Born of water

[JonahParticipant]

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.”

I offer the paper below not as an alternative to explaining my own view of this verse, but because it deals with objections to that view.  However the fact that it also presents my view which I had arrived at independently means I do not need to do that for myself either.

The one comment I would add however, is that I do not see how the idea that water here refers to water baptism can have any currency in the context of ‘one baptism’ New Covenant teaching, because it immediately makes a second baptism along with baptism in the Spirit a condition of regeneration.

It may be that water is understood in this way because water baptism is not an optional extra!  But neither is any aspect of repentance and subsequent obedience, which are part of the preparation for or fruit of regeneration, but not part of the divine birth which has no natural medium, even if it occurs at water baptism.  But we know from scripture (Acts 10) that water baptism is not always a precondition for that birth.

An argument advanced for water symbolising water baptism is the religio-historic context of the passage, whereby Nicodemus (it is argued) would have understood water baptism as the meanns whereby proselytes were ‘born again’ into the Jewish faith.  But if this were at the forefront of Nicodemus’s thinking (and our inspired Biblical source does not tell us that this was the case) why wouldn’t he ‘marvel’ at the concept of it being required of a Jew, rather than immediately thinking of it instead only in terms of a repeat natural birth?

 

BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED: WHAT DOES “BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT” MEAN IN JOHN 3:5?

• This topic was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Jonah.
• This topic was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Jonah.
• This topic was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Jonah.

[JonahParticipant]

I am now of the view that the three main interpretations of John 3:5 can all be represented by the single typology of the water representing the word of God. (These are, cleansing, especially from the Old Testament contexts of references to the use of water, which would have been so familiar to Nicodemus; natural birth (the view adopted in the original post), in which the foetus is immersed in water during a gestation period; and water baptism – but only as it symbolises the spiritual realities of washing and demonstrates obedience). Titus 3:5 – “…the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost” – water (for cleansing) and Spirit.

Jesus’s disciples were clean because they had believed the word of God. In John 15:3, Jesus says to them, “Now you are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” Later Jesus prayed the Father, “Sanctify them through your truth: your word is truth”, John 17:17. And in Ephesians 5:25, 26 we read, “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”. Acts 22:16, “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

So it seems that the word of God when received sanctifies the believer – by the grace of God, through the obedience of faith (which normally includes water baptism, e.g. Acts 2:38). This faith signifies his or her choice to be separate from sin (the meaning of sanctification) as witnessed by his conscience – 1 Pet 3:21 ( upon which grounds God gives the Holy Spirit as a divine act (Acts 5:32) to ‘purify the believer’s heart’ (Acts 15, 8:9). This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit, when He comes to regenerate them through inwardly renewing and indwelling them – when they are “born of the Spirit”. The first breath of the new born babe is when its life begins. So the new life in Christ begins, when the indwelling Spirit is first received.

But it is the faith response to the (water of the) word of God that brings us to that point of readiness for birth (John 1:12): so it is that Jesus said to those whose father was still the devil, in John 8:31, 32 – “If you continue in my word, then are you my disciples indeed; And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”. “Continue in my word”…for the disciples, regeneration did not happen as soon as they believed – there was a gestation period, in which figuratively speaking they were kept surrounded by the word of God as the foetus, formed through conception of the seed, is kept and nourished surrounded by water in the womb – set apart ready for birth. As long as they continued in that word, they were kept (John 17:6, 12). But if they turned back, they were miscarried.

The disciples could not receive the Spirit as soon as they believed as He had not been given. Although that is not the case for us, a gestation period of faithfully believing and following the Lord before regeneration/Spirit baptism does seem to be the experience of many. There is no set time for such a period – there may not need to be one at all – for, “the wind blows where it wills”.

So I am in 100% agreement with Ron, we are to respond with the obedience of faith to the word of God, for it is the seed of conception (1 Pet 1:23, ” being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which lives and abides for ever”) that will result in birth. And I believe that as long as we continue in that word, our faith will be reckoned to us for righteousness, even before the “imparted righteousness” of Wesley’s ‘entire sanctification’ at regeneration through the baptism in the Holy Spirit, should that not be immediate.

[ronbaileyModerator]

Jonah, I’m so sorry that it has taken so long to respond to your last post. I had an email a couple of weeks ago asking questions about born of water. Here is part of my reply…

As regards John 3. I touch on these a few times in ‘The Better Covenant’. Do you use a Kindle? If you do, and you have a copy of ‘The Better Covenant’ you can search for ‘Nicodemus’ and it will lead you to the relevant sections.

Briefly, water baptism was an accepted part of Jewish life, but only for proselytes. This is why John’s baptism was contentious. John was baptising Jews. Jewish baptism sometimes used the language of ‘being born again’ into the Kingdom of God, ie, in their view, Israel. The classic case was Naaman, whose skin was renewed as a child’s.

Jesus’ answers to Nicodemus focussed on this. Christ doesn’t validate the notion of water baptism as effecting regeneration but he doesn’t invalidate John’s baptism. John’s baptism was a ‘baptism to repentance. Its purpose was an act of repentance. The human response is necessary but not sufficient…

(Acts 2:38 NKJV)

[Author]

Posts