What Does "Born of Water" Mean in John 3:5?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

The consensus — and the answer found in the text itself

• The question posed (in the host's frame): John 3:5 quotes Jesus as saying, except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. In your book, The New Birth, you note that theologians have propagated many theories, about the meaning of this phrase, born of water. And you wrote that: some theologians believe that it refers to natural birth, which is accompanied by a watery flow of amniotic fluid. Others say it's identical to the birth of the spirit. And still others say that it refers to a spiritual cleansing, performed by the word of God. In your book, you argue that Jesus was referring to water baptism. Why do you believe that born of water, in this verse, is a reference to water baptism? And what about the other possibilities that you mentioned? The answer: I do believe that this verse refers to water baptism. And that is the consensus of the majority of scholars, and, historically, and even today — the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church, the Lutheran Church, Churches of Christ. And so the majority of Christian scholars would still say that. Among Protestants, even some Protestant scholars would agree with that. Others would not, because they don't believe baptism as part of the plan of salvation. So therefore they have to find some way to say it can't be referring to water baptism. Well, of course, the majority could be right, or wrong — I'm just giving you the background. But I think the answer is found in the text itself, and in the application of the New Testament Church. And yes: if you want a detailed explanation, discussion, considering all the alternatives, the discussion is in my book, The New Birth. But let's just take this passage, on its own terms, and see what it says.

Verse 3 and verse 5 — two elements, not natural birth, not a synonym

• I'm going to read from the New King James. And I'm going to go to John 3 (the reading announced in the text as 'John 33 through 5'): 'Jesus answered and said to him: most assuredly I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said to him: how can a man be born when he's old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered: most assuredly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' So, if you look at the parallel, verse 3 and verse 5: verse 3 — unless you're born again, you can't see the kingdom of God. Verse 5 — unless you're born of water and the spirit, you can't enter the kingdom of God. So I think verse 3 and verse 5 are equivalent. In other words: to be born again means to be born of water, and in the spirit. So the idea that it's natural birth, I think, is excluded, from the context. Because Jesus is talking about being born again. Nicodemus, mistakenly, was trying to figure out: what is this, talking about natural birth? And Jesus says: no. So I think that explanation is expressly excluded. And then verse 5 is an elaboration. So Nicodemus didn't understand what born again meant. So Jesus explained the same thing, in other terms. Well, when I said born again, I meant being born — born of water and spirit. So water and spirit are two elements, of the new birth. I think that's the most natural reading, of the text. So that would exclude the idea that birth of water is natural birth. That would also exclude the idea that birth of water, and birth of spirit, are synonymous. Because Jesus used the umbrella term, born again, to cover the whole experience. But then, when Nicodemus wanted further explanation, Jesus broke it down, and said: well, there are two elements here. There's water, and spirit. So the context wouldn't indicate: you must be born of the spirit, and you must be born of the spirit. He's making a distinction.

Scriptures: John 3:3-5

Not the word as water — and what Nicodemus could have known

• Now, that illuminates two of the alternatives. The third one is: what's 'washing of water by the word'? That's a reference to Ephesians 5. And while, certainly, the word of God is a cleansing agent, in our spiritual life: nowhere in the Bible does it indicate that — and nowhere in this context is it comparing the word, in salvation, to water. To the contrary, the word of God is likened to the seed. So, you see this in First Peter. You see that, in the parables of Jesus. The word is not like a river of water. The word is like a seed, that's planted. And if you're going to extend the analogy, of being born again: when people hear the word, you might say that's conception. But as they believe, and obey, the word: so, like a child might be conceived in the womb, but the birth is an experience that's distinct, from the initial conception. So, likewise, the new birth is distinct, from the initial hearing of the word. It involves our response, of faith, to the word; our obedience, to the word. So, to say the word would be the new birth: again, that's confusing things. That's not a scriptural illustration. And that doesn't fit the analogy, of new birth. And so the word would not be water. The word would be the seed, resulting — or, the word would be conception, resulting subsequently in the actual birth itself.
• Now, that leaves — I've excluded the other alternatives. That leaves: well, why do I think it would be baptism? Well, one of the things you always look at is context. What could Nicodemus, a religious leader, have known? So, in fact, Nicodemus didn't understand. And he goes on, later, in verse 9: 'Nicodemus answered, said to him: how can these things be?' In verse 10: 'Jesus answered, said to him: are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things?' So, when Jesus said, born of water, in the spirit, he expected that Nicodemus — as a Jewish religious leader, and biblical scholar — could have understood exactly what he was talking about. Well, what could Nicodemus have understood, in the life of Jesus? So, these other alternatives, that I mentioned, are subsequent Christian theological constructs. Nicodemus wouldn't have had anything to know, about that. But what could he have known? Well, as a Jew, he would have known that: when people converted, from another religion, to Judaism, part of that was what they call proelite baptism (proselyte, as heard). Proelite meaning converts: they would immerse them, in a ceremonial bath. So, on the temple grounds — and you can even go there today, in Jerusalem — there are scores of deep pools, or baths, where people would go down, for ceremonial cleansing. And they would fully immerse themselves. The Hebrew term is the Mikvah. So, the Old Testament had examples, of ceremonial cleansings, and washings. At the time of Jesus, there was proelite baptism, where converts, from other religions, were immersed — so, as part of becoming Jews.

Scriptures: Ephesians 5; 1 Peter (book-only); John 3:9-10

The immediate context — and the pattern of Acts

• And, more specifically, right here in the gospel of John, in the preceding chapter, you have John the Baptist, preaching the message of repentance: believe on the Messiah; wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit; the Messiah will give you the spirit. And so, to do that: I'm going to baptize you, in repentance. So, most obviously, when Jesus said, you must be born of the water and the spirit, he could have expected Nicodemus to know: well, the Old Testament — part of becoming a priest, you had a ceremonial immersion. In their day: part of becoming a Jew, being a convert, you would be immersed. And John the Baptist's preaching, going on right there: you want to show your repentance, and you want to show your waiting for the coming of the spirit — be baptized, be immersed in water. And we don't have to guess that. But actually, we see here in John, the same chapter — you have John 3:23: 'now John was also baptizing in Enon, near Salem (as the place-names are spoken), because there was much water there. And they came, and were baptized.' And then John, chapter 4, verse 1, and verse 2: 'therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made, and baptized, more disciples than John — though Jesus himself did not baptize, but his disciples.' So, in the immediate context, you've got John the Baptist baptizing, and Jesus' disciples baptizing. Well, the most obvious reference would be water baptism.
• Now, what about the application, to the New Testament Church? When you actually study the historical records: the book of Acts is the history book, of the early church. It shows how people actually were converted, and came into the church, after the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. So what happened? Acts 2:38 (the text carries the fused token 'acts 238'): 'repent, be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ. You shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.' And so, you can go through, throughout the records, in the book of Acts. Acts 8: the story of the Samaritans, that were baptized in the name of Jesus, filled with the spirit. Acts (the Paul chapter, its number garbled in the text): Paul — he was baptized, by calling on the name of Jesus; he was filled with the spirit. Acts 10: Cornelius, and his household, the Gentiles — they received the spirit first, and they were commanded to be baptized. Acts 19: the disciples of John, in Ephesus — they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ; they were filled with the spirit. So, here Jesus says, in John 3, the new birth is going to be a baptism of — are you going to be born of water and spirit? When you see the fulfillment of Jesus' words, consistently throughout the book of Acts, you find baptism of water, in Jesus' name; baptism, the spirit. So it's very easy to see that the birth of water and spirit is equated, in the rest of the New Testament, with the baptism of water, and the spirit.
• And I'll give you one more verse, that just makes it crystal clear. Because you find this exact usage of the word, in the story of Cornelius — Acts 10, verse 47 and 48. So, after the Gentiles received the Holy Spirit, they spoke in tongues. Then Peter asked this question, Acts 10:47: 'can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit, just as we have?' And he commanded them to be baptized, in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him, to stay a few days. So, he uses this very phrase: hey, can we forbid water? In the obvious implication: no, we can't. What does that mean? Be baptized in water, in the name of Jesus Christ. So Jesus said: you need the birth of water, and spirit. The apostle Peter — the apostle who was given the keys of the kingdom, to proclaim the message — says: we need to give them water. And you could even put, in kind of like parenthesis: just like Jesus said. And what was that water? Water baptism. So I think it's very strongly established, both from the immediate context, and from the application throughout the New Testament, that when Jesus said, you must be born of the water, and of the spirit, he meant: you must be baptized in water, and you must be baptized in the Holy Spirit. And that's the new birth experience.

Scriptures: John 3:23; John 4:1-2; Acts 2:38; Acts 8; Acts 9; Acts 10:47-48; Acts 19

Scripture index: John 3:3-5; Ephesians 5; 1 Peter (book-only); John 3:9-10; John 3:23; John 4:1-2; Acts 2:38; Acts 8; Acts 9; Acts 10:47-48; Acts 19.