John 3 and Election

I am comfortable with the idea of water being a symbol for the gospel.

 

I always wondered about this, too. Here are some possibilities (from the obvious to the bizarre...):

1. Symbolic: cleansed, as in baptism.

2. Symbolic: Washed by the Word (almost same as #1).

3. Born of water, which means a natural birth as well as a spiritual one (the water breaks).

4. Created by water (I've read a physicist's theory that God created all things out of water, which is somewhat corroborated by scripture).


I personally vote for #2.

 

Because one has to be born of water and the Spirit.

John 4:13-14(NASB)
13 Jesus answered and said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again;
14 but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.”

John 7:38(NASB)
38 “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’ ”

Ephesians 5:26(NASB)
26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,

 

I agree with this. Though I may possess one of the 'wierd' interpretations to offer, I associate this with the word as it is by the word and always made effectual through the power of the Holy Spirit of God that this regeneration and redemption is worked.

Bro. Dallas

 

I find this verse a little mysterious, too.

Might Titus 3:5 be a clue: "....by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit..."?

 

I would say that Titus 3.5 is in strong connection.

IMHO.

Bro. dallas

 

"Born of water" most easily answers Nicodemus' question concerning being born from the womb. The first birth is the physical one - the water - the second birth is the spiritual one. THat is the water and the spirit.

Reading any more into this passage makes it more complicated than it really is, I think.

 

"Water" in John 3:5 does not mean the Gospel of Christ. That would amount to the heresy of gospel regeneration. A parallell verse to look at (from the NT) for explaining John 3:5 is Titus 3:5. Also here "water" in the capacity of "washing" precedes (the) Spirit. Why would God the Spirit twice put a physical thing like water prior to Himself in the Greek Testament, which He inspired? Answer: "water"/"washing" refers to Christ, who has the preeminence before the Spirit, more specifically to the aspect of regeneration which has to do with cleansing by His blood. In both John 3:5 and Tit. 3:5 the conjunction kai could be rendered as "namely". Substitute "namely" for "and" in both verses and the riddle is pretty much solved. In John 3:5 the word "water" and the word "Spirit" (without article in the Greek) both refer to the same thing, begetting from above, yet emphasizing two aspects of it, cp. Tit. 3:5, which emphasizes 1)a washing (of regeneration) and 2) a "renewal of Holy Spirit" (no article here either in Gr.). Both the washing of regeneration and Holy Spirit renewal refer to the same event, begetting from above, yet highlighting two aspects of it.

Regeneration is a multifaceted thing according to the written word of God. Most of what is taught about it today under the guise of Christianity is heretical, sadly. The Scripture knows nothing about such anomalies as decisional regeneration, baptismal regeneration, faith regeneration, gospel regeneration, Bible regeneration, sermon regeneration. The only regeneration the Bible knows and teaches about is sovereign divine regeneration of dead sinners by the living voice of the Son of God, through the Holy Spirit of God. God the Triune Jehovah is the sole Regenerator, Him and no one else. Some call the biblical doctrine of regeneration by the term "Holy Spirit regeneration".

Harald

 

Brethren,

Perhaps this is way off, but I have wondered at the order of the Altar of sacrifice and the Brass Laver in the tabernacle and temple worship. The Laver is no doubt for the washing of the priest before entering into the tabernacle and/or temple.

I view this as typical of the Spirit as well.

Perhaps I should start another thread, but if you deem these related what are your thoughts?

Bro. Dallas

 

THat is a big assumption - that of kai translating of namely. Where else do we see John use that grammar employed? If we cannot find any other instances of this, then why should we here and here alone say that water and Spirit are the same thing? Is it because doctrine guides our hermeneutics?

 

And has anyone here read the next verse. This lends credibility to "born of water" as a physical birth. Jesus says, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (3:6). This is a clear parallel to the born of water and born of Spirit.

To read anything about regeneration into "born of water" is to read something that isn't there.

 

Except that it is the Spirit that regenerates, this is my understanding of the paralell.

Bro. Dallas

 

I wouldn't translate "kai" as namely, either, but --despite the next verse which mentions two births--the underlying language structure of this verse seems to suggest that it is one birth, by water and the Spirit, rather than two births, one by water and one by the Spirit.

 

Wiser men have argued that the absence of a second ek before Spirit in John 3:5 indicates that "water" and Spirit refer to the same thing. It says ex hydatos kai pneumatos - "out of water and of Spirit". Spirit is in the genitive. Or as I stated above "out of water, namely of Spirit". Only a baptismal regenerationist would believe "water" has reference to baptism. The NT refutes the notion that "water" is the written Gospel. Jesus the Lord taught that the written Gospel as preached, the good seed, fell into good ground. It did not create the good ground, but fell into it, mark well. The good ground into which the good seed, the Gospel, fell, was a good heart, viz. a regenerate heart. The Gospel preached (or written and read) falling into the good ground/regenerate heart resulted in fruit. Regeneration must and does precede the entrance of the true Gospel of Christ in power and Holy Spirit, 1Thess 1:5-6. The Gospel of God entering a regenerate heart in the day of God's power results in Gospel conversion, aka Gospel salvation.


"Water" in John 3:5 can logically and scripturally be nothing else than a purely spiritual occurrence, explained sufficiently by the words "washing of regeneration" of Titus 3:5, which to me speaks of inward cleansing of a sinner's soul by the blood of Christ applied in the Holy Spirit. This is a thing co-simultaneous to Holy Spirit renewal of the same verse.

The Gospel is impotent when it comes to the new birth, it has no inherent regenerating power. By definition the word Gospel is Good Tidings. The only Word able to regenerate is the Living Word incarnate, the Lord Jesus Christ. By His voice echoing in the spiritual realm are dead sinners quickened into spiritual life. The purpose of the Gospel is not to impart life, but to inform a regenerate sinner about spiritual things and realities as the Holy Spirit takes of the things of Christ and shows them to him. To believe anything else as regards regeneration than instantaneous and sovereign Holy Spirit regeneration apart from means is soteriological superstition.

Harald

 

And you have provided no evidence against the easiest translatoin - that of birth of water as being a physical one. Titus 3:5 does not exactly parallel, and you are "forcing" it as such.

 

But at least you are willing to admit that verse 6 suggests two verses. Why do you think Jesus would change like that?