I think we can agree that being born of water and the Spirit (John 3:5) is the same thing as being “born again” (John 3:3). So what does it mean to be born again? We see what it means in Romans 6:4: “Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.” The newness of life is a reference to being born again.
The larger context of John 3:5 shows a theme of cleansing, of which baptism is an essential element, whether it is viewed from a symbolic perspective or from a salvific or regenerational perspective. John 1 tells of the works of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus. In John 2 we see Jesus cleansing the temple. After the Nicodemus meeting in John 3, we see Jesus baptizing with His disciples. So cleansing is one of several themes we see as we read through the Gospel of John and baptism is a cleansing ritual. See Acts 22:16.
It was universally held that John 3:5 refers to water baptism from the 1st Century until Huldrych Zwingli in the16th Century came up with the idea that sacraments are made up concepts. The church fathers who expressly held to this view include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian of Carthage, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Ambrose of Milan, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysotom, Gregory of Nazianz, and Augustine. I have not discovered anyone who held another view during that period of time. There are those who pay little attention to historical development of Christian doctrines but they are missing out on the wisdom of the ages by their failure to do so. I pay attention to these things and show them great deference unless they are manifestly contrary to scripture. The idea that baptism is only symbolic is a new idea in Christian thinking, and a wrong idea.
Before Jesus and before John, baptism was a common practice in the Jewish world. Anyone who converted to the Jewish faith had to be baptized. The water of immersion (mikvah) in Rabbinic literature was referred to as the womb of the world, and as a convert came out of the water it was considered a new birth separating him from the pagan world. His status was changed and he was referred to as "a little child just born" or "a child of one day". We see the New Testament using similar Jewish terms as "born again," "new creation," and "born from above." Therefore, the phrase “born of water” would immediately tell a devout Jew like Nicodemus that Jesus was speaking of baptism. That is why everyone in the early church knew that being “born of water” was a reference to baptism. There was never any debate about it because it was always understood. Only in modern times did people get confused about the meaning of John 3:5 because its correct meaning interfered with their faulty soteriology.
As for those other verses I cited, you would have to be totally delirious to not recognize that they teach baptismal regeneration.
First,
IF the Jews baptized any convert to their religion, it is based solely on tradition and nothing else. We have no evidence that this was their practice. There is no evidence that Ruth was baptized; that Rahab the harlot was baptized. There is no evidence that any convert into Judaism was ever baptized.
Secondly, even if it were, it would have a completely different significance for they rejected Christ as their Messiah. Baptism is associated with solely with Christianity.
Thirdly, the word baptism is not a translation, but rather a transliteratioin of a Greek word, "baptidzo". The translation of the word is immersion. Thus the word "baptism" does not even exist in the Hebrew language, the language of the Hebrews before Christ came, before any of them were Hellenized.
The evidence is all against you. No such practice existed. If it did, it would have had a different meaning entirely and would not have even come into the mind of Nicodemus.
Next, Nicodemus had heard Christ, seen his miracles, and wanted to know more about Christ. He probably realized that Christ was the Messiah, that is who Christ claimed to be. "We know that thou art come from God," he said. He was not oblivious to the teachings of Christ.
Any supposition that indicates "water" means baptism is pure eisigesis. It is not in the context of the conversation. It would not be in the thinking of this Rabbi. He knew the OT well, where there is no mention of baptism. He was a well known rabbi, a teacher and ruler of the Jews.
Baptismal regeneration is one of the first heresies to enter into the church. It came afterward, more than two centuries later. It is not taught here nor any where else in Scripture. One doesn't have to mangle the Scriptures to try and teach error.
Three times Jesus said: "You must be born again," John 3:5 is only one of those times. In this verse he says you must be born of water and of the Spirit. Most of us agree that the Spirit refers to the Holy Spirit. But what does the water refer to. It does refer to something. It is not baptism for the reasons given above. Some think it might be amniotic fluid surrounding the baby giving a direct comparison of the physical birth to the spiritual birth throughout the passage. That is a plausible explanation, but I don't think the historical context will allow it. I just don't believe that when Jesus said "water," that Nicodemus would automatically think of "amniotic fluid."
That leaves one other choice. I believe that Nicodemus, having such a wealth of knowledge of the OT, would have gone back to the OT immediately. What is the most common use of water? It is for cleansing. His mind would go back to such well known Scripture as:
Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word. (Psalms 119:9)
--There are many other such Scriptures that teach that the Word is an object of cleansing. It cleanses our souls. How shall a young man cleanse his soul, is the question asked. The answer: "By taking heed to the Word."
Also Nicodemus would be very familiar with the Temple. He would have gone into it many times, and each time washed his hands at the laver of washing. The Pharisees had incorporated many other ceremonial washings as well. In fact they rebuked the disciples of Christ at one time saying "Why do your disciples wash not their hands."
Jesus taught:
Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. (John 15:3)
--There are only two agents by which one is born again: one is water and the other is the Spirit. Jesus teaches that it is the Word that cleanses. The same use that water has. Water is symbolic of the Word.
And James:
Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18)
--"Begat he us with the word of truth." The word "begat" or begotten refers to the new birth. We are born again through the Word.
There are only two agents by which a person is born again: the Word and the Holy Spirit.
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Peter 1:23)
--Born again by the word of God.
Here it is very clear. Both the word of God and the Spirit of God are needed to be born again. One needs both. One cannot be born again without the Word of God. One cannot be born again without the Spirit of God. These are the only two agencies that God uses. The word of God is absolutely imperative, for that is where the message of the gospel is found.
The water is not referring to baptism; it never did. It refers to God's Word.
Jeremiah made a mockery of those who thought they could wash away their sin with water (baptism):
For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD. (Jeremiah 2:22)
--Wash yourself, baptize yourself as much as you want. It won't do any good. The only thing that will wash away your sin is the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.
