How To Study The Bible

We were looking at John 3, 5 and so what sort of things did you observe? What kind of things did you see in John 3, 5 this last week? What did you come up with? At the beginning, it says there's a definite article before the name Jesus and I cannot find it. I've looked in several of the interlinears. Where did you see the mention of the Definite Article? It was in, and I didn't bring it. Is it one of these commentaries? No, it was in the software in the Study Bible. Oh, the Study Bible software. Yeah, it had A.N. in front of it. Let's see, where's verse 5? Hmm. Okay, answered. Jesus.

And that says there's a definite article. Okay, but A.N. is anarthrus. That means no definite article. Yeah, if it said anarthrus, then that would mean no article. Is that what it said? I didn't bring my complete work study. There's no definite article with the Spirit. Right, right. Interesting. Okay. Huh, okay. Alright, I'll have to look further into that.

What else did people notice? Well, I have one comment here that the Pharisees rejected the confession of sin. And perhaps this caught Ms. Bean's attention. Okay, the Pharisees rejected the confession of sin. What does that mean? I guess that we will confess your sin. Maybe you thought the Jews didn't have any. I don't know. I really don't know what it meant. Isn't that interesting? Yeah, okay. Let's back into that. The Pharisees were real big on following the law, right?

When you say they rejected the confession of sin, they didn't seem to place a great... Yeah, you follow the law, you're not sinning and you know, why bring it up? The Pharisees had a very interesting, I mean they of the various groups were probably, they still far missed the mark, but they were closer than a lot of the others. You know, here were the Sadducees that didn't believe in the resurrection, they didn't believe in angels, They didn't believe in anything but the first five books, and even that, they stripped out a lot of what it meant. So here's the Sadducees that were, you know, kind of off on one end here. The Pharisees, still, their concept was, you know, focus on doing all the law right. And that's zero in on that, you know, and don't worry about anything else. As a matter of fact, you don't want to even admit to it.

Strange, huh? Okay, what else did you notice? Well, I have another comment here about apparently born of the water and spirit kind of has clouded a lot of issues. Oh yeah. Regeneration. Yes, okay. They very definitely thought that they had to be baptized in order to be saved. Okay.

Up until now, the verses we've looked at have not been terribly controversial. In other words, people have, for the most part, been kind of along the same line in their thinking. This verse, verse 3-5, all of a sudden, it goes all over the place. The number of interpretations and the variety of understandings, and we'll take a look at that in a minute, have gone in a multitude of different directions.

Yes, Joanne. What about the translating pi as even so that it reads as a result of water even distributed? The endings on water and serum are the same. I'm not sure. Is that the case? Yes. Yes. Okay. The endings are different. Right. Yeah, they would be treated the same because they're the same part in the sentence, being joined with this Chi. Alright?

So then that would mean that water and spirit are the same, right? It would tend to favor that versus even, which would... It's not an absolute. differentiation. And that's why you see most translations going that direction versus calling it even the spirit.

I found a word in Interlinear for water. I forgot the word. It was a different word. It was the same start on the word but it was a different ending than anything I could find in the Lexicon or the Vimes dictionary. But there was some reference in there to the life, the water being of life, like when Christ's side was pierced and the blood and water came forth and there was a reference in there to that. Then I got off on the spirit thing, the wind and the spirit, that pursued pure back into Genesis when God breathed into man the breath of life. So I was trying to get all that put together and it just went... Yeah, here's one of the reasons, and it's only one, why this has interpretations that all of a sudden just start hitting the fan.

And that is the Greek word for breath and wind and spirit is the same and it's the same in Hebrew. Both Greek and Hebrew have breath and wind and spirit all one word. So it's the same as the Old Testament. When you look at where they've translated wind Spirit, breath, they have contextually had to make a choice between which one of those is it.

It would seem a little strange, for example, when it talked about the Lord formed Adam of the dust of the ground and then put into him wind. It would seem a little odd. So they'll say the breath of life. So they'll use the context to determine which definition it is.

We don't have the same situation for that word in English, but we have it for other situations because we have cases where the same word has a multitude of different meanings. So we've got the same instance, but here in this text they run into that very issue because the word for spirit or wind or breath is the same word in the Greek. that there's no nuance of difference except by context. I'm sorry, Bertha? Bertha's for water.

That's what you refresh it and keep the life results. Okay. All right. And we'll take a look at that in a minute because when it says water in here, which water is it talking about? And that gets to be quite a question. Okay. Anything else that you saw and noticed in here?

