John 3 - Born of Water and Spirit
- Thread starter GracePeace
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
"Born of water" has been generally misunderstood. Many wrongly believe it means baptismal regeneration. Others wrongly believe that it is a reference to amniotic fluid. Few understand that it is a metaphor for the Word of God, which is "the seed" on the New Birth.
When Jesus spoke of being born of water, He was alluding to what was revealed in Ezekiel 36:25: Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
Now what kind of water would God Himself sprinkle on sinners? Obviously it would not be H2O since it would cleanse from filthiness (sins) and idols. The answer is found in Ephesians 5:25,26: Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word...
According to this passage it is the application of the Word of God that cleanses the soul (by convicting and convincing). Thus it applies to the Gospel -- also the Word of God -- under the power of the Holy Spirit. and that is exactly what Peter and James tell us:
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the Word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the Word which by the Gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25)
This corresponds to the truth that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. And it is only those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ who are born again (contrary to Calvinistic nonsense about people being regenerated BEFORE they believe and are saved).
James confirms the words of Peter thus: Of his own will begat he [gave birth to] us with the Word of Truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:19)
To sum up, when Jesus said that the New Birth is by the power of the Holy Spirit and the power of the Word of God, He was speaking about spiritual realities and not physical substances.
When Jesus spoke of being born of water, He was alluding to what was revealed in Ezekiel 36:25: Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
Now what kind of water would God Himself sprinkle on sinners? Obviously it would not be H2O since it would cleanse from filthiness (sins) and idols. The answer is found in Ephesians 5:25,26: Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word...
According to this passage it is the application of the Word of God that cleanses the soul (by convicting and convincing). Thus it applies to the Gospel -- also the Word of God -- under the power of the Holy Spirit. and that is exactly what Peter and James tell us:
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the Word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the Word which by the Gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25)
This corresponds to the truth that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. And it is only those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ who are born again (contrary to Calvinistic nonsense about people being regenerated BEFORE they believe and are saved).
James confirms the words of Peter thus: Of his own will begat he [gave birth to] us with the Word of Truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:19)
To sum up, when Jesus said that the New Birth is by the power of the Holy Spirit and the power of the Word of God, He was speaking about spiritual realities and not physical substances.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
No being "born again" is being born of the Word. Jesus clearly describes the water birth and the spirit birth in the very next verse!
John 3:5-6
King James Version
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.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
The "kai" (and) tells us that Jesus is speaking of two births. we are saved through one new birth not two!
Verse 6 tells us that water birth is natural birth. We are conceived and grow in water and birthed o ut of water. That is why many times when women start labor their "water brakes".
We also get that old and true euphemism: "Born once(water/flesh/natural) die twice(physically /spiritually) born twice (natural and spiritual) die once (physical.)
Jesus is a far better grammatician than how we try to interpret His Words. He would never mix literal and metaphorical in the same sentence in a conversation like this. That would be horrendous grammar and form.
Was that not obvious? And are not your arguments specious? Who said anything about two new births?
I have provided all the Scriptures pertaining to the spiritual New Birth. Kindly read my post again.
Many, many times I have explained that my view is NOT that water and Spirit are the same but refer to the Word and the Spirit. I use the materials provided me by the author. Please do not miss that I think "water" is "Word".
Yes, to say "born of flesh" and "born of spirit" refer to the two births is correct--flesh is a nature and spirit is a nature.
Word is water.
Sorry, I meant that I didn't think I even got direct responses.
My view only causes Jesus to err if we do not defer to the material the author provides--if we defer to the terms and definitions provided it becomes clear "water" means "Word", and then you remember that the Bible does elsewhere teach we are "born again of incorruptible seed" (the Word). Both the Word and Spirit are God and John teaches we are "born not of the will of flesh but of God".
Go ahead and respond when you get a chance please.
Thanks!
Jesus is laying out the requirement for entering the Kingdom, so He's only discussing the new birth with "water and Spirit".
Ferris Bueller
Well-Known Member
It's helpful to look at this from Nicodemus' point of view. I think it's safe to see that Jesus is telling him he needs an additional birth. He's already got the 'water' birth down. What he lacks is the 'spiritual' birth. And we all know what the spiritual birth is. And we can understand what the 'water' birth is by seeing what water meant in the life of a Jew in Nicodemus' day.
Jesus equates the water birth as a 'flesh giving birth to flesh' kind of birth. Well, we know water meant water baptism in his day (don't bail out on me, yet, lol). Specifically, John's baptism for repentance. So the question is, "What kind of 'flesh' does the waters of repentance birth?" What man is birthed when one repents and turns to the law (remember, this is Nicodemus' day, not ours)? A natural man, of course, born of self effort. But that's not enough to see and enter into the kingdom of God. John's baptism only prepared a person for the appearing of Christ, who would then grant the spiritual birth. Paul talks about this 'natural' vs. 'spiritual' birth in Galatians 4:28-29.
Just repenting births a man born according to the effort of the flesh—a natural man—and one who will not see or enter into the kingdom of God. But a man born of both repentance and faith in Christ, by the Spirit, is a spiritual man—one who will see and enter into the kingdom.
