John 3:5

In my country I have also come across such who believe John 3:5 refers to water baptism. But this is a forced interpretation. The context does not speak of baptism/immersion. This verse should be considered in its context as well as in light of parallell passages. I believe Titus 3:5 interprets John 3:5. John 3:5 may be rendered as follows

"...Unless one be begotten of water, even of [the] Spirit..."

The absence of another ek before pneumatos does, according to wiser men, justice to the rendering of the conjunction kai as "even" (namely). Titus 3:5 perfectly interprets these words of the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe Christ uses the word water in John 3:5 to teach the aspect of spiritual cleansing in the Spirit's regeneration. Tit. 3:5 harmonizes with this when it teaches "washing of regeneration and renewal of Holy Spirit". Tit. 3:5 speaks of one and the same thing, the new birth from above, emphasizing two aspects of the same; i.e. cleansing and renewal. I believe Lord Jesus uses "water" before Spirit in John 3:5 because it refers to Him, that is, the cleansing by His blood, and the Bible teaches He is to have the preeminence in the salvation of those He saves by Himself, even preeminence before the Spirit of Christ. So also in Titus 3:5 where washing (by Christ's blood) is before renewal of Holy Spirit, although the executor of both is the Spirit of God. Why otherwise would the Spirit of inspiration in two verses put a natural thing, water/washing, before His own divine Person in such an important matter as the new birth?

As to the theory that God regenerates men by means of the written or preached word, the Gospel, I hold this to be heresy, the heresy of gospel regeneration. Abler men have refuted this heresy long ago and have shown it finds no real support from the word of God. It is surprising how many writing here hold to this false doctrine, although professing to have known God for so and so long, and so should have been taught by God's Spirit the truth of the matter.

Harald

 

In John 3:5 the second "of" in relation to the Spirit is given in italics in the Authorized version indicationg that is is not in the original text. Therfore the two (water and Spirit) speak not of two births, but one. And if the Spirit is involved, it is a spiritual birth and not of or by material substance such as water. The water must also be taken as spiritual nad symbolic. Water, used in a symbolic sense in the scriptures, represents the word of God.(Eph. 5:26, John 15:3).

 

The KJV does just as above writer says. But even though there is no ek (of, out of, from - denoting source)before Spirit (pneumatos), it was not necessary for the KJV translators to italicize the "of" before Spirit, because the word pneumatos is a genitive noun, thus "of Spirit". Pneumatos has no definite article in this verse in the original, so the KJV unnecessarily italicizes "of" and neglects to italicize its definite article "the" before Spirit. I firmly believe that if Lord Jesus Christ here would have spoken of two instruments in the new birth He would have used another ek before pneumatos. He speaks of one and the same thing, the new birth from above, with two aspects; water denoting cleansing or washing (of regeneration, Tit. 3.5; involving the blood of Christ) and Spirit, without the article, denoting Holy Spirit renewal (Tit. 3.5). In verse 6 He summarizes by speaking "that having been begotten of the Spirit". Likewise in v. 7 He speaks about "It is behooving you to be begotten from above". And also in v. 8 He refers solely to the Spirit. In verses 6, 7, and 8 He does interestingly not mention water, nor baptism, nor the word of God, as some affirm water refers to. The Lord Jesus Christ does not teach the unbiblical heresy of gospel regeneration.

Harald

 

John 3:5 and The Granville Sharp Rule.

"When the copulative "kai" connects two nouns of the same case, [viz. nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participles) of personal description, respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connexion, and attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill], if the article "ho", or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle: i.e. it denotes a farther description of the first-named person"

Granville Sharp, Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testament: Containing many New Proofs of the Divinity of Christ, from Passages which are wrongly Translated in the Common English Version. 1798.

Although John 3:5 was not part of the controversy which resulted in the Granville Sharp Rule and is missing the definite article before either "water-udor" or "Spirit-pneuma" it can possibly be applied to this passage, in other words the passage could be translated:

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water even the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

HankD

[ April 22, 2002, 11:00 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Harald,
Where do you find the idea that being regenerated by the Word is heresy?

James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

1Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Peter plainly says that we are born again by the Word of God. Is this heresy?
DHK

 

DHK. I said above that abler men than me have refuted this said heresy. May I direct you to the following short article which discusses this issue, by Walter Pendleton. He is a much more gifted man when it comes to verbal expression than me so I'll let him speak.

http://www.sgchapel.simplenet.com/article5.htm

Harald

 

Harald, you are mistaken not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God. Examine the following texts:

Romans 10:13-17
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the (spoken) Word of God.

1 Corinthians 1:21
For it pleased God by the foolishness of the message preached to save them that believe.

What will you do when confronted with the Scripture? Hmmm..... None of the other Primitives on this board have answered my questions regarding those two passages (there are others). It is time to pack up your heresy of denying God's means and the essential of faith and be saved. Put this false gospel behind you and seek eternal life.

 

Although I agree the Primitive Baptists are in error in understanding the matter of receiving eternal life through the preached gospel, I do not presume that they are unregenerate, only that they misunderstand regeneration. God's elect are saved despite personal doctrinal error. As Doug Wilson has said, the Bible does not say "nothing can seperate us from the love of Christ except shoddy exegesis".

By the same rule, one would have to judge all Arminians lost because they do not understand total depravity and saving grace!

 

Chris, I think we are in much agreement about the issue of Calvinism. Perhaps there are some minor areas of disagreement.

The primitives not only do not properly exegete (a standard which enforced would also rule out Amills from salvation ), they also DENY the need for faith in Christ. They will say that some will wake up in heaven simply because the are elect. If a person does not believe that faith in Christ is essential to salvation, why wouldn't I have the right to question his salvation? Is this not the crux issue of salvation?

 

The Word of God is the seed which causes conception (to beget).
James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of
firstfruits of his creatures.
1Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible,
by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

The Spirit gives birth to that which was conceived. (That which is BORN of the Spirit is Spirit.)

HankD

[ April 23, 2002, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]