Serious Faith Question

lsume said:

Your logical approach to the subject is just that, logical. I’m a retired mechanical engineer and can appreciate logic but this Topic is beyond logic. The only possesion that you currently have of infinite value is your eternal soul. Please consider praying and fasting in seeking The Truth.

Click to expand...

Funny I just saw His question....because today I was just talking to my spouse about 2 types of faith our continued discussion from the other day. And I may be wrong ...
But it stemmed from a passage of the location faith and love were at, "in Christ"
Therefore I believe there may be a measure of faith to every man to believe who Jesus is,
From the physical side....but after crossing over from death to life. The faith that continues to save is the faith that works by love.....both have in common belief...but the latter after being made anew[born again, or born from above] Therefore my take on water and spirit is just what He says....physical Man is born when a mother gives birth after her water burst. THEREFORE flesh gives birth to flesh. That is one type of life. However the new birth, born again or "from above"..experience Is a new life
that saturates ones life that's from God. SPIRIT GIVES BIRTH TO SPIRIT

corinth77777 said:

Funny I just saw His question....because today I was just talking to my spouse about 2 types of faith our continued discussion from the other day. And I may be wrong ...
But it stemmed from a passage of the location faith and love were at, "in Christ"
Therefore I believe there may be a measure of faith to every man to believe who Jesus is,
From the physical side....but after crossing over from death to life. The faith that continues to save is the faith that works by love.....both have in common belief...but the latter after being made anew[born again, or born from above] Therefore my take on water and spirit is just what He says....physical Man is born when a mother gives birth after her water burst. THEREFORE flesh gives birth to flesh. That is one type of life. However the new birth, born again or "from above"..experience Is a new life
that saturates ones life that's from God. SPIRIT GIVES BIRTH TO SPIRIT

Click to expand...

You are right on point with what the new life can be. You will be changed and judged as well. The judgement must first begin at True Christians. As I recall the Scripture Says The judgement must first begin at the House of God. The House of God is born again Christians. Your understanding must be growing.

lsume said:

You are right on point with what the new life can be. You will be changed and judged as well. The judgement must first begin at True Christians. As I recall the Scripture Says The judgement must first begin at the House of God. The House of God is born again Christians. Your understanding must be growing.

Click to expand...

I hope so
There is no condemnation for those in Christ who walk not after the flesh but the Spirit.
At this point..I believe I'm at the place where
I must labor to enter his rest...I think I may look that up....and once entered to do my best to remain....I'm setting myself up to be around the word...to hear it....it really helps...and is continual food for spiritual growth.

MyLordYeshuaTheMessiah said:

If a person has true faith, but has not been baptized.
Are they born again?

If your answer is yes, then explain where the "born of water" part fits into the persons faith.

Click to expand...

I think physical water is not what leads person to be born again. I think “water” can mean the words Jesus declared. Through them there can happen change in person heart so that he is born anew.

Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give me a drink,' you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water." The woman said to him, "Sir, you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep. From where then have you that living water? Are you greater than our father, Jacob, who gave us the well, and drank of it himself, as did his children, and his cattle?" Jesus answered her, "Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst again; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life."
John 4:10-14

Jesus answered him, "Most assuredly, I tell you, unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" Jesus answered, "Most assuredly I tell you, unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God! That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'
John 3:3-7

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

Kaon said:

Yes.

Born of water means you have to be a 100% human. The thief next to Christ that confessed his faith, repented of His ways and named the Word of God as the Christ and Son of God was likely not baptized - He saw the Word of God in Paradise that day.

Click to expand...

Hi Kaon,

In John 3:5-7, the water spoken of by Jesus is not a reference to “baptism,” but is a reference to the water through which a person is born into the world naturally the first time (in their mother's womb). He clarifies this truth when He says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Therefore, Jesus is simply distinguishing the “natural birth” (by water) from the “supernatural birth” (by the Spirit). This is further clarified when He says, “that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

corinth77777 said:

I hope so
There is no condemnation for those in Christ who walk not after the flesh but the Spirit.
At this point..I believe I'm at the place where
I must labor to enter his rest...I think I may look that up....and once entered to do my best to remain....I'm setting myself up to be around the word...to hear it....it really helps...and is continual food for spiritual growth.

