“The Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one” KJV 1 John 5:8 (cf. 1 John 5:6)

In the New Testament (NT) spontaneous praise, immediate “gladness and singleness of heart”, followed a baptism (Acts 2:46-47). Communally, such joy tokened God’s work “adding to the ecclesia such as should be saved”. A sinner had repented; there was rejoicing on earth and in heaven.  Praise celebrated the victory over the flesh and the world made possible through the blood of the Lamb. A victory Jesus anticipated as the effect of his work, when expounding what “ordained strength” of the Psalm presupposed: “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise” (Matt 21:16; cf. Ps 8:2[3]).[1]

In the Acts of the Apostles baptismal circumstances vary. The Ethiopian eunuch’s baptism, for example, was not public; a communal follow-up of praise is replaced with: “he went on his way rejoicing” (Acts 8:39). Whilst his approach to baptism was typical, and necessarily so, the circumstance of his baptism was not. His individual treatment shows the extent to which God, the ‘heart-knower’ (kardiognw,sthj Acts 1:24; 15:8), will go for those who would be saved (e.g. Acts 10:34-35).

Despite time or circumstantial differences, a believer’s baptism is effective because it identifies with “the water and the blood”, symbols of Christ’s redemptive work. But, more than this, and what I aim to show in this study, these two combined elements also form part of a “three-fold cord” which includes (the role of) ‘the spirit’. The ‘spirit’ involvement presents God-made angelic agency (cf. Ps 104:4 in Heb 1:7, 14) and the promise of a perfecting, ultimately being ‘equal to the angels, to die no more’ (Luke 20:36). This is God, in circumstantial manifestation (cf. Matt 18:10; Acts 12:11, 15), His holy spirit work, producing: “spirits of just ones made perfect” (Heb 12:23). Involving ministering angels from the beginning of the redemptive process is why “there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repents” (Luke 15:10).

So, clearly, ‘the spirit’ is not some pre-baptismal (mystic or inward) influence, without which we could not understand Scripture or be converted. Rather, foreknowingly, God provides circumstances in which a “good and honest heart” (Luke 8:15) will hearken to His words (now solely in scriptural form). This is the Eternal Spirit’s “call” (e.g. Isa 49:1, 9; Matt 20:16; 1 Cor 7:21-22; Gal 1:15; Rev 17:14) to or for “such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). The case of the Ethiopian Eunuch is paradigmatic of this: faith towards God that leads to repentance “comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom 10:16-18). So it is in the OT era for example in the case for Rahab[2] and Ruth.[3] Therefore, the work realised, at the initial stage, is the birth of a new babe, born out of ‘spirit’; it is not a work of the ‘flesh’: “that which is born out of the flesh, is flesh; that which is born out of the spirit, is spirit” (John 3:5-6).[4]

My foundational, three-fold cord, text is 1 John 5:5-6:

Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?  This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

This state of affairs is still operative or “bearing witness in earth” today (v. 8):

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

So, I consider texts in which these three combine. Where baptism―‘the water and the blood’ ―is the outcome, ‘the Spirit’ appears as God at work: (a) through angels, and (b) by His ministered word. These Spirit agencies, (a) and (b), bring “those who would be heirs of salvation” (Heb 1:14) to identify with “the water and the blood”. This emerges from Acts 8.

The Ethiopian eunuch had left Jerusalem, the centre for mass conversions to the Gospel. Yet unconverted, he was journeying southwards en route for Ethiopia. God sends His angel (8:26), also referred to as “the spirit” (8:29) or “spirit of the Lord” (8:39), who instructs Philip to get up and go southward from Jerusalem towards Gaza. Philip finds the eunuch in the desert, where, at a standstill in his chariot, he was trying to make sense of a Scriptural prophecy about Christ.  The (angel-)spirit instructs Philip further:

 [The Ethiopian eunuch was] sitting in his chariot read[ing] Esaias the prophet. Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And Philip ran thither to [him], and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptised? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

At this point 1 John 5:5 can be recalled: “Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?” Through belief and baptism the Ethiopian eunuch becomes “on the Lord’s side.”   The narrative continues in Acts 8:38:

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptised him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

The Ethiopian eunuch’s desire for baptism resulted from Philip’s Scriptural explanation about Christ’s suffering. Isaiah’s prophecy of a unique man’s death leads the eunuch to Christ.  The figure of an innocent animal’s loss of life is used to describe Christ’s sacrifice. The slaughtering of an animal involves the shedding of blood; so also in Christ’s death in which the iniquities of others were laid upon him.  Having preached Jesus, although what Philip actually said is not given, the record in Acts next mentions water and the eunuch’s request for baptism.  So it transpired, that, brought to this moment by the Spirit (i.e. the angel and inspirited words, testifying in prophetic Scripture to the spirit of Christ), the water and the blood associate with baptism.  The need for baptism relates to the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

