The New Birth

[defenderofthefaith]

Let's see what the new birth is NOT. :BangHead: It's not confirmation, church membership, water baptism, the taking of sacraments, observing religious duties, an intellectual reception of Christianity, orthodoxy of ffaith, going to church, saying prayers, reading the Bible, being moral, being cultured or refined, doing good deeds, doing your best, nor any of the many other things some men are trusting in to save them.

Nicodemus,, whom Jesus addressed concerning the New Birth, possessed most of the qualities I just listed, but Jesus said to him, ye must be born again ( John 3:7). :jesus:

The thief on the cross, and others Jesus forgave while on earth, were saved wiithout these things. They simply did the one necessary thing, they accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior by repenting and turning to God with the whole heart as a little child

There are millions, it is sad to say, who are trusting in good works to save them. And millions will die and be lost without the New Birth because they have been misled concerning the experience of being born again:tear:


Peace, Golfjack

You say that the New Birth is not water baptism.
Interesting how John 3:5 says:
"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."
But you say it's not water baptism? When Jesus says he must be born of WATER and of the Spirit.

Also, I will address what you said about the thief on the cross:
When we “handle aright the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), we see that the thief was not subject to the New Testament "New Birth" (the command of water baptism) because this command was not given until after the thief’s death. It was not until Christ was resurrected that He said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16). It was not until Christ’s death that the Old Testament ceased, signified by the tearing of the temple curtain (Matthew 27:51). When Jesus died, He took away the Old Testament, “nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14).

The word “testament” means “covenant” or “will.” The last will and testament of Christ is the New Testament, which consists of those teachings that apply to people after the death of Christ. If we expect to receive the benefits of the New Testament (salvation, forgiveness of sin, eternal life), we must submit to the terms of the will for which Christ is mediator (Hebrews 9:15), for “where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives” (Hebrews 9:16-17).

So prior to the Lord’s death and the sealing of the New Testament, New Testament baptism ("New Birth") for the forgiveness of sins was not a requirement for those who sought to be acceptable to God.

The thief on the cross could not have been baptized the way the new covenant stipulates you and I must be baptized. Why? Romans 6:3-4 teaches that if we wish to acquire “newness of life,” we must be baptized into Christ’s death, be buried with Christ in baptism, and then be raised from the dead. There was no way for the thief to comply with this New Testament baptism—Christ had not died! Christ had not been buried! Christ had not been raised! In fact, none of God’s ordained teachings pertaining to salvation in Christ (2 Timothy 2:10) and in His body the Church (Acts 2:47; Ephesians 1:22-23) had been given. The church, which Christ’s shed blood purchased (Acts 20:28), had not been established, and was not set up until weeks later (Acts 2).

We must not look to the thief as an example of salvation. Instead, we must obey “from the heart that form of doctrine” (Romans 6:17)—the form of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through baptism (Romans 6:3-4). Only then can we be “made free from sin to become the servants of righteousness” (Romans 6:18).

 

[Havensdad]

You say that the New Birth is not water baptism.
Interesting how John 3:5 says:
"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."
But you say it's not water baptism? When Jesus says he must be born of WATER and of the Spirit.

Also, I will address what you said about the thief on the cross:
When we “handle aright the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), we see that the thief was not subject to the New Testament "New Birth" (the command of water baptism) because this command was not given until after the thief’s death. It was not until Christ was resurrected that He said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16). It was not until Christ’s death that the Old Testament ceased, signified by the tearing of the temple curtain (Matthew 27:51). When Jesus died, He took away the Old Testament, “nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14).

The word “testament” means “covenant” or “will.” The last will and testament of Christ is the New Testament, which consists of those teachings that apply to people after the death of Christ. If we expect to receive the benefits of the New Testament (salvation, forgiveness of sin, eternal life), we must submit to the terms of the will for which Christ is mediator (Hebrews 9:15), for “where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives” (Hebrews 9:16-17).

