Born of water

I was talking with a bro. in Christ and we got into John 3:5-6, and he brought up something that is alien to me.
He sais that Jesus was useing the term "born of water" as natural child birth.

[b]John 3:5-6[/b] [color=990000]Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
[b]:6[/b] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.[/color]
This water is talking about baptism, and not saying that a man be born of natural birth and of the Spirit.

I don't think this lines up with the "Apostolic Doctrine" thread, so I am making it to be a whole new thread and see where it goes.

Born of water:

Jhn 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Born of Spirit:

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

His Body the Church, Born Again:

Ephesians 5:25-27 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, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Who is the water of Life?
Who is the Spirit of Christ?
Who is the Word?

In Christ: Phillip

Christinyou wrote:
Born of water:
Who is the water of Life?

Logic wrote:
I was talking with a bro. in Christ and we got into John 3:5-6, and he brought up something that is alien to me.
He sais that Jesus was useing the term "born of water" as natural child birth.

[b]John 3:5-6[/b] [color=990000]Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
[b]:6[/b] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.[/color]
This water is talking about baptism, and not saying that a man be born of natural birth and of the Spirit.

I don't think this lines up with the "Apostolic Doctrine" thread, so I am making it to be a whole new thread and see where it goes.

Logic, you are correct..Jesus Christ is NOT talking about natural birth. But I can tell you that almost every person who responds to this, will tell you that he is.

John 3:3 Except a man be born-[b]AGAIN[/b].."

To be born AGAIN, would have to imply that he has already been born once-being born once would be nothing less than natual birth. Jesus is not telling a grown man that he needs to be born naturally again. If this were true, then man would have to do exactly as Nicodemus said: and get back into his Mother's womb, close it up and be born-AGAIN

Jesus is not talking about being born, He is talking about being born AGAIN of water and of the Spirit.

Logic, He is, as you said, talking about water baptism.

This is not natural child birth. This is the witness of Who Christ is, by the three that agree. The water is Christs baptismal water, what was the witness? The Holy Spirit was upon Him as a dove as a witness to Him being One with the Spirit of God, and the Fathers witness was "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased".

The three that bear witnesses on earth are: The water of His beginning of His ministry on earth, The Holy Spirit on Him as One, The Fathers proclamation that in truth, This truly is my Son.

1 John 5:7-9 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

As the Three in Heaven are One witness, so also are the Three on earth One, The witness is true, Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Why was He baptized? Jhn 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

Matthew 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

"To fulfil all righteousness"; to carry into full effect every divine institution.

If you look for who the witnesses are you will see that the water testifies of the Who He is. The Person of Jesus Christ the Son of God.

This water is different from living water, but a profile of the Same Person that gives life, The water of Life and the witness that He is life.

In Christ: Phillip

I am glad that we (three) agree, I wonder how some might think that this "water" in john 3:5 means fleshly birth.

One is revealed by man.

One is revealed by the HOLY SPIRIT.

In Christ: Phillip

LittleGift wrote:

Logic wrote:
I am glad that we (three) agree, I wonder how some might think that this "water" in john 3:5 means fleshly birth.

Hi Bro Logic

I don't understand why everyone has to be so dogmatic about this - it could mean natural birth or baptism in water or?...

Or maybe "all of the above"...

Why not? Scripture is so very rich that every verse has a great depth of meaning.

If Jesus meant born of the flesh when HE said born of water, HE would have said it just as he did in verse 6.
The reason that HE said water is because HE meant water, not flesh.
Otherwise He would have said, "Except a man be born of fleash and of the Spirit" and/or "That which is born of the water is flesh"

This is common hermeneutics and exegesis.

1 John 5: 5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 6 This is he that came BY WATER AND BLOOD, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water AND blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness IN THE EARTH, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: AND THESE THREE AGREE IN ONE

Matt 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. 16 And Jesus, WHEN HE WAS BAPTIZED, went up straightway OUT OF THE WATER: and, lo, THE HEAVENS WERE OPENED UNTO HIM, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

The subject matter is not birth-rather, it is, to be BORN-AGAIN.

If Jesus is referring to natural birth, then none of us are born-AGAIN-because as Nic said, we would have to enter into THE SECOND TIME our mother's womb?

This is the direct statement that Nic asks. THen he even speaks naturally, he says "..how can a MAN be born (natural birth) when HE IS OLD? can he enter the second time enter his mother's womb and be born? (This is verse 4)

If Jesus was speaking of NATURAL birth,then why does he make the statement. " Except a man be born AGAIN"

If Jesus was speaking of NATURAL birth, then we ALL must get back in our mothers womb for the second time and be born again-because Christ is talking about being born-AGAIN, not being born the first time.