Click to expand...

The fact that you know to quote Romans 8:1 says a great deal to me. You are correct as well. Continue walking for The Truth while fasting and praying without ceasing as much as Christ will carry you. There is a day when I believe that the world at large will hear The Truth. If you seek, you will find. Christ came to me as a thief in the night. I had always professed Christ but I did not always walk in Christ. When he came to me, He taught me and continues to teach me today after about 30 years since I was rescued from myself. The date will be closer in March. However, there is punishment for sins when you are empowered to resist sin. To whom much is given much is expected. I strongly sense that you are on the path. You might read Malachi 3:1-3. Those Verses are exactly how it works.

I’ll pray for you.

Kris Jordan said:

Hi Kaon,

In John 3:5-7, the water spoken of by Jesus is not a reference to “baptism,” but is a reference to the water through which a person is born into the world naturally the first time (in their mother's womb). He clarifies this truth when He says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Therefore, Jesus is simply distinguishing the “natural birth” (by water) from the “supernatural birth” (by the Spirit). This is further clarified when He says, “that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

Click to expand...

I agree, but for many that simplicity is lost - which is why I emphasized the human aspect of being eligible to be born again i.e. any real, 100% human born of a 100% human mother is eligible to be born of the spirit of the Most High God.

Genetics are very important, as well as human authenticity. Many entities behave like humans, but are actually disqualified to be born again because they are not 100% human. I am not talking about the short-sighted notion of race being skin color at all; I am talking about, as an example, the Emim, Zuzim, Anakim, Nephilim, Rephaim, etc.

Kris Jordan said:

Hi Kaon,

In John 3:5-7, the water spoken of by Jesus is not a reference to “baptism,” but is a reference to the water through which a person is born into the world naturally the first time (in their mother's womb). He clarifies this truth when He says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Therefore, Jesus is simply distinguishing the “natural birth” (by water) from the “supernatural birth” (by the Spirit). This is further clarified when He says, “that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

Click to expand...

This is the usual go-to answer many in the modern world use, though nobody in the ancient Church believed such a thing.

But it always seem to me that those who advocate this reading haven't seriously considered it, because it amounts to Jesus saying, that to be born again you have to first have been born. Let's consider how weird that is, are there a bunch of people running around who haven't been born that need to hear this so that they can know how to be born again?

And notice that Jesus doesn't say "born of water and born of Spirit" as two births, but speaks of one birth "of water and the Spirit", this is a singular birth, the birth that is from above which He has been speaking about. This is Jesus' response to Nicodemus' apparent confusion. Jesus has told Nicodemus that to enter God's kingdom one must be born from above/again, to which Nicodemus asks, "Shall a man reenter his mother's womb to be born a second time?" Jesus clarifies this by speaking of the new birth as a birth of "water and the Spirit". And then Jesus appeals to Nicodemus' position as an educated rabbi, "Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?"

Why does Jesus make this appeal to Nicodemus rabbinical education? Because Nicodemus should have been keenly aware of the significance tevilah in a mikveh had. Such ritual bathing had many important meanings in Judaism, but one of these was as part of the rite of conversion; for a Gentile to convert and become a Jew they had to undergo tevilah in a mikveh, in which they were regarded as having experienced a new birth as a Jew, having been reborn into God's Covenant people. Thus, why is Nicodemus confused here when Jesus says one must be born anew to see God's kingdom? That one is to be born of water and the Spirit. Nicodemus should have been keenly aware of what Jesus was talking about.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

This is the usual go-to answer many in the modern world use, though nobody in the ancient Church believed such a thing.

But it always seem to me that those who advocate this reading haven't seriously considered it, because it amounts to Jesus saying, that to be born again you have to first have been born. Let's consider how weird that is, are there a bunch of people running around who haven't been born that need to hear this so that they can know how to be born again?

