"It's All a Matter of Interpretation"

[prism]

You have arrived at that erroneous conclusion by the misunderstanding of a single Greek word - "KAI".

Here is one of many similar translations. "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water AND (KAI) of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." In a casual reading of this, it would seem that water of some kind must be involved with entering the kingdom of God. But that idea does not align with all the other scriptures which remove any human work from the regeneration process, so that God and not man gets all the glory for this.

The problem with this mistaken view of John 3:5 arises from interpreting "KAI" incorrectly in this case. The word "kai" is not always required to mean "in addition to" something else. Many times it is used in an explanatory sense, meaning "namely" or "even". Such as in Ephesians 1:3, "Blessed be the God AND (KAI) Father of our Lord Jesus Christ..." This is not another God in addition to the Father. God IS the Father in this text. It would be "Blessed be God, (KAI) EVEN the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ".

With this understanding of how the little word "kai" can rightly be used, plug this into the John 3:5 verse and it would read, "...except a man be born of water (KAI) EVEN the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." This is a perfectly acceptable translation of this verse, which now does not contradict all the other texts about how our salvation is brought about. It now aligns with all the other scriptures which tell us that there is no voluntary activity of man that can achieve our regeneration.

Water is not in addition to the Spirit - water IS the Spirit, just as Jesus described it in John 7:38-39. "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..."

3 Res, That is quite a plausible explanation (translating kai for 'even' rather than 'and'), but after looking over several translations, I do not find any with that rendering. Can you give us a translation that renders kai as even?

 

[CherubRam]

You have arrived at that erroneous conclusion by the misunderstanding of a single Greek word - "KAI".

Here is one of many similar translations. "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water AND (KAI) of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." In a casual reading of this, it would seem that water of some kind must be involved with entering the kingdom of God. But that idea does not align with all the other scriptures which remove any human work from the regeneration process, so that God and not man gets all the glory for this.

The problem with this mistaken view of John 3:5 arises from interpreting "KAI" incorrectly in this case. The word "kai" is not always required to mean "in addition to" something else. Many times it is used in an explanatory sense, meaning "namely" or "even". Such as in Ephesians 1:3, "Blessed be the God AND (KAI) Father of our Lord Jesus Christ..." This is not another God in addition to the Father. God IS the Father in this text. It would be "Blessed be God, (KAI) EVEN the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ".

With this understanding of how the little word "kai" can rightly be used, plug this into the John 3:5 verse and it would read, "...except a man be born of water (KAI) EVEN the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." This is a perfectly acceptable translation of this verse, which now does not contradict all the other texts about how our salvation is brought about. It now aligns with all the other scriptures which tell us that there is no voluntary activity of man that can achieve our regeneration.

Water is not in addition to the Spirit - water IS the Spirit, just as Jesus described it in John 7:38-39. "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..."

In regards to "water."
Christ is referring to Baptism.

Born, as in born again, with the water baptism.

As for the word "even," you are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[CherubRam]

In the end there can be only one correct interpretation. However, we may not always be able to determine the correct interpretation. Some passages have multiple suggested possible interpretations with no clear 'winner.' More often than not, the evidence supports a particular interpretation.

Importantly, Scripture is not a matter of private interpretation. More often than not people commit the error of anachronism and read back their own understanding of the time into the Bible.

To understand what the text means and what is the correct interpretation we need to follow the principle that we must first seek to understand the *original context*. This is basic Biblical Hermeneutics 101. I like this diagram of the process: (1) First, determine what it meant then, in order to know (2) what it actually means, so that (3) we know how to correctly apply it today. If more sought to understand the original intent, there'd be a whole lot fewer spurious interpretations.

Your chart made no mention of parables, and the bible uses a lot of them.

By the way, parables can also function out of context.

 

[3 Resurrections]

3 Res, That is quite a plausible explanation (translating kai for 'even' rather than 'and'), but after looking over several translations, I do not find any with that rendering. Can you give us a translation that renders kai as even?

All but one translation that I can find renders this word "KAI" as "AND". The one that doesn't do this translates John 3:5 as "...except a man be renewed by the spiritual baptism, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

Two of the commentaries openly reject Calvin's interpretation of this as "...by water which IS the Spirit". So apparently Calvin and I are in agreement on this point that water IS the Spirit in this John 3:5 context. It matches Christ's own language in John 7:38-39 where Christ spoke of the rivers of living water being the Spirit flowing out of a converted person.

