Questions about when people get "saved"

[MT1926]

Eternal life begins just as Jesus said it would in John’s gospel when He said, “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life…” This type of passage is repeated multiple times in John’s gospel where the apparent condition to receive eternal life is simply to “believe.”

Thanks for the response.

This is what I wanted to discuss. I’m going to go through John’s gospel the way I understand it and you can respond and tell me what I’m missing. Because when I read John I don’t see simple belief being the apparent condition to receive eternal life.

You mentioned…

To be born of the Spirit (Jn. 3:3-5) is to become one spirit in Christ. (1st. Cor. 6:17.)

When I read John 3 I actually see it being a Chapter that tells us "simple belief is not enough.

Here’s why.

In order to understand John 3 we need to back up to John 2.

St. John tells us

23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs which he did; 24 but Jesus did not trust himself to them,

Here we have many who “simple” believed in his name. However, verse 24 goes on to tell us that Jesus did not trust himself to them.

I’m sure we can both agree that it’s because they don’t have “saving belief”? because Jesus goes on to say…

25 because he knew all men and needed no one to bear witness of man; for he himself knew what was in man.

Notice carefully here that St. John uses the word “man” three times here. This is important because Chapter three begins…

3 Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicode′mus, a ruler of the Jews.

St. John here is highlighting the point that Nicodemus is one of these men these so called “simple believers”. Here we are getting exhibit A of these men who think they are believing in Jesus and that their “simple belief” is enough. He even makes the statement…

“Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.”

This is an amazing statement for a Rabbi to say directly to Jesus.

Also, notice that this relates back to verse 23 that tells us the men who believed the “signs” weren’t the true believers.

Continued…

 

[MT1926]

…continued

How does Jesus respond to Nicodemus’ belief? He says…

3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God… 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. ”

Jesus here is telling Nicodemus that his belief is not enough. He says you can’t enter, let alone even see, the kingdom unless you are born from “water and spirit”. I notice you left that out in your comment. Not sure why because Jesus did not just say spirit He commanded “water and spirit”.

Sure I know you don’t believe in Baptism, but I believe St. John is making it crystal clear what Jesus means, because in John 1 he told us…

31 I myself did not know him; but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John bore witness, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’

This is when Jesus was Baptized. St. John here is showing us how the spirit and the water are connected. When Jesus was baptized the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a dove. Did Jesus need the Holy Spirit to descend on Him? or Was Jesus showing us what we must do also, to receive the Holy Spirit?

Also, St. John further drives home the point that belief isn’t enough and Baptism is necessary when he says…

22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized.

Why would Jesus go out into the land and start Baptizing if it wasn’t important? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to go out and tell everyone to make sure you truly believe?

On a side not John also tells us in chapter 2 that Jesus used the baptizmo (purification) jars to make the wine.

continued…

 

[MT1926]

…continued

I think it’s pretty clear that St. John is really honing in on Baptism being necessary for salvation in these first 3 chapters.

I think Jesus is letting us know here that our belief isn’t enough. He is telling us something more is needed.

Let’s go back to see what Jesus says we need. He tells us what is needed in John 1…

12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God;

Now we have here believers, but this verse doesn’t tell us that Jesus saved them it tells us that He gave them power.

Right here Jesus is telling us that “simple belief” is not enough. If we want to become children of God we need to first receive power.

Now if you truly believe Jesus and want to follow him shouldn’t you be saying what is this power and how do I receive it?

Well Jesus gave us the answer in John 3.

5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Right here he is telling us the Holy Spirit is the power and we receive it by being Baptized. It’s that simple.

Just think about it. Jesus didn’t give us the sacrament of Baptism because he wanted us to “do something” in order to be saved. He gave us Baptism because He loves us that much. He didn’t want us to rely on our own emotional belief, like Nicodemus. He wanted us to have a visible sign and assurance that we received the Holy Spirit.

This isn’t the end. There is so much more on Baptism throughout all of scripture. But I will stop here so I can get your thoughts.

