10250 North Freeway @ West Road
Houston, Texas 77037
Tel: (281) 447-8484

BORN OF WATER
Written by H. Frank Fort

This material is copyrighted and may not be copied or reproduced without the express written permission of the Berean Baptist Church.

To order a copy of Born of Water,
please visit our Publications section.

"BORN OF WATER"

I

 This phrase has been the instrument most used in effecting the delusion of the sincere, though simple, religionists throughout the centuries, beginning with Catholicism and continuing with the aid of her daughters and granddaughters alike. Here is the contention based upon that phrase "born of water": that it means baptism and without it one cannot enter the kingdom of God.

It is readily seen that "except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of God," John 3:5, but that "born of water" is baptism is not only not readily seen, but impossible to see in the light of the truth.

I propose to show that no one but a Baptist can believe John 3:5 and observe "the due order," a phrase of which Mr. R.N.Hogan, a colored Campbellite preacher, is so fond. A book entitled Sermons by Hogan and published by the Firm Foundation Publishing House, Austin, Texas, contains a sermon on "Seeking God After the Due Order," p. 187. The text is found in I Chronicles 15:13. I believe with all my soul in seeking God "after the due order" and do not believe He can be found on any other plan.

It shall be my purpose to prove that Baptists and not Campbellites observe the "due order" on John 3:5, not only by an examination of the text itself, but by statements from Campbellites themselves.

Now permit me to note for your consideration the "due order" of John 3:5, "born of water and of the Spirit." It is not "born of the Spirit and of water," but

1.  Born of water, and

2.  Of the Spirit.

This is the "due order". In order to learn what Campbellite preachers say about the two phrases above, let me refer you to their words. In the "Borden- Bogard" debate, page 328, Borden says:

"The Greek word here in John 3:5 is 'gennethe', and it means to generate or to be born (and explains that phrase 'to be born as to beget of father, to be born of mother) "Except a man be born of water and the Spirit," p.328.

Notice Mr. Borden's order: "begat of father," "born of mother," but of course when he cited the scripture, he had to of necessity reverse the order by saying "Except a man be born of water (the mother) and of the Spirit (father)." Therefore in order not to confuse the reader I will put Mr. Borden's "order" under the "Bible order" and see what results:

Mr. Borden: "To beget of the Father," first.

Bible: "Born of water," first.

Mr. Borden: "To be born of the mother," second.

Bible: "And of the Spirit," second.

A child can see that Mr. Borden is exactly opposite the Bible "due order." When Brother Slape, a Baptist preacher, debated John O'Dowd a Campbellite, in Houston, Texas, he called his attention to the order of John 3.5. Mr. O'Dowd said in reply that the order did not have anything to do with it and used as an illustration, the saying: "Put on your shoes and socks". Yes, men may say anything, but God is not in that haphazard business. What God said is a matter of record, and that is what we are examining now.

But one-may say that just because Borden said, "Beget of father, to be born of mother," does not necessarily mean that he meant them in that order, so let us consult other authorities. Mr. Hogan has in his outline on the "New Birth," p. 63, in Sermons by Hogan the following items: "Holy Spirit-male factor (in the new birth) and water-the female factor," items 1 and 4 in the outline. Here Mr. Hogan departs from his preaching on the "due order" in exactly the same way as E. M. Borden. Notice:

Bible: "Born of water," first.

Hogan: "Holy Spirit-male factor," first.

Bible: "Born of Spirit," second.

Hogan: "Water-female factor," second.

Exactly the reverse of the "due order" of John 3.5. Now let Hogan tell us if the order of his outline is according to his faith:

"So we see here Eph. 6:17 that the Word of God is the sword of the Spirit. Therefore, my friends, it is under the direction or guidance of the Holy Spirit that the Word is planted into the hearts of individuals, and a regeneration BEGINS, (not ends)" (p. 65, Sermons by Hogan)

It is obvious what Mr. Hogan means by the phrase, "Born-of the Spirit." He means what all Campbellites mean, "Begotten of God," which they all say precedes "born of water”. But you want proof very well. Hear Mr. Hardiog in "Harding-Nichols Debate" p. 70-71, "Mark you this new birth is one: though it consists of two parts, a begetting and a bringing forth again." In studying the question, we will ask first, "What is it to be born (begotten) of the Spirit"? God begets us by His Spirit all agree; hence, to be born (begotten) of the Spirit and to be born (begotten) of God are the same-two expressions conveying the same idea. Let us now turn to I John 5:1 and we will learn what it is to be born (begotten) of God. "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God; and every one that loveth him that begot, loveth him also that is begotten of him." From this verse we not only learn what it is to be born of God, but we also learn that to be born of Him is to be begotten of Him. When one is begotten by the father, and brought forth by the mother, the birth is then complete; he is born of father and mother. Remember, Hogan said, "The Spirit is the male factor (father) and water the female factor (mother)." Now let us continue with Harding:

"We have now learned (simple, isn't it) that when one has faith in his heart, loving, trusting faith, he is begotten of God. ‘Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God’. BUT bear in mind (Why? Because Campbellism cannot be sustained without it, and we are to believe it upon the naked unsupported bald faced assertions of its devotees) that when one is thus born (begotten) of the father, “HE IS NOT A SON OF GOD YET".