It is inevitable that Philip would have directed the eunuch to other OT passages about Christ. After all, at that time, these were the only available Holy Scriptures (the NT not yet available for added witness). Philip would have personally witnessed to Jesus’ life, death and resurrection in the way the Gospels now record. His argument would be compelling with Scripture’s recent fulfilment in Christ. Acts 8:26-39 is a compressed written account, but it serves its purpose.  Historical reportage (for us/our learning) is accommodated to spiritual relevance.  This is true of Scripture generally, and particularly of Jesus’ ministry, as is stated by John in his Gospel (20:30-31):

And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:  But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God [as the eunuch did]; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

This theme of God providing a lamb and by association the roots of baptism, go back to the beginning of Biblical history and before in God’s foreknowing mind. Hence Christ Jesus can be described as “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev 13:8). The underlying message is about a sacrificial death, the shedding of blood, for Divine forgiveness of or covering for sins.  Once sin entered the world and death by sin, God requires blood to cleanse and cover the sinner and thereby reconcile him with God. It was (from) then that a redemptive Gospel became necessary. Although baptism becomes a requirement for salvation with the coming of Christ in the NT, it is anticipated in the OT. Baptism identifies a believer with the death of Christ, “the Lamb of God”, whose shed blood “takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

Importantly, baptism unites believer and redeemer with the historical moment of redemption: buried with him by baptism into death (Rom 6:4; Col 2:12). That expiatory moment is significant for all time. Only this single (once for all) act could create this relation of saving fellowship, as is clearly stated in Rev 1:4-5:

…from the seven Spirits…And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his blood.[5]

In this text, the individual pronouns (‘our’, ‘us’; ‘him’, ‘his’) formalise or establish the relation the redeemer created through ‘washing’ – baptism – and ‘blood.’  This is “the water and the blood” theme related to Christ’s act of atonement (see above n. 1, p. 22).  Revelation 5 links this directly with “the Lamb of God”:

And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. Rev 5:6

And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast purchased us [cf. Gk. avgora,zw: e.g. 1 Cor 7:23; 2 Pet 2:1  ‘the Lord that bought them’][6] to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.  Rev 5:9.

Later, ‘blood’ and ‘lamb’ are brought together as a complete statement. In this context the associated element of ‘washing’, given in Rev 1:5, is also present:

[End of v. 13: Who are these which are arrayed in white robes?] And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed [water = baptism] their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Rev 7:14.

In 1 Cor 10:1-2, we are given a spiritual perspective on the exodus of Israel from Egypt. Although this incident is in the OT it is depicted as a baptism:

Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptised unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

Noah’s flood is described in the NT as a being like baptism (1 Pet 3:20-21), but this is the first baptism of a whole body of people. They are effectively ‘buried’ in, or, by, their watery surrounding; Noah did not “pass through the sea” (1 Cor 10:1). Israel is God’s multitudinous son, his firstborn, called out of Egypt.  Much can be made of this as a type for the saints. Indeed, 1 Cor 10:6 and 11 cause us to reflect on this piece of history in this personal way.  The Greek text has the word for ‘type(s)’ so translated elsewhere; but this is obscured by the KJV’s ‘our examples’ and ‘ensamples’ in vv. 6 &11. The use of “our [examples]” defines a relation for us to the types.

Prior to their baptism, the Israelites were saved from death by the blood of the lamb. Every Israelite was there at the Red Sea because God’s angel had mercifully passed over them. Had they not daubed the blood of a slain lamb on the doorposts and lintels of their houses they would have died in Egypt. Egypt would have been their grave; they would never have risen to a newness of life out of the (covering cloud and) baptismal waters of the Red Sea.  So here Christ is anticipated, prefigured, in this historical event.  Redemption was by water and blood.

The point of contact between the Red Sea, Noah’s flood and baptism is that in each case the water represents both death and life: (i) death to the world by drowning; or as it is symbolised in baptism: the cutting off (‘circumcision’) of the flesh (Col 2:11-14); (ii) life (resurrection to newness of life) by overcoming the world; by being delivered from the condemnation of death.

The ark was “pitched within and without” (Gen 6:14) ensuring it was fully proofed against the agent of death: water. (The water also cleansed the earth of sin). So the daubing of the pitch secured deliverance for the occupants of the ark. The ‘pitch’, or ‘pitching’ did for Noah what the blood of the lamb did for Israel in Egypt, and what Christ’s shed blood does, and has done from the foundation of the world, for all who would be saved. It is significant that the Hebrew word for ‘pitch’ is a form of the Levitical ‘kippur’ used for ‘atonement’ (e.g. in Leviticus 16), since this involved acts of blood ritual to cover a multitude of sins.^[7]

Prior to the flood God said: “My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh” (Gen 6:3). After the flood [water] of death and salvation God informs Noah of new conditions regarding the significance of blood: “But the flesh with the life thereof, shall ye not eat. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man” (Gen 9:4-6).  So in the context of the flood, which Peter associates with baptism (1 Pet 3:20-21), this familiar three-fold pattern is present.

