John 3:3-5

[AVBunyan]

John 3:3-7 – An Explanation



I've seen a lot of confusion over the below text. Here are my thougths - what's yours?



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.

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?

John 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.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.



I would like to, if I can, clear up some misunderstandings on this verse.



There are two main doctrines that are here in this verse are as follows:

1. “Born again” vs. 3– linked to the popular phrase “born again”

2. “Water and of the Spirit” – most commonly linked to water baptism



I would like to tackle the second one first vs. 5 – water. This is the easiest. Note the context of verse 5 refers back to vs. 4. The Lord in verse 3 told Nicodemus that he had to be born again. Immediately Nicodemus thought he had to come out of the mother’s womb again. Jesus answers and two things take place: “Except a man be born of water (physical birth for you are in a sack of water inside the womb) and the Spirit you cannot enter in. Jesus said, “You must have a physical birth (womb of water) and a spiritual birth. There is no mention of water baptism here. The reference “of water” is associated with the physical birth that all men must have first. Look at verse 6 where Jesus talks of a fleshly birth (from the womb). There are two births being discussed: physical (“flesh is flesh”) and the spiritual birth.

The part regarding “born again” is a little tougher to follow. I will tell you what I believe and you study it through and see if these things be so (Acts. 17:11).

Jesus was dealing with one of the leaders of Israel and not Jesus used the word “ye” must be born again in vs.7 referencing the Jewish nation as a whole for Nicodemus was representing the leadership of the Jews at that time. Jesus didn’t say “you” must be born again but “ye” (plural). Now, let me paraphrase and then I will move on. “Marvel not…..unto thee (Nicodemus), Ye (Israel) must be born again.

Now lets look at this “born again”. As we all know Israel blew it with God in the OT. God now calls them “Loammi” for they are not God’s people. Though Israel walked away from God we know that God will bring back his people. God gave them the chance in the gospels and they killed Jesus. Jesus on the cross asks the Father to forgive them (Israel) for they knew not what they did so the Father gives them another chance in the book of Acts. As we know they stoned Stephen so…..Israel rejected God the Father in the OT., God the Son in the gospels and then, finally God the Holy Ghost in Acts. Despite all that rejection God still made and covenant with Israel and will honor it and make unbelieving Israel believing Israel. How and when will God do this?

First, how? By doing a supernatural work in their hearts. When? at the end of tribulation and right before they enter into the kingdom. God will revive the valley of dry bones in Ezek. 37:4-14 by His Spirit. Now compare this passage with Isa. 66:8 (note “born at once”) and Eze. 36:26,27. Now go to Heb. 8:8 and you will get a complete picture. Right before the 1,000 yr. Reign the Lord will raise up unbelieving Israel, put a new heart and Spirit in them and then take them into the land that was promised to them. Then they will become the nation of priests on earth resenting God to the nations of the earth.

So, yes, Nicodemus, you have to born physically first and then “Ye” (Israel) will experience a spiritual birth. Now, note, their being “born again” will be their same form of bodies just a rebuilding of a human body that will house God’s Spirit. That is why the term “born again” fits this. This operation of God will be just a new birth from their old bodies redone.

How does this relate to us for you hear the term “born again” all the time? Now, let’s have some fun and get a blessing. When God saved your sorry soul (mine too) He didn’t just take your old body and put a new Spirit in it. It looks as though that is all He did but there is more. We need to see ourselves as God truly sees us. What happened to you is that you were made a new “creature” – II Cor. 5:17. Why did Paul use the term “new creature”? Because when you were saved you were spiritually baptized into the body of Christ – this was a new operation not done before this age of grace. You became bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh and raised you up and seated you in heavenly palaces at the right hand of God (Eph. 1,2). Therefore you are a new “creature” in Christ and nobody before this age has this privilege. Israel gets some land and you get to be a part of Christ’s body in the heavenly palaces for all eternity? Yeeehaaaw – Gloreeeeee to God!