Yeah, the word for answered. Okay. It conveys that Christ answered with discretion because of what Nicodemus asked before. Yeah. And, you know, our word answered is just there. Yes. It conveys a lot of meaning. Yes. The original word has more significance and is probably better responded Because answered assumes or implies a correlation between what was said and what was answered directly. Whereas one of the things you notice, the first thing that Jesus comes back with in an answer isn't a direct correspondence to what Nicodemus said. So yeah, this is a case where looking carefully at what that word is, makes a difference because Jesus isn't just coming back with an answer that directly corresponds to what he said. He's coming back with a response that's a considered response. In other words, listening to what Nicodemus has said but knowing, in Jesus' case, his heart condition and knowing much more spiritually in depth Jesus is able to respond appropriately, not just at a superficial level, answer in direct correspondence to what was said.

Do you see the difference there? Yeah, good point. What else? What else did you see? I don't know what it was. Ek means out from. Yes, ek means out from. Let's ask this question, what do you see as similar between verse 3 and verse 5? What do you see as similar?

It's born again. It changes every year. It's born again and it's born from above. Ah, okay. So there's some correspondence but also some difference here. Okay. Alright. So that's something that's at least related. What else? Also in verse 3 it says, See the kingdom of God and the truth is entered. Ah, okay. Yeah, so there's a difference. And we'll need to talk about that.

Are those synonyms? Or is he saying something different? What else do you see that's related or similar between the two? It talks about being born again of the Spirit also in verse 5. Okay. And did he say that before in verse 3? Not explicitly and clearly. Okay. Alright. What else do you see? Cooly-cooly or verily. Okay. Alright. Alright. So he's used that.

He's made this statement. This is a pivotal true statement, one that you can count upon. We looked at last week Paul's equivalent. This is a trustworthy statement, one on which you can believe. It's believable. What else? This is Jesus' statement. This is Jesus' statement of authority. We've mentioned before this is in contrast to the way the Jews typically talked with each other, where they're constantly throwing out different ideas and polarities and leaving it at that. So Jesus is making an explicit statement of what's true, which was unique.

Alright, what else do you see? What else correlates and corresponds between those two? Except, they're both put in a negative sense. In other words, Jesus isn't saying, okay, here's the way to get on the on-ramp and there's the freeway. He's saying, unless this happens, you're not going there. But to tell some guy that's the cream of the crop Pharisee, that's a phenomenal thing to say. He's saying this is an exceptional thing. Okay? So Jesus hasn't changed the story at all, has he? Okay? Now, what else? I was distracted for a minute. Did you talk about being born that he specifically states it's not physical?

Ah, okay, so here's a contrast. See, one of the things that we can do is we can compare and then we can contrast. So if you were to take 3 and 5, you could go through bit by bit and show what is precisely the same, what is similar, and then what is contrasting. And that's the point that he's making here that's real clear, isn't it? A very explicit contrast, because it is apparent from verse 4 that Nicodemus didn't get the picture. So there's a contrast here that comes out in verse 5 that in fact was built into what Jesus said in verse 3, but Nicodemus apparently didn't get it.

So Jesus is being very explicit. What else? He's speaking of mankind in general as far as Nicodemus is thinking of himself. Ah, okay. Good point. Jesus is speaking in broad terms. And I'm sure Nicodemus, even though he comes and says we, he's kind of, I'm sure, putting himself at the top of the list of whatever we is, right? Where he said, you know, how can a man be born when he's old? And he was thinking, him being old. Yeah, yeah. This is a, I couldn't figure this one out, but when Nicodemus talks about being born, he uses that Okay. Okay. Alright. Alright. We'll talk about that in a bit. Yeah, the difference between the infinitive versus the subjunctive. Okay.

Now, what else do you see? He said he cannot see the kingdom of God, and then the next he said he cannot enter. Right, okay, so there's the contrast between the two. And then the one thing, you see that phrase, kingdom of God, in each one. Just that part in itself. Did Jesus make any distinction in the kingdom of God between those two? Was there anything that qualifies it? See or enter. But he didn't make any other distinctions between those two aside from those words.

