I really do not know what you are talking about.
He that believes and is not water baptised is saved
- Thread starter 360watt
- Start date
Both @TomL and @FreeInChrist have lost me. I am totally confoused by what I am reading from you two. So I am out of here. You can carry on quite without me.
May God bless you both. Perhaps He knows what you are talking about.
May God bless you both. Perhaps He knows what you are talking about.
Acts 2:4 (LEB) — 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them ability to speak out.
filling
πίμπλημι (a lengthened form of the theme ΠΛΕΩ, whence πλέος, πλήρης [cf. Curtius § 366]): 1 aor. ἔπλησα; Pass., 1 fut. πλησθήσομαι; 1 aor. ἐπλήσθην; fr. Hom. on; Sept. for מָלַא, also for הִשְׂבִּיעַ (to satiate) and pass. שָׂבַע (to be full); to fill: τί, Lk. 5:7; τί τινος [W. § 30, 8 b.], a thing with something, Mt. 27:48; [Jn. 19:29 R G]; in pass., Mt. 22:10; Acts 19:29; [ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς, Jn. 12:3 Tr mrg.; cf. W. u. s. note; B. § 132, 12]. what wholly takes possession of the mind is said to fill it: pass.φόβου, Lk. 5:26; θάμβους, Acts 3:10; ἀνοίας, Lk. 6:11; ζήλου, Acts. 5:17; 13:45; θυμοῦ, Lk. 4:28; Acts 3:10; πνεύματος ἁγίου, Lk. 1:15, 41, 67; Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9.
Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (New York: Harper & Brothers., 1889), 509.
1 Corinthians 3:16 (LEB) — 16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and the Spirit of God dwells in you?
John 14:17 (LEB) — 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world is not able to receive, because it does not see him or know him. You know him, because he resides with you and will be in you.
οἰκέω fut. οἰκήσω—1. intr.live, dwell, have one’s habitation (Hom.+; inscr., pap., LXX; Philo, Aet. M. 148 ἐν) οἰκ. μετά τινος live with someone (M. Ant. 1, 17, 15; Gen 24:3; 27:44) Hv 5:2; in marriage (Soph., Oed. R. 990) 1 Cor 7:12f. ἔν τινι in someone orsometh. of the Christians ἐν κόσμῳ οἰκ. Dg 6:3b. Also of the soul ἐν τῷ σώματι ibid. a. Of the Spirit of God, which dwells in a pers. (cf. Test. Gad 5:4 ὁ φόβος τ. θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν αὐτῷ) Ro 8:9, 11; 1 Cor 3:16. Of the good Ro 7:18. Of sin vs. 20.
The baptism en the Spirit includes both filling and indwelling
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 557.
dwight92070
Active Member
Grok AI says: "Water's universal association with life, the womb, and amniotic fluid makes it a natural symbol across cultures."
We see it in ancient Egyptian mythology, Hindu literature, Greek mythology and literature, Mesopotamian mythology, Chinese creation myths, and even 20th century modern literature.
End information from Grok.
The amniotic fluid is 98% water.
So when Jesus says: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.", it's quite obvious that He is speaking of natural childbirth when He says "born of water". John 3:5
But just to be sure we know what He is referring to, He further explains it in the next verse. John 3:6
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit."
In fact, natural childbirth is directly referred to in verse 3, verse 4, verse 5, verse 6, and verse 7.
On the other hand, to say that "born of water" refers to water baptism, when the main theme of the passage is childbirth vs. spiritual birth, is to willfully ignore the obvious and the natural, in order to twist the meaning to get it to fit into their pet false teaching.
I'm not buying it and neither should anyone else.
We see it in ancient Egyptian mythology, Hindu literature, Greek mythology and literature, Mesopotamian mythology, Chinese creation myths, and even 20th century modern literature.
End information from Grok.
The amniotic fluid is 98% water.
So when Jesus says: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.", it's quite obvious that He is speaking of natural childbirth when He says "born of water". John 3:5
But just to be sure we know what He is referring to, He further explains it in the next verse. John 3:6
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit."
In fact, natural childbirth is directly referred to in verse 3, verse 4, verse 5, verse 6, and verse 7.
