Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
baptism for salvation?
- Thread starter Mark1616
- Start date
Jethro Bodine
Member
"5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and 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." (John 3:5-6 NASB)
28 ...you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise.29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh (the child under the law of repentance--see context) persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit..." (Galatians 4:28-29 NASB)
28 ...you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise.29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh (the child under the law of repentance--see context) persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit..." (Galatians 4:28-29 NASB)
Jethro Bodine
Member
I know what you're saying it means. I showed you it doesn't fit.
Water and blood is not special to Christ's birth that they somehow speak figuratively or metaphorically of HIS birth. It's crazy to try and distinguish between the blood of a virgin birth and the blood of a non-virgin birth.
Not when when the water and the hymein break when the baby comes into the world.
Navigator
Member
If it's our right, then that would make it open-handed; it does not skew either of our views on who Jesus was, is, or what He's done and provided.
Did Jesus not come back following His crucifixion?
You have yet to explain why it's a reference to the virgin birth. Jethro seems to be making good points that you're ignoring. You say born of water in the John passage is physical birth, but came by water and blood represents the virgin birth? Where are you getting that? People just did not speak in those terms back then.
And my pastor teaches that the baptisms are different, but I don't know anything regarding order in which they should occur, which I know you've commented on.
Jethro Bodine
Member
Look at the verse:
"6 This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood." (1 John 5:6 NASB)
You're trying to make the case that Jesus did not come by 'water only' like all the rest of us, but that he came by water and blood because Mary was a virgin. The problem is ALL humans come into the world by water and blood. It's nonsense to suggest that Mary bled in childbirth because she was a virgin, while all other women give birth by water only with no blood.
I'm not pretending to have spiritual insight into this difficult passage in 1 John, but I think he's speaking of the water and blood that issued forth from the side of Jesus when he was pierced.
"34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.35 And he who has seen ( that is, John) has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe.36 For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, “Not a bone of Him shall be broken.”37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.” (John 19:34-37 NASB)
See, in this passage we see the same elements of blood, and water, and testimony that this same author (John) speaks about in 1 John.
It seems that the blood and water that issued from Jesus' body testifies to him being the fulfillment of prophecy. Like I say, I'm not going to pretend I understand this in any great depth. But I can't see how the blood and the water is speaking of Christ's natural birth. But I can see how the blood and the water speak of him coming into the world to fulfill the prophecy of being pierced. And also how the water speaks of him being the water of life that issued forth when the rock (who Paul says was Christ) was struck in the desert, and how the blood he spilled speaks to the blood that is poured forth for the remission of sins when an animal is slain. The Spirit himself also testifying to the truth (as John says) that Jesus is the fulfillment of the law and the prophets.
While interesting, I don't think the water in the 1 John passage somehow explains the water in John 3. They are not the same. But when we consider that Jesus's 'born of the flesh' and Paul's 'born according to the flesh' are probably the same thing we can see that being 'born of flesh/ born of water' is a metonymy for repentance. Which Jesus says is not enough to see the kingdom of God. You must also be born again, from above, by the Spirit. The man who inherits the kingdom is born, both, of the waters of repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.
Last edited:
Jethro Bodine
Member
Why is it necessary to make sure we understand that a man must be birthed from the womb to be in the kingdom of God? I don't see the necessity of stating such an obvious truth (that you must exist as a person). That's why I don't think Jesus is referring to natural birth. The necessity of that kind of goes without saying. But I can definitely see the water Jesus speaks of that is necessary for salvation as the waters of repentance, but which is still not sufficient by itself to see the kingdom. Consider how important and relevant it is that Nicodemus, particularly, be told this truth. The Jews particularly are the ones who have to be convinced that repentance according to the righteousness of the law (as epitomized in water baptism) is not enough to see and enter into the kingdom of God.
Last edited:
Navigator
Member
But if you would only keep going in the 1 John passage, the context indicates that water and blood are separate things.
6 This is he who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.7 For there are three that testify:8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree. (1 John 5:6-8 ESV)
What would be the point of listing the water and the blood if they are meant to represent the same thing? That doesn't make sense. John presents them as three things that agree, and three things that testify. If the water and blood are meant to represent Virgin birth, that would be one thing that testifies, and then the Spirit, which would only leave us with two. So logically, when looking at the context, the water and blood SHOULD represent two different things.
Because in order to receive a spiritual body you must first have a natural body.
There is a natural body and there is a spiritual body.
It will be raised a spiritual body.
JLB
Jethro Bodine
Member
Why is it important that Jesus tell us this? Think about how unnecessary it is to make sure people know this. Then consider how truly important it is that Jesus tell us that being birthed according to the flesh (repentance unto God via water baptism) is not enough (but still necessary) to see and enter into the kingdom of God.