So prior to the Lord’s death and the sealing of the New Testament, New Testament baptism ("New Birth") for the forgiveness of sins was not a requirement for those who sought to be acceptable to God.

The thief on the cross could not have been baptized the way the new covenant stipulates you and I must be baptized. Why? Romans 6:3-4 teaches that if we wish to acquire “newness of life,” we must be baptized into Christ’s death, be buried with Christ in baptism, and then be raised from the dead. There was no way for the thief to comply with this New Testament baptism—Christ had not died! Christ had not been buried! Christ had not been raised! In fact, none of God’s ordained teachings pertaining to salvation in Christ (2 Timothy 2:10) and in His body the Church (Acts 2:47; Ephesians 1:22-23) had been given. The church, which Christ’s shed blood purchased (Acts 20:28), had not been established, and was not set up until weeks later (Acts 2).

We must not look to the thief as an example of salvation. Instead, we must obey “from the heart that form of doctrine” (Romans 6:17)—the form of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through baptism (Romans 6:3-4). Only then can we be “made free from sin to become the servants of righteousness” (Romans 6:18).

Paul said He was not sent to Baptize, but to preach the Gospel. This clearly delineates between the two. We are saved by faith, alone, and are then commanded to be baptized. This is the clear teaching of scripture.

 

[defenderofthefaith]

Paul said He was not sent to Baptize, but to preach the Gospel. This clearly delineates between the two. We are saved by faith, alone, and are then commanded to be baptized. This is the clear teaching of scripture.

Looking at 1 Corinthians in Context:
Paul was not indicating that baptism was unnecessary, but that people should not glory in the one who baptizes them. Some of the Corinthians were putting more emphasis on who baptized them, than on the one body of Christ to which a person is added when he or she is baptized (cf. Acts 2:41,47; Ephesians 4:4). Paul was thankful that he did not personally baptize any more Corinthians than he did, lest they boast in his name, rather than in the name of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:15).

Concerning 'faith alone'
James says that faith alone and without works is dead (James 2:17; 20; 26)
Paul says that faith, or belief, comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17)
James says that the demons also believe, and tremble (James 2:19)
In the Gospel of John it says that many chief rulers believed on him but did not confess him (John 12:42) and if you do not confess Christ you are doomed (Matthew 10:33)

Also, we see many accounts in Hebrews 11 (Faith's Hall of Fame) of those who had great faith but then through acts of obedience they were saved! The New Testament act of obedience is baptism.

 

[Marcia]

defenderofthefaith, I see you are Church of Christ. Now I understand your posts.

You will not find easy pickings here for your views of either water baptism as essential to salvation or losing salvation (though a few might agree with the latter view).

I've debated with people over both views; I had to as a new believer as for some reason, I was hit with every form and shape of Christianity out there for about about 5 solid years after I was saved (water baptism for salvation, word faith, losing salvation, annihilationism, universalism, kjvo, and others).

I've searched the scriptures many times and have not seen your view supported. I agree that water baptism is an act of obedience that outwardly shows our faith in Christ. But it shows that we are already saved. When we believe, we are baptized into Christ; the water baptism is the outward symbol of that.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

You say that the New Birth is not water baptism.
Interesting how John 3:5 says:
"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."
But you say it's not water baptism? When Jesus says he must be born of WATER and of the Spirit.

Also, I will address what you said about the thief on the cross:
When we “handle aright the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), we see that the thief was not subject to the New Testament "New Birth" (the command of water baptism) because this command was not given until after the thief’s death. It was not until Christ was resurrected that He said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16). It was not until Christ’s death that the Old Testament ceased, signified by the tearing of the temple curtain (Matthew 27:51). When Jesus died, He took away the Old Testament, “nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14).

The word “testament” means “covenant” or “will.” The last will and testament of Christ is the New Testament, which consists of those teachings that apply to people after the death of Christ. If we expect to receive the benefits of the New Testament (salvation, forgiveness of sin, eternal life), we must submit to the terms of the will for which Christ is mediator (Hebrews 9:15), for “where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives” (Hebrews 9:16-17).

