to him, "I lie not homie, Unless you are born from above, You can't scope out what I am talking about".

Then Nic said, "Yo Big J, How can I be born from above when I am old. Can my momma birth me again?

Big J said, " Nic, unless you have had a water and a Spirit birth, you can't join my gang. your first birth gives you life here, but your second birth give you life everlasting. Are you tripping because I said you must be born from above?

Or, "Yo Mama gave you a water birth, a flesh birth. You can't go back and do that again. That's the first birth. You need another birth, a second birth, a birth of the Spirit."

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Sam

Or, "Yo Mama gave you a water birth, a flesh birth. You can't go back and do that again. That's the first birth. You need another birth, a second birth, a birth of the Spirit."

Again, you are adding your interpretation of the verse to it. Why not just leave it as it is written. Then if it fits, it fits.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Again, you are adding your interpretation of the verse to it. Why not just leave it as it is written. Then if it fits, it fits.

St. Matt,
We're both adding our interpretation to it. We each read it in the light of what we already believe.

At least it's not being quoted here like I've seen some quote it, "Except a man be born again of the water and of the Spirit...."

[Rico]

One Accord, I've read your posts since I logged off, and the others' too. While reading them I couldn't help but think how much our perception of salvation affects how we read the Word. You read that passage and make a connection with water baptism I don't see, at least not in the part you are saying connects to water baptism. I see the connection to water baptism in Jesus saying we must be born of the Spirit, because I believe part of that process, an element if you will, is getting water baptized. I don't see that connection in Him saying we must be born of water because I don't see scriptures equating baptism with birth. An element of the new birth process? Most definitely. Specifically refering to water baptism when He said "born of water"? Absolutely not.

What bothers me most, when I get into the discussion of this scripture setting, is that the last thing I want people to think is that I don't believe in water baptism. God forbid I ever remove that aspect of salvation from His plan. Inevitably, people start quoting scripture, as Theophil did, completely glossing over the parts that prove my point about baptism being connected specifically to burial, and gleefully think they've proved me wrong. I don't believe that baptism alone brings about new birth, anymore than I believe that repentance or infilling of the Holy Ghost, by themselves, bring about new birth (not that I have ever read of someone receiving the HG without first having repented). I believe it takes all three for someone to be born of the Spirit.

That is a glimpse of the driving force behind my studies. These truths, repentance, baptism in Jesus Name, and infilling of the Holy Ghost, and how we as believers identify with these truths, is what led me to question the "born of water=baptism" doctrine. I could not find anywhere where water baptism in the NT is connected with being born. Nowhere. That's what caused me to take another look at the conversation between Nicodemus and Jesus. At the risk of repeating myself, Jesus was making a contrast between our natural birth and our spiritual birth because of the question Nicodemus asked him about going back into his mother's womb a second time to be reborn. Otherwise, Jesus completely ignored the question and was rambling about something that had nothing to do with answering the man.

[Sam]

This is an old post that I have posted before:

I said in an earlier post that one of the factors that affects our view of just how and when a person is saved is our understanding of what the “water” is or of what the term “born of water” means in John 3:5.

For purposes of this post I am using the terms “born again” or “regenerated” and “saved” as being the same experience. This would be salvation according to the way I understand that it is presented in our New Testament. I’m using it in the sense that we have been saved from sin and we are currently saved. I am not using it in the sense that our salvation will not actually be completed until we are resurrected incorruptible and immortal.

There are not a whole lot of references to being born again in the Bible that I can think of right now. The primary passage is John 3:1-21 which is the classic story of Nicodemus who came to Jesus by night. 1 Peter 1:23 refers to a time in the past when we were “born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, by the word of God.” James 1:18 says “of his own will begat he us with the word of truth.” In Titus 3:5 Paul speaks of “the washing of regeneration” and in Gal 3:29 he says, “ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” and follows that with a reference to our having been baptized into Christ (into the name of Christ according to the Syriac Bible) and having put on Christ. The Apostle John refers to us as “sons of God” (1 John 3:1-2), “children of God” (1 John 5:2) and as “born of God” (1 John 5:1, 4) plus other references in his epistle.

A few words about the classic passage on regeneration. John starts out by telling us about Nicodemus, a ruler (Sanhedrin member) and a Pharisee who came to Jesus by night. Jesus spoke these words to him, “Except a man be born again (or anew or from above), he cannot see (perceive, comprehend, experience) the kingdom of God” (verse 3). Nicodemus asks, “How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?” Jesus then answers this query as recorded in verses 5-8. “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” Nicodemus then asks another question, “How can these things be?” Jesus then gives an explanation which is found in verses 10-21. The account goes on. Jesus answered and said unto him, “Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.”

Jesus said that there is a birth of water and a birth of Spirit. He also said that this new birth experience was something “that we (He and others at that time) do know, and that we have seen” (verse 11) so it was something that had already happened to some and had been experienced by some. Jesus also said that this rebirth was the result of believing in Him (verses 15-21). He compared it to the Israelites in the wilderness receiving new life by looking by faith at the brazen serpent which had been hung on a pole (Numbers 21:4-8).

Now, what about the “water” in verse 5?

I don’t know how many opinions there are about what the “water” is that is spoken of there. I know about several and I will list them below.

1. Some believe that “born of water’ refers to our first birth. In our mother’s womb we were carried in a sac of water. When we came into the world this water was spilled. A woman may refer to this by saying, “My water broke,” or “they (hospital workers) broke my water.” The fluid is some times called “amniotic fluid” but is generally referred to as water. Those who believe in this theory say that in verse 5, Jesus was answering Nicodemus’ question about being born when he is old and about entering into his mother’s womb again. Jesus was saying some thing like, “No, you don’t go back into the womb. Don’t confuse the two births. This is a second birth, a rebirth. The first birth was a birth of water but the second birth is a birth of the Spirit. The first birth was of the flesh and affects you physically but the second birth is a birth of the Spirit and affects your spirit.”

2. Some believe that the “water’ spoken of in John 3:5 is the “Word of God.” Both 1 Peter 1:23 and James 1:18 mention the word being part of the new birth process. Another verse used to support this is John 15:3 where Jesus said, “Now are ye clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” Jesus is the vine and we are the branches and these branches are clean through the word. I think it was Bro. Gordon Magee that said Jesus was not referring to washing the branches with the word like water but was referring to pruning them with the penknife of the word. Another verse that is used to show that this water is the word is Eph 5:26 that is usually (mis)quoted as “that he might sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of the water of the word.” If you read the King James Bible it does not really say it that way.

3. Others believe that the water spoken of in verse 5 is the Spirit of God. God’s Spirit is referred to as water several places in the Bible. This is based on a rule called “Granville Sharp’s rule.” This rule states that “when you have two nouns, which are not proper names, and the two nouns are connected by the word "and," and the first noun has the article ("the") while the second does not, both nouns are referring to the same person.” This rule is some times invoked by Oneness teachers to show that phrases like “our God and Savior” or “the God and Father” both refer to the same person because there is no “the” in the Greek text in front of the second noun. I am not a Greek scholar. I don’t know if that applies here but some say it does and the “water and spirit” both refer to the same thing. The Amplified Bible offers as an alternate reading “except a man be born of water even the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Dr. Kenneth Wuest’s Expanded Translation renders verse 5 as “unless a person is born out of water as a source, even out of the Spirit as a source, he is not able to enter the kingdom of God.”

4. Another theory is that “born of water” refers to water baptism. The (Roman Catholic) Douay Bible has a note at John 3:5 which says, “By these words our Saviour hath declared the necessity of baptism: and by the word water it is evident that the application of it is necessary with the words... (Matthew 28:9).” The Roman Catholics are not the only ones that believe this. It is also taught by some Protestants, by the Church of Christ (Campbellites) and by some Oneness Pentecostals. Another verse used to show that this is water baptism is Ezekiel 36:25-27 where God speaks of a time in the future when He will sprinkle Israel with clean water to cleanse them, give them a new heart, put a new Spirit within them, take out their heart of stone, and cause them to walk in His statutes and keep His judgments. Also cited is the old custom of Jews referring to Gentiles who had converted to Judaism and had gone through the mikveh cleansing as being “born of water.”

There may be other interpretations of what the water of John 3:5 means but these are some that I have heard. You may have heard others. You may believe one of the above or maybe none of the above. I just wanted to show that there are different ways that people look at John 3:5. I am not arguing in favor of any of these. I’m just placing them before you.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Sam

St. Matt,
We're both adding our interpretation to it. We each read it in the light of what we already believe.

At least it's not being quoted here like I've seen some quote it, "Except a man be born again of the water and of the Spirit...."

Actually, I didn't force it to say anything other than what it said. I don't have to. I accept it just as it is.

[OneAccord]

I appreciate the response, Rico. So... you don't think Jesus was referring to water baptism in John 3? Big deal. I certainly won't take issue with your point of view, and I don't think for even a second you deny the necessity of water baptism. I engaged in the conversation with you for one reason. This has been one of the best, if not THE best, converstaions on two different points of veiw I have seen in a while. I really enjoyed the talk- Its not often people on different sides of the aisle, so to speak can do this without somebody's feathers getting ruffled. It had ben an enjoyable evening. And, with that, I gotta hit the hay!

[bkstokes]

Sam wrote "Jesus said that there is a birth of water and a birth of Spirit. He also said that this new birth experience was something “that we (He and others at that time) do know, and that we have seen” (verse 11) so it was something that had already happened to some and had been experienced by some. Jesus also said that this rebirth was the result of believing in Him (verses 15-21). He compared it to the Israelites in the wilderness receiving new life by looking by faith at the brazen serpent which had been hung on a pole (Numbers 21:4-8)."


This is quite an observation.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Actually, I didn't force it to say anything other than what it said. I don't have to. I accept it just as it is.

Brother, feel free to defend the status quo. I'm not going to knock you for that. At one time I believed the way you do about this scripture, mainly because that is the way I was taught it. I had to let that belief go, however, when I studied it out for myself. I don't believe that my belief on this scripture takes anything away from the Gospel whatsoever. If anything, I believe it makes a stronger case for the Gospel, as I understand its application in our lives.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

I appreciate the response, Rico. So... you don't think Jesus was referring to water baptism in John 3? Big deal. I certainly won't take issue with your point of view, and I don't think for even a second you deny the necessity of water baptism. I engaged in the conversation with you for one reason. This has been one of the best, if not THE best, converstaions on two different points of veiw I have seen in a while. I really enjoyed the talk- Its not often people on different sides of the aisle, so to speak can do this without somebody's feathers getting ruffled. It had ben an enjoyable evening. And, with that, I gotta hit the hay!

I will admit that, at first, I didn't want to get involved, OA. I usually get slammed by both sides over this issue. You oughtta see what happens when I get to talkin about other stuff I believe. Cons, Libs, Mods, and everything in between form an immediate alliance! Hehehehehehe! God bless you, Bro.