3 reasons favor the interpretation that "born of water and the Spirit" in John 3:5 means "water baptism" and an accompanying experience of the regenerating Spirit:
(1) You can come up with no example from the NT era of water as a reference to amniotic fluid.
Nonsense! The entire context is speaking of going back into a mother's womb and being re-born! Jesus answered the question that way!
Being born of water and being born of the Spirit are two different things. Water does not birth you with the Spirit.
Fact: Nowhere in all of Scripture is it said that anyone was immersed in the Spirit! The symbol and the substance of the Holy Spirit is always sprinkling and pouring. You probably were not baptized right, because the symbolism must be like the substance!
(2) Being born of water and the Spirit is a condition for entering the kingdom of God. Amniotic fluid has nothing to do with spirituality. But on the other hand, Peter teaches that baptism saves you (1 Peter 3:19).
True! Jesus said that which is flesh is flesh.... yet another fact is revealed.... you cannot be saved unless you were actually born! We must be "Born-AGAIN, this time spiritually!
(3) In Galatians 3:37, 29 Paul uses new birth imagery to explain what happens to the newly baptized. He teaches that "as many of you as have been baptized into Christ...have become Abraham's offspring" by faith.
Evangelicals wish Peter had never claimed that baptism saves, but Peter is merely reflecting what Jesus taught in John 3:5. Exactly in what sense baptism saves you is the subject for another thread.
Peter is not referring to John 3:5 in the least! Look at the example Peter says that Baptism is a FIGURE, not a REALITY, and that those in the Ark were saved by water. But notice a fact! Those an the Ark were never immersed, but everyone outside of the Ark was!
Galatians 3:27 and 29 do not have a drop of water in them! It is speaking a spiritual baptism by the Spirit. Water cannot put you into Christ.