When I see virtually all the translations choosing to interpret "KAI" as "AND" instead of "EVEN" or "NAMELY" when both are possible options, it makes me wonder what compelled them to make that choice. Perhaps pressure from those funding the translating committees? A wish not to rock the boat of the institutional church's traditional baptism practices? An instinctive wish to have some human input in achieving a salvation status? Fear of Mother Church? Simple repetition of their own religious training? None of these would be good reasons for choosing to translate this "KAI" term incorrectly, if there are scriptures that show us salvation is God's handiwork and not ours.

In regards to "water."
Christ is referring to Baptism.

Born, as in born again, with the water baptism.

As for the word "even," you are barking up the wrong tree.

Baptism is a word that doesn't even appear in this John 3:5 context. Water, yes. Baptism, no.

If you consider that I am "barking up the wrong tree", then it appears that you acknowledge that there is more than one possible "tree" that could be chosen in this case: the "AND" tree, or the "EVEN" tree. I choose the "EVEN" tree, because it does not conflict with the rest of scripture that tells us that salvation is "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost". No baptism anywhere in this - just the washing of the regenerating and renewing influence of the Holy Ghost at work on the individual.

Is baptism considered a "work of righteousness"? Sure it is. Then according to this verse above, that means baptism is NOT included in how salvation is achieved.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Sorry for your personal struggle

These are the first movements of Grace, God calling and drawing you to Himself
Conviction and sorrow for sin
A longing for God and His love
Initial grace
But regeneration happens with baptism

“Baptismal regeneration” is the initiation into the new covenant!

Christian baptism is an outward sign of the inward action of grace, or merits of Christ’s passion blood and death applied to our souls!

We cannot see the inward action of grace purifying the soul, so God gave us the outward “sign” of water washing the body to indicate the inward action of grace and connected the two.

OF course when a Human is BORN AGAIN through CONVICTION OF SIN and repentence calling on God IN FAITH for salvation, then one thing that they should do is be baptised by immersion in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy SPirit.

"Baptism" doesn't "Regenerate", or SAVE anybody. it's what a new Christian does AFTER they've been Saved / Regenrated as a symbolic representation and testimony of what the Lord HAS DONE in their lives. It's not a "Sacrament". It's an "Ordinance".

 

[prism]

All but one translation that I can find renders this word "KAI" as "AND". The one that doesn't do this translates John 3:5 as "...except a man be renewed by the spiritual baptism, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

John 3:5 ESV
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 NKJV
Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 NIV
Jesus answered, "What I'm about to tell you is true. No one can enter God's kingdom unless they are born with water and the Holy Spirit.

John 3:5 BSB
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

John 3:5 NASB
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Which version did you say uses the word 'even' for 'kai'?

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

That is quite a plausible explanation (translating kai for 'even' rather than 'and'), but after looking over several translations, I do not find any with that rendering. Can you give us a translation that renders kai as even?

For what it's worth, here is part of the study note on John 3:5 in the New English Translation (emphasis mine):

Note that the Greek word pneumatos is anarthrous (has no article) in John_3:5. This does not mean that spirit in the verse should be read as a direct reference to the Holy Spirit, but that both water and wind are figures—based on passages in the OT, which Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel should have known—that represent the regenerating work of the Spirit in the lives of men and women.​

 

[Soyeong]

How do you handle the comeback of "It's All a Matter of Interpretation"?

While people are free to interpret something however they want, not all interpretations are created equal, so we should seek to hold interpretations that we can make the strongest case for that hold up to criticism. It can be helpful to have the self-awareness to be able to recognize when our interpretation of a verse is completely absurd and be willing to conclude that we do not understand a passage rather than promote a position that is completely absurd, such as interpreting God's word as speaking against obeying God's word.

 

[prism]

While people are free to interpret something however they want, not all interpretations are created equal, so we should seek to hold interpretations that we can make the strongest case for that hold up to criticism. It can be helpful to have the self-awareness to be able to recognize when our interpretation of a verse is completely absurd and be willing to conclude that we do not understand a passage rather than promote a position that is completely absurd, such as interpreting God's word as speaking against obeying God's word.

Would you say that Scripture is its best interpreter?

 

[Soyeong]

Would you say that Scripture is its best interpreter?

Interpretation is an action that can only be taken by sentient beings, of which Scripture is not. We should use the surrounding and broader context of a verse to help us to correctly interpret it, but it is us who are doing the interpreting, not Scripture. If Scripture could interpret itself, then there wouldn't be anyone who disagreed about how it should be interpreted.

 

[prism]

For what it's worth, here is part of the study note on John 3:5 in the New English Translation (emphasis mine):

​

Note that the Greek word pneumatos is anarthrous (has no article) in John_3:5. This does not mean that spirit in the verse should be read as a direct reference to the Holy Spirit, but that both water and wind are figures—based on passages in the OT, which Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel should have known—that represent the regenerating work of the Spirit in the lives of men and women.​

Another interesting tidbit that I like mentioning, is that towards the end of the dialogue between Jesus and Nicodemus, on the new birth, we find this...

John 3:14-15 NASB
And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, [15] so that everyone who believes will have eternal life in Him.

This appears to be an allusion to His death and resurrection.

 

[prism]

Interpretation is an action that can only be taken by sentient beings, of which Scripture is not. We should use the surrounding and broader context of a verse to help us to correctly interpret it, but it is us who are doing the interpreting, not Scripture. If Scripture could interpret itself, then there wouldn't be anyone who disagreed about how it should be interpreted.

In other words, do you believe "comparing Scripture with Scripture" to be part of sound hermeneutics?

 

[Soyeong]

In other words, do you believe "comparing Scripture with Scripture" to be part of sound hermeneutics?

Indeed.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Which version did you say uses the word 'even' for 'kai'?

On a review of the translations in the biblehub.com list, none of them do this. The only one which translates this as "spiritual baptism" is the translation I listed above, the Mace New Testament.

That's exactly what seems suspicious to me. If a Greek word has two possible applications (being interpreted as "AND" or "EVEN"), then usually there is a mix of translations that differ in how they translate the verse, more reflective of a 50 / 50 split in this case. But in the case of John 3:5, almost universally, they are ALL applying the word "KAI" in only one of those two choices of translation - conveniently, the one which gives power to the institutional church to confer salvation to an individual via a water baptism rite. Why would the translators do this? Especially when the book of John itself just a few chapters later in John 7:38-39 has Christ defining what that symbolic "water" actually is - namely, the Spirit?

I believe the threat of the institutional church being able to accuse one of heresy has hung so heavy over the heads of translators that they have decided to defer to the traditional thought that water baptism is necessary for salvation in this John 3:5 verse, and have chosen to translate it in this other manner. The scriptures are quite right in saying that "the fear of man bringeth a snare". That "fear of man" truly has ensnared many people with regard to how John 3:5 is interpreted, resulting in a messed-up doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

 

[prism]

The scriptures are quite right in saying that "the fear of man bringeth a snare".

Hopefully that passage is translated without the fear of reprisals. (tongue in cheek).

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Then that’s when you were regenerated

Only according the Roman Catholic Doctrine. Baptism is what Born again Christians do AFTER they become Christians. Baptism HAS NOTHING TO DO with being Born again.

 

[prism]

Different 'spirits' give different 'interpretations', but the Holy Spirit has His own meaning,
It's our duty to seek out His meaning.

 

[CherubRam]

All but one translation that I can find renders this word "KAI" as "AND". The one that doesn't do this translates John 3:5 as "...except a man be renewed by the spiritual baptism, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

Two of the commentaries openly reject Calvin's interpretation of this as "...by water which IS the Spirit". So apparently Calvin and I are in agreement on this point that water IS the Spirit in this John 3:5 context. It matches Christ's own language in John 7:38-39 where Christ spoke of the rivers of living water being the Spirit flowing out of a converted person.

When I see virtually all the translations choosing to interpret "KAI" as "AND" instead of "EVEN" or "NAMELY" when both are possible options, it makes me wonder what compelled them to make that choice. Perhaps pressure from those funding the translating committees? A wish not to rock the boat of the institutional church's traditional baptism practices? An instinctive wish to have some human input in achieving a salvation status? Fear of Mother Church? Simple repetition of their own religious training? None of these would be good reasons for choosing to translate this "KAI" term incorrectly, if there are scriptures that show us salvation is God's handiwork and not ours.

Baptism is a word that doesn't even appear in this John 3:5 context. Water, yes. Baptism, no.

If you consider that I am "barking up the wrong tree", then it appears that you acknowledge that there is more than one possible "tree" that could be chosen in this case: the "AND" tree, or the "EVEN" tree. I choose the "EVEN" tree, because it does not conflict with the rest of scripture that tells us that salvation is "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost". No baptism anywhere in this - just the washing of the regenerating and renewing influence of the Holy Ghost at work on the individual.

Is baptism considered a "work of righteousness"? Sure it is. Then according to this verse above, that means baptism is NOT included in how salvation is achieved.

You are being to simple.

 

[3 Resurrections]

You are being to simple.

It seems that it was the habit of the Pharisees and Sadducees to complicate the worship of the Lord God with man-made traditions: a problem that has not disappeared.

 

[prism]

You are being to simple.

Please explain why.