So prior to the Lord’s death and the sealing of the New Testament, New Testament baptism ("New Birth") for the forgiveness of sins was not a requirement for those who sought to be acceptable to God.

The thief on the cross could not have been baptized the way the new covenant stipulates you and I must be baptized. Why? Romans 6:3-4 teaches that if we wish to acquire “newness of life,” we must be baptized into Christ’s death, be buried with Christ in baptism, and then be raised from the dead. There was no way for the thief to comply with this New Testament baptism—Christ had not died! Christ had not been buried! Christ had not been raised! In fact, none of God’s ordained teachings pertaining to salvation in Christ (2 Timothy 2:10) and in His body the Church (Acts 2:47; Ephesians 1:22-23) had been given. The church, which Christ’s shed blood purchased (Acts 20:28), had not been established, and was not set up until weeks later (Acts 2).

We must not look to the thief as an example of salvation. Instead, we must obey “from the heart that form of doctrine” (Romans 6:17)—the form of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through baptism (Romans 6:3-4). Only then can we be “made free from sin to become the servants of righteousness” (Romans 6:18).

From one who is a former Southern Baptist and who used to believe in OSAS and that Baptism was only a symbol (ie visual aid), I must say...
Good post! :thumbs:

 

[Doubting Thomas]

defenderofthefaith, I see you are Church of Christ. Now I understand your posts.

You will not find easy pickings here for your views of either water baptism as essential to salvation or losing salvation (though a few might agree with the latter view).

I've debated with people over both views; I had to as a new believer as for some reason, I was hit with every form and shape of Christianity out there for about about 5 solid years after I was saved (water baptism for salvation, word faith, losing salvation, annihilationism, universalism, kjvo, and others).

I've searched the scriptures many times and have not seen your view supported. I agree that water baptism is an act of obedience that outwardly shows our faith in Christ. But it shows that we are already saved. When we believe, we are baptized into Christ; the water baptism is the outward symbol of that.

That's interesting. Others of us (who once believed as you do) have searched the scriptures many times and have seen that view ("water baptism for salvation") supported. It's also the consistent view of the Church up until the Reformation when Zwingli defended the "outward symbol only" view.

 

[Amy.G]

Those that believe water baptism saves, how do you interpret this verse?

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:


There are also different interpretations of John 3.

5Jesus 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.

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


Born of water IMO is a referrence to Ezekial 36.

25Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Water represents cleansing in the Jewish economy. It was a symbol of God's removal of sin. Water itself has never had any power of it's own.

The water birth that Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about was a spiritual birth. That's why Nicodemus did not understand. He was looking at the new birth from a purely physical aspect.

Titus 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


Water does not save. Jesus saves.

 

[webdog]

That's interesting. Others of us (who once believed as you do) have searched the scriptures many times and have seen that view ("water baptism for salvation") supported. It's also the consistent view of the Church up until the Reformation when Zwingli defended the "outward symbol only" view.

Your view of salvation frustrates grace and is works based...a non salvation.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Your view of salvation frustrates grace and is works based...a non salvation.

I respectfully disagree...and so would the consensus of the historic Church.

 

[Marcia]

You say that the New Birth is not water baptism.
Interesting how John 3:5 says:
"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."
But you say it's not water baptism? When Jesus says he must be born of WATER and of the Spirit.

Read this link re John 3:5 (it's brief):
http://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-John-3-5.html
Excerpt_____Those who hold baptism to be required for salvation point to “born of water” as evidence. As one person has put it, “Jesus describes it and tells him plainly how—by being born of water and the Spirit. This is a perfect description of baptism! Jesus could not have given a more detailed and accurate explanation of baptism.” However, had Jesus actually wanted to say that one must be baptized to be saved, He clearly could have simply stated, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is baptized and born of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Further, if Jesus had made such a statement, He would have contradicted numerous other Bible passages that make it clear that salvation is by faith (John 3:16; John 3:36; Ephesians 2:8-9: Titus 3:5).

We should also not lose sight of the fact that when Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus, the ordinance of Christian baptism was not yet in effect.______(more)

Jesus was talking to an educated Jewish leader and he expected him to understand this. Many believe iIt refers back to a passage in Ezekiel and other places, where God's word was often depicted as water.

 

[annsni]

In reading this passage way back the first time and in my further study, I don't believe that it means baptism at all. Let's look back at what Nicodemus was thinking - natural birth. Did you know that at birth, the baby is born of "water" - amniotic fluid? I see Jesus speaking of the natural birth AND the spiritual birth. We must be born - then born again. It makes a lot more sense in this context than does baptism.

 

[defenderofthefaith]

Those that believe water baptism saves, how do you interpret this verse?

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire:

John the Baptizer here was referring to the coming of Christ and the Baptism of the Apostles in the upper room.
Acts 2:1-4
"And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

there are also different interpretations of John 3.

5Jesus 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.

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


Born of water IMO is a referrence to Ezekial 36.

25Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Whats makes you think that it is referring to Ezekial 36? Couldn't anyone take any one word from say the NT and say its reffering to a verse found in the OT because it has the same word? Explain more please.

The water birth that Jesus spoke to Nicodemus about was a spiritual birth. That's why Nicodemus did not understand. He was looking at the new birth from a purely physical aspect.

It is a turning of the heart, Baptism is a spiritual burial and resurrection with Christ (Romans 6) and it is a physical act of obedience.

Titus 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Water does not save. Jesus saves.

People love to get the idea that we're saying "all you need is the water, then you'll be saved" or that "water cleans you from all your sins."
The act of obedience towards God and reinacting the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6) you are cleansed of your sins through water Baptism.
Take Noah and the Ark for example. We don't say that it's the water in Baptism that saves you, just like it was not the Ark that saved Noah and his family. GOD saved Noah, Christ's blood saves us. But if Noah had not shown obedience by building the ark - would he have been saved? I think not! Just as we must show obedience by being Baptized to be saved.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

In reading this passage way back the first time and in my further study, I don't believe that it means baptism at all. Let's look back at what Nicodemus was thinking - natural birth. Did you know that at birth, the baby is born of "water" - amniotic fluid? I see Jesus speaking of the natural birth AND the spiritual birth. We must be born - then born again. It makes a lot more sense in this context than does baptism.

The interpretation that the phrase "water and spirit" does not refer to baptism, but rather to the natural birth in water (amniotic fluid) and the supernatural birth in the spirit has several flaws:

For one, the context of the passage clearly points towards baptism, and there is no evidence that the Greek word for water (hudor) represents amniotic fluid. If St. John had wished to show a dichotomy between water and the spirit, he would have said, "born of water and of the spirit," thus indicating two births. When John speaks of being born of water and the spirit, he mentions them as being a part of the same spiritual rebirth that takes place at baptism (see Tit. 3:5).

All of the early Christian writers understood John to be speaking in this way, and they unanimously agreed that John 3:5 referred to baptism.

In XC
-

 

[defenderofthefaith]

Your view of salvation frustrates grace and is works based...a non salvation.

You want to say it's works based but think of it this way...
Me: Hey Webdog, I want to give you a million dollars as a gift for christmas!
You: Awesome!
Me: All I need you to do is drive down to the bank closest to you, see a certain bank clerk, tell her who you are, sign a couple papers, fill out a few forms and then you'll get the million dollars!
You: You want me to do all that?
Me: Yeah
You: Heck no! You said it was a gift! I'm not working for it!

An act of obedience towards God is not working your way to heaven...it's like ripping the wrapping paper and cutting open the box that the gift is in.

 

[annsni]

You want to say it's works based but think of it this way...
Me: Hey Webdog, I want to give you a million dollars as a gift for christmas!
You: Awesome!
Me: All I need you to do is drive down to the bank closest to you, see a certain bank clerk, tell her who you are, sign a couple papers, fill out a few forms and then you'll get the million dollars!
You: You want me to do all that?
Me: Yeah
You: Heck no! You said it was a gift! I'm not working for it!

An act of obedience towards God is not working your way to heaven...it's like ripping the wrapping paper and cutting open the box that the gift is in.

Yet God tells us to do nothing more than believe on Him. No going anywhere, signing anything.

 

[defenderofthefaith]

Yet God tells us to do nothing more than believe on Him. No going anywhere, signing anything.

Actually, he says that we must...
*Hear and Have Faith - Romans 10:17 "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
*Believe on Christ - John 8:24 "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."
*Repent and Turn away from Sin - Acts 17:30 "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:"
*Confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God - Romans 10:10 "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."
*Be Baptized into Christ - Acts 22:16 "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

The Steps of Salvation.

 

[Marcia]

Whats makes you think that it is referring to Ezekial 36? Couldn't anyone take any one word from say the NT and say its reffering to a verse found in the OT because it has the same word? Explain more please.

I posted something about Ez but someone else specifically said Ez 36.

Jesus was talking to an educated Jewish leader (did you read the link I posted in my previous post - it's short?). Jesus expected Nicodemus to know what he was talking about. Nicodemus would have known Ez 36:

22"Therefore say to the house of Israel, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went.

23"I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst Then the nations will know that I am the LORD," declares the Lord GOD, "when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight.
24"For I will take you from the nations, gather you from all the lands and bring you into your own land.
25"Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.
26"Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27"I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.

Nicodemus would have not thought of baptism. As the article points out that I posted before, if Jesus had meant baptism here, he would have said so.

Look at Titus 3:
5He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

6whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.


We are baptized into Christ and baptized by the Holy Spirit when we have faith; that is when we are saved. Water baptism is the outward symbol of that.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Defenderof theFaith...

"You say that the New Birth is not water baptism.
Interesting how John 3:5 says:

"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."

But you say it's not water baptism? When Jesus says he must be born of WATER and of the Spirit."

Water baptism has nothing to do with being born again. What Jesus meant was that one must be born twice, to enter the Kingdom of God. The 1st "water" birth...natural birth...will not do. We must be born again, a second time. A spiritual birth is needed.

Going back to your verse...

"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water..."

The 1st birth...natural.

"...and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

That spiritual birth is by faith alone...

"For it is by grace that you are saved, through faith, and that not of yourself, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast"

Water baptism is a wonderful picture of the believers new life, and it follows the new birth, which had already occured by faith alone.

:godisgood:

 

[Alive in Christ]

Doubting Thomas,

"It's also the consistent view of the Church up until the Reformation"

A total falsehood.

In the scriptures we find justification by faith alone, and water baptism being symbolic.

And all through the centuries there have been believers who believed that.

The fact that there was false teaching also during those centuries does not make the false teaching...magically true.

It is still false.

Even during times when the false was the majority view, that still does not make the view true.

To the scriptures, to the scriptures, to the scriptures.

When we cast aside the scriptures for the false traditions of men we err greatly.


:godisgood:

 

[Havensdad]

Doubting Thomas,



A total falsehood.

In the scriptures we find justification by faith alone, and water baptism being symbolic.

And all through the centuries there have been believers who believed that.

The fact that there was false teaching also during those centuries does not make the false teaching...magically true.

It is still false.

Even during times when the false was the majority view, that still does not make the view true.

To the scriptures, to the scriptures, to the scriptures.

When we cast aside the scriptures for the false traditions of men we err greatly.


:godisgood:

Besides which, the traditional view was not in accord with CoC. They were Paedobaptists (They baptized infants), and they believed in the "magic water" brand of baptismal regeneration, which CoC rejects. So Defender can hardly argue that He has history on his side.