Now, let me distribute something here. I don't want to pass out here. This is basically this overhead here. Okay, here are some interpretation options. I put some, I didn't say all of them because it's possible you'll encounter some others. But in truth, this has a number of five, but when you include the asterisk or within one's human spirit, it ends up being nine. So a whole bunch of different options here. Let's talk through them. In fact, what I like to do when I come to a passage like this is, what are all the different options out there that people look at? And then consider each one, because I either want to eliminate something or find something that points so explicitly to one that the rest just drop out, or a combination of those two. Let's talk about number one here.

The water refers to the water of Christian baptism, and the spirit refers to regeneration by the Holy Spirit. That is, those of this understanding would say, unless you're baptized and been through this born again experience, you're not saved. That would be their understanding. And we've got the Church of Christ just right down the road that believes exactly that. And, in truth, like Catholic, a lot of the Orthodox churches, Lutheran, And even some Baptist churches and some of the Calvinistic churches put a lot of emphasis on doing this thing with the water. That if you haven't done that thing with the water, you're not saved. And they'll go around and do all sorts of extra things to make sure that that gets done. Race to somebody's bedside, go out there on the battlefield, whatever it is, to make sure you get this water on people. Okay. Is that a good interpretation or not? Okay, I see head shakings and lips kind of turned up and things like that. How do you arrive at a conclusion regarding that first interpretation? It's a human interpretation. Okay.

And you're correct. What's wrong with it even in the context that we've got here? What was Nicodemus' problem? The issue here would be that Nicodemus wouldn't identify as a Christian. Okay, yes, there you go. He's a Pharisee. That's right. This statement here in the historical context would mean zip.

Nicodemus had never heard of a Christian and what baptism had he been accustomed to? John's baptism was one that he'd come across. A baptism of repentance. They had baptism for Gentiles who were coming into the Jewish faith. But the idea of a Christian baptism, it didn't fit the picture.

What else is wrong with it? Even in the midst of this very context. Baptism is first. There's a problem with it right there. I'm going to get baptized and then I'm going to believe. Huh? Yeah, that's a little strange. What else is wrong? Because there are other things. Let's ask this question. What was Nicodemus' first impression after Jesus made his statement? That the whole thing is physical, right? So what is Jesus trying to do? Correct his misunderstanding that everything is physical.

So what are these people doing when they interpret it this way? They're having the same problem Nicodemus is. The only thing they're doing is they're changing it to the water is this physical water. So there's a problem right in the very context. They're saying that the answer is something physical when Jesus is trying to make a distinction very different from that. Trying to get Nicodemus to think on a level other than just the physical. So there's a problem right in the context. Why else is there a problem with this?

Paul writes to the Corinthians and he says, I went and baptized all of you, right? Is that what he said? Paul writes to the Corinthians and he says, I don't think I baptized any of you. Well, maybe a couple of you. But it wasn't a big deal. If it was a part of salvation, essential for it, don't you think he'd be scrambling out there to make sure they all got baptized? Instead, he kind of low-keys it, like it's no big deal. And here's the Philippian jailer, Acts 16. The jailer is about ready to do himself in, and the jailer is kind of saying his last words, what must I do to be saved? And Paul comes back and says what? Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you'll be saved. He didn't say, you better get that water on you or you're a crooked goose. So when does the thief on the cross become baptized?

Which is another problem. What you find is a number of instances where people were not baptized and yet they were called believers. You find a number of instances where the call is to believe. But the water is just not a part of the picture. And as you go into the epistles, baptism drops off significantly as a big part of the gospel. And why? It's because they want to put the focus on believing. And you'll find numerous epistles, one after the next, where baptism isn't even mentioned. And even among those, the question is, is the baptism referring to what's done with the water? Or is it some other meaning? Because the actual meaning of the word baptizo means to place into.

When they were making a Roman sword, They would take the sword and heat it up real hot in the fire and then thrust it quickly into cold water to temper the steel. When they would do that, they would say, I am doing a baptizo. I am baptizoing, so to speak, this sword. I am placing it into the water.

That is really what it means, the placing into. So the word was used as a placing into, not exclusively, as Christian baptism. So even those places where you do find it, the understanding that it means taking this person and putting them under the water as a part of Christian baptism, that's not the meaning in a great many contexts.

Okay, so there's a bunch of reasons why the first one doesn't work. Then I guess this is maybe a good time to pick it up, but how about all those? That's right. That's another point and a very good one. The Old Testament saints, they would not get baptized because to them there was no reason to based on what their understanding of what baptism meant. If you were born a Jew, it had no significance. So guys like Elijah, the whole baptism thing just didn't apply, didn't fit. So you've got another reason there that number one will drop off the list.

