Good morning JLB,
I don't expect you to understand. As a result, I actually have reservations in answering you.
I enjoy studying the historical backdrop to the culture in which Jesus taught. It is in our nature to hear what we want to hear based on our beliefs and understanding of the world around us. Point in case, baptism. Depending on your understanding and background it would be very easy for one person to misunderstand another persons words and even put words into the mouth of another that the other did not say based on what they themselves thought they heard, but in reality it was their own understanding which they erroneously imposed on another.
As far as Hillel, I don't think you will understand. I don't think you understand the historical crisis Jerusalem was in nor the impact Harod had on the Sanhedrin. As a result, you won't understand the impact Hillel had on Jewish law nor his opposition that came through Shammai.
These two great schools of thought were shaping the theological landscape of national Israel. One school of thought would be considered liberal while the other conservative. It would be like me asking you what you felt about the Trump wall. Your allegiance to your school of thought would be immediately known by your response.
When I read scripture, I am privileged to enter into a conversation, and I want to know what was being heard as much as what is being said. In regard to the wall, Jesus always sided with Hillel with the exception of divorce. Put another way, Hillel was generally closer to the words of Jesus than Shammai. Because Nicodemus was of the school of Hillel, I am interested in what he heard.
BTW, I do believe that water is a reference to baptism, but not the baptism you ascribe to since you and I speak of different baptisms.
I understand the crisis concerning scripture and what it plainly says.
So you believe water is a reference to water baptism.
Are you saying people are born again by water baptism?
JLB