The first plague in Egypt, water becoming blood was a potent sign of Egypt’s impending death at the Red Sea.  By contrast, the blood of the Lamb saved Israel and prefigured their baptism into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.   It was either burial in the grave of Egypt or resurrection out of the watery tomb of the parted Red sea.

Two points can be noted in this context:

1. Immediately after Israel’s baptism into Moses, Moses bursts into praise and song, celebrating God’s victory in their deliverance.  This reminds us of what happened in NT times following baptism, as I mentioned at the outset.
2. Isa 63:7-14 comments that it was the “Spirit of Yahweh” (v. 14), “His Holy Spirit” (vv. 10-11), that effected Israel’s deliverance; that is God, in the angel of His presence, in whom was His name (Exod 23:21), visited and redeemed His people. Thus again, we have “the spirit, the water and the blood” conjoined as in 1 John. 5.

When God’s Son came, having been born out of the Holy Spirit, water and blood pointedly associate with his work, his crucifixion or sacrificial death. For example: John the Baptist summons people to repent and be baptised to prepare for Christ’s coming.  As Jesus comes to be baptised of John, the Baptist declares (John 1:29):  “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”  The sign from God which confirms who Jesus is—is the spirit like a dove descending upon him.  (The dove had a special role with Noah). In short, we have ‘blood’ implicitly in “the Lamb of God”, ‘water’ to do with baptising, and the Spirit which descended on Jesus. These three have one focus: the Son of God.  (This word used for ‘lamb’ is a rare NT word and only occurs in this context, in 1 Pet 1:19 and in Acts 8:32 where the Eunuch was reading from Isaiah 53.)

The first sign or miracle Jesus performed was turning water into wine at a marriage supper in Cana of Galilee. (In Egypt the first plague as a sign was the turning of water into blood.) Among other things this transformation prefaced his ministry with the reason for it.  He witnessed the end in the beginning. The wine represents Jesus’ blood, the “blood of the new covenant shed for many for the remission of sins”.  Water in baptism does not become blood literally.  Transubstantiation in any shape or form is a Catholic myth. But what Jesus could see in the wine which was once water, must be seen by us in the water of baptism.

The Red Sea did not turn red, it did not become blood, but its water represented, typically, the blood of the lamb, as the Israelites were baptised into Moses.  The water of baptism should be considered as blood; imparting to us the reality of our redeemer’s death, and, of course, of necessity the resurrection following, as the achievement of the giving of his life.

In the Garden of Gethsemane, following the Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus is in an agony of mind and will. The suffering of Christ was not just on the tree. Whatever he endured was his ‘baptism’ (Luke 12:50); a life of cutting off the flesh; his death being the final and effective circumcision (Col 2:11-15). He prays to the Father for strength. What is before him he describes in a figure as “this cup”. Here, the wine at Cana, or the wine of the New Covenant in the cup shared with his disciples, merge with his suffering.  Luke 22:42:

Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.  And there appeared and angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.

Consistently, God acts and a ministering spirit is sent.  Jesus was pressed beyond measure with the weight of his death upon him and all that it meant in doing God’s will and saving his people from their sins, as prophesied in his name (Matt 1:21). “Water and blood” is implied in his experience; it is easy to miss the allusion (v. 44):

And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly (‘fervently’): and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

One of history’s most ironic and sad moments was when Pilate, seeking to exempt himself from any responsibility for Jesus’ crucifixion, “took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it” (Matt 27:24).   Sadly, his was not a baptismal washing in the blood of the lamb. His judgment was not just; therefore, he was guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

When just Abel was killed by his brother, God convicted Cain with the words; “the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth from the ground” (Gen 4:10). Jesus connects Abel’s treatment with his own at the hands of his brethren, the Jews (Matt 23:35). With Gentile compliance the people said, “His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matt 27:25).  Hebrews 12:24 informs us that Jesus’ blood “speaketh better things than that of Abel”.  This parallel with Abel, albeit with a measured difference, is significant in terms of a ‘speaking of blood after death’.  The difference is that Abel’s blood was not shed for many, it could not touch others: Abel was just, but not the Just One. Abel’s blood did not relate to water.  John 19:32-37:

Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs: But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw [it] bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

Jesus is dead on the tree but the reason for his being there speaks in: “blood and water”.  His last words had been: “into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46). Now Christ is silent. But a final unspoken witness to his work issues from his body: the voice of his “blood and water”. A moment now imprinted in his body (hands, feet and side).

Christ’s water and blood, by the arrangements of God’s Spirit (defined by the contexts considered), are mercifully there still to touch lives. The water and the blood in baptism signals transformation from death to life. Grasping more deeply the personal significance of “the water and the blood” that unites the redeemed with Christ, should more effectively empower or aid the spirit-work of perfecting.  Moreover, this identification with that once-for-all, yet ever availing, past moment, grants access by one spirit unto the Father.  Therefore, Jesus’ blood continues to be effective in cleansing us from sin (1 John 1:5-9).

---