THE NEED TO BE BAPTIZED BY WATER & THE SPIRIT

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Kim82

Well-known member
Jun 17, 2018
1,335
1,177
113
#21
Water in the Bible is symbolic of the word of God.
OK. But the Ethiopian eunuch and others saw it fit to get baptised.

Perhaps there are some persons who are not able to get baptized. Eg someone in prison maybe. But we have to leave those for God to decide. And as for the rest of us, we should do as He says.
 

Benadam

Active member
Aug 14, 2019
939
209
43
#22
How does getting dunked in filthy river water prepare our souls to receive the washing of the word of God?
John's Baptism was for repentance

John7:29
All the people, even the tax collectors, when they heard Jesus’ words, acknowledged that God’s way was right, because they had been baptized by John
Luke 7:30

But the Pharisees and the experts in the law rejected God’s purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John.)
 
Mar 21, 2009
1,912
736
113
New York
#23
I lean toward baptism as what Jesus was referring to when he said you must be born of water and of the spirit.

If I were to find a reference in ancient literature at the time of Christ that used the phrase "born of water" to refer to natural child birth I might change my mind or see that it could be a possibility. Until then it does not seem logical that Jesus would invent such a phrase and that the disciples would know what he meant.

However we do know that they were knee deep in the subject of baptism in water, and that since the first day they met Jesus it had been part of their daily discussions and religious concepts. They themselves were involved in baptizing people and if it was not a cultural norm to refer to natural birth as "born of water, by water etc" then their first thoughts would be that Jesus was referring to the spiritual significance behind baptism which they preached and focused on at this time.

The amniotic fluid may make you think of water but I am not so sure that the disciples would think of this. Unless you can find that it was a cultural norm to speak like that.

If anyone has seen evidence in ancient literature from the time of Christ or before where any phrase similar to "born of water" was used to refer to natural birth it would be strong evidence that Jesus might have meant that. Otherwise it would seem that Jesus would know that his disciples would think he was talking about baptism and he would have used another phrase like born of the womb and born of the spirit.

5Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
26,675
3,854
113
#24
Jesus said both are necessary.
John 3:5-7

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.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
KJV
Jesus said it was necessary to be BORN AGAIN to enter into the Kingdom of God. Being born again is when a person makes the decision to ask Jesus to come into their lives as Lord and Savior. Through the precious blood of Jesus that He shed on the cross, that person (by the Holy Spirit) is "cleansed" of all his sins and becomes a "new born believer." Cleansed is being baptized in the precious blood of Jesus which is a SPIRITUAL baptism.

Jesus said to be water baptized. He DID NOT say it was required for a person to enter into the Kingdom of God. He said for new believers to be water baptized because it serves as a "witness" to the Church and to the World that the person has become a believer IN and a disciple OF Jesus. Water baptism is the FIRST act of obedience by a new believer. All new believers SHOULD be water baptized because Jesus said to, HOWEVER, it IS NOT required for one to receive eternal life. Jesus NEVER said that.

(my thoughts)
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
20,834
9,538
113
54
#25
In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels water with being born out of a mother’s womb and with flesh based on the answer of Nicodemus to Jesus. Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and 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 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.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "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 and 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" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,520
113
#26
Jesus said both are necessary.
John 3:5-7

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.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
KJV
Both are necessary. If? . The shadow or ceremonial baptism comes after one has a desire to become a member of the kingdoms of priest , It does not mean they have been saved but simply a desire to be a member.

It was applied to Aaron two sons. They as it seems tried to turn it into a sign and wonder gospel as a way of self edification

Offering strange fire to give it there personal touch . Fire consumed them and left the priestly garment without a smell of smoke. A warning toward to those who doe seek after signs and wonders. No signs were given to wonder by.
 
Jun 5, 2018
35
17
8
#27
In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels water with being born out of a mother’s womb and with flesh based on the answer of Nicodemus to Jesus. Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and 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 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.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "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 and 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" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)
Well said, thank you
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,064
882
113
#28
We are born once into this world through water, that is the first birth. Then we are born again, the second birth, this is the birth of the spiritual man.
I agree but I have nothing against the doctrine of baptism in church and I looked forward to it when I got saved, I also see it as a time you can remember if you were able and look back on as an act of faith .. It is a symbol of a new birth
 
Mar 21, 2009
1,912
736
113
New York
#29
Both are necessary. If? . The shadow or ceremonial baptism comes after one has a desire to become a member of the kingdoms of priest , It does not mean they have been saved but simply a desire to be a member.