And notice that Jesus doesn't say "born of water and born of Spirit" as two births, but speaks of one birth "of water and the Spirit", this is a singular birth, the birth that is from above which He has been speaking about. This is Jesus' response to Nicodemus' apparent confusion. Jesus has told Nicodemus that to enter God's kingdom one must be born from above/again, to which Nicodemus asks, "Shall a man reenter his mother's womb to be born a second time?" Jesus clarifies this by speaking of the new birth as a birth of "water and the Spirit". And then Jesus appeals to Nicodemus' position as an educated rabbi, "Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?"

Why does Jesus make this appeal to Nicodemus rabbinical education? Because Nicodemus should have been keenly aware of the significance tevilah in a mikveh had. Such ritual bathing had many important meanings in Judaism, but one of these was as part of the rite of conversion; for a Gentile to convert and become a Jew they had to undergo tevilah in a mikveh, in which they were regarded as having experienced a new birth as a Jew, having been reborn into God's Covenant people. Thus, why is Nicodemus confused here when Jesus says one must be born anew to see God's kingdom? That one is to be born of water and the Spirit. Nicodemus should have been keenly aware of what Jesus was talking about.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Hi Kaon,

The belief that this verse speaks of the natural birth and not of water baptism is not based solely on this verse alone but on the totality of Scripture and it's teachings on salvation.

Kris Jordan said:

Hi Kaon,

The belief that this verse speaks of the natural birth and not of water baptism is not based solely on this verse alone but on the totality of Scripture and it's teachings on salvation.

Click to expand...

Not sure why you're calling me Kaon.

So your claim that this speaks of natural birth is based on "the totality of Scripture" seems like something that you should probably back up.

On the other hand, that this refers to Baptism has the folllowing things in its favor:

1. It is consistent with biblical language concerning Baptism.
2. It takes the historical context in which it was said seriously.
3. It is what Christians have always believed.

Which is to say, it's biblical, historical, and orthodox. Three things the "natural birth" argument, I believe, firmly lacks.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

Not sure why you're calling me Kaon.

So your claim that this speaks of natural birth is based on "the totality of Scripture" seems like something that you should probably back up.

On the other hand, that this refers to Baptism has the folllowing things in its favor:

1. It is consistent with biblical language concerning Baptism.
2. It takes the historical context in which it was said seriously.
3. It is what Christians have always believed.

Which is to say, it's biblical, historical, and orthodox. Three things the "natural birth" argument, I believe, firmly lacks.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Hello ViaCrucis, (LOL for calling you Kaon. I thought you were the original poster. Ha! Sorry about that. I wasn't paying attention on that part.)

Is your position on all of this is that water baptism saves us?

Kris Jordan said:

Hello ViaCrucis, (LOL for calling you Kaon. I thought you were the original poster. Ha! Sorry about that. I wasn't paying attention on that part.)

Is your position on all of this is that water baptism saves us?

Click to expand...

My position is that Baptism is the ordinary Means through which God works on us to make us His. I reject what would be called an ex opere operato view of the Sacraments, that is "of the working of the work" or "of the work itself"; the mere act or rite of Baptism isn't salvific; rather Baptism is salvific because of God's word which is attached to the Sacrament. As such Baptism is a gracious work of God through which He acts to accomplish what He Himself has promised to accomplish.

As such when we read, e.g. "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life." (Romans 6:3-4) the text means precisely what it says, that through Baptism we have been united to His death, burial, and resurrection. What is given to us in Baptism is precisely this word and promise from God: death, burial, and resurrection with Jesus Christ. This is true, not because there is something magical about water, but because God has attached this promise in order that we can be confident in God's promise.

God has, therefore, attached His word and promises to external, outward Means. For example, the preaching of the Gospel. It's not that ink on paper or the sounds produced by vocal chords is some how magical--it's that what is proclaimed, what is delivered, what is given here is God's word. The preaching of the Gospel is Means through which God works to create faith, as St. Paul says in Romans 10,

"How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, 'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!' But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, 'Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?' So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ."

It is God's gracious work, through the Means which He has given to the Church, that He acts to convert and bring sinners to Himself.

