pastorbillrandles wrote: “’Water and Spirit’ comes right out of Ezekiel. Jesus spoke in terms of scripture, Nicodemus was familiar with Ezekiel 36.”
Yes. I never said it didn’t. But does not Ezekiel 36 have fulfillment in the NT?
pastorbillrandles also wrote:
“A new birth would correspond more to a ‘new heart’ than to baptism.”
It might seem so if you understood baptism as merely an act of man rather than an act of God. So, to quote Jesus: “I also will ask you one thing, and answer Me: The baptism of John - was it from heaven or from men?” (Luke 20:4)
pastorbillrandles also wrote:
“the testimony of John the Baptist (John3:22-) is distinct from the conversation with Nicodemus.”
That is nothing more than your assertion, against which speaks the context, which the Apostle John writing by inspiration of God the Holy Spirit furnished.
pastorbillrandles also wrote:
“Jesus wouldn’t have pointed Nicodemus to John the Baptist, John the Baptist was sent to point people to Jesus.”
Clever, but wrong. If Nicodemus had not been baptized by John, which the people of “Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan” (Matthew 3:5) seemed to well understand was in accord with the command and will of God, then Nicodemus hadn’t been “pointed” to Jesus the Christ foretold by the OT prophets and pointed to by John, whom God appointed to prepare the way of the Christ. Nicodemus hadn’t believed the word of God spoken by the mouth of John. So Instead, Nicodemus pointed himself at Jesus the teacher from Nazareth, he prepared his own way. And it didn’t work very well. Jesus’ point was that if Nicodemus was told earthly things and didn’t believe, how would he believe if he was told heavenly things. In other words, if Nicodemus didn’t believe and understand that John spoke for God, saying, “repent and be baptized” (commands), and follow the plain and simple command - as most of the Pharisees and Sadducees also didn’t! - then he, lost, blind, and dead in sin as he was, could never believe in the Christ by his own ability.
Secondly,you said;pastorbillrandles also wrote: “the testimony of John the Baptist (John3:22-) is distinct from the conversation with Nicodemus.” That is nothing more than your assertion, against which speaks the context, which the Apostle John writing by inspiration of God the Holy Spirit furnished.
That is not an assertion, the text says..."After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
Thirdly, Ezekiel 36 does have a fulfillment in the NT as well as at the time of the end. The NT fulfimment of Ezekiel 36 is the New Birth!
Fourthly , I have never said or considered Baptisn to be "of men", read the article!
Finally we don't know whether or not Nicodmus had been baptised by John or impacted by Him at all. But we do know that Jesus insisted that He needed to be born again!