John 2

John 2:12-3

XIII THE SOJOURN OF JESUS AT , HIS FIRST DURING HIS AT WHICH HE THE TEMPLE AND Harmony pages 20-21 and John 2:12-3:21.After the events at Cana Jesus went down to Capernaum with his kindred and early disciples and there abode a short time. Nothing further of this brief sojourn at Capernaum is known. From Capernaum he goes to Jerusalem, where two significant events take place, viz: the cleansing of the Temple and the interview with Nicodemus. It is well to note here the scenes of his early ministry: beside the Jordan, at Cana of Galilee, at Capernaum, at Jerusalem, in Judea, and in Samaria.

A remarkable deed characterized both the beginning and end of his ministry in Judea. This was the cleansing of the Temple. At this first passover in his ministry he found the money-changers and those who sold animals for sacrifice in the Temple, making the Temple a house of merchandise. He at once proceeded to drive out the animals and to overturn the tables of the money-changers, an act which the Son of God only could perform without a protest from the offended. But the majesty of our Lord here doubtless beamed forth in such splendor that they were completely overawed and dared not resist, but simply demanded a sign of his authority. To which he replied that if they should destroy the temple of his body, in three days he would raise it up.

This is the first reference to his resurrection which he thus made the test of his messiahship early in his ministry and referred to it many times later, making it the test, both to his disciples and to his enemies. This cleansing of the Temple fulfilled two prophecies – Psalms 69:9 and Isaiah 56:7. Then follows a statement of the response of the people to his signs which he did: “Many believed on his name.” But Jesus did not trust himself to any man because his omniscience saw what was in man.

The second great event of this visit to Jerusalem was our Lord’s interview and discourse with Nicodemus, which furnishes us our most profitable lesson on…

The occasion of this discussion of our Lord was the coming to him of Nicodemus, by night at some unknown place in Jerusalem, to learn more of this great miracle worker. Our English word “regeneration,” etymologically, is a compound word. Generation means the act of begetting; regeneration, the begetting anew. Theologically it means a radical change in the soul or spirit of a man by the action of the Holy Spirit. But this change does not affect the substance of the soul, or impart any new faculty. It is not limited to the intellect, or to the will or to the affections, but it applies to the soul as a unit, including all its faculties or powers – intellect, will and affection.

It consists in spiritual quickening or making alive, in illuming the mind, in changing the will, in awakening new affections, and in spiritual cleansing. We say this radical change in the soul or spirit, called regeneration, is by the action of the Holy Spirit. How can the Holy Spirit of God act immediately on any other spirit, i.e., by direct impact of Spirit on spirit, or must he act mediately, i.e, by the use of means? He acts both ways, immediately and mediately. The scriptural proof that the Holy Spirit can act directly, or immediately, is as follows:

(1) On inanimate matter, Genesis 1:2; Genesis 2:7; Psalms 104:32.

(2) On beasts, Psalms 104:29-30.

(3) On babes in the womb, Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:41-44.

(4) In inspiration, 1 Samuel 10:10.

(5) In dreams and visions, Genesis 28:11-17; 1 Kings 3:5; Matthew 2:12.

(6) In demoniacal possessions, Acts 5:3; John 13:27.

(7) In regeneration of infants dying in infancy -implied – 2 Samuel 12:23.

(8) In the call to the ministry by impressions.

Some theologians hold that in the new birth the subject is passive and the Spirit’s power is immediate, i.e., the direct impact of Spirit on spirit. Others held that in the new birth the subject is active and that the Spirit employs the word of God as a means, but I say that there is an element of truth in both positions. Antecedent to all human effort a direct power of the Holy Spirit quickens the soul or makes it sensitive to impressions by the word. For example, “The Lord opened the heart of Lydia that she should attend to the words spoken by Paul.” Now if this first touch of the Spirit is what we mean by the new birth, the first position is undoubtedly correct. But while insisting on the necessity and reality of this initial and direct power of the Spirit, if one should hold that this is not what the Scriptures call the new birth he would be able to support his view by many scriptures. This appears from the fact that when one is born into the kingdom of God he is fully a child of God.