Also...Jesus never mentions anything in John 3:1-8 about a "Mother"

The reason why Jesus says " That which is born of the flesh is flesh" is because the man in which he was talking to was born of the flesh or, already naturally born, but needed to be born again of water and of the Spirit

Amen and Amen. Man, its not everyday that you hear people speaking and standing up for the truth. You must be Apostolic right as all of the saints should be, holding to the teachings of the apostles doctrine not man's visions, dreams, interpretation. The biblical foundation is found in the word.

I once came across a guy that thought the same thing that being born of the water was natural birth and that is obviously out of context because everyone has already had natural birth. Jesus was stating this fact was something that should happen in the future. Jesus didn't agree with Nicodemus about getting back into his mother womb but explained the born again experience which consists of the water and the spirit. The natural birth didn't consist of the water and the spirit. Being born of the water is not complete without the birth of the spirit for they both are a part of the new birth.

There is also people that say that being born of the water is the cleansing of the word or something related to the word and that is partly true but first cleansing and being born are two different things. When a believer is baptized in the name of Jesus he is obeying Jesus' commandment so in one way you can't exclude the obedience to the word from being born of the water but being born of water and the spirit are two things in your life that you can pin point and say it happened here. They are not a continious progression or transformation. The cleansing of the word and the perfecting of the saints through obedience of the word are life long. The New Birth is an event that may happen all at one time or in two intervals like the Samaritans who believed and were baptized and later on received the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands by the apostles.

So the truth is evident, it is clear. It is just that people are not willing to accept it or they are blinded by false teaching and fear of losing the praise of men.

What do you think about the topic concerning when the Holy Spirit comes to abide? Some say that the H.S comes right when you believe and they base this off of how Jesus breathed on the Apostles and said receive the H.S thus stating that the apostles already had the h.s but not the baptism of the h.s but these are used interchangeably for a reason in the book of Acts. By the way i don't see a difference between the reception of the h.s and the baptism of the h.s from the account on the Day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit came as Jesus promised on the Day of Pentecost, (it couldn't be before b/c jesus said that the Father wouldn't send the promise in till jesus was glorified and at that point when jesus breathed on the apostles he wasn't glorified yet but only resurrected)and Luke said that they received the h.s and spoke in other tongues as the spirit gave them the utterance. Also if the Apostles already had the h.s after Jesus breathed on them then Jesus physically would need to breathe on people today to fill them and in one way he does through the might rushing wind thats how they knew jesus had sent the holy spirit, it clicked with them (jesus breathed on them earlier as symbolic of the h.s and the mighty rushing wind from heaven came later to fill them) but the main point is when the holy spirit come to take up residence, how he does it is his businees whether through blowing, breathing, speaking, pouring, raining and etc.

Blazed, Hi , I do disagree on 2 issues and your explanation does not change my mind.
The issue of nicodemus question of entering into his mothers womb.
Then Jesus says that which is born of flesh is flesh and that which is born of spirit is spirit.
Then unless a man is born of water and spirit.....
I cannot interpret those statement apart,they must go together.....hence the water spoken of is natural childbirth.
The other issue of Father,Son, And Holy Spirit all translate into the name of Jesus.......I cannot make that jump with you . I will just choose to dissagree.
I really feel this is a doctrinal issue and I would need to see the whole perspective of your teachers to see where this is going.

Lets look at the text.

"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.
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 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.
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." John 3

Now, you say that Jesus is talking about the natural birth when he says to be born of water and you justify it by using the other text that says everyone that is born of the flesh is flesh. Jesus was not saying that being born of the water is natural birth he was explaining why we all need to be born again b/c EVERYONE THAT IS BORN OF THE FLESH IS FLESH. FLESH AND BLOOD WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD. Thanks for this conversation b/c i am literally receiving insight on this scripture. I never took it into thought how everyone who is born of the spirit is SPIRIT just as every one that is born of the flesh is FLESH. As I stated above before FLESH AND BLOOD WILL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

Now Jesus would have to be stupid to have meant by saying except a man be born of the water and he meant by that according to your beliefs on this except a man be born into this world and is born of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That doesnt make sense. Of course everyone that comes into this would comes through the flesh. Why would jesus say that when he knows that everyone that is born by a woman is born by the flesh. What is the use of Except like it is not going to happen. Everyone will be born of the water if being born of the water means being born by the flesh. You see that its not scriptural and it doesn't make sense. That usage of the scripture makes Jesus' words foolish and Jesus knows what he is talking about.

Concerning the other issue of the trinity the name of jesus it is really clear. Jesus is God manifest in the flesh. He is God with us "Immanuel". Since Jesus is God and was God the word before he came to this earth he is also the FATHER (Ex: Everlasting Father). We all know without a shadow of a doubt that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, there need be no argument there. If Jesus was God and is God and God is a spirit and his spirit is called the holy spirit in reality Jesus is the Holy Spirit. Who's spirit did the 120 recieve on the day of pentecost? God's spirit and the spirit of his dear son. These are not two spirits b/c God and the son are one and the same person and so is the spirit in unity and oneness with the Godhead. This is in no way denying the Father or the Holy Spirit. We see and accept the Father and the Holy Spirit in Jesus Christ. All the fullness of the Godhead lives in Jesus Christ Bodily right? Do you see now? Only tradition and false teaching will prevent you or fear of changing your traditions. Hope you understand the truth and that God will give you understanding on this subject.