On the other hand, to say that "born of water" refers to water baptism, when the main theme of the passage is childbirth vs. spiritual birth, is to willfully ignore the obvious and the natural, in order to twist the meaning to get it to fit into their pet false teaching.
I'm not buying it and neither should anyone else.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
John 3:5 is a repeat of John 3:3 to the extent of explaining what Jesus meant when He said that "unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3:5 explains what He meant by γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν [born again]. By being born again He meant γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ Πνεύματος [born of water and Spirit]. To be born again is to be born of water and Spirit. There is no way that Jesus was saying that we needed to be born again physically. Born again of water and Spirit can only be referring to being born again spiritually.
The attempt to make the water in verse five reference physical birth is absolutely ridiculous. It makes no sense whatsoever. It was His answer to counter Nicodemus' question of entering again into his mother's womb to be born. He further clarified that by saying that it had nothing whatsoever to do with being born of the flesh. It is strictly spiritual rebirth that Jesus is discussing.
Make of that what you will, but there is no way to rationally twist that to mean that being born again has anything to do with amniotic fluid of physical birth. You could perhaps claim that the water there is the water of the word, perhaps; but even that is a stretch to Zwingliize the passage.
mailmandan
Active Member
In John 3:5, Jesus said born of water and the Spirit. Jesus did not say born of baptism and the Spirit so Jesus was not saying unless one is water baptized; he cannot enter the kingdom of God. In John 3:18, Jesus said - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
In the very next chapter, Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14 and He connects living water with eternal life in John 4:14. Also, in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing.
If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again. So, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.
Also "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (1 Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Why do you not see that the water there, followed by the mention of flesh, in verse 6 KJV ....That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. followed by the statement verse 7 KJV 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.
This is talking about a birth of the fleah and a "Spirit birth.
I much prefer the new fangled way thesays it... leaving no room for confusion.
Berean Literal Bible
Vs 5 Jesus replied, “I assure you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit.
Vs 6 Humans can reproduce only human life, but the Holy Spirit gives birth to spiritual life.
Vs7 So don’t be surprised when I say, ‘You must be born again.’
It is the new birth from the Holy Spirit that Jesus was talking about.
OR
New Living Translation
Vs 5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless anyone be born of water and of the Spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God.
Vs 6 That having been born of the flesh is flesh, and that having been born of the Spirit is spirit.
Vs 7 Do not wonder that I said to you, 'It is necessary for you all to be born from above.'
OR
English Standard Version
Vs 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Vs 6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Vs 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
And NO... I am not trying to avoid eater baptism at all..... These translations were done by various translators and
arrive at the same conclusion that when Jesus mentions water and flesh.... He is talking about the human birth
in this exchange with Nicodemus.
The whole point is that being born again has nothing whatsoever to do with physical birth. Even so, Jesus was saying there that being born again is being born of water and Spirit. Make that whatever you wish, but there is no rational way to tie the mention of water to physical birth. It is the spirit that is born again of water and Spirit.
Last edited:
FreeInChrist
Active Member
I don't think Jesus was saying anything at all about poppycock. But you see whatever you wish.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Eternally-Grateful
Active Member
When did you first receive your spirit? I argue that you received your spirit at or before your physical birth. In other words your were born both physically and spiritually the first time. When you sinned, you became dead spiritually in your trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1) and you needed to be born again spiritually. And that is what Jesus was talking about.
Nothing there says anything about water referencing the amniotic fluid of physical birth. As to cleansing, I think that refers to being forgiven of sins. That is what is spoken of in John's baptism and in the baptism in Acts 2:38 and elsewhere.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
@Jim
Have you ever done any readings by Tony Warren of Mountain Retreat?
This comment is from his writings on Which Baptism is Baptism.
The entire article is posted in 3 parts right here. The following is part of part 2 and part of part 3
It is not just I who say these things but here is one far more learned than I. @Red Baker knows, or knows of him...so you can check out his credentials.
I am only posting part here as the complete is readily available on BAM at the link.
Ezekiel 36:25-26
- "Then will I Sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be Clean: from all your filthiness, and from your idols, will I cleanse you.
- A new heart also will I give you, and a new Spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh."