But if the subject of the hew birth is passive only – if regeneration is completed without the use of means and before the subject is penitent or believing, then we have a child of God who is yet in his sins, impenitent, without faith, and hence without Christ, which is philosophically impossible. Moreover, it is contrary to Scripture, as witness James 1:18 : “Having willed it, he begat us (apekuesen)by the word of truth” (1 Peter 1:23) : “Having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of the living God. But this is the word which was announced to you” (Galatians 3:26): “For ye are all the children of God through faith in Christ Jesus.” Romans 10:17 : “So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.” Moreover, in John 3:9-18, when Nicodemus asks, “How can these things come to be,” that is, what is the instrumental means of the new birth, Jesus explains by telling that Christ must be lifted up as an object of faith, as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness. Again, John 1:12-13 : “But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” This teaching may be put into a syllogism, thus: Every one born of God has the right to be called a child of God. But no one has the right until he believes in Jesus. Therefore the new birth is not completed without faith.

The true scriptural position then is this: There is, first of all, a direct influence of the Holy Spirit on the passive spirit of the sinner, quickening him or making him sensitive to the preaching of the Word. In this the sinner is passive. But he is not a subject of the new birth without contrition, repentance and faith. In exercising these he is active. Yet even his contrition is but a response to the Spirit’s conviction, and the exercise of his repentance and faith are but responses to the antecedent spiritual graces of repentance and faith. To illustrate take this diagram: Conviction – Grace of Repentance – Grace of Faith = New BirthContrition – Repentance – FaithThe upper or divine side represents the Spirit’s work. Then contrition, repentance, and faith are the constituent elements of the human side of regeneration.

When we say repentance and faith are fruits of regeneration we simply mean that in each case the Spirit grace above originates and works out the respective human exercise below. The following scriptures prove that repentance is a grace as well as a human exercise: Acts 5:31; Acts 11:18. That faith also is a grace, is seen from 1 Corinthians 2:4-5; 1 Corinthians 3:5; 2 Peter 1:1. The Holy Spirit then is the agent in regeneration and the instrumental means of regeneration is the Word of God, or the preaching of Christ crucified, yet the power of the Spirit does not reside in the word as inspired by him, but the agency is positive and active in the use of the word. This is illustrated by the use of the ax and the sword. We say that an ax is adapted to cutting down trees, and not that it has power to cut down a tree apart from its intelligent use by the woodsman; and we say that the sword is adapted to cut or thrust, not that it has in itself the power to kill apart from its intelligent wielding by the swordsman. So, though the Word of God is represented as “quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart, neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight, but all things are naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do,” yet this Word is but the Spirit’s sword, powerful only when wielded by him.

The scriptural proof that dying infants are regenerated is constructive and inferential rather than direct. Infants partake of the fallen nature of the parents, and without a change of that nature would be unfitted for heaven. The Scripture says that we are all by nature the children of wrath, but David says with reference to his dead child, “I shall go to him, but he cannot return to me.” As they cannot enter heaven without a change, and as the Spirit is the author of all the change that makes one meet for heaven, it is justly to be inferred that infants are regenerated.

While out hunting on a Western mountain I turned over a huge rock on the mountainside that seemed to be evenly balanced. Under this rock was a den of rattlesnakes, some of them very small, without rattles, and with the fangs not yet developed nor the poison secreted in the sac. These little snakes had never yet bitten any man, and yet if one of them bad been taken to a home and fed upon the milk which nourishes a child, as the snake grew the rattle would form, the fang would develop, the poison would secrete, and even if in its infancy it had been carried to heaven itself without a change of its nature, there, hard by the throne of God, it would have matured the deadly venom. The necessity for the regeneration of infants if they, when dying, are to enter heaven, is imperious. The nature vitiated through the fall of the first Adam is changed by the Spirit through the virtue of the Second Adam, our Lord Jesus Christ. In their case the Spirit’s power is immediate.

The principal passages of Scripture defining, embodying or illustrating the doctrine of regeneration are as follows: Psalms 51:2-10; Ezekiel 36:25-27; John 1:12-13; John 3:3-15; Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Ephesians 2:1-10; Ephesians 4:22-24; Ephesians 5:25-27; Colossians 2:13; Colossians 3:9-10; Titus 3:5; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23. All of these passages, and others like them, are to be carefully studied in order to a full understanding of this theme. Greek students will find it very profitable to look carefully at the original terms employed in these passages, but we may say for English students that among these terms are: “Born from above,” “born again,” “to make alive,” “to quicken,” “to raise from the dead,” “to transform,” “to renew,” “to create,” “to illumine,” and “to cleanse.” These terms imply supernatural power.

It has been said that the most important passage on regeneration is the third chapter of John. Returning to that chapter, we find that Jesus and Nicodemus talk of two births, the natural and the spiritual birth. The Spirit birth is first designated as “born from above.” It is next designated 8.3 ‘born of water and spirit." Theologians usually refer the phrase, “born of water” to baptism, but there are certain evils of this reference, viz: The doctrine of baptismal regeneration the conditioning of salvation upon external ordinances. It is impossible to exaggerate the fearful evils that have followed this wrong interpretation of the phrase, “born of water.”

