born of water
 

Born of Water

Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.


The Acts 2:38 message was first preached by Moses, at the base of the mount. It is confirmed throughout the Acts accounts, and is our very core doctrine. Water baptism…by complete immersion…in the name of Jesus Christ, is clearly a foundation stone of the new covenant. But to teach this water baptism from our text verse in John, is wrong.

Many ministers misquote this passage to read, “except a man be born again of water and of the spirit…” Not of any ill intent…but in zealous support of our position on water baptism. Our sanctioned bible study “In My Father’s House”…in Room One, paragraph three, finds the honorable Elder Yonts saying: “When we are baptized in Jesus’ name, we are born of the water.” Even the marginal notes of a Thompson Chain Reference Bible…here in John…states: 756-Baptism enjoined (1) Acts 2:38.

But the discourse between Jesus and Nicodemus, has nothing to do with water baptism. The whole crux of their discussion is new birth. Not death (repentance)…not burial (water baptism)…but new birth. Moreover, great plainness of speech is used, to show that this new birth is entirely spiritual in nature. It is an anointing seal…given only by our Lord…to each one personally.

What is ironic, is that in every reference to water baptism, we ourselves concur that the rite represents a burial, or a grave. Only here in John, do we reverse our hermeneutic, and make water baptism part of a birth experience. There are ample scriptures in the bible to support baptism in Jesus’ name. But in rightly divided scripture, this text in John is not among them.

Jesus’ first words on the matter state:

Verily, verily I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.

And at the last, he closes the argument with these words:

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 everyone that is born of the Spirit.

No mention of water baptism, or water birth, in either the intro or the summary, of our Lord’s lesson. He teaches that the new birth…the born again moment…is a single, spiritual birth. Is it prefaced with a death and a burial? With repentance and water baptism? Yes, the scriptures bear this out. It is the usual order, and thus we so teach.

There simply is no tenable argument; against the process of salvation mirroring the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord. Moses prophesied this in the altar of death, the laver of washing, and the presence of God in the holiest place. But the new birth is the resurrection part of that process. The born of the spirit here taught, is the climax of that salvation experience. We need not drag the laver into the holy place.

Born of water is mentioned a single time in their discussion. A befuddled Nicodemus asks Jesus:

How can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb?

Concerning that natural birth, Jesus teaches:

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.

Jesus is here drawing a contrast between two births…not encouraging a new, two-part birth. The fleshly birth from a nine month amniotic sac, is not enough Nicodemus. You must be born again. It is the Lord himself making the argument here; that born of water, and born of the flesh, are synonymous terms. Paul echoes the same argument in Galatians; as does Peter, in his comparison between corruptible seed, and incorruptible seed.

The fact that you’re sitting here reading this, affirms you’re halfway there. You’ve made it through born of water. You out-rassled millions upon millions of other sperm cells, and qualified for life. But having so done, you now must be born again. Your water birth gave you this life. Your spiritual birth gives you life everlasting. You must be born again.

Re: born of water
 

I disagree. Water and Spirit are clearly seen to be emphasis of Jesus in John 3, and the emphasis in Acts is water baptism and Spirit baptism. I have believed for years that death burial and resurrection are in baptism.

Romans 6:3-4 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? (4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.


Colossians 2:11-12 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: (12) Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Re: born of water
 

Don't know if you read this part of the post:

Born of water is mentioned a single time in their discussion. A befuddled Nicodemus asks Jesus:

How can a man enter a second time into his mother’s womb?

Concerning that natural birth, Jesus teaches:

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.

Jesus is here drawing a contrast between two births…not encouraging a new, two-part birth. The fleshly birth from a nine month amniotic sac, is not enough Nicodemus. You must be born again. It is the Lord himself making the argument here; that born of water, and born of the flesh, are synonymous terms. Paul echoes the same argument in Galatians; as does Peter, in his comparison between corruptible seed, and incorruptible seed.

So no, water and spirit are NOT clearly seen to be the emphasis of Jesus in John 3. Spirit...and Spirit baptism are His emphasis.

Re: born of water
 

I heard that view before but it appears to me that Acts negates it. It's simple. Look in Acts to see where water and Spirit come into view.

Re: born of water
 

You're all over the board my brother. Hard to have a fruitful discussion with you, when you keep jumping around like that.

Re: born of water
 

I am sticking with my original premise and working from there. I haven't jumped from it to anywhere else as you claim.

Re: born of water
 

OK...guess we're done here. Thank you for your input.

Re: born of water
 

Water and Spirit are seen in several places, with water alluding to water baptism in each case.

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Ephesians 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

in Ephesians, Christ died so he could wash us and present us to Himself as perfect. That is baptism. It is by the word because it is only through faith in what we are doing according to His word that baptism moves God to destroy our old man and remove everything that was repulsive to Him about us. Sins are gone and we are presented to him without spot or wrinkle.

The Titus passage mentions washing of regeneration. Again, the Spirit is never delineated as the washing agent. It sounds lyrically nice to sing a hymn about it, but it is strictly not that biblical. The Holy Ghost renews. It's clearly references to Acts 2:38. Even non-Spirit-filled scholars attest to this issue of water baptism in John 3, such as Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes and John Gill.

Re: born of water
 

You gave your premise and I gave mine. Big deal.

Re: born of water
 

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

John 3:8 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.


What the "baptism and spirit filled required for the new birth believers" confess is that only "being born of the Spirit" makes one half-born again. Yet, Jesus spoke of those "born of the Spirit" as if they were fully born again. How can that be?

Re: born of water
 

I just want to touch on the words I highlighted.

"Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the kingdom of God." No, that is not referring to water baptism. Simply stated, it means that a man cannot see God's kingdom unless the Father reveals it. I'm surprised many scholars cannot understand that! The word "gennao" is translated "born": it has two definitions. (1) born, begotten; and (2) birthed, come out of the womb. Nicodemus only understood the first part, so he said: "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb?" The Lord went further into his explanation, saying: "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter in..."

Why would anyone deny water baptism? Jesus said, "...make disciples of all nations, baptizing them..." Once more: "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved." But a man will see and believe only what he wants.

Re: born of water
 

I agree with the original poster 100%. Water baptisms precedes the new birth. The necessity of water baptism as part of believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, and as a step towards salvation does not rise and fall with John 3:5.

Re: born of water
 

Why would anyone accuse someone of denying water baptism when they are not? BTW I was hoping you would respond to my answer to your comment on the other thread....

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...t=46434&page=4

Re: born of water
 

amen to that--i seriously doubt that many--or any--of those sheep asking, "When did we..?" (do those things that got them 'saved') at the Separation Parable would even grasp any of this thread!

Re: born of water
 

Amen.

Re: born of water
 

The Spirit is intricately involved in water baptism and spirit baptism. Being "born of the Spirit" is not another way of saying "Spirit baptism" but being "born of the Spirit"is the same as saying being" born of water and the Spirit."

Re: born of water
 

I agree 100% with the opening post.

It always bothers me when people bring up the Titus passage and relate it to water baptism. Water baptism is NOT associated with regeneration. So if you're to bring up the "washing" part of that sentence, you must also deal with the "regeneration" part of that sentence. Regeneration is a function of the Holy Spirit. Titus 3:5 is talking about how the Spirit regenerates and renews. Certainly you are not a baptismal regenerist are you?

Also, regarding the Ephesians passage, are you suggesting that water baptism sanctifies us?

Re: born of water
 

Think about what you are saying for a moment. If being born of spirit means being born of water and the spirit then Jesus saying you must be born of water and the spirit is actually Jesus saying you must be born of water and of water and the spirit. Do you really think that's the best way to read John 3:5?

Re: born of water
 

Water is water baptism and regeneration is Spirit baptism. It's a combination work written there. Water baptism and spirit baptism are considered as accompanying words to sanctify not one on its own in this context.

Re: born of water
 

Amen. The UPCI's official stance is that water baptism is not associated with regeneration.

Re: born of water
 

We should read the full context in the scriptures.

If someone at point A asked how to get from point A to point C, and was told that he must pass through point B: would you suppose that he went through point B, if you later saw that same person at point C?

"He that is born of the flesh is flesh; and he that is born of the Spirit is spirit." Jesus must have known that to get from the flesh to the Spirit, a person must pass through the waters (obedience)!

Re: born of water
 

did you mean to say "washing is water baptism and regeneration is Spirit baptism" ?

If you're implying that washing in this passage = water baptism and regeneration = spirit baptism, your interpretation of Titus 3:5 would be "...but according to his mercy he saved us, by the 'water baptism' of 'Spirit Baptism,' and renewing of the Holy Ghost"

This seems to be both inconsistent and redundant.

maybe i misunderstood your reply?

I see that passage as two ways of describing the same event/moment when the Spirit comes into/onto a person... washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost. I don't understand it as a regenerative water baptism event and a separate moment of Spiritual renewing.

Re: born of water
 

I'm by no means an expert, but certain faiths believe that the spirit comes automatically upon water baptism right? Would those be considered baptismal regenerationalists? ... would Catholics and Baptists believe in baptismal regeneration? I'm asking because I really don't know.

Re: born of water
 

Right on!!

Re: born of water
 

The new birth discourse in John 3 has greater emphasis on the born of the spirit or spirit birth. This seems to be where the emphasis is in this passage. Jesus, in fact goes into a description of likening the Spirit to the wind that blows. Whether water refers to water baptism or it is synonymous with born of the flesh in the following verse is insignificant to me in regards to baptism being a part of the plan of salvation. There are enough other scriptures to justify the necessity of water baptism.

Re: born of water
 

Washing of regeneration. If washing refers to water baptism then water baptism is part of regeneration. It is not all of regeneration, but it is part of it.

If born of water means water baptism, then water baptism is PART of the new birth.

Israel was "baptised into/unto Moses" in the cloud and the sea. We are "baptised into/unto Christ" ... the parallel should be obvious. Thus, water baptism and Spirit baptism are two components if "regeneration". Historically, this was NEVER DISPUTED until the Nicene period when the Spirit baptism element faded out and was replaced by Chrismation, as far as I have been able to tell. Since the Apostasy had lost Spirit baptism, they moved ALL of regeneration to water baptism. Then the Reformers and Anabaptists and Baptists - Protesting Catholics - in rejecting popery often went to the doctrine of "regeneration comes before water baptism". The Reformed camp went so far as to claim regeneration came before belief, faith, repentance, or even hearing the gospel!

Anyway, a person must be born of water and Spirit. Since "a person" has already been born once, to be born of water and Spirit is to be born "again" or "anew".

Re: born of water
 

:highfive

Re: born of water
 

:thumbsup:thumbsup

Re: born of water
 

I don't believe in baptismal regeneration. Regeneration is a rebirth of the inner man. If water baptism regenerated a man, then everyone who is baptized would come up a regenerated new creature in Christ. We know this isn't true. A person can go down in the water a sinner and come up a wet sinner. Simon the magician in Acts 8 is an example of this as his heart was not right with God even though he had recently been water baptized. Regeneration is the birth of the Spirit, which is the old man being transformed into a new creature with the new life of the Spirit of Christ.

Re: born of water
 

Basically you are building and attacking a strawman.

1) What you mean by baptismal regeneration and what most of us here mean is probably something very different. We are not Roman Catholics.

2) I agree with you that regeneration is a rebirth of the inner man.

3) No one says that water baptism is the be all and end all of regeneration in Christ.

4) One goes down in the water a sinner and back out of the water a sinner, without any change whatsoever IF it is not done in faith. But if it is done in faith in Jesus Christ then he will go down in the water buried with Christ and come up out of the water risen with Christ...the metaphor. Down in the water laden with a dirty conscience, up out of the water with the circumcision of the Spirit, the removal of the body of sin/a cleansed conscience...the reality. In water baptism the old man is buried and the new man is risen to become transformed into the image of Christ. All of this is done by the Spirit of Christ who does not have to be "indwelling" to do the work but does have to inhabit the cleansed dwelling to complete the new birth.

Re: born of water
 

What about this verse?

1 John 5:1 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

How does this fit in with "water and Spirit"?

Re: born of water
 

It is simply reiterating that the only ones who have been born again are those that believe that Jesus is the Christ.

Re: born of water
 

Amen to the above statement!



Look at Romans 6....

6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?(those that are NOT baptized are NOT baptized into His death))

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.(How can we walk in newness of life if we are not "buried with him BY baptism" yet?)