Now, here's the next one. The water refers to the water of physical birth and the Spirit refers to regeneration by the Holy Spirit. Now, 1, 2, 3, and 4, and actually 5 here, all talk about the regenerating work or the regeneration of the Holy Spirit.

What do we mean by that? What's meant by regenerating by the Holy Spirit. What's that? When we say regenerating, this imparting eternal life, let's think through that. Why do we use the word re? What's the re in front of there mean? This is something that has to be done over. Did they have eternal life before? It's interesting. When we say re, it implies that they were doing something again. They were never going to be annihilated. Ah, okay.

In fact, we've got to think this thing through, don't we? Because our word that we have for this implies something that we need to think through because, in fact, it isn't like Okay, up until about 30 years old you were alive and all of a sudden you died and now we've got to get you back alive again. We're talking about a situation where really up until the fall these human beings had life and then there was spiritual deadness. Now, something else to think through about this and Cheryl and I were talking about it before things started here.

Back in the 1500s and into the early 1600s, there was the development of reformed faith. John Calvin's influence pretty much can be summarized as being in the last half of the 1500s. With that was the establishment of the reformed faith and a lot of other doctrines that ended up getting pinned on John Calvin that I'm of the opinion he didn't always believe in all of them. But anyway, We have this idea of reformed faith. There's Calvinism with the TULIP acronym. There is covenant theology and belief, a lot of those of the reformed and covenant faith, the law is your rule of life. There's a whole set of doctrines in there.

Folks of that background have come to define your being spiritually dead because that's really what we have to look at when we look at this word regenerated. They came to define being spiritually dead as you're out on a slab, cold, dead, unable to respond. You see that? Now, I ended up kind of bringing up this point when I was at seminary and it was interesting because the professor had been teaching Greek for quite a while and I brought up this point and he said, nobody's ever brought that up before.

Something you've heard here, I believe, and that is that death is not annihilation, termination, elimination, but death is separation. When Paul refers to death, you notice he uses the word sleep, right? In the sense of being physically dead. In a number of contexts, when Paul talks about death, he is really referring to separation. I've found so far about five different places where it's very clear that that's what he's referring to.

It's separation, not annihilation, termination, and those kinds of things. This understanding of what being regenerated means is a big part of the question. Is the problem that man is somehow spiritually terminated, or is the problem that man is separated? And so when we say regenerated, essentially what we're talking about is separated, I believe, separated from the life of God.

Not spiritually annihilated, terminated, eliminated, those kinds of things. Because one thing that's going to happen is spiritually these people are going to stand before the Lord someday. And the problem is not that they're not spiritually alive. As a matter of fact, that they stand before the Lord proves that they're not annihilated, terminated, out on the slab, cold dead. The problem is that they are in a very fixed and eternal way, barring this regeneration, separated from God.

That's the real source of the problem. So, anyway, I'm going to leave these with you because we're not going to have enough time cover this all, but what I'd like you to do is to take a look. We've kind of gone through and eliminated number one here, but the rest of these are still on the list. We haven't gotten to them yet.

Think about that word regeneration and what that means. There are places in the New Testament where that word is used. So see if you can look that up. And there are places where that word is used in the New Testament that will give us some insights as to what it means. You can also look up places where Paul talks about death and see if you can come to conclusions about this.

Is it annihilation, termination, elimination, as in the Reformed understanding? Because that's where they came up with, and many of them still come up with, In order to be regenerated, then, you have to be made alive first, and you can't make that choice.

God has to make that for you. So that's where they get this predestination idea. Since you're absolutely, totally dead, out on the slab, cold, unable to respond, then God has to elect you. You have no choice. God has to elect you, decide to make you alive, give you faith, because you don't have it yourself, so they teach, and then you're saved.

So this is not a small question, is it? This is a big one. Is that what's happening, or is something else going on? So we end up with this verse entering a whole bunch of questions, and they're important ones. So anyway, I'll leave this with you. You can cross off the first one if you want, but you can't cross off the next ones yet. Okay? All right, let's pray.

Lord, we do give you thanks that in you we do have life, that you are our life. And Lord, thank you that it appears that Nicodemus did come to a place of placing his trust and confidence in you and understanding. And we just look to you and your word, to your Holy Spirit's work in our hearts and lives to lead us into all truth as we continue to consider the content of this verse and those surrounding it. We just place ourselves, Lord, place our very lives in your hands in this. In Jesus' name, Amen.