Can’t you see you are not just “born again” (sounds good and all and I don’t panic when people use it.) You have been made a new creature in Christ Jesus. Won’t you admit that somebody being literally put in the literal body of Christ is a “new creature.” Yes, my dear saints, you have something better than just getting into the land. You have Christ in you, the hope of glory. You (the body of Christ) are part of a plan by God that was from “BEFORE” the foundation of the world. In other words you were planned in eternity. Israel and the Gentiles was just “from” the foundation of the world – Matt. 25:24. Your standing in Christ was from “before” the foundation of the world. The body of Christ is not limited to mansions - John 14 – our abode is above the third heavens in eternity with Christ (Eph. 2:4). Look at you, it is Christ “in” you. The disciples just had the Spirit dwelling amongst them (John 14:17 - Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.).

You may be down here in your old, tired, sinful flesh but the real you (saved and redeemed, glorified, etc.) is in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. Your standing is this – Perfect in the Son seated at the right hand of God, perfect with Christ’s righteousness. This is how God sees the real you. Now your state down here may be in a mess but up there where the real you is it is perfect. This is what God did to you through Christ at Calvary.

Now, what is your duty because of so great privileges? Turn to Eph. 4:1. God just got finished telling you what great things He hath done for you in the first three chapters of Ephesus and in 4:1 He tells you what to do about it. Paul says, “Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,”. You are perfect in heaven blessed with all spiritual blessings then walk down here like you believe it. In other words “walk, your position.” In the following 3 chapters Paul tells you how you should act based upon your position in Christ.

So, I trust that someone will get a blessing. This is not original thinking from me. I learned this after being under the same preacher for over 20 years who seeks to know all he can about God, Christ and the Christian life. If you do not agree with this then, that’s ok for this a forum.

May God bless!

 

[stevetruax]

The premill dispensational position is an abominable heresy destroying the faith of many. When Christ returns He will judge, there will be the bodily resurrection and the new heavens and new earth will be established. Christ will reign physically and all the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire. This is the historic Christian position.

This premill dispensational heresy is propogated by the likes of Scofield, Pentecost, Walvard, and worst of all Tim Lahay, Dave Hunt, Chuck Smith. It is Christian fiction at it's worst (Lahay does this with the gospel...it's "Left Behind").

 

[Serapha]

The premill dispensational position is an abominable heresy destroying the faith of many. When Christ returns He will judge, there will be the bodily resurrection and the new heavens and new earth will be established. Christ will reign physically and all the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire. This is the historic Christian position.

This premill dispensational heresy is propogated by the likes of Scofield, Pentecost, Walvard, and worst of all Tim Lahay, Dave Hunt, Chuck Smith. It is Christian fiction at it's worst (Lahay does this with the gospel...it's "Left Behind").

Hi there!



You are entitled to your opinion, but it remains just that... your opinion. As a premillenialist, dispensationalist, just plain Bible-thumper, I can only believe what the Word of God tells me.

Now... do you think that you could address the passage in John?


~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

John 3:3-7 – An Explanation




John 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.

Hi there!



Great posting!

In simple terms, followers of Christ had a physical birth and a spiritual birth. We all understand the physical birth of the child, but the spiritual birth causes problems. When you are born in the spirit, then you have the indwelling of Holy Spirit within you.


Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:



Even the disciples didn't receive the living presence of the Holy Spirit while Christ was walking among them. Christ gave His disciples the Spirit after His resurrection when He knew that He was no longer going to be with them. You might note that Judas never got the Holy Spirit, the indwelling of God before his death. While he walked with Christ, Judas was never born again.



~malaka~

 

[AVBunyan]

Hi there!


Great posting!

Now... do you think that you could address the passage in John?
~malaka~

Thanks Malaka - I appreciate you asking the responder to deal with the passage in your previous post - I too wonder how the pre-mil was brought into it - I was dealing with John 3:3-7

Again, thanks

 

[stevetruax]

In addressing this passage, I thought that the premill dispensational position was to interpret scripture "litererally"? How in the world can you take Christ's discussion on being born again with the tribulation, the millenium, & eschatology? (unless you have been reading the Scofield Bible Notes, which is similiar to reading Joseph Smith's work). It's amazing how the plain teaching of this passage can become pretexts and contexts for the premill disp. position.

The plain teaching of this passage has to do with the sovereign, good pleasure of God (Jn 1:12-13) transforming children of wrath into children of God (Eph 2:1). Nicodemus, as an unregenerate man did not understand this concept. Though he was the teacher of Isreal, he did not know these eternal truths.

