JOHN 3:5 'TRULY, TRULY, I SAY TO YOU, UNLESS ONE IS BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT, HE CANNOT ENTER THE KINGDOM OF GOD.'

The handout on Water Baptism, published by Campus Crusade For Christ argues, 'There is much debate over the meaning of this verse. It is at best AN UNCLEAR verse.' POINTS TO NOTE: (1) In responding to this contention, I feel like screaming, 'hold everything!' If this verse is unclear then why are groups like the above saying so much about being "born again"? If they don't even know what the verse really means then why do they talk as if they do? If the verse is unclear then how do they know what constitutes being born again? And why are they telling so many people that they need to be born again, if they don't even understand the very passage that talks about the particulars of the new birth? Frankly, I just don't get it. (2) What would Jesus say to such an argument? When Jesus talked about the new birth, Nicodemus responded, 'How can these things be?' (3:9) 'How is all this possible' (Wey). Seems like Nicodemus was just as confused over the meaning of Jesus' words as those who wrote the handout that we have been citing. The words of Jesus' where confusing to Nicodemus. Campus Crusade seems to think that the "unclear verse" is a safe position on this passage. Yet that is the exact position that Nicodemus assumed. And Jesus didn't remain silent, actually He rebuked Nicodemus for his lack of understanding: 'Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not understand these things?' (John 3:10)

In fact the following verses continue and point out that Jesus felt He had spoken something very basic: 'If I told you earthly things (things which happen on this earth) and you do not believe, how shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things?' (John 3:12) An application needs to be made: To say that this verse is unclear (which is admitting you don't understand), means that you are not qualified to teach people. If Campus Crusade doesn't understand John 3:5, then they need to come and sit before someone who does-and learn!

The handout continues. They admit that they aren't sure what the water refers to in John 3:5. One suggestion they give, 'Water refers to physical birth'. But that is exactly what Nicodemus thought it referred to (John 3:4 'How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born, can he?') To say that water refers to physical birth makes the passage look ridiculous. For what person on this planet-hasn't been born?? All who have lived automatically have the first point covered. How could such be a condition for salvation, seeing that you would never, ever, run into someone who had not be born? The handout then offers another option, 'Water is a symbol of the Spirit.' But that has the verse teaching, 'Born of the Spirit and the Spirit.'? In his debate with Mr. Rice, Alexander Campbell noted that even the denominational world understands what "water" means in John 3:5. The Westminister Confession of Faith states, 'all the Greek and Latin fathers (those who lived after the days of the apostles), without one single exception' agreed that John 3:5 refers to baptism (Campbell-Rice Debate p. 456). He also quoted Dr. Wall, a famous Episcopal writer, who noted, 'There is not one Christian writer of any antiquity, in any language, but who understands the new birth of water (John 3:5) as referring to baptism; and if it be not so understood, it is difficult to give an account of how a person is born of water, any more than born of wood.' (History of Baptism, Vol. I, p. 119)

John 3:5 is actually very easy to understand if you compare it with other clear passages:

SPIRIT WATER KINGDOM OF GOD

Believeth Baptized Saved-Mark 16:16

Renewing H.S. Washing of Regen. Saved-Titus 3:5

Seed-imperishable born again purified souls

The Word of God 1 Peter 1:22-23

By the Word of Truth-James 1:18

Through faith buried..in baptism having forgiven-Col. 2:12-13

1 PETER 3:21 'AND CORRESPONDING TO THAT, BAPTISM NOW SAVES YOU--NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, BUT AN APPEAL TO GOD FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--THROUGH THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST'.