I gave the above passage to prove that Campbellism teaches that we must be begotten of God BEFORE we are BORN of water, and to prove that Campbellites believe that a man is begotten when he believes that Christ is the son of God, but is not a son of God until "born of water" or as they teach, baptized; now here is their doctrine:

1.  Believe that Jesus is the Christ, thus begotten or born of God or the Spirit (the father), regeneration began.

2. Baptized, thus "born of water," the mother, regeneration or the new birth, completed.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the order of Campbellism. Now compare this order with the "due order" of John 3:5, "born of water (mother) and the Spirit (father)". But this order is the exact opposite of (mother) and the Spirit (father)". But this order is the exact opposite of the order of Campbellism. Somebody is out of order. Now what does Mr. Harding mean by the word "begotten"? He gives James 1:18 and I Peter 1:23 to prove we are begotten by the word (who denies it)? but then adds that those thus begotten may "be born" if they exercise the "power" of John 1:12, p. 72. Now Mr. Harding says "If God begets us by the preaching of the truth, in what sense can we be said to be begotten by the Spirit? And the answer to this question at once suggests itself, when we remember that God sent the Spirit down from heaven to preach the truth," pp. 72- 73. So you see what is meant by "born of the Spirit" according to Campbellism as given by Mr. Harding. Now Mr. Harding in summing up says:

"We have learned beyond a doubt (?) that the believer is born (begotten) of the Spirit; THEN comes baptism, and he is born of water and the Spirit," (p. 75, Harding-Nichols Debate):

Now what is the order of Mr. Harding's "new birth"?

1. Begotten of the Spirit. first.

2. Born of water, second.

Begotten of the Spirit when one believes that Jesus is the Son of God, and born of water when that believer is baptized. But since someone may say, "Why put so much stress on the 'order' of the subject?" Why, my friends, because we must seek God after "the due order." Now let us find one of Campbellism subjects that labored to bring forth. On page 28 of Sermons by Hogan we find Mr. Hogan saying to two men who were begotten (?) by the Spirit, these words:

"May God bless you, and help you to live true to the confession (that Jesus Christ was the Son of God) that you have thus surrendered. BAPTIZING TOMORROW, p. 28."

Surely this Campbellite preacher knew that "all spiritual blessings are in Christ," Eph. 1:3, and though these two men were begotten of God they were still motherless and unborn out of Christ and condemned. What blessing did they receive before the baptizing? These men confessed that “Jesus Christ is the Son of God," but when they did the preacher said: "This confession will bring your life to you AFTER you will have completed your obedience by being buried in baptism for the remission of your sins". Which would be the next day. Now compare what this preacher said with the Word of God: "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God (the two men did), God dwelleth in him, and he in God," I John 4:15. But Campbellism says "You have made the good confession today, and will dwell in God TOMORROW." Friends, surely anyone with as much as one brain cell working can see the difference between the disorder of Campbellism and the "due order" of the Bible.

These men believed in Christ, but Campbellism says "Life tomorrow." The Bible says, "He that believeth in me HATH everlasting life, " John 6:47. Campbellism says, "You believe tonight, and will pass into life tomorrow." The Bible says, "He that heareth my words (faith thus comes) and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but IS (now, not tomorrow) passed from death unto life," John 5:24. The two men who made the "good confession,", if the words "I do" are the confession, were under condemnation until tomorrow, but the Bible says, "He that believeth IS NOT CONDEMNED," John 3:18. Which is in your candid mind the "due order"? If "John 3:5 is the "due order," then Campbellism is the "disorder," and for your consideration before I pass on to the second phase of this study observe once again:

The Bible: "Born of water and the spirit".

Campbellism: "Begotten of the Spirit and born of the water".

Exactly opposite. Which is after the "due order"?

Now the absurdity of saying that "born of God" does not mean all that is included in the birth of John 3:5 forces two fathers upon every believer before he is baptized. Proof: E.M. Borden (Campbellite) in his debate with L.S. Ballard, when pressed to answer whether he baptized a child of God or a child of the devil said, "As he is not yet off the devil's territory, I baptize a child of the devil," (Ballard-Borden Debate, p. 132). So here is the Campbellite subject for baptism:

1.  A child of the devil, and                   

2.  Begotten of God, at the same time.

"It Does Make a Difference What You Believe"