The principle here is that God is the one who creates new birth. We have just as much to do with our spiritual birth or born again experience as we did with our physical birth. All is to the glory of God. Even the advancement of His kingdom. Christ rules and reigns in the hearts and minds of His people (Lk 17:21) and all things work for God's purposes (Phil 2:12-13).

 

[AVBunyan]

In addressing this passage, I thought that the premill dispensational position was to interpret scripture "litererally"? How in the world can you take Christ's discussion on being born again with the tribulation, the millenium, & eschatology? (unless you have been reading the Scofield Bible Notes, which is similiar to reading Joseph Smith's work).

I did take them literally - when you compare spiritual with spiritual then you understand the passage is dealing with Israel being born again in a day in the future. Remember, Jesus' first coming could have been his second coming if Israel had accepted their Messiah. The passage was looking at what could have taken place soon but because Israel rejected Christ as their Messiah then the passage fits tribulation doctrine perfectly.

Have you ever run the references on the word "born". It takes you to Isa. 66. Have you ever wondered why Paul (a Jew) said he was one "born out of due time"? Just something to think about.

I did appreciate you response though.

May God bless.

By the way, I've never read Scolfield's notes.

 

[stevetruax]

I don't understand why you spiritualized the text. Isn't this what your position claims that the amill position does? This passage is not apocalyptic but historical narrative.

When John (in verse 3:16) refers to the "world" is this the jewish world only? (it isn't) What do you do with passages like Romans 3:28-30? God is not a God only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles. It is all through faith, and through the (spiritual) seed of Abraham. There's no two plans of salvation. It's amazing that anyone would think that the sovereignty of man would thwart the puny efforts of God (sarcasm intended). God forbid that anyone would deny the Person and Work of Christ at His first coming.

When interpreting the OT it must be done in light of the revelation of the NT. Everything in the OT was a foreshadow of Christ. (it's called progressive revelation). It is very dangerous to have both feet in the OT and interpret the NT. Christ fulfilled all the laws of the OT. We don't look to rebuilding the sacrificial system in Jereusalem, to do so would deny His atoning sacrafice (read Hebrews)

Have you ever done a word study on "age" you will find that it is evil and present. Christ will come to judge this world and create a new one.

You will also find that God owes nothing to national Isreal, they broke the promises of God (Jer 31; Rom 10:21) and a new covenant has been instituted by Christ. The Church is now the Isreal of God as directed by Paul in Ephesians and in Hebrews (sp Heb 11:22) and is by faith! Paul speaks of the Gentiles in Eph 2:11 - that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

 

[AVBunyan]

Too much here to go over here so I’ll just “shoot from the hip.”



Steve said in quotes:
“I don't understand why you spiritualized the text.”

Show me where I spiritualized the text. I showed from scripture that the water there was a physical birth, not baptism, as some would teach.

I then showed, by comparing spiritual things with spiritual things that “born again” was not a reference to us today but to the nation of Israel at the second advent.

“This passage is not apocalyptic but historical narrative.”

Yes, it is was an historical narrative that points doctrinally to a future day when Israel will become a nation again in one day by God’s directive hand (Isa. 66 & Ezek. 37). Many times a historical verse is also a prophetic verse at the same time.

”When John (in verse 3:16) refers to the "world" is this the jewish world only?”

Jewish world only - Of course not. In fact, I don’t want to stir it up here but the verse says, “For God so LOVED” (past tense) – God doesn’t love this world or anything in it right now – this whole world lieth in wickedness and is run by the God of this world. I believe the world God is referring here to is the world he drowned out in Gen. 1:1.

“What do you do with passages like Romans 3:28-30?”

I believe them.

“There's no two plans of salvation.”

Are you telling me the plan of salvation is the same throughout the whole Bible?

“God forbid that anyone would deny the Person and Work of Christ at His first coming.”

You have to look real hard to get this out of my post in John 3 so I’m not sure what you mean here.

”When interpreting the OT it must be done in light of the revelation of the NT.”

Yes, and I will take you one step further. If you consider what Paul says he will give you understanding in all things – II Tim. 2:7.

“Everything in the OT was a foreshadow of Christ. (it's called progressive revelation). It is very dangerous to have both feet in the OT and interpret the NT”.

I certainly understand that and I think I have a rough idea about the difference between the Old and the New.

