It’s time to pick up some stray thoughts from prior posts and the comments.
Col 2:11-14
A few posts ago, I argued that the “circumcision not made with hands” is the receipt of the Holy Spirit when we’re saved. But I left open v. 12 —
(Col 2:11-12 NET) 11 In him you also were circumcised – not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshly body, that is, through the circumcision done by Christ. 12 Having been buried with him in baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead.
Paul associates baptism with the burial of Jesus, as he also does in Rom 6. And I agree with the nearly universal view of commentators that this is not a reference to Holy Spirit baptism. After all, that was the subject of v. 11. Here he is adding to that thought.
Paul’s purpose in this discussion is to keep the Colossians from being so insecure in their salvation that they fall for what the false teachers were saying.
(Col 2:8 NET) 8 Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
(Col 2:18 NET) 18 Let no one who delights in humility and the worship of angels pass judgment on you. That person goes on at great lengths about what he has supposedly seen, but he is puffed up with empty notions by his fleshly mind.
How do the Colossian Christians have the confidence to know that they don’t have to buy into these lies? Well, because they know that Jesus has saved them already. And how do they know that? Because they’ve been baptized — which pictures what has happened already.
Because this is a ritual that comes from God himself, and because it vividly pictures the spiritual reality behind their salvation, the lesson and experience of baptism should assure them that they’ve already been saved and already received the Spirit and already been forgiven. They don’t need to take any extra steps to be saved because their baptisms demonstrate that they’ve already been saved.
In short, what evidences the “circumcision done by Christ”? Tongues? Membership 101 class? No — God’s gift to them: baptism.
This says nothing about the order of salvation, the Spirit, baptism, faith, etc. Nor am I arguing that baptism is just about evidencing salvation. Nonetheless, Paul’s point is that, once you’ve been baptized, you should realize that you were baptized into Christ, Christ is sufficient to save, and you should stop looking for additional things needed to become saved.
Gal 3:27
How does this verse not mean that baptism is how we get to God’s grace?
(Gal 3:22-4:1 NET) 22 But the scripture imprisoned everything and everyone under sin so that the promise could be given– because of the faithfulness of Jesus Christ – to those who believe.
23 Now before faith came we were held in custody under the law, being kept as prisoners until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 Thus the law had become our guardian until Christ, so that we could be declared righteous by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.
26 For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female – for all of you [plural] are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you [plural] belong to Christ, then you [plural] are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise.
In English, verses 26 and 27 both begin with “for” (gar). According to Thayer’s,
Moreover, not the number but the nature of the word after which [gar] stands is the point to be noticed …
It’s concealed in the English, but in the Greek, in both verses the gar follows “all.” Hence, Paul’s point is not to argue Zwinglian vs. sacramental baptism theology. Rather, he’s building a case for the universal availability of the gospel: unlike circumcision, it’s not just for free male Jews.[1]
Hence, the element of baptism under consideration in v. 27 is, in contrast to circumcision, it’s universal availability. The same is true of faith (v. 26). And this is necessary because, as stated in v. 22, all are imprisoned under the law — unable to obey what we know of God’s will.
The Galatians had already been baptized, and so they knew that, unlike circumcision, baptism is for men and women, Jews and Gentiles, slave and free. Hence, if they’d just remember the terms of their admission, they’d see how very wrong it is to insist on circumcision as essential.
In short, we can’t read v. 27 as though it were a tract on baptism, much less on the order in which salvation is received compared to faith, confession, and baptism. The point isn’t that baptism clothes us with Christ. That’s faith (v. 26 and all of Galatians before). It’s that all — regardless of sex or race — are baptized because these are the very people who’ve been clothed with Christ.
(Neither is Paul saying that, therefore, salvation and the Spirit precede baptism. He’s just saying that salvation is just as universal and non-discriminatory as baptism.)
Mother Teresa and the Pharisees
I mentioned in a comment that both Mother Teresa and the Pharisees were willing to go to extremes to obey God’s will. Why is it that they are such different cases? Why do we treat Mother Teresa as someone to be honored and the Pharisees as someone rejected by God?
Well, it’s about magic. In the pagan world (and in magic), humans do things to force the gods to behave a certain way. It’s about control. If I want Apollo to bless my new business venture, I buy his goodwill with prayers and sacrifices — and Apollo so wants these things, that I can induce him to act as I wish.
In magic, I say certain words and mix up certain potions and, if I get it right, the gods will do something for me.
And this was the attitude of the Pharisees. They thought that if the Jews would just get Sabbath observance (among many other things) exactly right, they could induce God to send his Kingdom (and overthrow the Romans). They wanted to be pleasing to God, but it wasn’t about a transformed heart. It was to get something.
When you love God because love is the bargained for consideration for a good life, then you really just love yourself. When you love God because that’s the price for heaven, then you’ve not loved God at all.
Mother Teresa lived the life she lived because she thought God wanted her to do so. Period. She was acting out of a true love, not selfishness hidden in a wrapper of love. She wasn’t trading service for heaven. And most of us have no trouble telling the difference between a rule keeper and someone who truly loves.
We have to remember that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 by the Romans was seen by Jesus and the apostles as parallel to the destruction of Jerusalem centuries earlier by Nebuchadnezzar.
The ancient Judeans were guilty of idolatry, even infant sacrifice. What did the First Century Jews do to deserve another destruction of their city and Temple? The traditional answer is that they rejected Jesus, but it’s got to be more than that. God sent a prophet, John the Baptist, to call for repentance. From what?
