Re: [John_Lit] Water and Blood in 1 John 5:6
> But this still differentiates the Holy SpiritJohn's baptism is not from above if you accept the implicit allusion to
> (the "water from above") from the Baptist's "water" (= the Law and the
> which is really also from above, since the Father is the One who acts
Genesis 1:6-8. The Holy Spirit represents water from above and John's
baptism represents water below.
> I still do not see howPlease read John 2:9. What does the headwaiter taste? He tastes "Water...
> you are connecting the Holy Spirit to "water" in Jn 2 except that the
> was transformed into "wine"
which had become wine." John doesn't actively describe the water's
transformation instead he modifies the noun 'water' with the description
"which had become wine." This suggests to me that wine is apart of John's
water motif. If you believe wine equals the Holy Spirit and you believe
living water equals the Holy Spirit, why don't you see the strong potential
for a correlation between these two symbols?
> Thirdly, in Jn 3, you again want to identify "water" with the Holy SpiritIt's not simply my view and not simply because the preposition governs both
> the preposition that governs both "water and the Spirit" seems, in your
> view, to
> make these two identical.
"water and the Spirit." 1) It's held by a prominent NT scholar, D.A.
Carson. 2) "born of water and Spirit" in 3:5 is a restatement of "born
again" in 3:3 which also suggests its one birth and not two. 3) Again
translates the Greek word anothen which means "from above." Water from
above is implicitly how John describes the Holy Spirit in John 1. 4) it
makes sense in light of the totality of John's water motif.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I believe that I understand your argument: You want to interpret the first thingEssentially.
> in the comparison (water) in a literal fashion- as normal earthly "water" that
> can only do what it was meant to do in whatever context it is found within John,
> and then you want to interpret the second thing being compared/contrasted as
> referring to something "symbolic"- something "more" than what the first thing
> can do that is being compared/contrasted. Thus your "earthly" and "heavenly"
> descriptions. Am I correct?