“Christ fulfilled all the laws of the OT. We don't look to rebuilding the sacrificial system in Jereusalem, to do so would deny His atoning sacrafice (read Hebrews)”

Ok, now where did you get the idea from my post that I am seeking to do the above?

”You will also find that God owes nothing to national Isreal, they broke the promises of God (Jer 31; Rom 10:21) and a new covenant has been instituted by Christ.”

This is where we part. God made a covenant with Israel and will fulfill it – this is one of the major themes of the Old Testament. This is another major study that we don't have the time or space now. A lot of doctrinal error today comes from taking the promises that were once promised to Israel and applying them to the body of Christ today.

“The Church is now the Isreal of God as directed by Paul in Ephesians”

I’ve heard this teaching before. I’d be real interested in seeing you prove this from Paul.

“But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.”

Yes, but it doesn’t say we have replaced Israel. One of the major themes of the Old Testament is Christ coming back to restore Israel so they can fulfill God’s plan for them as a nation, which is to be a nation of priests dispensing God’s blessings to the nations of the earth for eternity.

Well must go now. Have a good evening. It has been interesting.

May God bless.

 

[stevetruax]

Promises to Israel do not await future fulfillment:
Deut 1:8, 6:23
Joshua 1:6; 11:23; 21:43-45
Neh 9:23

Isreal and the Church are one body:
John 10:16
Romans 11:24
Galatians 3:28-29
Ephesians 2:13-16; 3:4-6

 

[stevetruax]

There has only been one way of salvation for all mankind in redemptive history: Justification is by faith. It was this way with the OT (Heb 11) and the NT (Rom 1:17, 3:22, 26, 28, 30; 4:5, 9, 13, 16; 5:1; 9:30; 10:17, etc.)

Can you demonstrate where in this passage of John 3:3-7 it's referring to national Israel? Christ is teaching an eternal principle for all humanity. Are you a Christian? Aren't you born again? Don't you have the Spirit of God dwelling within you?

 

[Serapha]

There has only been one way of salvation for all mankind in redemptive history: Justification is by faith. It was this way with the OT (Heb 11) and the NT (Rom 1:17, 3:22, 26, 28, 30; 4:5, 9, 13, 16; 5:1; 9:30; 10:17, etc.)

Can you demonstrate where in this passage of John 3:3-7 it's referring to national Israel? Christ is teaching an eternal principle for all humanity. Are you a Christian? Aren't you born again? Don't you have the Spirit of God dwelling within you?

Whoa here!




It is obvious from the posting that everyone is professing Christianity... so back that mule up. Asking if a person is a Christian or if they are born again is uncalled for in this posting... and they are words being posted to inflame... and that's against the rules of the forum.


Keep the thread online and keep the personal comments and inquiries out of it.


~malaka~

 

[Yahweh Nissi]

I do not think he was trying to flame here. When I say to someone, "you are coming, aren't you?" - it means I expect that they are. I think steve was just saying 'are you these things - surely you are, therefore surely you see the point I am making'.

Peace,
YN.

 

[stevetruax]

malaka:
Christians (either Jew or Gentile, there is no difference) are born again by the Spirit of God. I think that the division comes from heresy and that is what your dispensationalism does. It is another gospel.

 

[Oblio]

You must have a physical birth (womb of water) and a spiritual birth. There is no mention of water baptism here. The reference “of water” is associated with the physical birth that all men must have first. Look at verse 6 where Jesus talks of a fleshly birth (from the womb). There are two births being discussed: physical (“flesh is flesh”) and the spiritual birth.

Born of water is applying a modern euphemism for childbirth that did not exist in ancient Palestine.

 

[AVBunyan]

Can you demonstrate where in this passage of John 3:3-7 it's referring to national Israel? Christ is teaching an eternal principle for all humanity. Are you a Christian? Aren't you born again? Don't you have the Spirit of God dwelling within you?

Thanks Malaka, I do appreciate your concern - but I think what Steve was saying that Jesus was asking those things in the verse (according to steve's interpretation) and directing them to all generally. I don't think he was questioning my salvation (At least I don't think he was?!?). Steve and I do not agree on that but that is fine. I think Steve is saying that Jesus was speaking general in a salvation for all and I was saying Jesus was speaking specifically of the nation of Israel at that time.

Steve, correct me if I am misrepresenting you this for I am in no way offended.

My gospel message comes from Paul who got it from Christ. Paul got the latest instructions.

