Born of Water and Spirit by Jack Kelly

[Saint Stev:-0]

In reply to Jesus is Lords quote

"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***"

My reply:

The problem with what your stating is Jesus said if a MAN meaning somebody is already existing on earth be born of the water.

I would agree with you if Jesus would of stated if an egg is fertilized and born of the water. That would make more since. Weird,but understanding.

Also Jesus points out if a man be born. We do not have the will to be born but our parents place this will. So by our own will we get baptized and by our own will we except his spirit. God doesn't force his spirit upon anybody. He gives to who wants it. Wink ; )

[Saint Stev:-0]

Are you saying that natural birth takes the place of immersion baptism?

1 am saying that it is a sacrament like Christening or dedication or infant baptism. Is it necessary -no- but the acceptance of Jesus sacrifice for our sin and the infilling of the Holy Spirit now that we are not under the law is all sufficient. Water immersion is a sacrament - am I not correct? Just the same as a wedding, communion or infant baptism ?

My issue with immersion is that those of other faiths who do not immerse may feel it is necessary for salvation because of the way it is presented and taught by the baptists of differing denominations. While I am secure in my faith and knowledge of Salvation and have no need for the process of immersion I find immersion unnecessary for a deeper understanding of faith in our Lord and the working of the Holy Spirit in a life surrendered to Him - freed by Jesus death and resurrection. If it is something that I must do then it takes away from the gift of grace and becomes works making the gift of no effect.

Do you realize you're teaching that all mentions of baptism in the Word can be ignored? If natural childbirth takes the place of immersion baptism, that would mean that God forces baptism on everyone. It also means that every mention of baptism, other than baptism of the Holy Spirit, is redundant. They're just empty words and phrases that mean absolutely nothing. You're taking away and adding things to the bible to suit your own belief's. Jesus was baptised and regardless if it was full immersion or just a sprinkling, you're saying it isn't necessary because we were all baptised at birth. Your own belief that sprinkling is all that is needed is also redundant if natural childbirth takes the place of full immersion baptism.

You're teaching something here that isn't biblical.

Where do you see that I am saying that all mention of baptism should be ignored? I have not indicated that anywhere!

I am saying that the water and the blood that flowed from Jesus side is what cleanses me. That is all the cleansing I need for my sin. I do not have to go through any other ceremony because it was done once for all. We do infant baptism a ceremony/sacrament which you do not agree with and that is fine with me but do not insist that immersion is necessary because all was done on the cross for me and I need not add to what Jesus did on the cross. Did He not say 'It is done!' once for all?

Your statement is false on baptism is not needed. Jesus gave the command in Mark 16:16 be baptized to be saved.

There is no example of infant baptism in the bible. Jesus points out in John 3:5 if a man be born of the water, meaning someone with understanding. We all agree that a baby is not a person capable of receiving this choice.

Mark 16:16

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

[Saint Stev:-0]

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.

I don't believe I agree with your post on Christian baptism meaning. It represents that we are buried with Jesus and raised like him.

Romans 6:1-8

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?

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.

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

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.

7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

[Littlelambseativy]

What then does the water and the blood which flowed from the pierced side of Jesus do for us? Why does Jesus tell His disciples that they are clean because of the word He had already spoken to them (John 15:5). The word clean here is connected to the word clean in John 13:10 where Jesus says that "He who is bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean, and you are clean but not all of you " referring to Judas leaving me to think according to immersion that Judas was also immersed.

The words bathed and wash are translated from two different Greek words. The first is from Gk. louo and denotes complete ablution. Wash is from Gk. nipto which is the usual NT word for washing for washing hands or feet.

So once one believes he is cleansed as before the law from all sin "once for all" but needs throughout his life to bring his sins daily to the Father in confession to abide in unbroken confession with the Father and the Son. The blood answers forever but the individual needs constant cleansing from sin and guilt through prayer. Christ will not have communion with a defiled saint.

So is baptism the most important of cleansing or is the daily confession of sin. Baptized and live in sin because of no time for confession or prayer and hope that the immersion has done it once for all or no immersion and confessing daily? To me the rite of immersion is one that denominations use before one can join or vote in that denomination but necessary no. I would rather depend on the blood of my saviour which flowed with water from his pierced side only than on anything that I, myself, may have to do.

[Landers]

Hi I believe he referred to the three witnesses,, the water , the blood , and the spirit

Landers

[Guest shiloh357]

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.

He knew about the Kingdom because that is all Jesus preached about. Jesus preached the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. That was the primary feature of Jesus' teaching. It is not farfectched to think that he might have been present at some of Jesus' teachings.