This is why Christ called His Church not to be silent and do nothing, but to go out and preach the Gospel to every living creature, to make disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

So when you ask me if I believe that "baptism saves", that requires that we first understand what Baptism even is.

If Baptism is merely some churchly ritual done for show, then no, it doesn't do anything.
But if Baptism is God's word connected to, in and under, the external rite, namely the administering of water in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit for the purpose which Christ instituted it--then it most definitely and absolutely does save. Because Baptism is nothing other than the application of Christ's perfect and finished work--His death and resurrection--to us, in order that our sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38), we have been clothed with Jesus Christ Himself (Galatians 3:27), having been buried with Him, died with Him, having been crucified with Him, in order that we have life in Him (Romans 6:3-4, Colossians 2:12). And thus, what St. Peter says is therefore true, "This Baptism which now saves you, not by a removal of dirt from the flesh, but of a pledge of a new conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 3:21)

If Baptism is only a bath, then it means nothing.
If Baptism is God's word and promise conveyed and given to us, efficaciously, through this Means as promised by God and instituted by Christ, for our benefit, then it accomplishes everything which God says about it.

Thus, again, it makes all the difference by what we mean when we say "Baptism".

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

Because Baptism is nothing other than the application of Christ's perfect and finished work--His death and resurrection--to us, in order that our sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38), we have been clothed with Jesus Christ Himself (Galatians 3:27), having been buried with Him, died with Him, having been crucified with Him, in order that we have life in Him (Romans 6:3-4, Colossians 2:12). And thus, what St. Peter says is therefore true, "This Baptism which now saves you, not by a removal of dirt from the flesh, but of a pledge of a new conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 3:21)

If Baptism is only a bath, then it means nothing.
If Baptism is God's word and promise conveyed and given to us, efficaciously, through this Means as promised by God and instituted by Christ, for our benefit, then it accomplishes everything which God says about it.

Click to expand...

Hi ViaCrucis,

Faith is the vehicle through which God's grace (salvation) is imputed to us, not water baptism.

Scripture References:
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9 (NASB)

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:26 (NASB)

...so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith;
Ephesians 3:17a (NASB)

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13 (NKJV)

Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
Romans 5:1-2 (NKJV)

And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
1 John 5:11-13 (NKJV)

But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Titus 3:4-7 (NASB)

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.
Romans 3:28-30 (NKJV)

For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.
John 6:40 (NASB)

...so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith;
Philippians 3:8b-9 (NASB)

What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works.
Romans 9:30-32 (NASB)

For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.
Galatians 2:19-21 (NKJV)

You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 3:14-15 (NASB)

The words “it was credited to him” were written not for him alone, but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness-for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.
Romans 4:23-25 (NIV)

The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.
John 3:35-36 (NJKV)

As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:14-16 (NASB)

Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
John 5:24 (NASB)

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Romans 1:16 (NASB)

Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.
Acts 15:7b-9 (NASB)

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
1 Peter 1:3-5 (NASB)

MyLordYeshuaTheMessiah said:

If a person has true faith, but has not been baptized.
Are they born again?

If your answer is yes, then explain where the "born of water" part fits into the persons faith.

Click to expand...

I would view a water baptism as an outward sign of that public declaration of that faith in Jesus Christ.

The performance of the baptism itself is not the primary doctrine of Christianity.

1 Corinthians 1:17
For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.

The belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the primary doctrine in Christianity.

A water baptism is of secondary importance to the underlying truth of the Christian gospel.

Kris Jordan said:

Hi Kaon,

In John 3:5-7, the water spoken of by Jesus is not a reference to “baptism,” but is a reference to the water through which a person is born into the world naturally the first time (in their mother's womb). He clarifies this truth when He says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Therefore, Jesus is simply distinguishing the “natural birth” (by water) from the “supernatural birth” (by the Spirit). This is further clarified when He says, “that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

Click to expand...

That's not a satisfactory position - it is rather a desperate attempt at a solution, because evangelical assumptions cannot address this passage in a cogent way.