Now what Steve did say:

"I think that the division comes from heresy and that is what your dispensationalism does."

I think he may have been calling my method of Bible study heresy (dispensationaliism) but that is ok - I can handle it. This is a forum.

I may respond later but Steve, if I understand what you are saying about the Church and Israel being one body etc. then we will just agree to disagree for I don't see us budging from our positions on the matter. To try to change one's point of view on this subject would be too much I believe.

May God bless all.

 

[Serapha]

malaka:
Christians (either Jew or Gentile, there is no difference) are born again by the Spirit of God. I think that the division comes from heresy and that is what your dispensationalism does. It is another gospel.

Hi there!



You are entitled to your opinion, but it is just that ... your opinion. I try to keep my opinion to myself and stick to what the Bible states. Maybe the Bible is what you view as heresy?

There are only four gospels and they all teach the same message, so perhaps you are interpreting dispensationism in the wrong light. If you want to post your "opinion" as a new thread, feel free. But this thread isn't about your opinion of dispensationalism.

~malaka~

 

[AVBunyan]

Hi there!

But this thread isn't about your opinion of dispensationalism.

~malaka~

This is true - we are talking about John 3:3-7. I was trying to show:
1. Water baptism is not in the verses.
2. Born again is for the nation of Israel.
3. We, in the body of Christ, have something better, we are created a new creature in Christ Jesus and are seated in heavenly places.

Have a nice evening.

 

[stevetruax]

Sorry to confuse you with the scripture. You didn't read the passages I mentioned in my earlier posts.

Why is it that "your" bible has a different meaning than those who have gone before us? This "new wind of doctrine" has only been around for roughly 200 years. This premill teaching was created by John Darby as it's founder, C.I. Scofield, The Plymouth Brethren & George Müller? (just in case you don't know your history, they are your heretical forefathers).

A fictional gospel brings forth a fictional Christ.
A fictional Christ brings forth a fictional salvation.
A fictional salvation yields the wrath, fire and indignation of a real God.

I thought that there were bereans on this forum but I was wrong. Indeed we live in an age of anti-intellectualism where we look to entertainment for truth.

This is my last post. Don't bother replying. Go back to sleep.

 

[Philip]

John 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.

The Greek text actually says "born of water and the Spirit", not "born of water and of the Spirit". (Even the KJV indicates that the second "of" is added.) This is a subtle, but important, distinction that I will return to in a moment.

I would like to tackle the second one first vs. 5 – water. This is the easiest. Note the context of verse 5 refers back to vs. 4. The Lord in verse 3 told Nicodemus that he had to be born again. Immediately Nicodemus thought he had to come out of the mother’s womb again. Jesus answers and two things take place: “Except a man be born of water (physical birth for you are in a sack of water inside the womb)

There is a major problem with this interpretation. There is absolutely no record in the Bible or any other Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew literature of the phrase "born of water" to indicate a physical birth. There is no reason to believe that Nicodemus would understand it in that way. Nicodemus, being a Pharisee, would have known the Old Testement very well. It is far more likely that Christ's words would have brought a passage such as

Ezekiel 36:25-26
I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances.​

to Nicodemus's mind. If we let Scripture interpret Scripture, we see the connection between water and Spirit.

and the Spirit you cannot enter in. Jesus said, “You must have a physical birth (womb of water) and a spiritual birth.

Now we return to my first comment. The Greek texts read ""born of water and the Spirit". This indicates only one birth with two aspects. It does not indicate two separate births.

There is no mention of water baptism here.

John records this conversation soon after Christ's Baptism and immediately before Christ and the Apostles began baptizing. To say there is no mention of water baptism is to pull the passage out of context. Further, as I indicated above, a Jew well versed in the Old Testament would have made a connection between the water and Spirit. We must remember that baptisms did not begin with Christianity. Jews had been baptizing and using ceremonial washings long before the Christ came. They always associated this with a spiritual cleaning.

The reference “of water” is associated with the physical birth that all men must have first. Look at verse 6 where Jesus talks of a fleshly birth (from the womb).

Again, there is no indication that anyone ever used the phrase "born of water" to refer to a physical birth. This interpretation is a recent invention.

There are two births being discussed: physical (“flesh is flesh”) and the spiritual birth.

Again, the Greek indicates only one birth, not two.