It led directly to the doctrine of infant baptism. The logic would be this: If infants are lost without regeneration, and regeneration is by baptism, in order to save the infants they must be baptized. The teaching of history is very clear as to the origin of infant baptism, that it arose from the preceding doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Then there followed also historically and quite naturally a change of baptism itself into sprinkling or pouring, to meet the case of infants, though the Greek church yet practices the immersion of infants.

The phrase, “born of water,” cannot be explained by baptism.

The argument is very conclusive. Christ and Nicodemus discuss but two births, the natural birth and the spiritual birth; “that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” The phrase, “born of water and Spirit,” cannot mean two births, one of water and one of Spirit, because there is no article in the original before the words. Whatever it means, it is one birth. It must be either baptism or Spirit, and both terms express only one birth. Otherwise our chapter talks of three births – the natural birth, the baptism birth, and the Spirit birth, which is contrary to the context. Moreover, the context shows that the salvation involved in the third chapter of John is a salvation of grace and not of sacraments.

But what is most conclusive is that our Lord rebukes Nicodemus for not understanding what he meant by “born of water and Spirit,” Nicodemus being a teacher of the Old Testament. But as the Old Testament has not a word about baptism, he would not be censurable for failing to understand the meaning of this phrase, if “born of water” referred to baptism. The censure lies in the fact that what is meant by “born of water and Spirit” is clearly set forth in the Old Testament, which is so silent about baptism, and with which Nicodemus, as a master in Israel, ought to have been well acquainted.

The phrase, “born of water and Spirit,” is but an expansion of the previous phrase, “born from above.” It interprets and develops the first phrase, bringing out the two elements in regeneration, namely, cleansing and renewing. It is only when we lose sight of the cleansing element in regeneration that we are liable to go astray in interpreting the phrase “born of water.” The matter is clearly set forth in Ezekiel 36:25-26, which declares: “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; from all of your filthiness and from all of your idols, will I cleanse you.” This is the cleansing element of regeneration. The passage adds: “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” And this is the renewing element. Clean water in this passage does not mean pure water or just water. It means water of cleansing, or water of purification. There was a special recipe for the compounding of this cleansing water, or water of purification.

This recipe is found in the book of Numbers, where Moses is directed to take a red heifer and burn her with red cedar wood, and to cast scarlet thread into the fire, and then to gather up the ashes and mingle them with running water, in order to put them into a liquid form, and this is the clean water, or water of purification of the Bible. It was administered by taking a bunch of hyssop and dipping it into this liquid and sprinkling it upon the one to be ceremonially cleansed. We can thus easily understand the fifty-first Psalm, in which David says, “Purge me [or cleanse me] with hyssop, and I shall be clean. Wash me and I shall be whiter than snow.” He thus brings out in type the cleansing element in regeneration.

Now, this water of purification was a type. It was typical of the blood of Christ. Concerning this the letter to the Hebrews says, “For if the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purify your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.” So that the Old Testament idea of clean water was equal to the ashes of the heifer, and that typified the blood of Christ, applied in regeneration by the Holy Spirit. This produces the cleansing element of regeneration, and with this Nicodemus ought to have been familiar.

“Born of water and spirit” simply means “cleansed by the blood of Christ and renewed by the Holy Spirit.”

The New Testament with even greater clearness brings out these two elements of regeneration. Paul writes to Titus (3:5): “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 Spirit.” The same thought is presented in his letter to the Ephesians, when he says, “Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word.” Here is a strange kind of washing – a washing through the Word, indicating the instrumentality of the Word in effecting regeneration, and yet showing that the washing is a figurative washing, a washing that accomplishes cleansing, and that cleansing is applied by the Holy Spirit.

So that the phrase, “born of water and Spirit” means the same as “born from above,” and it means the same as the “washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”

Christ says, “Ye must be born from above in order to see the kingdom of God,” and he says, “Except a man be born of water and Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” This language emphasizes the necessity of regeneration in the strongest possible way. Now let us clearly and forcibly state the reason or ground of this necessity. The necessity lies in the fact that man is fallen and depraved, and without the change effected by regeneration could not enjoy heaven, even if he were permitted to enter it. Therefore in any true system of theology the doctrine of human depravity is a vital and fundamental doctrine. It is a touchstone that when applied clearly defines every man’s position and shows his proper alignment. If he does not believe that man is fallen he sees no necessity for the regeneration and sanctification by the Holy Spirit.