Here's why it's unsatisfactory.
(1) This speech is Christ's main speech on salvation - His magnum opus on the topic. It should therefore be clear speech. If everyone in the world had a wish, it would likely be, 'Would God please just stand before me and tell me in plain language how to be saved?' But that's exactly what He is doing in the passage. Therefore it should be CLEAR.
(2) Reading 'born of water' as natural birth is NOT hermeneutically clear. Why not? Hermeneutics is an imperfect science and therefore needs some ground rules to avoid utter chaos. One of the indispensable rules is that we should interpret the Greek in ways fundamentally similar to how the Greeks themselves used those same words. And here's the problem. Neither in Greek nor in any known language, historically, has 'born of water' been used as an idiom for natural birth. Nobody talks that way. Nobody says stuff like, "I have two children. Back when my first child was born of water..."
(3) Nowhere does the NT set forth natural birth as a prerequisite for salvation. Obviously, if you were never born into this world, you wouldn't be around to seek salvation out of it. Here again, it makes for a hermeneutical anomaly instead of hermeneutical clarity.

What we are looking for is a simple and seamless reading. There shouldn't be any bumps in the road. The challenge in all this is the apparent tension:
(1) On the one hand He seems to say that salvation was by faith alone (John 3:16).
(2) On the other hand He seems to say that water is involved (3:5).

The goal here shouldn't merely be to resolve the tension - the goal should rather be to find a reading so seamless that it suddenly becomes clear that there never was any tension to begin with. And from what I've seen, my reading is the only one in history that can accomplish such. I'll cover it when I have time.

In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels "water" with being born out of a mother’s womb (verse 4) and with "flesh" (verse 6). Simply stated in that case, Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to see the kingdom of God two births are necessary. The first is a physical, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic water) and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that 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 this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the Word of God, and in such uses it 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), but the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration.

So to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

Danthemailman said:

In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels "water" with being born out of a mother’s womb (verse 4) and with "flesh" (verse 6). Simply stated in that case, Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to see the kingdom of God two births are necessary. The first is a physical, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic water) and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that 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 this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the Word of God, and in such uses it 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), but the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration.

So to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

Click to expand...

We shouldn't assume baptism from the get-go. Correct. Rather we should try to establish whether that's the best reading.

But perhaps I'm misreading you. Are you saying there is no physical water involved? In other words we have a phrase "water and Spirit" where the first half is a metaphor for the 2nd half? That's not even how metaphors are normally structured.

This is supposed to be the very Son of God standing before us providing us clear insight on how to be saved. It is the ONE speech that we'd expect to be especially lucid. It is the LAST place we'd expect to see metaphors, especially the utter confusion of a phrase that is half-metaphor and half-literal.

In all that confusion, how can you be sure you don't have it backwards? Meaning, maybe the 2nd half is a metaphor for the 1st half?

Later I will demonstrate that this passage, if read correctly, has no metaphors.

MyLordYeshuaTheMessiah said:

If a person has true faith, but has not been baptized.
Are they born again?

If your answer is yes, then explain where the "born of water" part fits into the persons faith.

Click to expand...

We just do as our Lord modeled and commanded. And this is why the earliest church, continuing throughout the ages in both the east and the west, always took baptism seriously. We don't need to debate with each other about it. Baptism is known as the "sacrament of faith", being the first formal public profession of that faith. Without faith it's meaningless. Either way, the "lavers of regeneration" as it's called in Titus 3, is the normative way God has provided to experience and proclaim our entrance into His kingdom.

Kris Jordan said:

Hi Kaon,

In John 3:5-7, the water spoken of by Jesus is not a reference to “baptism,” but is a reference to the water through which a person is born into the world naturally the first time (in their mother's womb). He clarifies this truth when He says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Therefore, Jesus is simply distinguishing the “natural birth” (by water) from the “supernatural birth” (by the Spirit). This is further clarified when He says, “that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

Click to expand...