From the handout: 'Not the removal of dirt from the body. That is, not ceremonial washing in water, like baptism is.' (1) But baptism isn't a ceremonial washing. This argument is attacking a position that we don't hold-we don't believe that baptism is a bath to remove physical dirt from the body. This argument has Peter saying, 'Baptism (water baptism-3:20 'safely through the water') now saves you, but it isn't water baptism that saves you.'??? (2) People need to remember that any argument directed against baptism is also directed against the intelligence and inspiration of Jesus and the apostles, for they clearly taught it. Why would Jesus and the apostles teach a "ceremonial washing"? If you are truly saved at the point of faith, then why add a ceremonial washing? The handout further says, 'Water didn't save Noah. The ark did.' Actually, the truth of the matter is that a number of things saved Noah: (a) His obedient faith -Hebrews 11:7. (b) God's grace-Genesis 6:8. (c) The ark. And water-1 Peter 3:21. In like manner, a number of things contribute to our salvation. God's grace, the blood of Christ, hearing the gospel message, faith, repentance, confession and baptism. To argue that the ark saved Noah and not water is silly. For without all the water, that sinful generation would have still been there. The handout makes another point, 'Noah was pronounced righteous before the flood because of his faith.' But it wasn't faith-only (see Genesis 6:8-9). In addition, Peter isn't arguing that the flood waters saved Noah's soul, rather they helped deliver Noah from a sinful world. Then the handout says, 'Noah was "saved" from his sinful generation, not from hell..Baptism "saves us" from the sinful world around us in that during baptism we are to "pledge a good conscience toward God". That is, we decide not to live in sin any longer.' POINTS TO NOTE: (1) But baptism doesn't deliver us from a sinful world- in the same manner as the flood delivered Noah. The flood removed all the sinners, but baptism doesn't do that. So that's not the parallel in these passages. The parallel is that through water Noah was brought safely to a new world cleansed of evil, in like manner, water baptism saves us, i.e. brings us to a new life (Romans 6:4). And baptism is much more than simply pledging a good conscience, rather, the sinner realizes that baptism is the last step before they can have a clear conscience before God. And notice the last phrase, 'through the resurrection of Jesus Christ'. It is the resurrection that gives meaning to baptism, for baptism parallels the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus (Romans 6:3-5).

ACTS 22:16 'ARISE, AND BE BAPTIZED, AND WASH AWAY YOU SINS, CALLING ON HIS NAME'. They try to get this verse to read something like, 'Call on His name' (faith), sins removed and then you are baptized. Actually, the verse teaches that until you have submitted to the command to be baptized, you truly haven't placed your faith in Christ and His ability to save you.

ROMANS 6:3-7 The handout says: 'What are we baptized into?..The main idea of the verses must agree with the context of Paul's statements regarding salvation in chapters 1-8 of Romans!' The assumption is that the Book of Romans teaches salvation by faith-only. But such isn't the case (Romans 1:5 'obedience of faith'; 1:17 'live by faith'; 2:6-10; 4:17-22; 6:17-18). In response to the question, 'What are we baptized into?' The answer is, 'into Christ' (6:3), where redemption is found (3:24).

GALATIANS 3:27 The handout says, 'Again, baptized into what?'. Again, the answer is, 'into Christ' (3:27), where all spiritual blessings are found (Eph. 1:3). In addition, they are trying to argue that the baptism of the above passages refers to Holy Spirit baptism, and not water baptism. Yet, the baptism connected with salvation is water baptism (Acts 8:35-38; 10:47-48; 11:13-14).

MATTHEW 28:19 The argument is that in this passage disciples are made before they are baptized. (a) The word disciple can refer to a learner, someone still on the road to salvation (Acts 19:1-5). (b) This is actually a strong verse for baptism, when we compare it with its parallel passage, Mark 16:16. The verse kills the doctrine of faith-only, for it infers that one can know quite a bit about God, be learning His Word, have faith and yet still remain in an unsaved condition!

JOHN 4:1-2 'Jesus Himself never baptized anyone, which is very strange if He wanted to be sure that people knew it was necessary for salvation. Jesus did not put an emphasis on water baptism, rather His shed blood.' POINTS TO NOTE: (a) His disciples did the baptizing, He preached, they baptized. (b) Jesus did let people know-Mark 16:16. (c) Jesus linked His shed blood with water baptism-Compare Matthew 26:28=Acts 2:38. (d) Jesus also lived under a different covenant. Jesus never went to "church" or worshipped on Sunday either!

EPHESIANS 4:4-6 The argument is that the "one baptism" refers to Holy Spirit baptism. Yet Holy Spirit baptism wasn't commanded, but water baptism was (Acts 10:47-48). Thus the baptism commanded, must be the baptized commanded of all men (Mark 16:16), hence the "one baptism".

EPHESIANS 2:8-9 People fail to realized that baptism is in the context of these passages. The faith of 2:8 includes the baptism mentioned in 2:5 'made us alive together with Christ..and raised us up with Him'. Compare with Colossians 2:12-13.