"Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." John 3:5
While being born of the Spirit is pretty clear, I've heard the argument before that Jesus is only referring to one's physical birth when he speaks of "water" or amniotic fluid, so to speak. The point of said argument being to somehow cheapen baptism as a necessity for Salvation. Personally, I see three issues with this Baptism avoiding interpretation.
Issue #1 Per Christ's teaching, Baptism is of Water and The Spirit.
Looking back at the general context of John, a mere two chapters earlier Jesus, Himself, was baptized. Jesus, Himself, did not start His public ministry until he had been baptized. However, what is key to note is that the Holy Spirit was there when Jesus was baptized. The description of John the baptist reveals an immediate collusion of Baptism with the Holy Spirit. "And John bore witness, "I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him." John 1:32 This wording is nearly the same in all four of the Gospels. See Mark 1:10, Matthew 3:16, and Luke 3:22 for the others. Essentially, when John speaks of one who will come to baptize with the Spirit, he speaks of baptism not to the exclusion of water but with it. Though, just to be clear, baptism is not the only place for the Spirit to act.
Issue #2 Grammatical Context
I am taking people at their word for this, but apparently in Greek the word format is such that you could not rephrase the sentence to say "Unless you are born of Water and Unless you are born of The Spirit". The wording is such that the words "Water" and "Spirit" are locked under the heading of a singular event. That is to say that the singular event referred to (Baptism) comprises two parts simultaneously occurring and not two events at separate times of life.
Issue #3 Context
The most compelling argument for me is this; "After this Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized." John 3:22 Think about it for a moment and then go back and re-read John 3. Right after having a talk with Nicodemus on water and The Spirit, Jesus goes off and spends time baptizing. Coincidence? I think not. He was definitely trying to let us know something.
Go and set the World on Fire
3 comments:
1. So did Jesus have to be baptized with water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom of
heaven? And John doesn't, but Paul does exclude baptism from the gospel in I Cor. 1:17.
He is saying in this passage that we shouldn't separate ourselves according to school
of baptism (I was baptized under this or that teacher), but that we are united in
Christ. Secondly, how in the world can the Catholic church condone the baptism of
desire when, according to Catholic doctrine, John 3:3 specifically states that no one
can see the kingdom of God without being baptized with water? On the pro side, many
protestant denominations would agree that baptism is necessary for salvation. I do not.
2.I'd be interested to see whether this was true or not. But since I'm not a Greek
scholar, I will take at their word the scholars who agree with my opinion instead of
the scholars who agree with yours. Is that fair, or do you think we might miss something
if we approach it that way... ?
3. You should have read further. I happened to read John 1-4 today in my daily quiet
time. Look at John 4:1-2 (included here not for your benefit, but for the benefit of
any readers who are really just browsing and not interested in having an open-Bible
discussion right this second): "When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had
heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself
baptized not, but his disciples,) ... " If baptism were so important, wouldn't He
be involved in it, as you suspected he might have been?
OK, clearly it is important, since it is included in the great comission, at the end
of each of the gospels- except Luke, which is sequeled by Acts, and Acts starts with
the great commission. But note the wording in Mark 16:16. Yes, anyone who believes and
is baptized is saved. But whoever does not believe (it does NOT say, whoever is not
baptized) is damned. This is backed up by verses like John 3:15-18, which, if taken
at face value, seem to say that simple belief is all that is required for salvation.
This is a simple, logical, either-or situation. Believe, and you are saved. Don't
believe, and you are condemned. Baptism is notably missing from these verses.
more when i get home...
1. Firstly, of course, Jesus didn't need to be baptized but He still did choose to do so, possible simply to identify with us, sinners.
What I think you are worried about is hinging Salvation on Baptism. Guess what? "God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His Sacraments."(CCC1257)
So, to explain: Baptism of Desire is basically a doctrine to explain how people who fail to be baptized with water in this life and had desired to be with the Lord, still end up with God.
As for 1 Cor 1:17, I will have to look closer into this verse and the surrounding context, but on a cursory note I can state one possibility. Paul doesn't state that he hasn't baptized, he is simply expressing his calling. Since one's calling differs from person to person, Paul's God-given focus was likely just to preach.
2. For now, I can accept that answer. Give me about two years and I will know enough Greek to answer that question for sure or at least wait until I find someone who can explain Greek to people to whom it is all Greek.
3. Actually, my thoughts on John 4:2 is that it makes perfect sense. According to John the Baptist, Jesus would come to baptize with the Holy Spirit and since it is not yet time for Jesus to administer the Holy Spirit, John(the writer) would be simply squelching a horrible rumor within his Gospel.
4. Amen, Belief is of the highest importance, but belief in Jesus is no simple belief. It demands all. After all, "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder." James 2:19 So, we must take it a step farther and show belief with action.
This is a random thought: Man (Adam) was born into the world from dirt. We are made new by being born of water. We go from being dirtied in sin into being cleansed in water.
"And as they went along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water! What is to prevent my being baptized?" Acts 8:36
I can concede this: I doubt anyone who consciously refuses to be baptized is truly a Christian. I would have to ask that person /why/ they chose to blatantly disobey a command of scripture. Where is the desire for obedience to evidence their salvation? "If you love me, keep my commandments," and, "If you are ashamed of me before men, I will be ashamed of you before my heavenly Father [paraphrase]." Since faith without works is dead, a lack of the fruit of obedience in this simple thing is highly indicative of a dead tree, although I maintain, not conclusively. (I need to stop reading Nietsche, he talks like this!)
Post a Comment