RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues



Message

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/11/2008 1:16:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

LOL. GD. Come on! You know better than that. That is the most ridiculous statement you have ever made. It is your opinion is that it refers to baptism. But the very idea that it cannot possibly refer to anything logically or grammatically is simply not true. I have posted on this many times. In both John 4 and John 7, Jesus Himself uses water as a substitute word for the HS.
I'm glad I gave you a good laugh. Hope it made your day!! [:)]

Certainly Jesus Himself uses water as a substitute word for the Holy Spirit in both John 4 and John 7. However, the straightforward, prosaic nature of Jesus' statement in John 3:5, and the lack of any contextual indication of a figurative intention for the term "water" leads me to believe that it's not figurative in this verse. For example, in John 3:5 Jesus uses only the bare and unqualified term "water," whereas in both John 4 and John 7 he speaks of living water. Also, in John 4 and John 7, there is a contextual contrast between ordinary water and living water offered by Jesus. Such a contrast is absent in John 3:5. In John 3:5 there are simply two nouns, both of which are objects of the one preposition "of" and are joined by the simple conjunction "and." In both the historical and literary contexts the term "water" would immediately call to mind the common practice of baptism in water.

quote:

And pneuma, in Greek can mean either wind, breathe or spirit. Water and wind, both being fluids are blatant metaphors and symbols for the HS. Several examples in the Bible exist. However, not a single example exists where the term water is substituted for baptism.
I guess I'm too simple minded to grasp that because water and wind are both fluids that therefore "water" means Holy Spirit. And I'm not sure about your assertion that the term "water" never refers to baptism in the NT. I believe it does in this verse at least. But even if there are no others, I'll still believe He's referring to baptism. Just like those who think it's physical birth even though physical birth is never referred to as being born of water. It is always referred to as being born of the flesh.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/11/2008 3:53:41 PM)

quote:

I'm glad I gave you a good laugh. Hope it made your day!!


GD. My main criticism stems from the fact that you wrote confidently about the grammar and context, something you are not in the least qualified to make on your own.

quote:

and the lack of any contextual indication of a figurative intention for the term "water" leads me to believe that it's not figurative in this verse.


Let's see. Figurative language is used in verse 3-4 with the figurative use of the new birth is compared with the natural birth. Figurative language comparing the HS with the blowing of the wind is present verse 6. No metaphor? No figurative language? Come on, GD. Jesus was so known for using figurative language that He was criticized for it.

He said He was a "Door" and "Bread of Life," and "Lamb of God"--and so forth. Metaphor literally saturated His words. It would be hard to imagine a passage where He doesn't. And BTW, if He did mean "baptism," it would still have to be an allusion. The absence of metaphor or allusion also eliminates baptism as an interpretation.

quote:

For example, in John 3:5 Jesus uses only the bare and unqualified term "water," whereas in both John 4 and John 7 he speaks of living water.


The lack of the word "living" in verse 5 means that He cannot be referring to the HS? I really don't see how the absence of an adjective is any kind of compelling argument. Further, the word "pneuma" which means both/either "wind" or "breath," not to mention "spirit."

BTW, do you have any kind of recognized Greek authority who says that the adjective "living" changes the meaning of the word? Or is that just wishful thinking on your part?

quote:

Such a contrast is absent in John 3:5. In John 3:5 there are simply two nouns, both of which are objects of the one preposition "of" and are joined by the simple conjunction "and." In both the historical and literary contexts the term "water" would immediately call to mind the common practice of baptism in water.


No, not necessarily. You are making judgments based on what we would call anachronisms. You are using common church interpretations and imagining that Nicodemus would think the same way. Nicodemus comes from an OT Jewish heritage, not a NT one. He would be thinking probably somewhat differently.

QUOTE
Isaiah 44:3-5 and Ezek 37:9-10 are pertinent examples of water and wind as life-giving symbols of the Spirit of God in his work among people. Both occur in contexts that deal with the future restoration of Israel in his work among people. Both occur in contexts that deal with the future restoration of Israel as a nation prior to the establishment of the messianic kingdom. It is therefore particularly appropriate that Jesus should introduce them in a conversation about entering the kingdom of God. Note that the Greek word pneumatos is anarthrous (has no article) in verse 5. This does not mean that spirit should be read as a direct reference to the Holy Spirit, but that both water and wind are figures (based on passages in the OT, which Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel should have known) that represent the regenerating work of the Spirit in the lives of men and women.
UNQUOTE NET Bible notes, page 1943, First Beta Edition.

quote:

And I'm not sure about your assertion that the term "water" never refers to baptism in the NT. I believe it does in this verse at least.