The doctrines of depravity and regeneration irreconcilably antagonizes the modern doctrine of evolution, which teaches that man has never fallen; that he is continually ascending; and hence no full-fledged Darwinian evolutionist believes in the historic veracity of the account in Genesis of the fall of man, nor does he believe in the necessity of either regeneration by the Spirit, or sanctification by the Spirit, holding that man can be cultivated and trained into the highest possible development.

Another vital scriptural doctrine is involved in this antagonism, viz., the vicarious expiation of Christ. If spiritual cleansing, secured by the application of the blood of Christ, is an essential and integral part of regeneration, the doctrine of the vicarious expiation of Christ is necessarily involved in this antagonism, and hence, consistently, the full-fledged Darwinian evolutionist like Mr. Haeckel, boldly denies any necessity for an atonement, or any virtue in this direction in the death of Christ.

Justification comes in touch with regeneration at that point where the Spirit of God by the application of the blood of Christ, cleanses the soul. When the man accepts the Lord Jesus Christ as, his Teacher, Sacrifice, Priest, and King, and trusts in him for salvation, then God in heaven justifies the man, or declares an acquittal of him) through his faith in the blood, but the blood is applied in the cleansing part of regeneration, so that we see again from this relation between regeneration and justification how it is that regeneration cannot be complete without faith.

1. Trace Jesus in his early ministry from the banks of the Jordan to the beginning of his great ministry in Galilee.

2. What remarkable deed characterized both the beginning and the end of his ministry in Judea?

3. How do you explain this bold act of Jesus?

4. What sign of his authority did he here submit and how did he here afterward make this the test of 1) is messiahship?

5. What prophecies were fulfilled ill these two incidents of cleansing the Temple?

6. What statement here of the omniscience of Jesus?

7. What was the second great event of this visit to Jerusalem and what the great lesson from it?

8. What the occasion, time, and place of this interview with Nicodemus?

9. What the etymological meaning of the English word “regeneration”?

10. Theological meaning?

11. Does it change the substance of the soul, or impart any new faculties?

12. Is its effect limited to the intellect, or to the will, or to the affections?

13. In what then does it consist?

14. Can the Holy Spirit operate immediately on another spirit, i.e., direct impact of Spirit on spirit, or must he operate immediately, i.e., through the use of means?

15. Cite scriptural proof that the Spirit may act immediately in at least eight different cases.

16. According to theologians, does the Holy Spirit in regeneration operate mediately or immediately?

17. But what do you say?

18. While insisting on the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit how do you make it appear that the scriptural new birth is not complete without the use of means?

19. Cite the scriptural proof.

20. Put the scriptural proof of Joh 1:12-13 in the form of a syllogism, its human exercise.

21. What then is the true scriptural teaching?

22. Illustrate this by a diagram.

23. Explain the diagram.

24. How then may we rightly say that repentance and faith are fruits of regeneration?

25. Cite Scripture proof that the divine grace of repentance precedes

26. What is the similar proof concerning faith?

27. Who then always is the efficient agent of regeneration?

28. The instrumental means?

29. What part of the Word of God, the Law or the Gospel?

30. When we say the Spirit is the power and the Word is the means, does the Spirit power reside in the Word because inspired, or is the Spirit agency positive and active in the use of the Word?

31. Illustrate this by the ax and the sword.

32. In the case of infants dying are they saved with or without regeneration?

33. What is the constructive scriptural proof?

34. In their case is the Spirit’s operation mediate or immediate?

35. Cite the principal passages. Old Testament and New Testament, embodying the doctrine of regeneration,

36. What words are here employed to define or illustrate regeneration?

37. What do they imply?

38. Greek students cite the principal Greek words employed to define or illustrate regeneration, citing one passage in which each separate word is used, giving the inflection of the word these used (i.e., the case and number and person of the noun or the voice, mood, tense, number and person of the verb).

39. Of how many births do Nicodemus and Jesus talk?

40. How is the Spirit birth first designated?

41. How the second time?

42. To what do theologians generally refer “born of water”?

43. What the evils of the doctrine?

44. Show why it cannot be so explained.

45. What then does it mean?

46. Christ says, “Ye must be born from above to see the kingdom of God . . . Except a man be born of water and Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” State clearly and forcibly the reason, or ground, of this necessity.

47. What then is the position of the doctrine of depravity?

48. How do the doctrines of depravity and regeneration irreconcilably antagonize the modern doctrine of evolution?

49. What other vital scriptural doctrine is involved in this antagonism?

50. At what point in regeneration does justification come in touch with it?