God Bless

 

[MonteRCMS]

Lord, I love You. Please forgive me my sins. Hold me in Your Arms. Make me the way YOU want me to be.

 

[Mary888]

That’s what I understood yes. We cannot say in this life if one is saved or not.

 

[Mary888]

Is there a distinction between ‘saved’ and ‘redeemed’?

 

[Reuben_J]

Is there a distinction between ‘saved’ and ‘redeemed’?

From a layman’s term, we can look at them in two ways, I think.

First, they can have the same outcome. One is saved by the redeeming grace of Jesus Christ on the cross. If there is nothing in between, like we do not back slide, then we would be finally saved and will be in heaven.

Alternatively, we can see being saved as having a finality to it, whereas being redeemed may not. We are redeemed in Baptism by grace, but we do not know that we are saved until we meet the Lord during the Judgment/last day.

 

[tgGodsway]

Okay MT1926,. I just now saw this but all I have is my cell phone. I will address some of it now but when I get to my computer later, cover it more thorough.
Firstly, to believe in his name is to suggest they saw him as Messiah. However, this alone should never mean that Jesus should treat them as His inner circle. Trust comes through time spent. Secondly on that point, there is no indication that they were somehow something short of a true believer.

Secondly the John 3 passage does not talk about water baptism in the discussion with Nicodemus. Jesus said one must be born of water and Spirit. What does it mean to be born of water?..
Theologians argue this point all the time. Some say he was talking about water baptism. But the word born suggest physical birth. Two births are necessary to enter the kingdom of God. Birth #1 born of water, and birth #2 born of Spirit. These two working together will open kingdom life in my view. But not all born again believers enter the kingdom. … okay my one finger typing says it’s time to quit. Blessings to you sir.

 

[MT1926]

Theologians argue this point all the time. Some say he was talking about water baptism. But the word born suggest physical birth. Two births are necessary to enter the kingdom of God. Birth #1 born of water, and birth #2 born of Spirit. These two working together will open kingdom life in my view. But not all born again believers enter the kingdom. … okay my one finger typing says it’s time to quit. Blessings to you sir.

Thanks for the response.

Other than them reading their own theology and opinions into the text could you explain how they come to this conclusion?

First, when I read this text I notice the text does not say “unless one is born of water and then born again of the Spirit…” Note Jesus says you must be “born of water and the Spirit.” This is one event. Baptism. You are dividing Jesus words into 2 events, how do you come to the conclusion that this is two events?

Second, why would Jesus say unless someone is born of physical birth? Isn’t everyone listening already born that way? Is there another way we can be born that isn’t physical birth? That if this were to happen we have no way of being born again because the first birth didn’t count? If he was speaking of natural birth their was no reason to bring it up because there is no other way to be born the first time.

Third let’s go back and finish a verse I already mentioned…

John 1:12-13

12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Notice here in Chapter 1 St. John already defined our first birth as being born of blood and flesh. He never mentions water. Why would we believe water means birth in Chapter 3? When we were just told born of blood means our first birth two chapters earlier?

If you could point to some Biblical texts that shows Jesus was talking about a two step process and that He meant water is first birth, I would appreciate it. Cause I can’t see it in the text.

God Bless

 

[lanman87]

If you could point to some Biblical texts that shows Jesus was talking about a two step process and that He meant water is first birth, I would appreciate it. Cause I can’t see it in the text.

Look at it context. Here it is in the NLT version

Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, unless you are born again,[a] you cannot see the Kingdom of God.”

4 “What do you mean?” exclaimed Nicodemus. “How can an old man go back into his mother’s womb and be born again?”

5 Jesus replied, “I assure you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit. 6 Humans can reproduce only human life, but the Holy Spirit gives birth to spiritual life.[c] 7 So don’t be surprised when I say, ‘You[d] must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it wants. Just as you can hear the wind but can’t tell where it comes from or where it is going, so you can’t explain how people are born of the Spirit.”