Since this is the issue under debate at this stage, you cannot logically use that as an example. You would fallaciously be trying to something by the use of something not yet proven. We call the circular reasoning. If you aren't sure that water never means baptism, please show me where.

quote:

But even if there are no others, I'll still believe He's referring to baptism.

You can believe anything that you wish. But insofar as there being no grammatical and contextual reasons for believing otherwise, you are simply wrong.

quote:

Just like those who think it's physical birth even though physical birth is never referred to as being born of water. It is always referred to as being born of the flesh.


Frankly, I agree that it does not refer to the water of the womb, i.e. amniotic fluid. But I am not in a habit of challenging every disagreeable idea that comes down the pike. I don't have enough time.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/11/2008 10:54:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

Let's see. Figurative language is used in verse 3-4 with the figurative use of the new birth is compared with the natural birth. Figurative language comparing the HS with the blowing of the wind is present verse 6. No metaphor? No figurative language? Come on, GD. Jesus was so known for using figurative language that He was criticized for it.

He said He was a "Door" and "Bread of Life," and "Lamb of God"--and so forth. Metaphor literally saturated His words. It would be hard to imagine a passage where He doesn't. And BTW, if He did mean "baptism," it would still have to be an allusion. The absence of metaphor or allusion also eliminates baptism as an interpretation.
I agree the Jesus frequently used figurative language. But I don't believe He used it all the time. And I also think that when He used figurative language it was obviously figurative. And just because He was speaking figuratively in verses 3-4 does not mean he was speaking figuratively in verse 5. I don't think He's speaking figuratively at all in verse 5. I think when He says "water" He means "water." That is not figurative language. And the only time, that I know of, that water and the Spirit come together in the life of a Christian is at baptism.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/11/2008 10:59:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

GD. My main criticism stems from the fact that you wrote confidently about the grammar and context, something you are not in the least qualified to make on your own.
Maybe not, but I know a prepositional phrase with a dual object when I see one. Grammatically that indicates a single birth that involves water and the Spirit.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/11/2008 11:10:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

The lack of the word "living" in verse 5 means that He cannot be referring to the HS? I really don't see how the absence of an adjective is any kind of compelling argument. Further, the word "pneuma" which means both/either "wind" or "breath," not to mention "spirit."

BTW, do you have any kind of recognized Greek authority who says that the adjective "living" changes the meaning of the word? Or is that just wishful thinking on your part?
I was merely pointing out that when Jesus used "water" in a figurative sense it was obviously figurative. The lact of the word "living" in John 3:5 doesn't mean that He can't be referring to the Holy Spirit. It means that He's not using the term figuratively. And I must be too dense to see the point your trying to make by giving me all the translations of the word "pneuma."

No, I do not have a recognized Greek authority who says that the adjective "living" changes the meaning of the word? I never said that the meaning of the word was changed by the adjective. You said that He was using the word figuratively. I was merely pointing out that it was obviously figuratively whereas in John 3:5 its not obvious.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 3:41:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
I disagree that grammar is irrelevant in determining whether water is figurative or not.
Okay, then please explain how it would be relevant.

quote:

If Jesus had meant to convey that we are born of the Word of God, He could have just said so.
Actually, He did, if you believe all the Bible was written by God, : "For by grace are ye saved through faith". No room for birth by water here unless you don't think being regenerated is being born from above. We see absolutely from the following verses that we are born of the Word of God.

Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. -James 1:8

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. -1Peter 1:23

For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. -1Corinthians 4:15

We see John uses "born of water and the Spirit" as equivalent to "born of God" (John 1:13; 1 John 2:29; 3:10; 4:7; 5:4). The Spirit of God does the supernatural cleansing from sin which is called Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is the baptism that is essential and without which no one will see heaven. Water baptism, otoh, is not an essential for salvation. Scripture doesn't teach it as an essential and many were saved in both the OT and NT without benefit of it.