Brother,
Water is not the same thing as blood.
Came by water is a reference to the natural birth of a human being as they come into this world.
Came by water and blood is a reference to the supernatural birth of the messiah by a Virgin, as He came into this world.
Born of water is a reference to the natural birth of a human being, to qualify being born again.
Born of the Spirit is the reference to being born again, after you qualify by first being born.
Spirits can not obtain salvation.
You must first obtain a natural body, in order to be raised a spiritual body.
The spiritual is not first, but the natural, then the spiritual.
Remember, God foreknew us, before we became flesh, as he predestined us to be conformed to the Image of His Son.
JLB
Jesus said -
For flesh gives birth to flesh.
That is very plain.
If you think that Jesus was trying to confuse Nicodemus by changing the subject, then that is your right.
JLB
Jethro Bodine
Member
Jethro Bodine
Member
You're on the right track. You just can't see what the 'natural' is that comes first before the spiritual. It has nothing to do with first being born a human being.
Study the Bible to see what the common denominator is in all the examples of 'natural first, spiritual second' and you'll get what I've been saying.
For flesh gives birth to flesh.
Spirit gives birth yo spirit.
The mindset of that day was such, that they believed if you were a son of Abraham then you were automatically a child of God.
Jesus taught him you must be born again, that spiritual birth is also necessary. Not just natural birth.
Spirit gives birth to spirit.
We are spirit beings, just like angels or demons, with one difference.
We have a natural body, unlike the other spirits.
To qualify for salvation, ie; the resurrection of the dead, you must have a natural body that will be raised a spiritual body.
JLB
Jethro Bodine
Member
No offense to you, because I know this doctrine you're defending is not your invention, but this teaching amounts to a incredibly profound 'duh' moment. "Gee, we have to be born to enter the kingdom of God? Thanks for warning us Jesus."
Again, do not take offense, that is not aimed at you, but rather at the silly doctrine this is that circulates in our churches.
The main problem with the water being a metaphor for literal, natural birth (or metonymy, which ever it is in the case of literal birth) is it does not take into account the proselyte who joins himself to the nation and kingdom of Israel. But if the water is understood to represent joining the nation and kingdom of Israel through an outward repentance to the righteousness of God through water baptism then it does account for the foreigner who joins himself to the nation and kingdom of God's people.
Take the 'literal' aspect out of the birth Jesus is talking about and I think you are getting close to what Jesus was trying to tell Nicodemus. Remember, the problem Nicodemus had was he was also thinking in terms of the literal and not the spiritual.
Last edited:
Nicodemus was a teacher of the Jews in his day. Nicodemus was being a smart elec to Jesus when he said to Jesus, "can a man enter into His mothers womb a second time?"
Physical birth was being discussed and Jesus threw Nicodemus a curve ball because of His sarcasm.
He used the Phrase"born of water" for physical birth to this teacher of the Jews because Nicodemus knew that water had a spiritual connotation/analogy to it. Specifically to the laver in the temple. Nicodemus would have to use the water in the Laver every morning to sanctify his hands and feet."And you shall make a laver of copper, and its pedestal of copper... " (Ex. 30:18)
This is an interesting tidbit that I am quite sure Nicodemus knew;
The midrash explains......
The Temple was extravagant, gold, silver highly decorated but the laver was copper and remained copper throughout the generations. Were did the copper come from?
The copper was "born" of the righteous women of Israel. The righteous women would donate all of their shinny copper mirrors and jewelry to the temple to make the laver.
So Jesus was using Nicodemus's natural religious vocabulary to help him see the spiritual life.
Physical birth was being discussed and Jesus threw Nicodemus a curve ball because of His sarcasm.
He used the Phrase"born of water" for physical birth to this teacher of the Jews because Nicodemus knew that water had a spiritual connotation/analogy to it. Specifically to the laver in the temple. Nicodemus would have to use the water in the Laver every morning to sanctify his hands and feet."And you shall make a laver of copper, and its pedestal of copper... " (Ex. 30:18)
This is an interesting tidbit that I am quite sure Nicodemus knew;
The midrash explains......
The Temple was extravagant, gold, silver highly decorated but the laver was copper and remained copper throughout the generations. Were did the copper come from?
The copper was "born" of the righteous women of Israel. The righteous women would donate all of their shinny copper mirrors and jewelry to the temple to make the laver.
So Jesus was using Nicodemus's natural religious vocabulary to help him see the spiritual life.
We have to be born of water and spirit.
Not just born.
You seem to just simply ignore all the implications of all the puts and all the scriptures that relate.
I think you would be better entertained with something more exciting like z one on one with Webb.
JLB
In order to be "born again" we first must be born.
Deep Revelation.
I like your take on the matter.
Good stuff.
JLB