Born of water and the Holy Spirit

Born of water and the Holy Spirit

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Joh 3:5 

Bishop J.C. Ryle (1816-1900) says of this verse: This famous text has unhappily given rise to widely different interpretations. (From his Expository Thoughts of the Gospels; EXCELLENT BOOKS !! Anything by Ryle is great.)

Let me weigh in on it.

By "water" Jesus could mean:

1) Actual water baptism is required to be saved.

2) Water baptism, but it is not required to be saved.

3) The word of God.

4) The Holy Spirit.

Let me first say, before we look at each of the above options, that I take as a general rule, that the most easily understood meaning of a verse is the correct understanding. God is not hiding from us, nor does he hide Truth from us. He wants to be known, which is why he reveals himself to us; he wants us to know Truth. If an explanation requires all kinds of convoluted reasoning, I consider it highly suspect. And obviously, if it contradicts other clear scripture, it is wrong, for God does not contradict himself.

That being said, let us look at each of these.

1) The position states that water baptism, of what ever mode (immersion, sprinkling, dipping), whether of infants or upon profession of faith, is required if one is to be saved. Meaning, if someone is not baptized, they don't go to heaven, they cannot go to heaven - period!

Several problems with this.

Old Testament saints, like Enoch, Abraham, etc were not baptized, but they are in heaven. To say they were circumcised, ie had received the sign of the covenant, does not work. Jesus said to an Old Testament era person, he had to be "baptized;" Nicodemus was circumcised. Nor would that argument hold for Adam and Enoch and Noah, etc, who all lived before circumcision comes on the scene with Abraham, 2000 years later. Jesus was talking about something else.

This position states that baptism removes Original Sin, baptism is primary, preaching is secondary. We Protestants do the opposite, we preach so that people can be saved.

Peter says in 1Pe 3:21 "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

It is clear in that verse that baptism does not remove sin, but is our saying to God, and others, I am identify with Jesus, by being baptized into his death and resurrection. Peter specifically says "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God."

Rom 6:4-5 stating that baptism is to show we have been buried with Christ in his death, and raised with him in his resurrection.

It has nothing to do with removal of sin, original or any other.

The clear New Testament example that baptism is NOT required for one to be saved is the Thief on the Cross, who obviously died un-baptized, but to whom Jesus said "today you will be with me in Paradise."

Lastly, if baptism saves, Jesus would have said "go and baptized everyone, whether they want to be baptized or not; that way they can go to heaven," but he said "go and preach, and baptize those who believe, ie have been saved."

So Jesus cannot be saying baptism is required to enter heaven.

2) This position tries to strike a middle ground. They do not want to say, like in #1 above, that water baptism removes sin, or that it is required to be saved, or that if a person is not baptized, they cannot go to heaven, but they do hold that "water" refers to water baptism.

Except that, Jesus said "except," which means it is required. This position says it is not required. By trying to hold a middle ground, they put forward a position that is confused; it is confused, because it is wrong, clearly contradicting what Jesus said.

3) I knew someone who held that "water" meant the word of God, and he used Eph 5:26 as proof, "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,"

That verse actually does not say the word of God is water, just that as water washes and cleans, so does the word of God, but at least he was using the Bible to support his position.

4) That "water" refers to the Holy Spirit. This is the position I hold.

I have five (5) reasons for holding it:

- Jesus continues to explain to Nicodemus the work of the Holy Spirit, and the absolute need for the Holy Spirit to work; there is not one word about baptism!

"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Joh 3:5-8

The Holy Spirit is mentioned 3 times in 4 verses, and note in verse 7, Jesus simply says "born again" not mentioning water, just restating and clarifying v 6, where he also only mentions the Holy Spirit. The work of salvation is an inner work, effected by the Holy Spirit, not of the flesh/external; water baptism is external, it does not effect the heart.

- He uses another word picture to describe the Holy Spirit "wind." He wants the work of the Holy Spirit to be clearly understood.

Regarding "wind," think Eze 37:1-10, the Valley of Dry Bones, where wind and the Holy Spirit are the same, and not to forget Pentecost.

He uses 2 word pictures "water" and "wind;" they both refer to the Holy Spirit. One does not refer to baptism, which is never further explained, and the other the Holy Spirit which is elaborated on. These few verses are a unified whole, not disjointed and random. So if by "water" he meant baptism, why not clearly say so? Why go to great lengths to make the work of the Holy Spirit clearly understood, but leave us wondering what "water" means?

- He explains the work of the Holy Spirit, as done internally, but perceived externally, like the wind. He clarifies the meaning of "wind," but gives not further explanation of "water," meaning "wind" is to show the work of the Holy Spirit, but "water" means the Holy Spirit, and so does not need to be clarified.

First he tells us the Holy Spirit is like water, then he tells us his work is like the working of the wind.

- John records in his gospel Jesus linking "water" and the Holy Spirit in 2 other places:

"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." Joh 4:14 

The water coming out from within is the Holy Spirit.

"In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)" Joh 7:37-39

This is crystal clear, and a perfect parallel to what Jesus said to the Samaritan woman in Joh 4.

The point of referring to those 2 portions is that Jesus used water to mean the Holy Spirit.

- but the most straightforward reason is the grammatical reason!

"Water AND the Holy Spirit."

The Greek word for "and" is "kai."

"Kai" can mean either "and," exactly like in English "I ate both apples and oranges;" or it can be a mild contrastive "I ate apples, but not oranges;" or it can mean "even, I mean" "I ate apples, even (I mean) Granny Smiths," where a type of apple is then stated.

It is in that way that "kai" must be understood in this verse: except a man be born again of water, I mean the Holy Spirit ... "

And this is supported by the order of the 2 phrases: first water, then Holy Spirit. If "water" meant baptism, it would have to come second, because first would be the work of the Holy Spirit: "except a man is born of the Holy Spirit, and then by water baptism ..." But then the Thief on the Cross would not be in heaven.

The order is very important: "water, I mean, the Holy Spirit."

I don't think any Evangelical Christian would consider any other understanding, as we all hold that the new birth is a work of the Holy Spirit, giving life to a dead sinner; totally an inner work, not having to do with the externals, like water baptism.

But if this sounds new to you, I would encourage you to read the Bible, the New Testament, and see if there is any verse that says baptism removes Original Sin, or the baptism saves, or gives new life.

Remember, God wants to be known. He is not hiding. The most obvious, most easily understood meaning of a Bible verse, is most likely the correct understanding.

Do not be afraid of the Bible, it is not a "mystery" book; it is the book of God, who is light:

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." 1Jn 1:5 

2 March 2026