In addition, to insist that water baptism is an essential is to declare unsaved multitudes of Christians the world over who have never been connected to any church or organization and have never been water baptized.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 3:45:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
But you can always tell when He's speaking figuratively.
Apparently, you've never visited the Roman Catholic threads....."this is my body" :)

quote:

There are no indications in John 3:5 that He's speaking figuratively there.
Except for the biggest indication possible - elsewhere in Scripture God tells us exactly what it is that saves - the Word of God as the Holy Spirit applies it to our hearts.

quote:

Right!! I have never said that faith comes from water.
But you have said that salvation comes when one is water baptized which actually is impossible because faith is an evidence of salvation. Therefore, the one being water baptized is already saved because he has exhibited faith.

quote:

And the only water in the Christian experience that is even remotely linked with the reception of the Holy Spirit is the water of baptism.
Yet, we see no connection between water and the reception of the Holy Spirit. John 3 doesn't mention baptism; and we see John the Baptist speaking of Christ in John 1 telling us of the only essential baptism:

And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.-John 1:33

and again....
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 -Matthew 3:11


Clearly as seen from the above verses Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit and in John 4 He uses water as a metaphor for the Spirit.

But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. -John 4:14

quote:

I also agree with your closing jab that water baptism cannot accomplish anything. It's not what water baptism accomplishes that saves us, it is what is accomplished in water baptism that saves us.
Really, that's just playing with words. If what is accomplished in water baptism can only be accomplished in water baptism then water baptism accomplishes.

BTW, I have jabbed and I have been jabbed and by comparison that was no jab :)



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 3:48:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
I am going to say something that sounds heretical to many. I came across an article yesterday by Francis Schaffer. He pointed out some examples in the Bible where baptizo can mean saturation with water by means other than immersion. While immersion presents the best metaphor for the act of death, entombment and resurrecting, on the basis of the word baptizo alone, it can mean other things.
I've been saying precisely this all along and have presented the relevant passages. Scripture is, in fact, clear that baptizo is used other than immersion. There is not one single passage that demands an understanding of baptism by immersion.

Thanks, for the info on Schaffer I'd like to check it out since there are few who correctly understand baptizo.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 5:53:50 AM)

quote:

I agree the Jesus frequently used figurative language. But I don't believe He used it all the time. And I also think that when He used figurative language it was obviously figurative. And just because He was speaking figuratively in verses 3-4 does not mean he was speaking figuratively in verse 5. I don't think He's speaking figuratively at all in verse 5. I think when He says "water" He means "water." That is not figurative language. And the only time, that I know of, that water and the Spirit come together in the life of a Christian is at baptism.


Uh. The burden of proof is on you that He's not. He does in the verses all around it. To suggest otherwise actually goes against the tide.
quote:

Maybe not, but I know a prepositional phrase with a dual object when I see one. Grammatically that indicates a single birth that involves water and the Spirit.


A grammatical construction with a dual object does not obligate that there are 2 separate and distinct objects. It can also mean that the two grammatical objects are the same thing.

"I would like to present my wife and the mother of my children." Does that indicate there are two people?
quote:

I was merely pointing out that when Jesus used "water" in a figurative sense it was obviously figurative. The lact of the word "living" in John 3:5 doesn't mean that He can't be referring to the Holy Spirit. It means that He's not using the term figuratively.


No it doesn't, not at all.
quote:

And I must be too dense to see the point your trying to make by giving me all the translations of the word "pneuma."


Word plays. Puns, if you will. Jesus does it with the discussion of the new birth. By using terms with double meanings, it heightens the discussion and functions as an attention getting device for the reader.

quote:

No, I do not have a recognized Greek authority who says that the adjective "living" changes the meaning of the word? I never said that the meaning of the word was changed by the adjective.


Look. You said that the presence of the word "living" in chapter 7 and chapter 4 makes it figurative but the absence of it in chapter 3 makes it literal. "Living" is an adjective (living water). Ergo, the absence of an adjective in chapter 3 makes it nonliteral, according to you.

kelman said:
quote:

I've been saying precisely this all along and have presented the relevant passages. Scripture is, in fact, clear that baptizo is used other than immersion. There is not one single passage that demands an understanding of baptism by immersion.

Thanks, for the info on Schaffer I'd like to check it out since there are few who correctly understand baptizo.


Well, it was news to me. I was reared Baptist. I knew of only one passage in the NT. Schaffer's article was compelling. I'll try to dig it up. Or, you can google it.



lgpreacherman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 9:19:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

And pneuma, in Greek can mean either wind, breathe or spirit. Water and wind, both being fluids are blatant metaphors and symbols for the HS. Several examples in the Bible exist. However, not a single example exists where the term water is substituted for baptism.


I guess I'm too simple minded to grasp that because water and wind are both fluids that therefore "water" means Holy Spirit. And I'm not sure about your assertion that the term "water" never refers to baptism in the NT. I believe it does in this verse at least. But even if there are no others, I'll still believe He's referring to baptism. Just like those who think it's physical birth even though physical birth is never referred to as being born of water. It is always referred to as being born of the flesh.


