rhomphaeam
Member
To take this verse first.
This of course is the prophecy of Samuel to Saul. The other man was to the prophetic gift and hence the exclamation in vv 11-12 "When they came to the hill there, behold, a group of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came upon him mightily, so that he prophesied among them. It came about, when all who knew him previously saw that he prophesied now with the prophets, that the people said to one another, “What has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?”
I would be as reticent to say that Saul was born again of the Spirit of God in that instant - as it is clear to say that in the end Saul consulted a witch because the Spirit had departed from Him. In a similar way I don't find it easy to utilise the term water in John 3:5 for a similar reason - not to be explained here unless I can explain it. But Vine says this:
hudor (ὕδωρ, 5204), whence Eng. prefix, “hydro-,” is used (a) of the natural element, frequently in the Gospels; in the plural especially in the Apocalypse; elsewhere, e.g., Heb. 9:19; Jas. 3:12; in 1 John 5:6, that Christ “came by water and blood,” may refer either (1) to the elements that flowed from His side on the cross after His death, or, in view of the order of the words and the prepositions here used, (2) to His baptism in Jordan and His death on the cross. As to (1), the “water” would symbolize the moral and practical cleansing effected by the removal of defilement by our taking heed to the Word of God in heart, life and habit; cf. Lev. 14, as to the cleansing of the leper. As to (2), Jesus the Son of God came on His mission by, or through, “water” and blood, namely, at His baptism, when He publicly entered upon His mission and was declared to be the Son of God by the witness of the Father, and at the cross, when He publicly closed His witness; the apostle’s statement thus counteracts the doctrine of the Gnostics that the divine Logos united Himself with the Man Jesus at His baptism, and left him at Gethsemane. On the contrary, He who was baptized and He who was crucified was the Son of God throughout in His combined deity and humanity.
The word “water” is used symbolically in John 3:5, either (1) of the Word of God, as in 1 Pet. 1:23 (cf. the symbolic use in Eph. 5:26), or, in view of the preposition ek, “out of,” (2) of the truth conveyed by baptism, this being the expression, not the medium, the symbol, not the cause, of the believer’s identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection. So the New Birth is, in one sense, the setting aside of all that the believer was according to the flesh, for it is evident that there must be an entirely new beginning. Some regard the kai, “and,” in John 3:5, as epexegetic, = “even,” in which case the “water” would be emblematic of the Spirit, as in John 7:38 (cf. 4:10, 14), but not in 1 John 5:8. where the Spirit and the “water” are distinguished. “The water of life,” Rev. 21:6 and 22:1, 17, is emblematic of the maintenance of spiritual life in perpetuity. In Rev. 17:1 “the waters” are symbolic of nations, peoples, etc.
So I must say that I will have to give some thought to what you have shared. I have been checked several times over that use of mine and even on this forum by the Spirit when another poster exclaimed an agreement that the term was not a reference to baptismal regeneration. But you cover that too. Thanks for raising it - I will reflect and perhaps find that I need to amend what I have written for future use.
Addendum:
it was this post by JLB that gave me thought and when I say that the Spirit checked my spirit.
Reading it again I see that he may not have been alluding to an oft heresy of baptismal regeneration and I also see that he references John 3:12 to give credence to his agreement with what I said. I wonder if he would share further?
Last edited: