John 3:5/Ez. 36:25-27

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>So how can I say that in v.5 Jesus is referring to TWO aspects of the ONE 
>new birth? Get ready folks, this blew me away when I first read of the 
>connection! Enter, Ezekiel 36:25-27 (NIV): 
>
>v.25 "I will sprinkle clean water on you and you will be clean; I will 
>cleanse you from all your impurities and all your idols.
>
>v.26 "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will 
>remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.
>
>v.27 "I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be 
>careful to keep My laws."
>
>Note that this is God speaking here (there are similar passages in Isaiah, 
>although they presently escape me) so the "clean water" referred to in v.25 
>is obviously not literal H-2-O, but a beautiful word-picture of the 
>spiritual purification that God would one day impart to His people. I'm 
>completely convinced that this is what Jesus is referring to in John 3:5 - 
>God's purification (water) and impartation of the Spirit in the heart of 
>the believer! 

I'm with you to this point, but then your departure is as follows

                 I submit that the water in v.5 is not so much the literal 
>water of baptism but the spiritual cleansing (remission of sins) that God 
>works during christian initiation/baptism.
>
You may submit that the water in verse 5 is (i don't understand what you
mean by *not so much the literal*, either it is literal, or it is not
literal or is it both?) literal but you have to contend with Peter in Acts
10:47 Can any man forbid *water*, that these should not be baptized, which
have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? and Phillip in Acts 8:36  And as
they went on their way, they came unto a certain *water*: and the eunuch
said, See, here is *water*; what doth hinder me to be baptized? Phillip had
joined himself to the eunuch preaching the gospel of being born again of
water and spirit.

If Peter and Phillip believed water meant baptism, on what authority to you
interpret water to mean something else?  By an OT prophecy?  The Old was a
shadow of the new!  

This does open up a discussion of baptism being a mystical rite (as you are
expounding) and the name of Jesus spoken over the candidate being an
incantation (though you have not affirmed such, this would be the next
logical presumption if water does not mean baptism), or is it yet another
Biblical maxim stressing the need of obedience to the plan of salvation.
That plan with all the ascending types and shadows being, Repent, be
Baptized in the Name of Jesus and recieve the Spirit.
 
>These OT references also make Jesus' rebuke of Nicodemus much more 
>understandable. In v.10 Jesus upbraids him, telling him that as a teacher 
>of Israel he really should know these things (i.e. the prophesies of 
>Ezekiel and Isaiah). It obviously doesn't make sense to blame poor Nic. for 
>not knowing Acts 2:38! ;-)  (Although Acts 2:38 is basically the 
>fulfillment of Ez. 36:25-27)
>
Agreed.  I believe you are right on the money here but have streched the
envelope too far to say water does not mean baptism.
 



He who sows is nothing but a sowing sower.