(Mat 3:7-10 ESV) 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bear fruit in keeping with repentance. 9 And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. 10 Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”
Of course, it wasn’t just the Pharisees. The Zealots wanted to go to war against the Romans for God — even though the Romans were happy to let the Jews worship God. They wanted political freedom and wanted God to get it for them. The Sadducees were deniers of the resurrection and part of a corrupt priestly class. The Essenes so misunderstood obedience that they felt God was best served by withdrawing from society. As Paul argues in Romans 2,
(Rom 2:23–24 ESV) 23 You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. 24 For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”
Paul, before his conversion, reflects the character of the Jewish leaders of his day: If you disagree with someone, kill him.
In short, it’s no wonder that Jesus preferred the company of society’s outcasts.
This should demonstrate the distinction between law and the law of Christ. Ultimately, as anticipated by Deu 30:6 and Jer 31, Christianity is about coming to faith in Jesus so that he can, by the Spirit, transform our hearts to truly love others — not as a magic formula to get into heaven and avoid hell but because love has become our new nature. Only then can God be truly loved and worshiped.
And this understanding of love should tell us how to approach the doctrine of baptism and why works can’t save.
The “law of Christ,” found in Gal 6:2, is “love your neighbor” (Gal 5:14) written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:18,22-23). It’s a law that can’t be obeyed. I mean, if we obey it because it’s a law, it’s not really obedience.
If my son tells me he loves me because he fears for his inheritance, he doesn’t really love me — and he won’t get my inheritance. His heart has to be changed so much that he’d love me even if I had nothing to leave him at all.
(Gal 5:18 ESV) 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
And that’s pretty much it.
___________________
[1] Non-Jewish slaves could be circumcised and so participate in Passover (Exo 12:44). Circumcision for male Jews, however, was mandatory.
You seem to affirm that there is a baptism by the Holy Spirit. You write:
And I agree with the nearly universal view of commentators that this is not a reference to Holy Spirit baptism. After all, that was the subject of v. 11.
Verse 11 says not one word about a baptism by the Holy Spirit. No apostolic writing speaks of a baptism by the Holy Spirit. Apostles taught that there is ONE baptism and that of necessity is the one commanded by Jesus to be performed by Christians. No verse properly translated and understood will contradict Ephesians 4:5 where Paul claims that for this age there is ONE baptism.
Ray, you and I have exchanged numerous lengthy emails about the assertion you make here. I simply point you again to 1 Corinthians 12:13, which still says (in spite of your repeated denials) “For by one Spirit were we all baptized into one body….:
You can deny that “Spirit” here is the “Holy Spirit,” but the context says otherwise.
You can argue that we are commanded to baptize converts, and that we do not baptize in the Holy Spirit, but Jesus does (also true). But have you thought carefully about John 4 where it is said that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, but Jesus baptized no one – his disciples did. When we baptize someone in the name of Jesus, we are acting in his stead. It is as if he were doing the baptizing using our hands as his agents. It is he who gives the promised Spirit.
Agreed Jerry. The seal of our salvation and the one thing Paul identifies as how we know that we belong to Christ is the Spirit……. Not that we have been dunked in water. Ould someone be baptized for show and not sincere repentance. Surely. Would god be obligated or required to dispense the Spirit in this case? Hardly.
Ray wrote,
Ray,
Go back and re-read the words of John the Baptist (recorded 5 different books of the NT) contrasting his baptism with water with Jesus’ baptism with the Spirit. Clearly this Spirit’s baptism is an important theme of the four Gospels and Acts.
Check out the OT background that explains why the Spirit’s baptism is so important to the NT writers and what John the Baptist’s listeners surely understood to be coming.
Check out the allusions to this again in Acts 2 and 10, 11, and 15.
Then ask yourself whether the OT prophecies were completely fulfilled at Pentecost and the Cornelius.
Then check out Paul’s use of “outpour” — an OT allusion to the same promised HS promised by JTB — in every single Christian conversion.
Your argument is, I take it, per H. Leo Boles, by the time Ephesians was penned, water baptism and HS baptism had been united into a single baptism.
Maybe Boles is right. But by the same logic, Paul’s insistence on “one body” in Eph 4:4 would deny that Jesus has both a physical, resurrection body and the church as a body. The correct response is that Paul is not so much counting the number of bodies in Christian theology as he is referring to the unity found in the singular spiritual body of Christ on earth, the church.
Hence, “one baptism” is not counting baptisms any more than he is counting bodies. He is, rather, pointing out the unity found in the baptism he is referencing – surely water baptism because he also references “one Spirit.”
Or perhaps Paul sees Spirit baptism and water baptism as sufficiently concurrent to be thought of as a single event — even if not exactly simultaneous.
However, there are cases where receipt of the Spirit is not tied to water baptism, such as the Samaritans and the apostles. Hence, we cannot tie God’s hands about such things, and so Eph 4 seems a very thin argument given the historical evidence to the contrary.
In my MA thesis, The Use of Baptism in Exhorting Christians, (Cincinnatti Christian University, 1976), I compared the context of Paul’s argument for unity in Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12. There are many of the same elements in each of these. Hence, I concluded that the baptisms mentioned in each are the same, or at least concurrent. I described it then as one baptism in two elements (cf. John 3:5 & 1 Cor 10:1-2 for similar usage). This is very similar to what Jay wrote in his comment above:
In 1976 I felt like a voice crying in the wilderness. Today it is nice to have company in what many then would have considered heresy.
All we know is that the HS is present when we are baptized and working in us. There is “water and the Spirit” involved when we are baptized into Christ. There are many things we do not and may not know, but we know that we are in Christ and that is enough.