What did Jesus mean?

[Wansvic]

I believe in water baptism and I encourage all believers to get baptized in water. I don’t believe “born of water” is water baptism. When studying water baptism I can find only a reference to burial and never birth; and that “for a good conscience before God”. We bring people out of the water because it would be a capital offense to do otherwise.

Water can cleanse our conscience. Water/word can wash us and our minds as we continue with Christ. Certainly water baptism “saves us” but not salvation to go to heaven. It saves us from the pursuit of our enemies. If one reckons themselves dead in Christ there is nothing the enemy can accuse them of.

It also is consistent with Paul water baptizing very few. If it was required for salvation unto God then why pass it over?

Paul stated that in baptism one's sin is destroyed. (Rom. 6:3-6) It is commonly understood that unless one's personal sin is dealt with they cannot enter the kingdom of God. Ananias instructed Paul that in baptism his sins would be washed away. (Acts 22:16) Therefore Paul's comment concerning how few he baptized should not be seen as evidence that water baptism does not play a part in one's salvation. The biblical record shows that water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus was still part of Paul's message over 20 years after Pentecost. (Acts 19:1-6) This points to Paul's primary ministry being to preach the message while others, most often, administered water baptism.

Consider the God designed birthing processes. In the natural, a newborn enters the world after breaking forth from the waters of the mother's womb. This parallels what occurs when a person is born again in the spiritual realm. They break the surface of water in baptism a new creation.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Baptism is a work of man. It's a symbolic action representing an entrance into a sect or priesthood.

It's an act of obedience. If you label every act of obedience a "work of man" what are we supposed to do, nothing? Is giving to the poor a work of man? Is showing hospitality a work of man? How about preaching and teaching the good news: Is that a work of man?

 

[Wansvic]

Picking nits.

If that were true, why is there no record of the apostles administering water baptism that way? Water baptism was consistently performed in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-6, 22:16) Also, consider that water baptism is a deed. (an action performed) Note what Colossians 3:17 says: "...whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Also noteworthy is Paul's instruction to born again Corinthians concerning the relevance of their water baptism in the name of Jesus.
Paul's comments reveal water baptisms were administered in Jesus’ name: "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 1 Cor 1:14-16

 

[ResidentAlien]

If that were true, why is there no record of the apostles administering water baptism that way? Water baptism was consistently performed in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-6, 22:16) Also, consider that water baptism is a deed. (an action performed) Note what Colossians 3:17 says: "...whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Also noteworthy is Paul's instruction to born again Corinthians concerning the relevance of their water baptism in the name of Jesus.
Paul's comments reveal water baptisms were administered in Jesus’ name: "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 1 Cor 1:14-16

Old story. Heard it a million times.

 

[Wansvic]

This is circular reasoning because you still haven't exegeted Acts 2:38 to show me that it is referring to water baptism.


Again, you have pulled out a verse that you think involves water baptism to justify your interpretation of Acts 2:38.


Of course, they are connected, but the passage does not describe or define which comes first or how one affects the other. They are merely associated. This passage does not help or hurt your position.

Um...read that again, brother.

““Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”” (Acts 10:47)
​

1. This actually is a reference to water baptism under the new covenant, so bravo for using a relevant passage for this discussion.
2. They already had received the Holy Spirit before their water baptism. Water baptism comes after receiving the Holy Spirit.
This is because baptism is a command (Acts 10:48), and we cannot obey His commandments unless we love Him (John 14:15), and we cannot love Him unless we are born of God (1 John 4:7, 5:1)

Kindly, I think I've pointed out enough to throw a wrench in the theology you've proposed. Now I will share what I think you and many Christians have missed... There is another baptism besides water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit:

"By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body,
whether Jews or Greeks,whether slaves or free” (1 Corinthians 12:13)​

This is the baptism into Christ, by which we have access to the Holy Spirit because He indwells us when we first believe.

So put simply, here are the three baptisms:

1. (salvation) The Holy Spirit baptized you into Christ
2. (obedience) Water baptism (another believer baptized you to symbolize the baptism that already happened internally (#1))
3. (empowering) Christ baptizes you with the Holy Spirit

Number 2 and 3 sometimes happen simultaneously or in different orders, as we see that from the book of Acts. There's no fixed order for the second and third baptisms.


You (like many) haven't yet seen the distinction between the first two.
The baptism mentioned in Rom 6:3 is not water baptism.
It is also not "the baptism in the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1:6, Acts 2:4).

The baptism that Paul speaks of in Rom 6:3 is the same as he described in Acts 2:38, Gal 3:27 & 1 Cor 12:13, etc, where the believer is baptized IN Christ, BY the Holy Spirit, at the moment of faith=salvation. This is a baptism of YOUR spirit...The Holy Spirit baptized you INTO Jesus. That's how a person is "IN Christ" because they've been baptized into Christ.

Not only are there 3 baptisms. But these 3 are foreshadowed in the OT, pointing towards what would be available for us today. For someone to approach God in His fullness, they would have to offer a sacrifice on the bronze altar (representing the first baptism, which is (technically) symbolic of being baptized in the blood of Christ. Then one would proceed to the bronze laver, to wash with water, which is representative of water baptism and an outward expression of clensing. And finally one would enter the tent where God's Spirit dwelt, which is representative of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

3 baptisms... of blood, water, and spirit.

I respectfully disagree with your conclusions. Being baptized INTO Christ's death is different than having the Holy Ghost come to dwell inside one's body.

The reason I presented all of the detailed conversion experiences is because upon study they confirm truth concerning a few things.
1. Both water baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost are referenced as part of the rebirth experience.
2. A particular sequence of #1 was not required.
3. NT water baptism was consistently done in the name of the Lord Jesus.

The Word indicates that truth is established through the existence of 2-3 scriptures stating the same thing. Scripture confirmation of what I presented above is as follows:
1. Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:44-48, 19:1-6, 22:16
2. The initial Jewish and Gentile conversions - Holy Ghost first, afterward water baptism in Jesus' name (Acts 2:2-38, 10:43-48)
Apostle Paul - Holy Ghost first, afterward water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 9:17-18 and 22:16)
The Samaritans and Ephesus disciples - Water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus first, afterward received Holy Ghost. (8:12-18, 19:1-6)
3. Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:44-48, 19:1-6, 22:16

The OT laver served two purposes:
1. Water from the laver was used to wash Aaron and his sons from head to toe as PART of the initiation into the priesthood. (Exodus 40:12-15) This foreshadowed the NT water baptism. It's consistent with 1 Peter 2:9; those who have been born again are members of the royal priesthood. Note: Initiation included anointing both Aaron and his sons with oil. (Foreshadows baptism of the Holy Ghost)
2. After initiation into the priesthood, they had to wash their hands and feet at the laver before entering into the tabernacle. (Exodus 30:19-21)

 

[Wansvic]

@Diakonos my post timed out.
Lastly, it is by the Spirit that we are baptized into one body via water baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost.

By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body,
whether Jews or Greeks,whether slaves or free” (1 Corinthians 12:13)

 

[Wansvic]

Old story. Heard it a million times.

If you have been shown the scriptures a million times. I am curious why you think it isn't important how a person is water baptized.

 

[ResidentAlien]

If you have been shown the scriptures a million times. I am curious why you think it isn't important how a person is water baptized.

I don't think it's unimportant. We have the command from the Lord to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Yet there's no account that states it was done in exactly this way: it says they were baptized in the name of Jesus.

So, we can sit around all day picking nits or we can accept the fact that either way is acceptable. To say it has to be one way or another is entirely too legalistic. I believe we should baptize but getting off in the weeds about what words we need to say is counterproductive.

Now, you have my position. I have no interest in debating.

 

[Aaron56]

That's not in scripture. All references to water baptism are specifically about burial. Not death, burial, and resurrection. Just burial.

@Diakonos my post timed out.
Lastly, it is by the Spirit that we are baptized into one body via water baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost.

By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body,
whether Jews or Greeks,whether slaves or free” (1 Corinthians 12:13)

You’re making the common mistake of reading “water baptism” whenever you see the word “baptize”. Baptize is to simply immerse. If you were cleaning, you would baptize a sponge into cleaning solution.

You can restate the verse thus: “By the Holy Spirit we are immersed into one body.”

Just as it is written “.. in fact, God has arranged the members of the body, every one of them, according to His design.”

 

[Wansvic]

@Aaron56 The NT rebirth experience entails belief in the entire gospel message. (Acts 2) Required obedience in repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus and receiving the Holy Ghost. These requirements are directly related to Jesus' death, burial and resurrection.

 

[Magenta]

I doubt that he was baptized even though you quoted the perfect hyperbole to counter such a claim.

Just saying.

I doubt there is any reason to doubt it LOL. Textually speaking, that is

But also, in case anyone would respond by saying something along the lines of, well, he was a criminal, a thief, and who knows what all else he may have been guilty of...? There is still nothing in the text to suggest he had never been baptized. And just for good measure: criminals can be just as sincere in their religiosity as any other pew warmer, and just as sincere in the practice of any rituals offered up to absolve them of their sins. The Mafia comes to mind...

