Born of Water and Spirit by Jack Kelly

[Guest man]

You're trying to win an argument, I'm simply trying to show you something. If you refuse to look, there's nothing I can do about that.

Your argument is with scripture, not me. As I said, when our views are in conflict with the Word, somethings wrong.

Now if you'll excuse me, it's getting a bit dusty in here.

[Qnts2]

If in the OT a form of baptism was a priest using hyssop dipped in water or the blood of bulls or goats and sprinkled on the people was sufficient to cleans the people. Why is not the blood of the Lamb of God not sufficient to cleans us?

If in the immersion process ( and who is to say that Jesus did not stand in the Jordan and John scooped up water and poured water on the head of Jesus) any part of the body is not immersed does that mean mean that the person is not baptized? What happens to a person who is terrified of drowning does that mean they cannot be sprinkled as in the OT or have water poured on the head ?

It is such a dogmatic thing with the baptists that it is not proper and the denomination which does not do the immersion is not worth the time to even enter the doors no matter that the gospel is preached - they throw out all with the water.

Just a personal grievance against the insistence of one way or damnation for all who do not believe their way. I admit I do not adhere that immersion is necessary but rather the cleansing of the blood of Jesus is all in all. As I said and probably the various churches began with the apostles viewing some of the dogma differently yet all were founded in the Salvation through the cleansing through the blood of Jesus. However born of water at birth absolutely in full agreement with JK.

In the OT, there was an immersion / ritual bath in the law which is called the 'mikvah'. Since this is a part of the law, what John the Baptist was doing was not a foreign thing to the people.

The immersion was to be done in 'living water' or water which was 'moving' or its source was from moving water. There are a lot of varying reasons a person was required by law to go to the 'mikvah'. If a person had a skin lesion which was leperous (dead skin and flesh), a priest would check it and declare it leprous. If the status changed, and it was no longer leprous, after a waiting period and a second check, the person would go to immerse themselves, and after the immersion would be able to enter the assembly of Israel. The immersion did not cure the person but when the Priest recognized the person as clean/cured it was the final step before re-entering the assembly.

So, in my view, a baptism does not 'clean' the person as that is Jesus alone. A baptism does several things. It is symbolic of what has occurred. It is a time when a member of the assembly recognizes the person is clean by the work of Jesus and agrees to immerse them. It is a time for the assembly to recognize the person as clean, a brother, and a member of the assembly. And finally, it is a time when the person who has been saved/cleaned, pronounces publically their faith, 'believe in their heart and confess with their mouth'.

In the early church, Christianity was outlawed by the Roman government. It was known that Christians often baptised new believers in the Jordan or other rivers or lakes. So, there were at times spies who would watch and turn the new believers into Rome which would result in the new believers death. In order to save peoples lives the baptism was moved indoors and sprinkling or pouring was practiced and viewed as acceptable, for the sake of the safety of the new believer.

The same kind of practice is in Judaism. It going to the Mikvah could be life threatening, another method was found, or if it was a matter of health and well being, the mikvah could be delayed or simply not practiced.

Life and safety come first as this practice is not necessary for salvation.

[NeedYouLord]

I love what Strong's Concordance says about "baptised"...There are different variations of the word...but I'm only using "baptised"...Only Greek #907 is used in the New Testament for the word "baptised"...

It is a very very long definition but here are some highlights:

To make overwhelmed, ie: fully wet, used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, espec, (tech.) of the ordinance of Chr. baptism...

the rite performed by John The Baptist who called upon the people to repent that they might receive remission of sins. Those who obeyed came confessing their sins, thus acknowledging their unfitness to be in the Messiah's coming kingdom (Acts 1:5, 11:16, 19:4).

The phrase in Matthew 28:19, "baptizing them into the Name" would indicate that the baptized person was closely bound to, or became the property of, the one into whose name he was baptized.

Oh Yes I Am Yours, Jesus!!! Whew...Hahaha

In Acts 22:16, it is used in the middle voice, in the command given to Saul of Tarsus, "arise and be baptized," the significance of the middle voice form being "get thyself baptized."

The experience of those who were in the ark at the time of the Flood was a figure or type of the facts of spiritual death, burial, and resurrection, Christian baptism being an antitupon, "a corresponding type," "a like figure," (1 Peter 3:21).

I just knew there was a very good reason that the desire to be baptised was put in me...

[GoldenEagle]

So, in my view, a baptism does not 'clean' the person as that is Jesus alone. A baptism does several things. It is symbolic of what has occurred. It is a time when a member of the assembly recognizes the person is clean by the work of Jesus and agrees to immerse them. It is a time for the assembly to recognize the person as clean, a brother, and a member of the assembly. And finally, it is a time when the person who has been saved/cleaned, pronounces publically their faith, 'believe in their heart and confess with their mouth'.

In the early church, Christianity was outlawed by the Roman government. It was known that Christians often baptised new believers in the Jordan or other rivers or lakes. So, there were at times spies who would watch and turn the new believers into Rome which would result in the new believers death. In order to save peoples lives the baptism was moved indoors and sprinkling or pouring was practiced and viewed as acceptable, for the sake of the safety of the new believer.

Very interesting thoughts. I agree underlined.

Where did you read this in bold?

God bless,

GE

[Saint Stev:-0]

Born Of Water And The Spirit

Q. I have a question on John 3:5, Jesus was talking about being born of water and of the Spirit. In my Tuesday night Bible study class a question came up asking what this meant. Someone said that Jesus was talking about water baptism but I don’t see that here. Am I way off? What was Jesus really saying in John 3:5?

A. Let’s put John 3:5 -6 together to get a clearer picture of what Jesus was saying:

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

Being born of water speaks of our first birth. It’s the natural one where we emerge from our birth waters, the amniotic fluid in which we’ve spent the previous nine months. It’s flesh (our mom) giving birth to flesh (us), when we become the child of our earthly parents.

Being born of the Spirit is the 2nd birth, the supernatural one, where our spirit is knit with God’s. It’s when we are born again, when Spirit gives birth to spirit, and we become a child of God (John 1:12-13).

Calling the water the first birth would be incorrect. Jesus is telling a man that already exist before him. That's like a realtor saying you can by this house if you have good credit and breath oxygen. Plus Nicodemus understood that's why he ask the question how do you be born of a mothers womb again?

So what does the water mean? All types of examples of salvation through out the book of acts they were all baptized submerged completely in water. Why? Jesus gave the great commission to be baptized in (Matt. 28:19,Mark 16:16,Luke 24:47)

This is all scriptures referencing water baptism in Jesus name. Why? Jesus gave the command to be born of the water.

Now the spirit. How do we know when we're born of the spirit? Jesus explains this in John3:8 saying the Holy Ghost comes like the wind.

The first time the Holy Ghost is pured out is on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-4. So what's the official sign when we receive the spirit?

Tongues is the sign. Here's the explanation by scripture alone.

How do we know when we have received the Holy Ghost.

Jesus explains how we know when we are born of the spirit in (John 3:8).

John 3:8

The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound thereof, but can not tell from where it came, and where it goes: so is everyone that is born of the Spirit.

Here he is speaking spiritually. In Acts 1 he tells his disciples to wait for him. and in (Acts 1:8)he explains after the Holy Ghost has come upon you then you are my witnesses.

Now in (Acts 2:1-4) it explains when the Holy Ghost was first poured out.

Acts 2:1-4

1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Notice in (Acts 2:2) it notes "as of a rushing mighty WIND".

Jesus said the HG is like the WIND in (John 3:8).

This is the first time the Holy Ghost was received. Let's see when the Gentiles received.

Acts 10:44-46

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Here after Peter got done preaching the Gospel. The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles. Look where it notes that the Jews where amazed because the Gentile received the Holy Ghost like them. Why? because they spoke in tongues.

Lets continue reading into (Acts 11:15-16).

Here peter was explaining about when the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost like the Jews did in the beginning. We know the beginning is (Acts 2:1-4).

Acts 11:15-16

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Also note that Peter says Jesus will baptize with the Holy Ghost in verse 16, referencing speaking in tongues.

Let's continue on to Paul talking about the Holy Ghost.

(Acts 19:1-8) Paul runs into John baptist disciples.

Acts 19:1-7

And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

7 And all the men were about twelve.

We can see in here after the Holy Ghost comes upon you. You'll speak in tongues. Jesus said these signs will follow after those that believe in (Mark 16:17) speaking in tongues.

Jehovah said in Isaiah 28:11-12 in a new tongues he shall speak to his people.

So my friend. Have you received the Holy ghost since you've believed?

God bless. In Jesus name. : )

[Enoc]

As I have said before "Baptism" according to you is a commandment. I disagree. It is a sacrament/rite of some churches which adhere to immersion and those who believe in this are as adamant as you are and will never change. To me it is no different than infant baptism or dedication and the promise of parents to bring the child up in the faith and admonition of God.

Yes I saw your items in red. But the baptism by the apostles was it full immersion in a land that is dry and with few streams of water ? or could it have been the pouring or sprinkling/dabbing/ dripping water on the head of the convert? They had to draw water from a well was full immersion even possible?

Full immersion was the common practice among the Jews.

The record left by these various witnesses overwhelmingly testifies to immersion as the normal mode of baptism in the Christian church during the first ten to fourteen centuries. ¹ This is in addition to the evidence found throughout the writings of the church fathers that immersion was the early church's common mode of baptism.

Here we find baptism by immersion already in existence. Gentiles who espoused Judaism were required to enter its fold by circumcision, baptism, and the offering of a sacrifice. This article cannot discuss the beginnings of proselyte baptism in Judaism, but the fact that the apostle Paul reflects rabbinic argumentation for proselyte baptism in one of his early epistles (1 Cor. 10:2: "And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea") would seem to indicate that this practice was in existence at the time of the birth of the Christian church. A Gentile convert to Judaism was required to undergo immersion. While he stood in the water, two scholars nearby read some of the lighter and some of the heavier requirements of the Law. Then at the proper time he immersed him self. ²

[Guest ninhao]

So, in my view, a baptism does not 'clean' the person as that is Jesus alone. A baptism does several things. It is symbolic of what has occurred. It is a time when a member of the assembly recognizes the person is clean by the work of Jesus and agrees to immerse them. It is a time for the assembly to recognize the person as clean, a brother, and a member of the assembly. And finally, it is a time when the person who has been saved/cleaned, pronounces publically their faith, 'believe in their heart and confess with their mouth'.

