Featured "born of water" does not mean "baptized".

A math student might observe you must be born the first time in order to be born again. And being born the first time does not add up to allowing you to enter the kingdom of God.

 

We receive the baptism into Christ and His Body moment got saved

 

Just so. But our Lord is not referring to a physical human birth. 'That which is born of the flesh is flesh.....' It's a 1 Corinthians 2:14 situation, and we need look no further than Nicodemus to see that a human birth just doesn't cut the mustard. 'How can these things be?' He asks. He hasn't got a clue what's going on. '.....That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.' Nicodemus needs a transformation that all his piety, learning and book knowledge can't give him. He needs a change so radical that it can only be described as a new birth, a spiritual birth, a birth from above.

 

See my post #25. It's not about a physical birth.
And amniotic fluid is not water as I'm sure you would find if you tried drinking the stuff.

 

read the question that Nicodemus asked Jesus in verse 4. Jesus' respones is from verse 5 onwards. Nicodemus could not imagine how a person can be "reborn" from his mothers womb a second time, which is impossible. Jesus took his words, and said that the Rebirth that He is speaking about, was not "physical", which is what Nicodemus meant, by "Spirtiual". This is the contrast.

 

I entirely agree with that. We simply draw different conclusions from it. May I invite you to read my post #8 again, and to consider 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:26 and, especially, Titus 3:5? The spiritual cleansing of indwelling sin and depravity is an integral part of the New Birth.

 

Could some one on Baptist Board explain more fully 1 Peter 3:21 about baptism only being a picture of the new birth? I am "ministering" (Although I'm NOT a minister {Church Officer].) My next-door neighbor claims that simply because he was baptized that, in and of itself, proves to him that he has experienced the New Birth. Can anyone here on Baptist Board help out, especially if you can supply specific NT verses that may apply to his line of reasoning?

 

No, as this topic has been discussed in previous threads and I don't think that the contents of a video will change my mind about it.
My answer, based on careful study of God's word over many years, is what I wrote above.

However, some years ago I did indeed believe that being born of water meant being born of a woman.
I no longer understand it that way.

 

num19:
9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.

13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.

17 And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel:
20 But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord: the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean.
21 And it shall be a perpetual statute unto them, that he that sprinkleth the water of separation shall wash his clothes; and he that toucheth the water of separation shall be unclean until even.

 

This is a very interesting and much misused verse/passage. Check out this link on what some of the commentators say. Ask the Holy Spirit to guide you to which is the correct one

1 Peter 3:21 Commentaries: Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you-- not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience-- through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

 

Let me ask?

Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Could, "the first begotten of the dead," be construed as a regeneration? Is, "the first begotten out of the dead," tied to our sins being washed away? Consider the gospel by which we are being saved. 1 Cor 15:1,2 And I make known to you, brethren, the good news (gospel) that I proclaimed to you, which also ye did receive, in which also ye have stood,
V 3 for I delivered to you first, what also I did receive, that Christ died (shed his life blood) for our sins, according to the Writings,
Now is the being raised out of the dead (the first begotten of the dead) (regenerated) tied to our sins being washed away in that blood of Christ?

Verse 17 and if Christ hath not risen, vain is your faith, ye are yet in your sins;

What does Acts 2 say about Christ? V 23 says he was slain, died. Verse 32 says God raised him up, V 31 Soul not left to Hades, flesh did not see corruption. out of the dead ones.

And then what is stated next? He received form the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit.

And then what took place fifty days following the weekly Sabbath after he died? - He shed forth this.

Titus 3:5 (not by works that are in righteousness that we did but according to His kindness,) He did save us, through a bathing (washing) of regeneration, and a renewing of the Holy Spirit,

? Fifty days later ?
V 6 which He poured upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour,

Your thoughts.

 

here are some of my own thoughts on this

1. If water batism is part of salvation, then salvation is no longer of grace, but also includes work, which Romans 11:6, and other passages, show to be not possible
2. The thief on the cross was not water baptised, and yet because he confessed his sins and believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, he was saved.
3. The Apostle Paul says that he thanked the Lord that he did not himself baptize many, 1 Cor. 10-17, esp verse 17. If water baptism was part of being saved, then Paul was wrong in what he says.
4. In Acts 2:41 we read, "Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day". Showing that the sinner needs to believe in the Gospel Message, and "repent and believe", as Jesus says in Mark 1:15, to be saved
5. In Romans 6:4, in context, shows that water baptism represents the putting away of the old life, and the new life in Jesus Christ

 

So far, I TRIED to use 1 Corinthians 1:14-17 where the Apostle Paul seemed to disregard his baptizing some people as secondary to preaching the Gospel, but his reply was that while Paul himself may have considered it to be a secondary situation, he STILL performed it, and thus (According to him), water baptism still must be included in Jesus's commissioning us to 'Go Forth ..."! Moreover, Peter on the day of Pentecost DID say that a person STILL must be water baptized (Ref. Acts 2:38) in order to the New Birth. I'm not a Greek scholar, but I do recall long ago said that the word "For" does NOT always mean "In order to receive." Do any of you here on Baptist Board have any information about how the Greek word that's in our English Language Bibles translated "For" means something different than "In order to receive"?

 

A person could be wanted for murder, and be (1) the person to be murdered, or (2) the person who did the murder.

Is water baptism in view in Acts of the Apostles 2:28? The answer is no. Why? Because the forgiveness of sins does not depend on water baptism. The thief on the cross was not water baptized. But we a person is spiritually baptized into Christ, they undergo the washing of regeneration (also called the circumcision of Christ) where their sin burden is removed (thus forgiven).

And note the circumcision is done without hands (not performed by human action).

 

were you meant to say anything?

 

I always find your posts very interesting and challenging - so challenging that sometimes I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. But let me try to answer.

I don't think so. The Lord Jesus, uniquely, stood in no need of a new birth, having no sins to be washed away.

The Lord Jesus rising from the dead is to do with our justification (Romans 4:25). God is propitiated by the death of Jesus, and shows this by raising Him from the dead. The New Birth is more to do with our sanctification.God gives us His Spirit and writes His laws on our hearts.

I think you are conflating the atonement and the New Birth. They are indeed intimately connected: no one has his sins forgiven without also being born again and no one is born again without his sins being borne by the Saviour on the cross. The Bible sometimes describes our salvation as being through the one, sometimes through the other. But they are not the same thing.

I hope that helps. It's about the best I can do.