Concerning the assertion that there is not correlation between actual H20 water and baptisim in the NT what about the instance in Acts between Philip and the Ethiopian
quote:

35.Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
36.As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, "Look, here is water. Why shouldn't I be baptized?"
38.And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.
39.When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.


If Baptism in the NT is always about Spirit and never about water then was the Ethiopian able to see the Spirit and therefore ask Philip to bring him down into the Spirit to be baptized?



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 9:36:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

Actually, He did, if you believe all the Bible was written by God, : "For by grace are ye saved through faith". No room for birth by water here unless you don't think being regenerated is being born from above. We see absolutely from the following verses that we are born of the Word of God.
I agree that there is no water in the verse you quoted. However, since I believe all the Bible was written by God, I do believe that baptism is part of becoming saved. I do believe that being regenerated is being born from above. And, although, I've never thought about it, you may be right that we are born of the Word of God.

quote:

We see John uses "born of water and the Spirit" as equivalent to "born of God" (John 1:13; 1 John 2:29; 3:10; 4:7; 5:4). The Spirit of God does the supernatural cleansing from sin which is called Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is the baptism that is essential and without which no one will see heaven. Water baptism, otoh, is not an essential for salvation. Scripture doesn't teach it as an essential and many were saved in both the OT and NT without benefit of it.

In addition, to insist that water baptism is an essential is to declare unsaved multitudes of Christians the world over who have never been connected to any church or organization and have never been water baptized.
I agree that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is essential and that without it no one will see heaven. I also believe that God's Word teaches that water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are the same baptism.

As for those who have gone to heaven without the benefit of baptism I recently read what Cyprian, a theologian from the third century A.D. wrote concerning those who were coming into the Church from heretical sects without being rebaptized:

"But some one says, "What, then, shall become of those who in past times, coming from heresy to the Church, were received without baptism?" The Lord is able by His mercy to give indulgence, and not to separate from the gifts of His Church those who by simplicity were admitted into the Church, and in the Church have fallen asleep. Nevertheless it does not follow that, because there was error at one time, there must always be error; since it is more fitting for wise and God-fearing men, gladly and without delay to obey the truth when laid open and perceived, than pertinaciously and obstinately to struggle against brethren and fellow-priests on behalf of heretics.
(Cyprian, Epistle 72:23, "The Epistles of Cyprian," tr. Ernest Wallis, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (New York: Scribner's, 1886; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), V:385).

And just to be clear, I am not using this quotation to imply that anyone on these boards who disagrees with me is a heretic.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 9:56:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

But you have said that salvation comes when one is water baptized which actually is impossible because faith is an evidence of salvation. Therefore, the one being water baptized is already saved because he has exhibited faith.
I don't how the fact that faith being an evidence of salvation makes it impossible for God to work His work of salvation in our lives when we are baptized. Certainly the one being baptized must exhibit faith prior to baptism, but then we are not saved by faith. As you pointed out "For by grace you have been saved through faith (Ephesians 2:8). God bestows His grace, by which we are saved, upon us when we are baptized. But there is nothing in the act of baptism, that we do, that saves us. It's all God saving us.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 4:39:08 PM)

lgpreacherman said:
quote:

If Baptism in the NT is always about Spirit and never about water then was the Ethiopian able to see the Spirit and therefore ask Philip to bring him down into the Spirit to be baptized?


I'm not sure if that was directed to me or not.

Anyway, one way to lose credibility real quick is to suppose that one of the parties in the discussion is saying something he is not. We do not assume a metaphor when a literal meaning makes sense. Therefore, the presence of the word "water" in a passage does not indicate, in any way, that we can randomly substitute a metaphorical term just because we feel like it.

"Born of water" does not make any sense literally. Therefore, it opens the way to interpret it as a metaphor. It happens to make a great deal of sense to interpret the term "water" metaphorically in John 3:5.