Note God again says that He will sprinkle clean water upon us and we shall be clean from all our sins. Clearly God says sprinkle, not dip or immerse. Because of church tradition, some would retort that this is wrong, and cling to the idea that only immersion is the proper mode of Baptism. God forbid, for true baptism or washing is of God and not by our denominational presuppositions. These scriptures should preclude anyone from claiming that immersion is the only mode of baptism. In Illustrating spiritual baptism, God uses sprinkling. Thus I believe that sprinkling is a perfectly acceptable and biblically defensible way of baptizing, based upon my study of the pertinent scriptures. Water baptism that is efficacious and important is not H²0, but spiritual waters. When God says, repent (Acts 2:38) and be baptized and you will be saved, this repentance is unto salvation, but Baptism in literal water is not. How do we know? Because Ephesians carefully tells us there is one baptism:
Ephesians 4:5
- "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism.."
Those are God's words and so they are faithful and true. Nevertheless, it is clear that we saw in Acts 1:5 the mention of two baptisms. John Baptized in water, and spoke of one coming who will baptize in the holy spirit. This is important because we just read God's word specifically declare that there is only one baptism. How can this be? Well, it can be because the only true Baptism is Baptism in the Holy Spirit, the baptism in water is merely a token of that one Baptism. It's just like there is only one sacrifice, which is Christ Jesus. Yet the Israelites offered sacrifices that pointed to the one true Sacrifice, and we offer the sacrifice of ourselves in Christ as holy and acceptable to God. Because of His mercy, that one true sacrifice covers all our works that are wrought in Him.
Romans 12:1
- "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service."
As in the one sacrifice, so in the one Baptism. What that clearly means is that any other Baptism (physical water) is merely a sign or token of this one real Baptism. Anyone who denies that might as well call God's word a lie, because He says there is only one--meaning only one that is efficacious to cleanse us from sin.
John 1:33
- "And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."
John baptized with water as a sign, but the "One Baptism" that the sign pointed to was this baptism in the Holy Spirit he prophesied Christ would bring. There is no contradiction of these Baptisms. Because the only real Baptism (Cleansing/Washing) is the Baptism of the Spirit, and all water Baptisms are simply a token of that one Baptism. We could say the same thing about circumcision. There was one circumcision, and that was the circumcision of the Heart. The circumcision r cutting away of the flesh was merely a token of that one true spiritual circumcision.
Colossians 2:11
- "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:"
There we see confirmed the one circumcision of salvation. The physical cutting off of the flesh was merely a token of this one Spiritual circumcision in cutting off of the flesh in rebirth without that fleshly or carnal nature. Anyone not of this one true circumcision, the circumcision made without hands, God declares as being truly 'uncircumcised' to Him. That is even if he had been circumcised in the flesh, to God he is as uncircumcised and spiritually a heathen separated from the covenant of God. That it is not about physical circumcision, but Spiritual is the principle that we see at work here.
Likewise, there is one Lamb of God that is slain for our sins. Therefore those literal lambs that were slain in the Old Testament were simply tokens of the One true Lamb of God that would be slain and :"truly" take away sin. Can you imagine those of the Old Testament congregation arguing over if the blood used from the lamb slain should be two cups or three? But that is exactly what some of the church today contend about with this issue. It's ridiculous for the church to argue over how much, or literally the amount of water used to signify baptismal cleansing. What is Biblically commanded in baptism is water as a token, and that's all. Any other added requirements are meaningless. So why is the church today so concerned whether it should be a splash of water, a pool of water, or a river of water? My opinion is that it is because of their church traditions. But while they are busy pointing, they are in truth (and ironically) missing the whole point of water Baptism.
Moreover, those who even insist that baptism in water is synonymous with baptism in the Spirit are treading on dangerous ground. It is easily proven by scripture that this belief is Biblically indefensible.
Acts 8:15
- "Who when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might RECEIVE the Holy Ghost.
- for as yet He was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus."
So here we see that although these people had been Baptized in water, they still were yet saved because they didn't yet have the Holy Ghost spiritually cleanse them. And God plainly tells us, He that doesn't have the Holy Spirit is none of His (Romans 8:9). Proof positive that water Baptism does not mean one has been Baptized in the Holy Spirit whereby he has been redeemed or saved. Baptism in water and the Holy Spirit can happen at the same time, or it can happen at different times. Because the water is merely a token. While anyone can set a date and time to be Baptized in water, no one can set a date for Baptizing in the Spirit but God. So then honestly, rationally and logically, how could water Baptism mean one is saved or not saved? Are we in control of our time of salvation or is God in control? We can set a date to have the sign of water put on us, but the Baptism that saves us is of the Spirit and could happen before water Baptism, or after or even not at all. That is basically what 1st Peter chapter three is illustrating. Water can cleanse our flesh of physical filth, but it cannot bring real salvation.