 

[CorrectiveLens]

In John 3: 5 Jesus talks about being born of water and the Spirit, what does this mean? Also, why can't one enter into the kingdom of God because of this?
John 3: 5
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 suspect that born of water means natural birth as when the mother's water breaks just before giving birth. When a person is born of the Spirit, he is born again and becomes a new person filled with love for God and people. This happens when he repents of his sins and turns to God for forgiveness and strength to overcome. You are baptized in the name of the Father when you repent and turn to Him. You are baptized in the name of the Son when you put your faith and trust in the Father's plan for our salvation through Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. When you are baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit, you become part of the spiritual body of Christ and therefore, adopted children of the Father. You will be obeying the Spirit of the Law of God when you love God with all your mind, heart, and soul, strive to do His will, and all your actions and thoughts are motivated by love for God and man. You are perfected.

 

[JohnDB]

It's an act of obedience. If you label every act of obedience a "work of man" what are we supposed to do, nothing? Is giving to the poor a work of man? Is showing hospitality a work of man? How about preaching and teaching the good news: Is that a work of man?

Those acts of man you mentioned are actually works of faith... completely different fruit than a baptism.

A Baptism today is the equivalent of a circumcision.

Unnecessary and poorly understood.

 

[JohnDB]

suspect that born of water means natural birth as when the mother's water breaks just before giving birth.

So everything except reptiles and birds has been born of water?

That makes no sense.

Does not compute whatsoever.

 

[JohnDB]

doubt there is any reason to doubt it LOL. Textually speaking, that is

He might have been in jail....

You know jailbirds...

 

[Amanuensis]

I believe that the most persuasive reason to apply the water to baptism is because that is what they were doing at the time.

They were baptising on a daily basis before this event. They were preaching a baptism of repentance. They had probably just baptized people that day. Therefore his disciples would have understood him to mean baptism when he says this.

There is no way that they would have thought of the water in birth. If you could find literature from the time of Christ where it was common to refer to child birth as being born of water then you would have a strong reason to believe that was a possible application. Without that evidence it is extremely unlikely and pretty much impossible that Jesus would be talking about child birth as "born of water" and have invented the phrase at that moment and expected anyone to understand it.

And if Jesus had of invented that phrase at that moment to refer to natural child birth then the disciples would have used it in explaining the born again process later but in their writings they only refer to the necessity of baptism and being filled with the Spirit.

He is telling Nicodemus that if he was as well read in the scriptures as people expected him to be as a teacher, that he would know that this was prophesied, that a new heart and spirit would be given to them. This baptism of repentance and faith in the Christ was causing people to enter into the kingdom of heaven. This was the simple introduction to the theological subject of being born again, which would be expanded upon later by Peter, Paul etc...

 

[christian1st]

In John 3: 5 Jesus talks about being born of water and the Spirit, what does this mean? Also, why can't one enter into the kingdom of God because of this?
John 3: 5
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.

Simply answer verse 5 answers it

 

[Magenta]

He might have been in jail....

You know jailbirds...

Maybe. John the Baptist was baptizing for a while before Jesus came along

 

[Amanuensis]

Maybe. John the Baptist was baptizing for a while before Jesus came along

If Jesus was referring to the baptism of repentance the emphasis is on the repentance not the water itself. So he says born of water and of the spirit because He and his disciples were known for baptising people and teaching a doctrine of repentance in order to enter the kingdom of God. His conversation with Nicodemus is a defence of what they were doing everyday and what it meant.

The thief repented on the cross and believe on Jesus so he did the same thing that would result in the invisible born again entry into the kingdom that "born of water.. signified.. that is repentance.

 

[Magenta]

If Jesus was referring to the baptism of repentance the emphasis is on the repentance not the water itself. So he says born of water and of the spirit because He and his disciples were known for baptising people and teaching a doctrine of repentance in order to enter the kingdom of God. His conversation with Nicodemus is a defence of what they were doing everyday and what it meant.

The thief repented on the cross and believe on Jesus so he did the same thing that would result in the invisible born again entry into the kingdom that "born of water.. signified.. that is repentance.

We were talking about whether or not the thief on the cross had been baptized. Most assume he was not, but the text does not say this. What the text does say is that when JtB was baptizing, "People went out to him from all of Jerusalem and the countryside of Judea." Of course we do not know where the thief was at that time, or if he partook in such rituals, or even his ethnicity or religious orientation.