Jesus equates the water birth as a 'flesh giving birth to flesh' kind of birth. Well, we know water meant water baptism in his day (don't bail out on me, yet, lol). Specifically, John's baptism for repentance. So the question is, "What kind of 'flesh' does the waters of repentance birth?" What man is birthed when one repents and turns to the law (remember, this is Nicodemus' day, not ours)? A natural man, of course, born of self effort. But that's not enough to see and enter into the kingdom of God. John's baptism only prepared a person for the appearing of Christ, who would then grant the spiritual birth. Paul talks about this 'natural' vs. 'spiritual' birth in Galatians 4:28-29.
28Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise (spiritual children). 29At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.
Just repenting births a man born according to the effort of the flesh—a natural man—and one who will not see or enter into the kingdom of God. But a man born of both repentance and faith in Christ, by the Spirit, is a spiritual man—one who will see and enter into the kingdom.
“Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. (the effort of) Flesh gives birth to flesh, but (faith in Christ by) the Spirit gives birth to spirit. John 3:5-6
Both births are necessary to see and enter into the kingdom. John appeared to bring the people of Israel to the requirement to repent, birthing natural men. Jesus appeared to fill in the requirement for faith in God, birthing spiritual men who inherit the kingdom.
Ferris Bueller
Well-Known Member
Which is why 'water' is referring to fleshly repentance, and 'spirit' is referring to faith in God. Repentance alone births our favorite whipping boy, the 'legalist'. He can not and will not inherit the kingdom. But faith in God births a spiritual man, the one who inherits the kingdom of his Father, even though he is born second, defying all natural expectation that the son born first is the one who inherits the blessing.
@CadyandZoe @Ferris Bueller @Enoch111 @Ronald Nolette
Nicodemus misunderstands what "born again" means ("Born again? Be born out of my mother's womb again?"), so, in His clarification, Jesus first addresses Nicodemus's error (the negative--"No, not being born of any womb at all--much less returning to your mother's womb to come back out again (that would still be flesh).").
Nicodemus misunderstands what "born again" means ("Born again? Be born out of my mother's womb again?"), so, in His clarification, Jesus first addresses Nicodemus's error (the negative--"No, not being born of any womb at all--much less returning to your mother's womb to come back out again (that would still be flesh).").
Last edited:
Illuminator
Well-Known Member
Another proposed explanation is that the “water” refers to the word of God.
Proponents of this interpretation use 1 Peter 1:23 for support: “You have been born anew, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God.” Notice how Peter associates the second birth with the “word of God.”
Protestants further support this claim with Ephesians 5:25-26, where Paul speaks of Christ cleansing the Church “by the washing of water with the word.” They then couple this with John 15:3, where Jesus says, “You are already made clean by the word which I have spoken to you.”
When you take into consideration that the second birth elsewhere in Scripture is associated with the word of God, and that the word of God is that which washes us clean, then it seems plausible for a Protestant to conclude that the water in the born again discourse refers to the word of God and not the waters of baptism.
The problem here is that the conclusion, “The water in the born again discourse doesn’t refer to baptism,” does not follow from the premise, “We are born anew by the word of God.” Philosophers have a term for this type of argument: non sequitur, which is Latin for “it does not follow.”
To be born again by the word of God is not mutually exclusive from being born anew through the waters of baptism. It’s possible that one can be born again by both, no matter how you interpret the phrase word of God.
For example, the word of God is, first, a person: Jesus. John describes Jesus as the “Word of God” in both John 1:1-3 and Revelation 19:13. But being born anew by Jesus doesn’t preclude the waters of baptism as also being a cause of our new birth. In fact, Paul tells us that it is through baptism that we are incorporated into Jesus and are able to drink of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13). It’s not either Jesus or the waters of baptism; it’s both-and.
The word of God that Peter speaks of in 1 Peter 1:23 is the “good news preached” (1 Pet. 1:25)—the oral preaching that Paul calls the “word of God” in 1 Thessalonians 2:13. Must we conclude that our second birth is made actual by apostolic preaching rather the waters of baptism? (Or Jesus, for that matter.) Isn’t Peter the one who commands those listening on the day of Pentecost to “repent and be baptized” in order that they may receive the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)?
Even if we take the word of God as referring to the Bible, as most Protestants readily do, it doesn’t undermine water baptism as a cause of our new birth, since the form of water baptism is straight from the Bible: “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Here too, our new birth is made actual by both the “word of God” and the waters of baptism.
It’s true that more work needs to be done to fully support the Catholic interpretation of the born again teaching. But at least we can see that attempts to reinterpret “born of water” as not referring to the waters of baptism are unconvincing. John 3:3-5 remains strong biblical evidence for spiritual rebirth by baptism.
Defending Rebirth by Water
Proponents of this interpretation use 1 Peter 1:23 for support: “You have been born anew, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God.” Notice how Peter associates the second birth with the “word of God.”
Protestants further support this claim with Ephesians 5:25-26, where Paul speaks of Christ cleansing the Church “by the washing of water with the word.” They then couple this with John 15:3, where Jesus says, “You are already made clean by the word which I have spoken to you.”