9 “How are these things possible?” Nicodemus asked.

Nicodemus is asking “Can I enter again into my mothers womb?” Many think that water, in this context, refers to a mothers womb. Jesus is contrasting the physical (human birth) with the spiritual birth (being born again).

Another view of John 3:3 is that Jesus was using Old Testament metaphorical language that Nicodemus would understand. Water is often used as a symbol of spiritual cleansing in the Scriptures. Many think that Jesus was tying Old Testament Prophecy to himself by using the term Water and the Spirit. This would confirm to Nicodemus that Jesus was the one who would “sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.” Ezekiel 26:25

Either of these explanations fits in better with other scriptures that indicated “being born again”, “receiving the Holy Spirit”, “being sons of God” are by faith/belief.

For instance:

so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith. Galatians 3:14

But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. Galatians 3:25

3 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, Ephesians 1:13

The Bible is clear that we receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit through faith/belief and not baptism. Although, it can be at the same time as water baptism (Acts 2:38), after water baptism (Acts 19:5-6), or before water baptism (Acts 11:15-17). However, the Bible never has an example of someone being born again without faith/belief.

 

[Reuben_J]

It says exactly born of the water and Spirit - not just receiving the Holy Spirit.

I am not sola scriptural - but it is obvious here that one has to be faithful to the word first. And it says “born of the water and Spirit”.

We have to satisfy both - baptize, if is baptize, with water, and Spirit.

Both were done in the Bible - John baptized with water and Jesus with the Holy Spirit.

 

[MT1926]

Look at it context. Here it is in the NLT version

Yes I agree, Nicodemus is thinking this. But you are jumping ahead to verse 5 and tying what he said to the water. Jesus hasn’t brought the water up yet. Nicodemus is making this conclusion on what Jesus said. Born Again.

Let’s break it down.

Jesus says unless you are born again.

Nicodemus says how can I be “PHYSICALLY” born again.

Jesus doesn’t say OK Nicodemus pay close attention. I’m going to compare and contrast physical birth to spiritual birth. If He was contrasting the two, basic grammar states He would have had to separate the water and the Spirit. He would have had to say "no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and THEN born again of the Spirit.

He would have had to at least use the word THEN instead of THE.

Also why on earth would you believe what Nicodemus is saying (physical birth) is the “CONTEXT” of the Chapter?

Finally, that is a pretty poor translation of verses 6-7. It’s not even similar to the Greek. It should read…

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.[a] 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born anew.’

If you read it the way it was original written you can see that this is not speaking of birth, it is speaking of living “in the flesh”

As Jesus will say again:

Mark 14:38
38 Watch[a] and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

As well as St. Paul in too many verses to list in Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians.

Continued…

 

[MT1926]

Cont…

Another view of John 3:3 is that Jesus was using Old Testament metaphorical language that Nicodemus would understand. Water is often used as a symbol of spiritual cleansing in the Scriptures. Many think that Jesus was tying Old Testament Prophecy to himself by using the term Water and the Spirit. This would confirm to Nicodemus that Jesus was the one who would “sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.” Ezekiel 26:25

I have no problem with this. It actually falls right in line with Catholic teaching. Not only did Jesus tell us He would sprinkle us with clean water He showed us exactly how and when it would happen.

John 1:31-34
31 I myself did not know him; but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John bore witness, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”

Matthew 3:16
16 And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened[a] and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him;

We find that when Jesus was baptized, “the heavens were opened” and the Spirit descended upon him.

Obviously, this was not because Jesus needed to be baptized. In fact, St. John the Baptist noted that he needed to be baptized by Jesus

Matthew 3:14
14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

Why doesn’t Jesus respond, no you don’t all you need to do is believe?

Nope not a word about belief, instead He says…

Matthew 3:15
15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Then he consented.

Jesus was baptized in order to “fulfill all righteousness” and “to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins,” according to Scripture

In these verses Jesus showed us the way the heavens would be opened to us so that the Holy Spirit would descend upon us… through baptism.