1st Peter 3:21
- "The like FIGURE whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us, not the putting away of filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
Again, we are clearly told that Baptism does save us, but "NOT" the Baptism in water wherein you can put away the filth of the flesh (washing), but Baptism of the Spirit that is provided us by the redemption secured in the death and resurrection of Christ. Water Baptism is a figure, a sign, or a token of something infinitely more important. Water is the figure of the acknowledgement of a good conscience toward God. A token that we are made clean of our carnal nature. It is our new birth where we are born of water and baptized in this Spirit. And that work was accomplished by the death and resurrection of Christ, not by any man does of applying literal water.
Titus 3:5
- "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His Mercy He Saved us, by the wasking of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost."
We are regenerated by the cleansing of the Holy Spirit of God. That word translated regeneration means a spiritual nativity or a spiritual rebirth. We gladly put on the sign of water Baptism to signify the true washing that came when Christ reigns in our lives. John the Baptist baptized with the Baptism of repentance with physical water, but after the cross, Jesus made it so we were Baptized by a infinitely more permanent solution to the uncleanness of the flesh.
Luke 3:16
I pulled the following from above for emphasis. But will not add, take away or highlight due to copyright infringements.
#1Note God again says that He will sprinkle clean water upon us and we shall be clean from all our sins. Clearly God says sprinkle, not dip or immerse. Because of church tradition, some would retort that this is wrong, and cling to the idea that only immersion is the proper mode of Baptism. God forbid, for true baptism or washing is of God and not by our denominational presuppositions. These scriptures should preclude anyone from claiming that immersion is the only mode of baptism. In Illustrating spiritual baptism, God uses sprinkling. Thus I believe that sprinkling is a perfectly acceptable and biblically defensible way of baptizing, based upon my study of the pertinent scriptures. Water baptism that is efficacious and important is not H²0, but spiritual waters. When God says, repent (Acts 2:38) and be baptized and you will be saved, this repentance is unto salvation, but Baptism in literal water is not. How do we know? Because Ephesians carefully tells us there is one baptism:
Ephesians 4:5
- "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism.."
#3
Acts 8:15
- "Who when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might RECEIVE the Holy Ghost.
- for as yet He was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus."
So here we see that although these people had been Baptized in water, they still were yet saved because they didn't yet have the Holy Ghost spiritually cleanse them. And God plainly tells us, He that doesn't have the Holy Spirit is none of His (Romans 8:9). Proof positive that water Baptism does not mean one has been Baptized in the Holy Spirit whereby he has been redeemed or saved.
#4 Again, we are clearly told that Baptism does save us, but "NOT" the Baptism in water wherein you can put away the filth of the flesh (washing), but Baptism of the Spirit that is provided us by the redemption secured in the death and resurrection of Christ.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Have you every in your entire life heard a woman say either in person, in a movie, reading a book "Oh! My anmiotic fluid broke?"
It is..."My water broke"
Have you ever in your entire life heard anyone from 2000 plus years ago even know what that fluid was? And they could not type blood either... They just knew it was wet.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
I know this is not addressed to me but I have a comment.
That makes the perfect case for a baby baptism....
Water baptism immediately following the Holy Spirit baptism
Thanks Jim, I really needed that.
BTW.... Pleanty of people have sinned after their immersion baptisms. Pleant of people have also sinned after they received the Holy Spirit.... When it happens though.... you WILL know about it.
Of course we receive our spirits with our souls when we have a body to contain them.... Tripartite man in fact. But if you are meaning we receive the Holy Spirit then
That makes the perfect case for a baby baptism....
Water baptism immediately following the Holy Spirit baptism
Thanks Jim, I really needed that.
Naw... it was not.
BTW.... Pleanty of people have sinned after their immersion baptisms. Pleant of people have also sinned after they received the Holy Spirit.... When it happens though.... you WILL know about it.
Similar threads