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:(buried by baptism is also being "planted". If we are not baptized, we are not planted, nor ready to be resurrected either)

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.(baptism is also called a "crucifixion" here)

7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.(verse 4 says we are "buried with Him by baptism INTO death". If we are not baptized, we are not dead to sin yet and subsequently not free from sin)

This ENTIRE passage cannot apply to those that have not been baptized yet, therefore water baptism is absolutely essential and AUTOMATICALLY part of the spiritual regeneration process.

If a person is NOT baptized, they are NOT saved!

Re: born of water
 

Born ("gennao"): is translated begotten and birthed.

In the following verses, John3:3; John 1:13; I Peter 1:23, the word "born" should be translated "begotten": and they agree in context.

Even the natural realm shows us that a child is first begotten ("born") in the womb of a woman, and then in due time she gives birth (is "born").
The word in both instances is "gennao".

The "born again" experience is the God-given ability to see his kingdom and choose whether or not to enter in! If a man chooses to enter in, it is due to repentance.

Being born (birthed) "...of water and of the Spirit..." gives us the ABILITY (by remission of sins and the Spirit) to enter into God's kingdom.

Re: born of water
 

The way I understand this is very simple. Regardless of the difference in meaning perhaps of the different texts regarding water and spirit birth - I look to see how the apostles interpreted and understood how to be saved. What actions did they take?

We find both water baptism, and spirit baptism in the book of Acts. That answers the question for me. The understanding of the apostles was to baptize in the name of the Lord Jesus, and to receive the spirit. We know this because of Acts 10:44-48. "for they HEARD them speak with tongues and magnify God".

In my mind, this settles any questions there are. If the apostles baptized in water, and received the spirit through speaking with tongues, how much more simple can it get than to do what they did?

Re: born of water
 

That's good.

Re: born of water
 

Why shouldn't born be translated as begotten in 1 John 5:1?

Re: born of water
 

I found this to be interesting:

Born of the water and of the Spirit

Jesus said everyone must be born of the water and of the Spirit. Most Christians argue about being born of the water; does it mean being born of the birth water of a mother; or does it mean water baptism? For the most part, Christians are ignorant of the Jewish connection to water baptism. They see it as a new invention beginning with John the Baptist. This gives many to reject water and Spirit baptisms as two parts to being born again. For Apostolics, we see in Acts 2:38 the verification of water and Spirit baptisms as the born again experience. We do not need nor do we look for any other validation or proof to the meaning of Jesus in John 3:3-5. However, for those not convinced in water and Spirit baptisms of the one new birth, especially that being born of the water is water baptism: I offer the Jewish source as proof.

“The baptismal water (Mikveh) in rabbinic literature was referred to as the womb of the world, and as a convert came out of the water it was considered a new birth separating him from the pagan world. As the convert came out of these waters his status was changed and he was referred to as “a little child just born” or “a child of one day” (Yeb. 22a; 48b; 97b). We see the New Testament using similar Jewish terms as “born anew,” “new creation,” and “born from above.”

This mikveh in the above picture (ritual baptism of purification) was located to the south of the Temple close to the Huldah gate. It dates to the time of the Temple during the life-time of Jesus and the Apostles. It was covered up by dirt for centuries until it was discovered and excavated. At a time when people have concocted all sorts of theories about baptism and its origin, truth speaks from the ground. Here is the proof that water baptism has an ancient history and did not begin with John the Baptist.

The Mikveh was used for several different washings. They were all for a good conscience before God. The Mikveh was not a work of man, it was not invented by man. God is the designer and originator of this baptism (by baptism we mean immersion). There were several types of mikveh-baptisms. There was mikveh for women who completed their monthly cycle. This purification mikveh could be done at home and is the cause of the water pots where Jesus turned water into wine. It is said these contained water after the manner of the purification of the Jews. These waters of Mikveh were also for the washing of hands after being defiled by touching things unclean. They were used for washing clothes that might have become unclean by some contact with the profane. The waters of Mikveh were specifically designed to bring about sanctification. They were additionally the object for ceremonial washing and purification. In other words, whatever passed through the waters of Mikveh was then cleansed, purified, and sanctified, MADE HOLY!