The Bible is clear that we receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit through faith/belief and not baptism.

If the Bible is so clear Baptism isn’t necessary why does it keep linking Baptism with faith and repentance? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to never bring up what you are claiming Jesus never taught in the first place?

Hope this helps,

God Bless.

PS. I just noticed you never really answered my question. You gave an opinion of what you believe but you never really pointed out…

Where does the Bible tell us water means first birth?

 

[tgGodsway]

First, when I read this text I notice the text does not say “unless one is born of water and then born again of the Spirit…” Note Jesus says you must be “born of water and the Spirit.” This is one event. Baptism. You are dividing Jesus words into 2 events, how do you come to the conclusion that this is two events?

Okay. I’ve a few here. Uh… to be born again from it’s Greek counterparts is also to say, born from above. And yes Jesus is saying two things in the same sentence. unless you are born of water AND… born of the Spirit, YOU CANNOT…

There is one thing He certainly wasn’t saying. He wasn’t saying anything about baptism in this passage. However, if you want to use this word, the apostle Paul uses it to speak of a universal baptism in 1st. Cor. 12:13, “for by one Spirit you were baptized into one body, (Christ.)”

This too is a type of new birth. But Jesus didn’t use that word here and so to impose it may cause a reading into the passage something not there.

Verse 6 gives more a clue. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit. … v8 So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit. Jesus drops the water analogy after verse 5. He doesn’t bring it up again.

Nicodemus was a ruler in Israel who needed a second birth. Obviously he had a physical birth, but that alone was not enough to be a true teacher of God, at least not from this point on. Things were changing in Israel.

Second, why would Jesus say unless someone is born of physical birth? Isn’t everyone listening already born that way? Is there another way we can be born that isn’t physical birth?

No, you missed his point. It wasn’t about physical birth at all. "unless you have been born physically, and spiritually, you cannot enter the kingdom of God. What is the kingdom of God? Is it heaven? keep in mind who this question was really for. It was for Nicodemus, a teacher in Israel. What is the Kingdom? Some say heaven. … On what basis? I do not believe Jesus was talking about heaven here at all. If you study all the passages you can find on the subject of the kingdom of God, you will realize the kingdom of God isn’t about heaven but all about God’s way of doing things.

Heaven and Kingdom are not synonymous or interchangeable terms. The kingdom and eternal life are not interchangeable terms. The Kingdom of God is simply God’s way of doing things.

This matters when we read John 3:3-5. Jesus told the teacher of Israel, you cannot enter God’s way of doing things unless you are born of the Spirit. This was His driving point. Nicodemus was a teacher because he was a Pharisee, but he wasn’t teaching God’s ways. Why not? because he needed to be born of the Spirit. This was a new concept in his day because the Spirit of God was getting ready to take residence in men’s hearts for the very first time.

 

[lanman87]

If the Bible is so clear Baptism isn’t necessary why does it keep linking Baptism with faith and repentance?

Because baptism is a sign or symbol of new birth. Or as Augustine put it, “an outward sign of an inward grace”. Baptism isn’t being born again it is an expression or symbol that you have been born again.

 

[lanman87]

Obviously, this was not because Jesus needed to be baptized. In fact, St. John the Baptist noted that he needed to be baptized by Jesus

No Jesus didn’t need to be baptized. These verses tell us why John was baptizing in the first place. I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel. John came to prepare the people for the coming Messiah. John baptized with water but Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit. How are we baptized by the Holy Spirit? By faith/belief. How do we get faith? God calls us and takes us from spiritual death to spiritual life. Eph 2:5

Where does the Bible tell us water means first birth?

It was inference from the topic of the conversation. Where does the Bible say water, in this passage, means baptism?

 

[MT1926]

This matters when we read John 3:3-5.

I have no problem with this. It doesn’t really change the need for Baptism.

Jesus told a man, who was among the men who “BELIEVED” that their belief was not enough to enter God’s way of doing things.

Okay. …unless you are born of water AND… born of the Spirit, YOU CANNOT…

I think you are missing the point. Yes Jesus is saying two things. And these two things are what is needed to be born again. He is saying two things but He is speaking of one event.

He wasn’t saying anything about baptism in this passage.

Then what was He saying. As I already pointed out Jesus made it crystal clear that BELIEF was not enough. He was showing Nicodemus that he needed something more. He was proving to Nicodemus that his faith, his belief wasn’t enough. He was showing him that an emotional response is not proof that he had received that something more. If he had received the Holy Spirit
.

However, if you want to use this word, the apostle Paul uses

Why do you need to quote St. Paul to understand what Jesus is saying. Should you be reading St. Paul’s words based on what Jesus says?

Jesus didn’t use that word here and so to impose it may cause a reading into the passage something not there.

And to ignore the water in John 1, 2 and 3 leads one to the claim that Jesus wasn’t talking about Baptism.

Verse 6 gives more a clue. …Jesus drops the water analogy after verse 5. He doesn’t bring it up again.

Why does Jesus need to repeat Himself more than once before we have an obligation to follow His teachings?

Think about it in reverse. If water was of so little importance that He drops the word in verse 6, why did He waste His breath in verse 5.

Please think about this. If Jesus wasn’t speaking of Baptism…

Why does He go out and Baptize immediately after talking to Nicodemus in verse 22?

Why doesn’t it say after this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with them and taught them to believe.

This is exactly what you are doing in verse 6. You are saying see Jesus doesn’t mention water again. Well by using that rule it leaves into question why Jesus doesn’t say believe in verse 22.

And then at the very beginning of Chapter 4 St. John tells us again.

4 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, “Jesus is making and baptizing more disciples than John”

Why was Jesus and the Apostles using such an unimportant action to make disciples? They sure seem to be wasting a lot of time performing such an unimportant task?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the belief part of what I wrote, that was kind of the point I was trying to make but it got off track and onto Baptism.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Because baptism is a sign or symbol of new birth. Or as Augustine put it, “an outward sign of an inward grace”. Baptism isn’t being born again it is an expression or symbol that you have been born again.

Please don’t pick and choose from Augustine (and apply your own interpretation of what you think he meant) unless you plan on believing what he really taught…

Augustine

“What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

“The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

“Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born” (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

“By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).

 

[MT1926]

No Jesus didn’t need to be baptized. These verses tell us why John was baptizing in the first place. I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel. John came to prepare the people for the coming Messiah. John baptized with water but Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit. How are we baptized by the Holy Spirit? By faith/belief. How do we get faith? God calls us and takes us from spiritual death to spiritual life. Eph 2:5

So why did Jesus get Baptized then?

It was inference from the topic of the conversation. Where does the Bible say water, in this passage, means baptism?

Well I didn’t make the inference, he did. I explained why water means Baptism in this passage at length. Sure you don’t have to accept it. But at least I provided a Biblical basis for why I believe Jesus is talking about Baptism. You go the other way and say I know Baptism isn’t necessary therefor water can’t mean Baptism and must mean something else. UMMM let’s try first birth, yeah first birth sounds good.

I wrote multiple posts to just touch on the subject of Baptism, with Biblical references. You go an accuse me of inferring without even attempting to back up your claims or refuting the verses I provided.

I’m not here to change your mind, I can see that you are set in your ways. I’m here so anyone else that comes along can read for themselves and see who is actually doing the research and who is doing the inference.

God Bless

 

[lanman87]

So why did Jesus get Baptized then?

John Baptized Jesus that He (Jesus) might be revealed to Israel. The Spirit coming down like a dove and a voice saying “This is my beloved son in whom I’m well pleased” was an announcement that Jesus was the Christ.

How do account for the versus I posted about the Spirit and being born of God being received by faith/belief? TO me they are pretty clear that we are born of God (born again) and receive the spirit by faith/belief.