As noted in my last couple of posts, John 3:5-16 aims to explain salvation in a clear/seamless manner, and thus without metaphor/parable. Verse 8 LOOKS like a metaphor due to a mistranslation:

"The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound but know not whence it came or where it's going. So is everyone born of the Spirit" (3:8).

As we shall see, the correct title of the Third Person is The Holy Wind (or Breath). Therefore the correct reading of verse 8 is the following, which is NOT a metaphor.

"The Holy Wind (Pneuma) blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound but know not whence it came or where it's going. So it is for anyone born of the Holy Wind (Pneuma)" (3:8).

The traditional metaphor-reading of verse 8 is obviously incorrect, for several reasons:
(1) Ordinary wind doesn't blow/travel WHEREVER IT PLEASES. Rather it ends up wherever the forces of nature drive it. It doesn't CHOOSE where to go.
(2) The same Greek word Pneuma is used twice. Pneuma is obviously not a metaphor for Pneuma. At least that's not how most metaphors are constructed.
(3) If Pneuma is a mere metaphor for the Godhead, Trinitarian doctrine is undermined.

In sum, the metaphor-reading of verse 8 is not even remotely close to being clear/seamless.

Faced with these two opposing titles:
(1) The Holy Spirit/Ghost as immaterial, intangible substance
(2) The Holy Wind/Breath as material, tangible substance
we only need ONE CLEAR PASSAGE to determine His correct title - because titles (such as Father and Son) DO NOT CHANGE.

Let's put it another way. Let's assume God is indeed a spirit. In that case, the Bible must never mention wind/breath in the context of the Third Person, as such would confuse/mislead us. So if we can find even one such 'misleading' passage, then God evidently INTENDED title #2. Fortunately there are several such passages - three of which are particularly decisive.

"Jesus breathed on them, and said, Receive ye The Holy [Breath]" (John 20:22).

He was expelling MATERIAL wind/breath from His nostrils (not some immaterial ghost). Do you see where this is headed? The new birth (the topic of 3:5) and sanctification are physical processes caused by the insufflation of divine Breath/Wind (see Gen 2:7). On the day of Pentecost:

"Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy [Wind]" (Acts 2).

Note what happened. They heard a violent Wind blowing because God had just breathed upon them. In fact His Wind/Breath was Fiery (see Psalm 18:8), hence they saw tongues of Fire.

The waters of the Red Sea did not part instantly but rather were gradually separated by a blowing Wind over the course of an entire evening. According to Moses it was a blast of Breath from God's nostrils - and Moses used the same Hebrew word for Breath that all the theologians, misled by Plato's philosphy for 2,000 years straight, have been mistranslating as "the Spirit of God."

FINALLY we are now ready to understand John 3:5. As the OT indicated, God can assume any physical shape (smoke, fire, water, pillars of cloud, light, etc). Therefore:

"Unless a man is born of Water (Hudor) and Wind (Pneuma), he cannot enter the Kingdom of God" (3:5).

God supplies the Water of cleansing. We do not need to wash ourselves (no need to be baptized) because, as verse 16 states, salvation is by faith alone. Our only duty is to believe, if 3:16 be true.

Jesus told Nicodemus that he should have already known the Water-dynamic from the OT. In Ezekiel 36, God describes the new birth and sanctification in terms of His cleansing Water and Wind - note the same two Greek words are used in the Septuagint.

"I will sprinkle clean water [Hudor] on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Breath [Pneuma] in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws."


The new birth is obviously a physical cleansing because thought is a physical process. To deny this is to deny the existence of the human brain. And the brain, like the rest of our body, is largely liquid-based and air-driven (oxygen-driven). Naturally, then, God cleanses/redirects our thoughts by first entering into our bodies as Water, Wind, and evidently other forms as well such as Light (2Cor 4:4-6). He LITERALLY washes away our sins.

In those mighty apostolic revivals, the divine Water was sufficiently ubiquitous to even permeate baptismal waters. Hence the NT rightly implied that apostolic water baptism actually washed away sins. (Do not presume the same of the baptisms done today).

HTacianas said:

Wow. What church does your church belong to. That sounded stupid.

Click to expand...

What sounds stupid?