"For unto us a CHILD is born, unto us a SON is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called WONDERFUL, COUNSELLOR, THE MIGHTY GOD, The EVERLASTIN FATHER, THE PRINCE OF PEACE.

Of the increase of [his] government and peace [there shall be] no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this." Isa 9:6-7

Who is this? Doesn't this sound familiar? This must be God right? But it says unto us a child is born, a son is given. Wait God is not born, God has always been unless it is talking about Jesus Christ the only begotten son of God who was God manifested in the flesh.

Can I be any more clearer?

psalm1 wrote:
Blazed, Hi , I do disagree on 2 issues and your explanation does not change my mind.
The issue of nicodemus question of entering into his mothers womb.
Then Jesus says that which is born of flesh is flesh and that which is born of spirit is spirit.
Then unless a man is born of water and spirit.....
I cannot interpret those statement apart,they must go together.....hence the water spoken of is natural childbirth.
The other issue of Father,Son, And Holy Spirit all translate into the name of Jesus.......I cannot make that jump with you . I will just choose to dissagree.
I really feel this is a doctrinal issue and I would need to see the whole perspective of your teachers to see where this is going.

Logic I am only looking at that one paassage and reconciling what i read.
To me [I could be wrong] If i apply your reasoning then we have 3 births 1] natural 2]through baptism [that wich is born of the flesh is flesh] 3]rebirth[born again]
You will notice no reference to baptism in the dialog with nicodemas.
This in my opinion is a conveinent place to insert water baptism which in no way is being referred to [this is strictly my opinion]
You and i are not the first to examine these two possibilities. Theologians differ on this matter.
I dont know if I 'proved my theory'...as you say...but i would say it is equally possible to cast doubt on the other view since it doesnt fit the dialog.
So since niether of us really knows for now i choose to say born of the womb=natural birth
Make sense?
......David

We must also look at Jesus' words to Nicodemas, and what Jesus was holding Nicodemas accountable for.

Jesus asks him-
John 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Now what "things" would Christ be speaking of? Where in OT was there a similar idea presented that Nicodemas should have known?

Perhaps here-
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.
Ezekiel 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Ezekiel 36:27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Here we see both water and spirit spoken of in regards to the new birth, or regeneration. This is the promise of the new covenant is it not?

Here we see both water and spirit spoken of in regards to the new birth, or regeneration. This is the promise of the new covenant is it not?

Yes, I think you are on the right track here with this reference to Ezekiel. I believe that Jesus' words in John 3:5 about being born of water and spirit have nothing to do with literal H2O. It's not about water or baptism. Salvation cannot be accomplished by a bath. The water He was speaking of was symbolic, it was from the Old Testament picture of purification. Nicodemus would have understood that reference. The Ezekiel 36 passage brings together the ideas of water and spirit, it is the OT promise of regeneration.

The Holy Spirit places the believer into the body of Christ and purifies the believer by the water of the word...

[i]that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,[/i]
(Eph 5:26)

[i]Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you.[/i]
(Joh 15:3)

Paul refers to the "washing of regeneration" and "renewing by the Holy Spirit" in Titus 3:5, echoing Jesus' words in John 3:5. Jesus was telling Nicodemus that he needed to be spiritually purified and spiritually reborn. The whole point in speaking to Nicodemus this way was to show him that law and rituals-including baptism-cannot give eternal life. Baptismal regeneration is unscriptural.

In Christ,

Ron

roaringlamb,i dont see how nicodemas could possibly have connected those 3 scriptures to what Jesus was saying.
They were not dialogging on baptism. they were specifically discussing birth.
The weight is definately on the side of natural birth.
besides if the baptism theory is taken to its logical conclusion it appears to me we have 3 births.

.....David

InTheLight, In that case the born=baptism theory still doesnt fit because not only would nicodemas have to connect Jesus words to baptism [which I cant see happening] even more far fetched he would have to connect baptism with birth.
Its almost like a picture is being presented that any good jew would automatically connect the dots of this obvious baptism=born of water theory when even us being enlightened would not say "you need to be born of water" I have never heard of this
And yet you think nicodemas would have automatically thought this?
This just doesnt seem possiblle

...David

They were not dialogging on baptism.

Those verses in Ezekiel have nothing to do with baptism, but rather the cleansing effect of a regenerated heart.

If not these verses, then where in the OT would Christ be drawing from, and wondering what Nicodemas did not understand.