GD,

BTW. If you interpret "water" as a reference to baptism in verse 5, that cannot be literal either. Taking something literally means that it has to say exactly and precisely what it is intended. Interpreting "water" as meaning "baptism" makes Jesus saying something other than what He says.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/12/2008 11:33:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

GD,

BTW. If you interpret "water" as a reference to baptism in verse 5, that cannot be literal either. Taking something literally means that it has to say exactly and precisely what it is intended. Interpreting "water" as meaning "baptism" makes Jesus saying something other than what He says.
Maybe I'm splitting this hair to fine. I do think that Jesus is refering to baptism in verse 5. However, I also think Jesus said exactly and precisely what He intended to say when He said "water." I don't think that "water" means baptism in this verse, I think it means "water." But I think it obviously refers to baptism, because there is no place else in a Christian's life where water and the Spirit come together except at baptism.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 1:27:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lgpreacherman
Concerning the assertion that there is not correlation between actual H20 water and baptisim in the NT what about the instance in Acts between Philip and the Ethiopian
As far as I know, it hasn't been said there is no correlation between water and baptism in the NT, of course there is, we often see examples of it.

What is being said is that the act of water baptism does not save, does not give the Holy Spirit, cannot wash away sins. The only baptism which can do the aforementioned is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit which has nothing to do with water baptism. Water baptism has no substance and is simply the "sign" of the substantive baptism - that of the Holy Spirit. That is why Scripture can say there is but "one" baptism.

The passages concerning the Ethiopian eunuch and Philip are often used to illustrate "immersion" when in fact they actually illustrate the opposite.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 1:35:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
I agree that there is no water in the verse you quoted. However, since I believe all the Bible was written by God, I do believe that baptism is part of becoming saved.
I understand that's what you believe; but, where is the evidence that water is "part" of becoming saved? Coming to faith is always shown as the prerequisite of water baptism which means the person has already been saved and without benefit of water.

quote:

And, although, I've never thought about it, you may be right that we are born of the Word of God.
Yes, according to those verses it would seem no other conclusion is possible. Therefore, we cannot say that at the time of water baptism we become saved or are baptized with the Holy Spirit.

quote:

I agree that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is essential and that without it no one will see heaven. I also believe that God's Word teaches that water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are the same baptism.
Where in Scripture do you think it is taught the two baptisms are one and the same? We are told that Christ "shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" and this is never said in the context of water. In fact, John the Baptist makes a distinction between water baptism and what Jesus Christ does.

quote:

And just to be clear, I am not using this quotation to imply that anyone on these boards who disagrees with me is a heretic.
Whew....I'm glad of that :)



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 1:38:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
I don't how the fact that faith being an evidence of salvation makes it impossible for God to work His work of salvation in our lives when we are baptized. Certainly the one being baptized must exhibit faith prior to baptism, but then we are not saved by faith
If faith is the "evidence" of salvation, it is proof our salvation has already taken place – something accomplished in the past - wouldn't you agree? Therefore, we have already been saved prior to and without benefit of water baptism. God has already "worked His work of salvation in our lives".

quote:

As you pointed out "For by grace you have been saved through faith (Ephesians 2:8). God bestows His grace, by which we are saved, upon us when we are baptized.
It doesn't mention water or baptism at all. Nor, is there any place in Scripture which suggests God's grace is bestowed at the time of water baptism. But, those other verses presented "do" tell us that the Word of God is how we become "born of God" (James 1:8; 1Peter 1:23; 1Corinthians 4:15 ).



GrahamCracker -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 5:41:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

Maybe I'm splitting this hair to fine. I do think that Jesus is refering to baptism in verse 5. However, I also think Jesus said exactly and precisely what He intended to say when He said "water." I don't think that "water" means baptism in this verse, I think it means "water." But I think it obviously refers to baptism, because there is no place else in a Christian's life where water and the Spirit come together except at baptism.


GD,

That doesn't make sense. You can't say that it means exactly what it says and then claim that it refers to baptism. Either it means "water" or it means something else by the use of the water. Do you know what literal means? It doesn't sound like it.



Doghouse -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 6:32:07 AM)

I think a thread such as this one answers the question posed in this thread.

I believe this is what happens when people are free to invent and develop their own little personal theologies without scrutiny, examination or testing.

To deny the salvic properties of the Sacrament of Baptism, instituted by Christ Himself, is to deny the validity of the instruction of Jesus. And if what Jesus teaches isn't valid for Christian faith, then hey...go follow Mohammed...

I don't believe there is anything more to the discussion than that.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 7:44:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL; GrahamCracker

GD,

That doesn't make sense. You can't say that it means exactly what it says and then claim that it refers to baptism. Either it means "water" or it means something else by the use of the water. Do you know what literal means? It doesn't sound like it.
Yes, I can say that it means exactly what it says and then claim that it refers to baptism. I know I'm not qualified to make observations on the English language, but it seems to me that what a word means and what it refers to are wholly different aspects of that word. So, when I say that "water" in John 3:5 means "water" I am not saying that it means amniotic fluid, the Spirit, the Word, or baptism. When I say that refers to baptism I am not taking away from my literal interpretation of the meaning of the term. It still means "water."