When you take into consideration that the second birth elsewhere in Scripture is associated with the word of God, and that the word of God is that which washes us clean, then it seems plausible for a Protestant to conclude that the water in the born again discourse refers to the word of God and not the waters of baptism.
The problem here is that the conclusion, “The water in the born again discourse doesn’t refer to baptism,” does not follow from the premise, “We are born anew by the word of God.” Philosophers have a term for this type of argument: non sequitur, which is Latin for “it does not follow.”
To be born again by the word of God is not mutually exclusive from being born anew through the waters of baptism. It’s possible that one can be born again by both, no matter how you interpret the phrase word of God.
For example, the word of God is, first, a person: Jesus. John describes Jesus as the “Word of God” in both John 1:1-3 and Revelation 19:13. But being born anew by Jesus doesn’t preclude the waters of baptism as also being a cause of our new birth. In fact, Paul tells us that it is through baptism that we are incorporated into Jesus and are able to drink of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13). It’s not either Jesus or the waters of baptism; it’s both-and.
The word of God that Peter speaks of in 1 Peter 1:23 is the “good news preached” (1 Pet. 1:25)—the oral preaching that Paul calls the “word of God” in 1 Thessalonians 2:13. Must we conclude that our second birth is made actual by apostolic preaching rather the waters of baptism? (Or Jesus, for that matter.) Isn’t Peter the one who commands those listening on the day of Pentecost to “repent and be baptized” in order that they may receive the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)?
Even if we take the word of God as referring to the Bible, as most Protestants readily do, it doesn’t undermine water baptism as a cause of our new birth, since the form of water baptism is straight from the Bible: “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Here too, our new birth is made actual by both the “word of God” and the waters of baptism.
It’s true that more work needs to be done to fully support the Catholic interpretation of the born again teaching. But at least we can see that attempts to reinterpret “born of water” as not referring to the waters of baptism are unconvincing. John 3:3-5 remains strong biblical evidence for spiritual rebirth by baptism.
Defending Rebirth by Water
No, you also missed that the author tells us "rivers of living water" refers to the effect of receiving "the Spirit" in John 7. We speak words of life after we receive the Spirit. We are born of God--by means of the Word spoken by the power of the Spirit.
@Illuminator
He is speaking the Word by the Spirit so that Christ will be in them again.
This arguing to bring them back under the persuasion from God is "giving birth again".
Guess what ISN'T "giving birth again". "Baptism".
"My little children, for whom I am again in pangs of labor until Christ be formed in you again." Galatians 4:19.
He is speaking the Word by the Spirit so that Christ will be in them again.
This arguing to bring them back under the persuasion from God is "giving birth again".
Guess what ISN'T "giving birth again". "Baptism".
Last edited:
BTW, is "baptismal rebirth" a dogma? I've already disproven "Mary is New Eve" which is the foundation of the dogma of "Mary's Immaculate Conception". This would be another.
Psalm 119 "I have more insight than all my teachers because Your statutes are my counselors" (para).
You're welcome. You can leave the ridiculous priestly garments behind lol
mailmandan
Well-Known Member
To automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted. Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If that sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.
Water is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, divine life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit. (Titus 3:5)
Water is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, divine life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit. (Titus 3:5)
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
The mere fact Jesus did not mention baptism at all when he told him how to receive the new birth of eternal life, just further proves this point
Nancy
Well-Known Member
John 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."
When were you first born? In the natural. Through your mothers "natural" womb.
John 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?"
Jesus reply?
"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."
And the VERY NEXT scripture?
John 3:6
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
So, would not "natural" birth be of the "flesh? I see nothing of baptism anywhere near these verses, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A few more verses Jesus says,
John 3:12
"If I have told you earthly things, (which He did...born of flesh?) and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?"
(Born of The Spirit)
He spoke of natural, birth. "born of water and THEN born of Spirit...? Flesh/Spirit...I see nothing about baptism.
These verses have always had me wondering and, not saying that I'm correct but, I really do not think it is about the water baptism of John.
This is where I have landed so far and...right or wrong, He will reveal it to me.
Love you bro!!!
Ferris Bueller
Well-Known Member
Not water baptism itself, but the repentance that water baptism represents. John's baptism, the baptism for repentance, births a natural man. Jesus' baptism by the Spirit births a spiritual man.
The man born of flesh, the man of works: "...the son born according to the flesh..." Galatians 4:29
The man born of the Spirit, the man of faith: "...the son born by the power of the Spirit..." Galatians 4:29
Ferris Bueller
Well-Known Member
John's baptism was a baptism for repentance and is flesh giving birth to flesh. It births a son of Abraham "born according to the flesh"—Galatians 4:29. But Jesus' baptism is the Spirit giving birth to spirit and results in a son of Abraham "born by the power of the Spirit"—Galatians 4:29. The son born by the power of the Spirit inherits the kingdom, not the son born as a result of the flesh—Galatians 4:30. That's why you must be born of water AND the Spirit to see the kingdom of God. Jesus is telling Nicodemus that John's baptism, though necessary, is not enough to see and enter into the kingdom of God.
“I baptize you with water for repentance... He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." Matthew 3:11
Last edited:
Similar threads