Holiness is first the product of the Mikveh before it is the product of daily living and a part of a person's character. Even so, holiness begins at baptism when the blood of Jesus washes (cleanses) away all sin and uncleanness whereby a person is profane and unholy before God. This holiness is purification and the convert is in a state of total cleansing and purity having been washed by the blood of Jesus. In this condition of sanctification by the blood of Jesus, the convert cannot be condemned for past sins by anyone: not the devil, not the priest or preacher, not friends or relatives, no, not even by your own self. A person so baptized according to Acts 2:38 is free from all condemnation. After this holiness, baptism is seen as the sanctification and justification of God upon the convert. A person is then set aside by God for blessing and for special purpose in the Kingdom. The individual is totally and fully justified by the blood of Jesus. Justification simply means made just, without sin or evil, and without any condemnation before God. So, we are in baptism justified by the name and blood of Jesus Messieh (Romans 5:9; 1Corinthians 6:11; Galatians 2:16). Mikveh symbolism as it applied to all prior washings and cleansings are rolled into ONE BAPTISM, ONE MIKVEH! So there is no need for divers Mikveh washings or baptisms in the New Testament. Many are void of this understanding. They think Paul was saying ONE BAPTISM because he was either arguing for the trinity formula of Matthew 28:19 or he was arguing for the Acts 2:38 formula. This is not true. There were no trinitarians at that time and no trinity baptisms. In fact, the trinitarian language was not in the original Hebrew Matthew. Click here to see for yourself. Paul's ONE BAPTISM points to there being only one holy cleansing MIKVEH for the purification, sanctification, and justification of the convert and that being the one according to Acts 2:38. Any other explanation of ONE BAPTISM is simply conjecture and will not be explained in contrast to the previous many Mikveh-Baptisms of the Jews.

Mikveh is the gathering together of any waters where any form of washing or passing through is considered an act of cleansing and sanctification. The term arises from the creation account when God gathered the waters and separated the land from the sea. From this springs the idea that in all acts of Mikveh there is a separation made by the water. It is said when the children passed through the Red Sea on the way to the promised land and were thus separated and sanctified unto Moses from Egyptian defilement, that this was a mikveh. The passing through the waters of the Red Sea is called a mikveh by Jews. Likewise, any passing through waters of separation by any means of cleansing is called a mikveh. When a Gentile wanted to convert to Judaism, he/she had to undergo Mikveh-baptism as a sign they were passing from Gentileism into Judaism, passing from idols to the true God, passing from life as a dead person to a new life in God, passing from the darkness of evil knowledge into the light of God's truth, and passing from the religion of the nations to accept the religion of the Jews. A person who did not say as Ruth: Your people shall be my people and your God shall be my God, could not enter the waters of convert Mikveh because they had not brought forth the fruits of repentance (Turning to God from one's past sins, life, and identity). These could not be a convert to Judaism. Each convert must make the same confession as Ruth at the time of their convert Mikveh-baptism: Your people shall become my people, and your God my God. All these Mikveh were by immersion and the name of God was invoked over them as they were either self immersed or was plunged under by a baptizer. The name "ADONAI ELOHIM EHJEH" (Lord God of Salvation and Deliverance) was pronounced over the convert.

All water baptism of the New Testament have their beginning in these ancient Mikveh cleansing, purification washings of the Jews. Water baptism was essential to becoming Jewish in olden times and it is essential to becoming a Christian in the New Testament. Any doctrine on baptism that does not include the Jewish foundation of these Mikveh washings is incomplete and usually false.

If you have not come to Jesus by the waters of separation in New Testament Mikveh according to the grace of God found through faith in Acts 2:38, now is the TIME. Do it today. If there is no one to bring you into the no condemnation holiness of Jesus and you want to live for God in true holiness and separation from the world, then call me. I will make plans to see that you are immersed according to the correct manner of faith (1-813-238-SAVE).

Born of the water and of the Spirit is New Testament and Apostolic truth found in Acts 2:38.

Pastor Reckart

http://jesus-messiah.com/html/mikveh.html

Re: born of water
 

Quote from a Jewish website:

"The mikvah personifies both the womb and the grave; the portals to life and afterlife."

http://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman...The-Mikvah.htm

Re: born of water
 

Another interesting link...

http://www.setapartpeople.com/mikvah...tual-cleansing