It was applied to Aaron two sons. They as it seems tried to turn it into a sign and wonder gospel as a way of self edification

Offering strange fire to give it there personal touch . Fire consumed them and left the priestly garment without a smell of smoke. A warning toward to those who doe seek after signs and wonders. No signs were given to wonder by.
Your starting to obsess on signs and wonders garee
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,520
113
#30
Your starting to obsess on signs and wonders garee
Thanks . Again we must be careful how we hear what the Spirit says to us. I am no scholar just sharing the bread .

I have been looking at it more closely and appreciate input.

My goal is to exposes them those who seek after lying wonders .The sign could be true but the interpretation must follow . Can't interpret words without understanding. A person is left wondering? .

Jesus called them that walked by sight a evil generation. Not a salvation issue but again how can we hear him who has no form? Can nothing come from nothing. Wondering by wondering.

The sign and wonder seekers are obsessed .To prove it, they make a wonderful sound without meaning and backward in wonderment. as some kind of filling up again and again.?

Can't serve two teaching masters. (1) Nothing as a unknow wonder? and prophecy the tongue of God .

I think its why he told Nicodenmus to marvel or wonder not . Warning of him the evil one who works through "lying wonder" with all power to deceive. God sends them who are wondering a strong delusion so they can keep on wondering .
Because they received not the love of the truth words with meaning.

Dark place for a believer that desires to be slain in the spirit of wonders .

Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2 Thessalonians 2: 10-11
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,064
882
113
#31
Thanks . Again we must be careful how we hear what the Spirit says to us. I am no scholar just sharing the bread .

I have been looking at it more closely and appreciate input.

My goal is to exposes them those who seek after lying wonders .The sign could be true but the interpretation must follow . Can't interpret words without understanding. A person is left wondering? .

Jesus called them that walked by sight a evil generation. Not a salvation issue but again how can we hear him who has no form? Can nothing come from nothing. Wondering by wondering.

The sign and wonder seekers are obsessed .To prove it, they make a wonderful sound without meaning and backward in wonderment. as some kind of filling up again and again.?

Can't serve two teaching masters. (1) Nothing as a unknow wonder? and prophecy the tongue of God .

I think its why he told Nicodenmus to marvel or wonder not . Warning of him the evil one who works through "lying wonder" with all power to deceive. God sends them who are wondering a strong delusion so they can keep on wondering .
Because they received not the love of the truth words with meaning.

Dark place for a believer that desires to be slain in the spirit of wonders .

Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2 Thessalonians 2: 10-11
You sound more like someone who has demon oppression who stays obsessed and angry when they start riding you .. Peace, be still
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,636
1,806
113
#32
I lean toward baptism as what Jesus was referring to when he said you must be born of water and of the spirit.

If I were to find a reference in ancient literature at the time of Christ that used the phrase "born of water" to refer to natural child birth I might change my mind or see that it could be a possibility. Until then it does not seem logical that Jesus would invent such a phrase and that the disciples would know what he meant.

However we do know that they were knee deep in the subject of baptism in water, and that since the first day they met Jesus it had been part of their daily discussions and religious concepts. They themselves were involved in baptizing people and if it was not a cultural norm to refer to natural birth as "born of water, by water etc" then their first thoughts would be that Jesus was referring to the spiritual significance behind baptism which they preached and focused on at this time.

The amniotic fluid may make you think of water but I am not so sure that the disciples would think of this. Unless you can find that it was a cultural norm to speak like that.

If anyone has seen evidence in ancient literature from the time of Christ or before where any phrase similar to "born of water" was used to refer to natural birth it would be strong evidence that Jesus might have meant that. Otherwise it would seem that Jesus would know that his disciples would think he was talking about baptism and he would have used another phrase like born of the womb and born of the spirit.

5Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Theres a google book called Sketch of the Religions of the World that will answer your question about water baptism/born again,

Jesus was of the Nazarene sect. key.
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,064
882
113
#33
Theres a google book called Sketch of the Religions of the World that will answer your question about water baptism/born again,

Jesus was of the Nazarene sect. key.
Jesus said to make no vows/oaths
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,636
1,806
113
#34
Jesus said to make no vows/oaths
Ancient Judaism