John's baptism was not Christian baptism and would not apply to the issue of whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation.

[OneLight]

Your statement is false on baptism is not needed. Jesus gave the command in Mark 16:16 be baptized to be saved.

There is no example of infant baptism in the bible. Jesus points out in John 3:5 if a man be born of the water, meaning someone with understanding. We all agree that a baby is not a person capable of receiving this choice.

Mark 16:16

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

So often this verse is is misunderstood. Baptism is a result of being saved, not the avenue of salvation. It it was, Christ would of included baptism in His statement of being dammed. He did not. His words were "but he that believeth not shall be damned" ... no mention of baptism at all.

[Saint Stev:-0]

What then does the water and the blood which flowed from the pierced side of Jesus do for us? Why does Jesus tell His disciples that they are clean because of the word He had already spoken to them (John 15:5). The word clean here is connected to the word clean in John 13:10 where Jesus says that "He who is bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean, and you are clean but not all of you " referring to Judas leaving me to think according to immersion that Judas was also immersed.

The words bathed and wash are translated from two different Greek words. The first is from Gk. louo and denotes complete ablution. Wash is from Gk. nipto which is the usual NT word for washing for washing hands or feet.

So once one believes he is cleansed as before the law from all sin "once for all" but needs throughout his life to bring his sins daily to the Father in confession to abide in unbroken confession with the Father and the Son. The blood answers forever but the individual needs constant cleansing from sin and guilt through prayer. Christ will not have communion with a defiled saint.

So is baptism the most important of cleansing or is the daily confession of sin. Baptized and live in sin because of no time for confession or prayer and hope that the immersion has done it once for all or no immersion and confessing daily? To me the rite of immersion is one that denominations use before one can join or vote in that denomination but necessary no. I would rather depend on the blood of my saviour which flowed with water from his pierced side only than on anything that I, myself, may have to do.

The first part of Jesus blood and water shows that 1John 5:8 the Water, Blood and spirit agree in 1. The blood is shed for us, the water to show baptism in his name, his spirit poured into us like the day of Pentecost. Without shedding of Jesus blood, there's no remission (Heb. 9:22).

Jesus does tell his disciples they're clean by his word in John 15:3. Jesus explains the whole time Jesus explains he's the branch and how the branch bears fruit. How are they clean by his word? We have to read Line upon Line (Isaiah 28:9-13).

If you keep reading in the same chapter Jesus explains how they're clean. They abide in his Word. Now let's read.

John 15:10

If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

Your trying to form to meanings of the word wash. When you read Acts 22:16 Ananias states arise be baptized and wash away your sins. He's clearly referring to Acts 2:38 in being baptized and filled with the holy ghost. Your explanation doesn't fit into Acts 22:16. Ananias didn't state your washed by the word but he's showing they're washed by the word meaning command. Judas had sin because of his lust of money clearly shown in scriptures. Therefore makes him unclean. The disciples are washed by Jesus word because they follow his command.

Also Ananias was right in Acts 22;16 baptism washing away sins. Jesus said for the remission of sins preached in his name (Luke 24:47). Peter stated remission of sins in Acts 2:38.

Baptism is the first cleansing of remission of all your sins. Yes, I agree we must die daily in repentance to prayer.

Baptism necessary, Yes. I ask you how do you bury yourself with Jesus? Also Jesus stated the command in Mark 16:16

[Saint Stev:-0]

Your statement is false on baptism is not needed. Jesus gave the command in Mark 16:16 be baptized to be saved.

There is no example of infant baptism in the bible. Jesus points out in John 3:5 if a man be born of the water, meaning someone with understanding. We all agree that a baby is not a person capable of receiving this choice.

Mark 16:16

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

So often this verse is is misunderstood. Baptism is a result of being saved, not the avenue of salvation. It it was, Christ would of included baptism in His statement of being dammed. He did not. His words were "but he that believeth not shall be damned" ... no mention of baptism at all.

Your explanation is false. Here's why. Jesus stated he who believes and is baptized is saved. Question. Who states I do not believe in the Gospel but I will be baptized?

No one. So this shows Jesus would not need to repeat the actual word baptism in the second line of Mark 16:16. Why? Being baptized without believing is pointless all on it's own.

[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.

He knew about the Kingdom because that is all Jesus preached about. Jesus preached the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. That was the primary feature of Jesus' teaching. It is not farfectched to think that he might have been present at some of Jesus' teachings.

John's baptism was not Christian baptism and would not apply to the issue of whether or not baptism is necessary for salvation.

Your statement is incorrect. Here's why. Jesus disciples baptized people unto repentance. Why? because it was nescessary.

John 4:1-2

When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

² (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)