In the early church, Christianity was outlawed by the Roman government. It was known that Christians often baptised new believers in the Jordan or other rivers or lakes. So, there were at times spies who would watch and turn the new believers into Rome which would result in the new believers death. In order to save peoples lives the baptism was moved indoors and sprinkling or pouring was practiced and viewed as acceptable, for the sake of the safety of the new believer.

Very interesting thoughts. I agree underlined.

Where did you read this in bold?

God bless,

GE

This sounds very logical but I've never heard it before.

[Mcgyver]

I'd like to interject two comments....

First: It seems to me that the context and construction of the conversation recorded in John 3:3-8 gives it's own interpretation:

Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot 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 say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Nicodemus obviously interprets Jesus' words in the first two sentences to mean being born again physically...Nicodemus asks how one can be born physically a second time.

Jesus of course answers: “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (emphasis mine).

This is a comparative statement...and in comparing "born of water" with "born of flesh is flesh"; I can only assume that Jesus is referring to the natural, physical birth of a human being in this portion. ***shrug***

Second:

As far as baptism, we actually have quite an important (though non-canonical) source document contemporary to the time that IMO can help quite a bit.

The document is known as the Didache (AKA The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations). This was in circulation prior to AD 100 (some scholars argue a date as early as AD 40-AD 60), and is the oldest "church handbook" known, and contains the following instructions concerning baptism in chapter 7:

And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

As a Baptist, obviously I hold to baptism by immersion...however I also believe that it is not so much the form as it is the public confession of; and obedience to, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. A soldier in the sandbox who comes to faith and is baptized out of a canteen is just as baptized as one who gets dunked in a Creek. JMO

As far as this:

In the early church, Christianity was outlawed by the Roman government. It was known that Christians often baptised new believers in the Jordan or other rivers or lakes. So, there were at times spies who would watch and turn the new believers into Rome which would result in the new believers death. In order to save peoples lives the baptism was moved indoors and sprinkling or pouring was practiced and viewed as acceptable, for the sake of the safety of the new believer.

Although I haven't seen this anywhere...I wouldn't automatically discount it...but yet during the persecutions of the church all it took was an accusation that one was a Christian to "start the ball rolling" (c.f. Pliny the Younger Letters)

Considering some of the examples we have (Polycarp for example), and the general attitude prevalent that it was an honor to suffer and to be martyred for Christ...I'd be hesitant to state that baptism (one of the most important rites in the early church) would have been changed simply out of safety concerns....

[Saint Stev:-0]

So, in my view, a baptism does not 'clean' the person as that is Jesus alone. A baptism does several things. It is symbolic of what has occurred. It is a time when a member of the assembly recognizes the person is clean by the work of Jesus and agrees to immerse them. It is a time for the assembly to recognize the person as clean, a brother, and a member of the assembly. And finally, it is a time when the person who has been saved/cleaned, pronounces publically their faith, 'believe in their heart and confess with their mouth'.

In the early church, Christianity was outlawed by the Roman government. It was known that Christians often baptised new believers in the Jordan or other rivers or lakes. So, there were at times spies who would watch and turn the new believers into Rome which would result in the new believers death. In order to save peoples lives the baptism was moved indoors and sprinkling or pouring was practiced and viewed as acceptable, for the sake of the safety of the new believer.

Very interesting thoughts. I agree underlined.

Where did you read this in bold?

God bless,

GE

This sounds very logical but I've never heard it before.

Actually Paul references baptism being part of washing away your sins

Acts 22:16

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

[Saint Stev:-0]

Anytime I get into a discussion about baptisms, I know Jesus told one of the thieves on the cross that today he would be with Me in paradise. That thief wasn't baptized. I've heard people claim that he was baptized after he was dead, if that were the case, I would think God would find that important enough to be mentioned in the Bible if that was one of the conditions of salvation.

Praise the Lord! I just want to? point something out here about thief on the cross. People say that he was not baptize. I beg to differ. (Luke 23:39-43) U have 2 different personalities here happening. 1 knew about the Kingdom and the other didn't. The word kingdom is very important here. (Matt. 3:5-6, Mark 1:5) Records that all around Region was baptized and the Kingdom of Heaven was preached by John the Bapt. Question, how would the thief know about the kingdom if not for John?

Luke 1:76-77 records Zachariah (Johns father) stating that John Baptist will give knowledge of salvation. Which is baptism unto repentance.

More is explained in this video link:

*** Videos are to be posted in the Video Forum only. ***

Edited May 25, 2013 by OneLight