Nazarenes and Ebionites
Josephus reports four main sects or schools of Judaism: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and Zealots. The earliest followers of Jesus were known as Nazarenes, and perhaps later, Ebionites, and form an important part of the picture of Palestinian Jewish groups in late 2nd Temple times.
The Ebionite/Nazarene movement was made up of mostly Jewish/Israelite followers of John the Baptizer and later Jesus, who were concentrated in Palestine and surrounding regions and led by “James the Just” (the oldest brother of Jesus), and flourished between the years 30-80 C.E. They were zealous for the Torah and continued to walk in all the mitzvot (commandments) as enlightened by their Rabbi and Teacher, but accepted non-Jews into their fellowship on the basis of some version of the Noachide Laws (Acts 15 and 21). The term Ebionite (from Hebrew ‘Evyonim) means “Poor Ones” and was taken from the teachings of Jesus: “Blessed are you Poor Ones, for yours is the Kingdom of God” based on Isaiah 66:2 and other related texts that address a remnant group of faithful ones. Nazarene comes from the Hebrew word Netzer (drawn from Isaiah 11:1) and means “a Branch”—so the Nazarenes were the “Branchites” or followers of the one they believed to be the Branch. The term Nazarene was likely the one first used for these followers of Jesus, as evidenced by Acts 24:5 where Paul is called “the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.” Here we see the word used in a similar way to that of Josephus in writing of the four sects/schools of Judaism: Pharisees; Sadducess; Essenes; and Zealots. So the term Nazarene is probably the best and broadest term for the movement, while Ebionite (Poor Ones) was used as well, along with a whole list of other terms: Saints, Children of Light, the Way, New Covenanters, et al. We also know from the book of Acts that the group itself preferred the designation “The Way” (see Acts 24:14, 22, etc.). The term “Christian,” first used in Greek speaking areas for the movement, actually is an attempt to translate the term Nazarene and basically means a “Messianist.”
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,636
1,806
113
#35
Ancient Judaism


Nazarenes and Ebionites
Josephus reports four main sects or schools of Judaism: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and Zealots. The earliest followers of Jesus were known as Nazarenes, and perhaps later, Ebionites, and form an important part of the picture of Palestinian Jewish groups in late 2nd Temple times.
The Ebionite/Nazarene movement was made up of mostly Jewish/Israelite followers of John the Baptizer and later Jesus, who were concentrated in Palestine and surrounding regions and led by “James the Just” (the oldest brother of Jesus), and flourished between the years 30-80 C.E. They were zealous for the Torah and continued to walk in all the mitzvot (commandments) as enlightened by their Rabbi and Teacher, but accepted non-Jews into their fellowship on the basis of some version of the Noachide Laws (Acts 15 and 21). The term Ebionite (from Hebrew ‘Evyonim) means “Poor Ones” and was taken from the teachings of Jesus: “Blessed are you Poor Ones, for yours is the Kingdom of God” based on Isaiah 66:2 and other related texts that address a remnant group of faithful ones. Nazarene comes from the Hebrew word Netzer (drawn from Isaiah 11:1) and means “a Branch”—so the Nazarenes were the “Branchites” or followers of the one they believed to be the Branch. The term Nazarene was likely the one first used for these followers of Jesus, as evidenced by Acts 24:5 where Paul is called “the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.” Here we see the word used in a similar way to that of Josephus in writing of the four sects/schools of Judaism: Pharisees; Sadducess; Essenes; and Zealots. So the term Nazarene is probably the best and broadest term for the movement, while Ebionite (Poor Ones) was used as well, along with a whole list of other terms: Saints, Children of Light, the Way, New Covenanters, et al. We also know from the book of Acts that the group itself preferred the designation “The Way” (see Acts 24:14, 22, etc.). The term “Christian,” first used in Greek speaking areas for the movement, actually is an attempt to translate the term Nazarene and basically means a “Messianist.”
also sprouts
 

Benadam

Active member
Aug 14, 2019
939
209
43
#37
Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.
Then we are Baptized into our own life and John's Baptism was unnecessary. We can forego the straight way to God John provided because I was born
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,636
1,806
113
#38
Josephus was a good Jew, was he a born again Christian ? I hear the Talmud has some pretty nasty stuff about Christians and possibly Jesus too
I don’t know. He was a historian or a scribe? Recorder? I’ve not read his life story. Nor have I read the Talmud. Wish I could though.

Your point?
 
May 19, 2020
3,050
1,247
113
#39
It is impossible for our fleshly being to comprehend all this means. We can understand water, but God uses what we know of water to explain the spirit. We use water in many ways, those ways are of the flesh. We have to blindly trust the Lord to use it for the spirit and reach the Holy Spirit within us to explain how it can show us the spirit.


We have to blindly trust the Lord to use it for the spirit and reach the Holy Spirit within us to explain how it can show us the spirit.

Is that biblical?

Show us the spirit?
 

bojack

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2019
2,064
882
113
#40
I don’t know. He was a historian or a scribe? Recorder? I’ve not read his life story. Nor have I read the Talmud. Wish I could though.

Your point?
I haven't either but I've seen and heard enough to get the picture I think .. I don't think Josephus could have give Christians or Jesus a completely fair shake from my perspective ..