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 8:10:38 AM)

There are at least five reasons why I believe the Nicodemus would have understood Jesus as referring to baptism when He said "water." We, who have the benefit of the complete New Testament have even more reasons for believing that Jesus was referring to baptism.

1. The fame of the ministry of John the Baptist and the fact that he was baptizing repentant Jews (instead of them baptizing themselves). All of Israel knew that John baptized in water (John 1:26-31). Nicodemus could not have helped but connect Jesus' words with John's work.

2. Jesus' own baptism by John was probably well known in that day. It involved a conjunction of water baptism and the descent of the Holy Spirit. So, Jesus' reference to "water and Spirit" would naturally cause us to think of baptism.

3. In John the Baptist's teaching there was a distinction between water baptism and Spirit baptism (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16; John 1:33). This is shown especially in Mark 1:8 where John says, "I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit." Therefore, when we see "water and Spirit" mentioned together in John 3:5, we would naturally think of baptism.

4. Another tenet of John's teaching was the relationship between his water baptism and the coming Kingdom (Matthew 3:2). So when Jesus relates water and the kingdom, it naturally would bring to mind baptism.

5. This reason applies to us who have the complete testimony of the New Testament and that is the relationship of the concepts of baptism, birth, and resurrection. Jesus says, in John 3:5 "born of water." While there are no other NT passages that specifically speak of baptism as a birth, there are two passages that speak of it as a resurrection (Romans 6:4-5; and Colossians 2:12). In Scripture resurrection and birth are figuratively intertwined. Jesus is referred to as the "first-born from the dead" (Romans 8:29). Jesus' resurrection is equated with His begetting in Acts 13:33. So, it seems to me "raised up in baptism" and "born of water" and equivalent concepts.

Based on these reasons, I feel justified in taking John 3:5 as a reference to baptism.



GrahamCracker -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 5:40:19 PM)

quote:

Yes, I can say that it means exactly what it says and then claim that it refers to baptism. I know I'm not qualified to make observations on the English language, but it seems to me that what a word means and what it refers to are wholly different aspects of that word. So, when I say that "water" in John 3:5 means "water" I am not saying that it means amniotic fluid, the Spirit, the Word, or baptism. When I say that refers to baptism I am not taking away from my literal interpretation of the meaning of the term. It still means "water."


GD,

But it's a joke to claim that water must be taken literally. What does "born of water" mean if taken literally? That water is our parent? That water passed its genetic material to a person? I don't think so. The absurdity of such a claim makes a complete farce of language. You would thus be relegated to some symbolic, idiomatic or literary device to explain the term, just as I am.

The term "water" must mean something.

You are entitled to your interpretation but do not make the claim that it is the only logical interpretation. That's absurd and ridiculous.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 6:49:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

But it's a joke to claim that water must be taken literally.
If you think that's a joke, what about thinking that Jesus is saying that "unless a person is born physically, he cannot be saved." Now, that's a joke. And what about interpreting Jesus' words as meaning "unless one is born of the Spirit and the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Talk about absurd and ridiculous -- not to mention redundant!!

As far as I'm concerned interpreting "water" as meaning "water" is the easiest and least obscure interpretation. Usually that which is obscure in less accurate than that which is obvious. At least so I've been told. [:)]



lgpreacherman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 6:49:49 PM)

Forgive me if I went off course. I thought I was following pretty closely and it seemed like the implication was that when baptisim is mentioned in the Bible it is always of a spiritual nature and that the use of wart in baptisim was a distortion. If that was not what was being said please forgive me.



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/13/2008 8:24:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker

But it's a joke to claim that water must be taken literally.
If you think that's a joke, what about thinking that Jesus is saying that "unless a person is born physically, he cannot be saved." Now, that's a joke.

What about thinking, instead, "unless a person is born physically and spiritually, he cannot be saved". That's not silly. It also addresses Nicodemus concern about returning to his mother's womb to be "born again". He certainly had a physical orientation to the term Jesus used. His response to Jesus' words was silly, of course.

Recall, Jesus told him "unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" in v.3. His response in v.4 was "how can a man be born when is is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born, can he?" So Nic was thinking in terms of two physical births.

So, Jesus' answer about being born of water and the Spirit could easily mean "unless there is a physical and a spiritual birth, no one can see the kingdom of God".



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI