Baptism in the Holy Spirit - PDF Free Download

New Testament/Theology A Re-examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Penteco...

Author: James D. G. Dunn

745 downloads 4401 Views 14MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

New Testament/Theology

A Re-examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today

Baptism in the

Holy Spirit This classic, now it1 a new paperback edition, introduces the reader to the most distinctive aspect of Pentecostal theologybaptism in the Holy Spirit. Dr. Dunn sees water-baptism as only one element in the New Testament pattern of conversion and initiation. The gift of the Spirit, he believes, is the central element. For the writers of the New Testament only those who received the Spirit could be called Christians. For them, the reception of the Spirit was a very definite and often dramatic experience - the decisive and climactic experience in conversion-initiation - to which the Christian was usually recalled when reminded of the beginning of his Christian faith and experience. What Dr. Dunn uncovers here is the place of the gift of the Spirit in the total complex event of becoming a Christian. His conclusions will help any reader to deepen his own understanding of the sacrament of baptism. JAMES D. G. D U N N is Lecturer in New Testament in the Department of Theology at the University of Nottingham, England. He is also author of jeszts and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Rejlected in the Neu; Testament (sequel to BAP~ISMIN THE HOLY SPIRIT), Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry Into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation, and Unity and Dirjersity in the N e w Testament.

T H E WESTMINSTER PRESS

rSBN 0-664-24140-9

Cover rllurtr~rtran The Baptlsm of Chrlst from the Copyrrght photograph. G ~ o r g t oLanratI

northdoor ef the Baptistry, Florence.

B A P T I S M IN T H E H O L Y

SPIRIT

BooKS BY JAMES D . G . DUNN Publlshed by The Westminster Press Baptism in the Holy Spirit Vnity ajid D'iversHy in the New Testament Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament

J A M E S D. G. D U N N

BAPTISM IN THE

H O L Y SPIRIT A Ke-examimtion oj the New Testamen} Teaching on the Gift oJ the Spirit in relation to Ventemtalism today

W T h e "Westminster Press Philadelphia

Copyright © SCM Press Ltd 1970 Publlshed by The Westminster Press® Philadelphia, Pennsylvania P R I N T E D I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S OF A M E R I C A

9 8 7 6 5 4 3

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Dunn, James D G 1939Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Includes bibliographical references and Indexes. 1. Baptism in the Holy Spirit — Biblical teaching. L Title. BS680.H56D861977 234'.1 77-3995 ISBN 0-664-24140-9

CONTENTS

Abbrevsations

I

vi

Intxoduction

I PART O N E

II III

T h e Expectation of J o h n the Baptist T h e Experience of Jesus at J o r d a n

8 23

PART TWO

IV V VI VII Vili IX

T h e Miracle of Pentecost

38

T h e Riddle of Samaria

55

T h e Conversion of Paul T h e Conversion of Cornelius

73

T h e 'Disciples' at Ephesus

79 83

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

90

PART T H R E E

X XI XII XTTT

T h e Early Paulines

103

T h e Corinthian Letters T h e Letter to R o m e

116

T h e Later Paulines

139 152

PART FOUR

XIV

T h e Johannine Pentecost?

XV XVI

T h e Spirit and Baptism in J o h n ' s Gospel

173 183

T h e Spirit and the Word in the Letters of John

195

PART FIVE

XVn XVIII XIX

T h e Spirit and Baptism in Hebrews

205

Conversion-initiation in Peter

215

Conclusion

224

Index of Modem Authors a«d Works Index of Biblical References

230 237

ABBREVIATIONS

Arndt and Gingrich

W. F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich, A GnekEnglish Lexüo» of the New Testament (ET 1957) AV Authorized (King James) Version Bibliotheca Sacra Bih.Sac. Blass-Debrunner-Funk F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Uterature (ET and ed. R. W . Funk, 1961) Baptism in the New Testament - A Symposium BNT by A. George and others (ET 1964) (originally a special study in two numbers of Lumiire et Vie, 1956) BNTE The Backff-outid of the New Testament and its Bschatohg) - Studies in Honour of C. H. Dodd (ed. W. D. Davies and D. Daube, 19J4) The Baptist Qmrterly BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Catbolic Biblical Quarterly ed. Editor Evangelical Quarterly EJ2 English translation ET Evangelische Theologie EvTi Expository Times ExpT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament HNT The Interpreter's Bible IB The International Ctitical Commentary ICC The Jerusalem Bible JB Journal of Biblical Uterature ]BL Journal of Theological Studies JTS H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Liddell and Scott Lexicon (revised by H. S. Jones, 1940) LXX Septuagint Moflätt The Mofett New Testament Commentary (based on the translation of the NT by J . Moöatt) Moulton and Milligan J . H. Moulton and G. Milligan, Tie Vocahulaty of the Greek Testament (1930)

Abbreviations n.d. NEB NovTest NTD NTS Peake RB RG& RSV SJT Strack-Billerbeck TDNT TEV TLZ TWBB TWNT TZ VecB ZNW

Vll

No date given The New English Bible Novum Testamentum Das Neue Testament Deutsch New Testament Studies Peake's Commentary on the Bible 2(ed. M. Black 196}) Revue Biblique Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart ^(ic)^jS.) Revised Standard Version Scottish Journal of Theologe H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar i(um Neuen Testamentaus Talmudund Midrasch (i 92 zfF.) Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (ET of TWNT) (tians. and ed. G. W. Bromiley i964fF.) Good Newsfor Modern Man: The New Testament: Today's English Version Theologische Uteratun^eitung A Theoloffcal Word Book of the Bible (ed. A. Richardson 1950) Theologisches Wörterbuch Neuen Testament {e.i. G. Kittel; now G. Friedrich, i933ff.) Theologische Zeitschrift Vocahulaty of the Bible (ed. J . - J . von Allmen, ET 1958) Zeitschriftfür die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

PREFACE

This monograph is primarily a N e w Testament study. But it is occasioned by the inctcasing interest in and influence of PentecostaUsm over the past ten years, and therefore has several subsidiary purposes. It is my hope that these chaptets will help to introduce scholars, students and ministers to the most distinctive aspect of Pentecostal theology - baptism in the Holy Spirit. It will become evident that this doctrine cannot escape heavy criticism ftom a N e w Testament Standpoint, but I would hope also that the importance and value of the Pentecostal emphasis will not be lost sight of or ignored. In particular, the Pentecostal contribution shovdd cause Christians in the 'main-line' denominations to look afresh with critical eyes at the place they give to the Holy Spirit in doctrine and experience and in their various theologies of con version, Initiation and baptism. A n d any voice which bids us test familiär traditions by the yardstick of the N e w Testament is to be welcomed. I wish to take this opportunity of expressing my thanks: to the R e v . Michael Harper for his interest, Information and fellowship at various stages of my research; to D r G . R . Beasley-Murray and the Rev. J . P. M . Sweet for their comments on an earlier draft (my thesis); and to the R e v . J o h n Bowden and Miss Jean Cunningham of S C M Press for their advice and skill in the preparation of the manuscript for publication. I cannot sufficiently express my gratitude to Professor C. F . D . Moule, that most gracious Christian gentleman and scholar, whose acute and constructive criticism at all times during my research was invaluable. A b o v e all comes my debt to my mother, whose years of sacrifice on her fainily's behalf is I hope rewarded in some small measure by this volume, and to Meta, my wife and 'true yokefellow', whose love and patience have been a constant Inspiration and support in all the hours spent on this book. Edinburgh, March i^yo

JAMES D . G . DUNN

I INTRODUCTION

W i T H i N more radical and pietistic Protestantism tiiere has g t o w n Up a tradition which holds that salvation, so far as it may be known in this life, is experienccd in two stages: first, the experience of becoming a Christian; then, as a later and distinct event, a second experience of the Holy Spirit. F o r many Puritans the second experience was one of assurance.i F o r Wesley the first stage was justification and partial sanctification, the second the divine gift of cntire sanctification or Chßstian perfection.2 A direct line can be drawn from Puritan teaching on the Spirit through early Methodism to the nineteenth-century Holiness Movement with its 'Higher Life' message, in which justification by faith (deliverance from the penalty of sin) was distinguished from the second divine work of sanctification, also received by faith (deliverance from the power of sin). One of the Holiness Movement's most vigorous ofFspring, the Keswick Convention, used to be notable for its 'second blessing' teaching,^ and such metaphors as the one which characterizes some Christians as living between Calvary and Pentecost still have currency at the Conven tion. Within this whole tradition the idea of Spirit-baptism has often been associated with the second stage. Thomas G o o d w i n equated the experience of assurance with the 'seal of the Spirit' in E p h . 1. 13f. and with the baptism with the Holy Ghost; he even caUed it 'a new conversion'.* J o h n Fletcher, the saintly Methodist, quite 1 See J . I. Packer, the Wisdom of cur Fathers (Puritan Conference, 1 9 5 6 ) 1 4 - 2 5 ; J . K. Parratt, EQ 4 1 (1969) 1 6 3 ; cf. The Westminster Confession X V I I I . * J . Wesley, A Piain Account of Christian Perfection (reprinted 1 9 5 2 ) . ä S. Barabas, So Great Salvation - the Histoty and Message qf the Keswick Convention ( 1 9 5 2 ) ; see also B. B. Warfield, Perfutionism (1958) j - 2 1 5 . * Goodwin, Works I, Sermon X V , X V I , especially 237f., 247f., 2 5 1 .

2

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

often used the phtase 'baptism with the Spirit' and understood it to describe the sudden receiving of entire sanctification.^ A n d among the earlier 'Higher Life' teachers the second experience of sancti fication was commonly called 'the baptism of the Holy Ghost'. However, towards the close of the nineteenth Century, particularly in America, the emphasis in the use of the phrase gradually shifted from the idea of sanctification and holiness (a purifying baptism of fire cleansing from sin) to that of empowering for Service (principally on the basis of Luke 24.49; Acts 1.5, 8). A t the same time in the United States there was a growing interest in Spiritual gifts, and several prominent Holiness leaders taught that these could, and should still be in Operation within the Church. It was directly from this context that Pentecostalism sprang, the latest and most flourishing branch of Christianity. A s a fuUscale movement it dates from the remarkable series of meetings in Azusa Street, Los Angeles, which began in 1906. But its beginnings may be traced back to Topeka Bible College where what was to become the distinctive belief of Pentecostals was first fiiUy formulated at the end of 1900 - namely, 'that in apostolic times, the speaking in tongues was considered to be the initial physical evidence of a person's having received the baptism in the Holy Spirit'. According to J . R . Flower, a leading figure in the American Assemblies of G o d from 1 9 1 4 to 1959, 'It was this decision which has made the Pentecostal Movement of the Twentieth Century'.^ A s a result of their own experience the early pioneers of this movement came to believe that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is a second (Pentecostal) experience distinct from and subsequent to conversion which gives power for witness (Acts 1.8), that speaking in tongues, as in Acts 2.4, is the necessary and inevitable evidence of the 'baptism', and that the Spiritual gifts listed in I Cor. 1 2 . 8 - 1 0 may and should be manifestcd when Pentecostal Christians meet for worship. A s so often happens in such cases, succeeding generations have hardened these early less rigid beliefs into the dogmas of Pentecostal tradition. Pentecostalism has riow become a movement of world-wide importance, reckoned as 'a third force in Christendom' (alongside Catholicism and Protestantism) by not a few leading churchmen. Moreover, since i960 Pentecostäl teaching has been making a « N. Bloch-Hoell, Tbe Penfeeoital Movemtut ( E T 1 9 6 4 ) 1 4 1 . • C. Brumback, Suddenly . . . From Htavtn ( 1 9 6 1 ) 2 3 .

Introduction

3

significant penetration into older denominations.' Taken together these facts make imperative a d o s e study of the distinctive Pente costal doctrines. Of particular interest to the N T scholar is the Pentecostal's teaching about the baptism in the Spirit, for in it he claims to have discovered the N T pattern of conversion-initiation - the only pattern which makes sense of the data in Acts - and also the principal explanation for the amazing growth of the early Church. But does the N T mean by baptism in the Holy Spirit what the Pente costal understands the phrase to mean? Is baptism in the Holy Spirit to be separated from conversion-initiation, and is the beginning of the Christian hfe to be thus divided up into distinct stages? Is Spirit-baptism something essentiaUy different from becoming a Christian, so that even a Christian of many years' Standing may never have been baptized in the Spirit? These are some of the important questions which Pentecostal teaching raises, and it will be the primary task of this book to re-examine the N T in the light of this teaching with a view to answering these questions. Put in a nutshell, w e hope to discover what is the place of the gift of the Spirit in the total complex event of becoming a Christian. This will inevitably involve us in a wider debate than merely with Pentecostals. F o r many outside Pente costalism make a straightforward Identification between baptism in the Spirit and the Christian sacrament of water-baptism,8 while others distingviish two gifts or Comings of the Spirit, the first at conversion-initiation and the second at a later date, in Confirmation« or in the bestowal of charismata.io I shall therefore be 7 See e.g. H. Berkhof, Tb» Doctrine of tbe Holy Spirit (1964) 8 5 - 9 0 ; A . Walker, Breakthrougb: ReJiscoPtri»£ tbe Spirit (1969) 4 0 - 5 4 . For a fuller tteatment see my fotthcoming article in S]T. * See p. 98 n. 1 7 below. For want of a better or more convenient label I shall use the word 'sacramentalist' to describe the view which regards waterbaptism as the focus of conversion-initiation, so that forgiveness, the gift of the Spirit, membership of Christ, etc., become a function of the rite, and can be said to be mediated or conveycd through it (cf. C. Gore, Tbe Holy Spirit and the Church [i 924] 1 2 4 n. 1 ) . The title does not describe a theological position as such, but in different passages diflSercnt commentators will adopt a sacra mentalist Interpretation. • For a high doctrine of Confinnation see especially A . J . Mason, The Relation of Confirmation to Baptism ( 1 8 9 1 ) ; G . Dix, Confirmation or the Laying on ofHands ( 1 9 3 6 ) . also The Tbeologf of Confirmation in Relation to Baptism ( 1 9 4 6 ) ; L. S. Thomton, Confirmation and its Place in the Baptismal Mystety ( 1 9 5 4 ) . 1" See p. 55 n. i, p. 94 below.

4

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

defining my position over against two and sometimes three or four different Standpoints. This whole subject has often been treated in the past, but the Pentecostal doctrine of Spirit-baptism makes a new and important contribution to an old debate, and by focusing attention on the gift of the Spirit and separating the gift of the Spirit from conver sion-initiation, it both revitalizes the debate and calls in question many of the traditionally accepted views of Christian baptism. A complete re-examination of the N T teaching on the gift of the Spirit and its relation to belief and baptism is therefore necessary.il I hope to show that for the writers of the N T the baptism in or gift of the Spirit was part of the event (or process) of becoming a Christian, together with the effective proclamation of the Gospel, belief in (ek) Jesus as L o r d , and water-baptism in the name of the L o r d Jesus; that it was the chief element in conversion-initiation so that only those w h o had thus received the Spirit could be called Christians; that the reception of the Spirit was a very definite and often dramatic experience, the decisive and climactic experience in conversion-initiation, to which the Christian was usually recalled when reminded of the beginning of his Christian faith and experience.i2 W e shall see that while the Pentecostal's beUef in the dynamic and experiential nature of Spirit-baptism is well founded, his Separation of it from conversion-initiation is wholly unjustified; and that, conversely, while water-baptism is an important element in the complex of conversion-initiation, it is neither to be equated or confused with Spirit-baptism nor to be given the most prominent part in that complex event. T h e high point in conver sion-initiation is the gift of the Spirit, and the beginning of the Christian life is to be reckoned from the experience of Spiritbaptism. We shall see that the baptism in the Spirit from the Start was " Cf. J . Weiss, Earliett Cbriitianity ( E T 1 9 3 7 ) 6 2 5 .

1* J . Denncy: 'In Acts, as elsewhete in the N T , the teception of the Spirit is the whole of Christianity' {Dictionary qf Christ and tbe Gospels [1906] I 7 3 8 ) ; cf. R. C. Moberiy, Atonement and Personality ( 1 9 0 1 ) 9 0 ; Doctrine in the Church of England ( 1 9 3 8 ) . See also E . Schweizer, riTNT V I 394; L . Newbigin, The Household of God (195 3) 89. The experience of the Spirit has been rightly emphasized by most writers on the Spirit; e.g. E . F . Scott, Tbe Spirit in the New Testament ( 1 9 2 3 ) ; H. W. Robinson, Tbe Christian Experience of tbe Holy Spirit (.tgzS);H.P.VanD\xsea,Spirit,SonandFatber(ig6o); G. S. Hcndry, Tbe Holy Spirit in Christian Theology ''(1965).

Introduction

J

understood as an initiatory experience (chapter II), that even with Jesus himself the anointing of the Spirit at Jordan was essentiaUy initiatory, and that the water-baptism of J o h n was otüy preparatory for and not conflated with the bestowal of the Spirit (chapter III). The Pentecostal doctrine is built chiefly on Acts, but a detailed study will reveal that for the writer of Acts in the last analysis it is only by receiving the Spirit that one becomes a Christian; water-baptism is clearly distinct from and even antithetical to Spirit-baptism, and is best understood as the expression of the faith which receives the Spirit (Part T w o ) . In the Pauhne Uterature the story is much the same, although the distinction between water-baptism and Spirit-baptism is not so sharp (Part Three). With J o h n both PentecostaHst and sacramentalist have firmer ground to stand on, but not firm enough to bear the weight of their respective theologies (Part Four). A final examination o f Hebrews and I Peter confirms the negative conclusions and more restricted role w e have had to give to the sacrament of baptism (Part Five). Before turning to the detailed exegesis and exposition I should perhaps explain w h y I describe the event of becoming a Christian by the inelegant title 'conversion-initiation'. 'Baptism' is the usual shorthand description. But the trouble with 'baptism' is that it is a 'concertina' w o r d : it may be used simply for the actual act of Immersion in water, or its meaning may be expanded to take in more and more o f the rites and constituent parts of conversioninitiation until it embraces the whole.^^ T w o difficulties arise: first, w e are never quite sure just h o w broadly or h o w narrowly it is being used; second, however broad its use, at its centre always Stands the rite of Immersion. T h e inevitable happens: no matter h o w whole-hearted the initial protest that 'baptism' is being used for the whole event of becoming a Christian, sooner or later the reader becomes aware that the wind has been squeezed out of the concertina and w e are really talking about the rite of Immersion, and it is to the water-rite that all the blessings (forgiveness, union with Christ, the gift of the Spirit, etc.) of the whole event are being ascribed. It will become apparent in this study that the confusion of water-baptism with Spiritbaptism inevitably involves the confusion of water with Spirit, so " E.g. R. Allen, Missionmy Mitbods - St Faid's or Ourst «(1960) 7 3 n. i; N. Clark in Crisis for Baptism (ed. B. S. Moss 1965) 7 1 .

6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

that the administration of water becomes nothing other than the bestowal of the Spirit.i* In Reformed theology a 'sacrament' has been classically defined as having two parts: 'an outward and sensible sign' and 'an inward and Spiritual grace thereby signified' (T^e Westminster l-arger Catechism 163). 'Neither of these, the sign or the "grace", is by itself the Sacrament; a Sacrament exists where sign and grace are brought together into one Operation and constitute a Single action.' The 'outward part (the sign) . . . actually conveys and confers its Spiritual part' (H. J . Wotherspoon and J . M. Kirkpatrick, A Manual of Church Doctrine According to the Church of Scotland [1920], revised and enlarged by T. F. Torrance and R. S. Wright [1965] 1 7 - 1 9 ; see also 1 9 - 2 5 ; cf. Wotherspoon, Religious Values in the Sacraments [1928] 125-6 andpassim; R. S. Wallace, Calvin's Doctrine of the Word and Sacrament [1955] 1 5 9 - 7 1 ; Church of Scotland, Special Commission on Baptism, The Biblical Doctrine of Baptism [1958] 62-64, 67-69; also The Doctrine of Baptism [1962] 1 1 ; T. F. Torrance, TZ I4[i958] 243f.;E. J . F. Atndt, The Font and the Table [i<)6-j] i^i., 17). In my opinion this definition misinterprets the teaching of the NT. The Oxford Dictionary shows that both in traditional and modern usage 'sacrament' refers primarily to the ceremony or rite seen as somehow a means of grace. E v e n more important is the fact that although ßdm-iaßa and ßairrCCeiv are used in the N T either literally or metaphorically, these uses are quite distinct, as w e shall see; no Single occurrence of either w o r d embraces both meanings simultaneously. T h e N T never uses 'baptism' as a description of the total event of becoming a Christian (including repentance, confession, water-baptism, forgiveness, etc). I n the N T /äaima/xa and ßam-i^eiv are never concertina w o r d s ; their meanings are always clear cut. I am thus in fundamental disagreement at this point with the Church of Scotland's Special Commission: 'Baptisma never refers to the rite of Baptism alone; it refers also to the salvation events which give the rite its meaning and which are operative in the rite through the work of the Holy Spirit (Biblical Doctrine ij£.; see also their Interim Report [ 1 9 5 5 ] 8 - 1 0 ; Torrance 2 4 8 f . ) . A n alternative to 'baptism' is not easy to find. F o r the sake of precision w e want to distinguish water-baptism from the other ritual acts like oral confession and laying on of hands. There are i< See p. 98 n. 1 7 below.

Introduction

7

also the more inward, subjective (even mystical) aspects of the whole event like repentance, forgiveness, union with Christ. I shall therefore use 'Initiation' to describe the ritual, external acts as distinct from these latter,i5 and 'conversion' when w e are thinking of that inner transformation as distinct from, or rather without including th^ ritual acts. T h e total event of becoming a Christian embraces both 'conversion' and 'Initiation', and so w e shall call it 'conversion-initiation'. My sole purpose here is clarity of thought. T h e terms chosen do not pre-judge the relation between 'conversion' and 'Initiation', whether they are distinct, or simultaneous, or synonymous. T h e terms themselves are far from adequate,!^ and impart an element of rigidity which is regrettable, but in a discussion which has been obscured by lack of precise definitions with terms often too fluid to be grasped adequately, it is of the utmost importance that we enter the debate with the meaning of such central concepts clear and unambiguous. 15 This restriction of the meaning to the ritual act refers only to the noxm 'Initiation'. 1» 'Initiation' has overtones of pagan cults and secrct societies, and 'con version' tends to be popularly linked with an emotional (and too often shallow) 'decision for Christ'. More serious is the fact that 'conversion' properly describes man's act of turning to God (cf. F . Field, Notes on tbe Translation qf the New Testament [1899] 2 4 6 - 5 1 ; W. Barclay, Turning to God: Conversion in tbe New Testament [ 1 9 6 3 ] 2 1 - 2 5 ) ; hut there is no other suitable word, and its use in a broader, less literal sense, of something which happens to and in a man ('to be converted') rather than or including something he himself does ('to convett') is quite common and respectable. See e.g. W. James, Tbe Variefies of Religious Experience ( i 9 6 0 edition) 1 9 4 ; A . C. Undcrwood, Conversion: Christian and Non-Cbristian ( 1 9 2 5 ) ; O. Brandon, Christianity from Within (1965) 2 3 - 2 5 . In my use 'conversion' embraces both the human and the divine action in the whole (non-ritual) event of becoming a Christian,

PART

ONE

II THE

EXPECTATION

OF J O H N T H E

BAPTIST

A STUDY of the 'baptism in the Holy Spirit' naturally begins with the words of J o h n the Baptist: in Mark's version ( 1 . 8 ) : iyw ißdtTTioa vfids vSari, avTOS Se ßaiTTlarei v[iäs TTVEU/nart dyiü>.

W e will confine ourselves initially to the second half of the logion a clause which has caused commentators much perplexity. T w o questions pose themselves: 'What was its original form (Matthew and L u k e add K A I mpC) ?' and 'What did it originally mean ?' Since the end of the last Century two reconstructions have gained approval, so that today most scholars would deny that J o h n mentioned the H o l y Spirit, at least in this connection: either he spoke of baptism in fire alone,i or eise he spoke of baptism with wind (irvevim) and fire,^ in both cases the metaphor of baptism being equivalent to the metaphor of winnowing and destrucdon by fire which immediately foUows (Matt. 3 . 1 2 ; L u k e 3 . 1 7 ) . 1 C. A . Briggs, Tbe Messiab of tbe Gospels (1894) 6 7 , dted in H. G. Marsh, Origi» and Significance of New Testament Baptism ( 1 9 4 1 ) 2 9 ; J . Wellhausen, Das Evangelium Mattbaei (1904) 6 ; M. Dibelius, Die urcbristlicbe Überlieferung von Jobannes dem Täufer ( 1 9 1 1 ) 5 6 ; H. von Baer, Der beilige Geist in den LMkasscbriften ( 1 9 2 6 ) 1 6 1 - 3 ; R. Bultmann, Tbe Histoty of tbe Synoptic Tradition ( E T 1 9 6 3 ) 2 4 6 ; J . M. Creed, Tbe Gospel According to St Luke ( 1 9 3 0 ) 5 4 ; T. W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus (1949) 4of.; W. F. Flenüngton, Tbe New Testament Doctrine of Baptism ( 1 9 4 8 ) ; P. Vielhauer. RGG» III ( 1 9 5 9 ) 8o4f.; W. C. Robinson J r . . Tbe Way of the Lord (1962) 8 9 ; E . Haenchen, Der Weg Jesu (1966) 4 3 , 50. See also V. Taylor, Tbe Gospel According to St Mark ( 1 9 5 2 ) 1 5 7 . * A . B. Bruce, Expositor's Greek Testament ( 1 8 9 7 ) I 8 4 ; H. M. Treen, ExpT 35 ( 1 9 2 3 - 2 4 ) 5 2 1 ; R. Eislcr, The Messiab Jesus and John the Baptist ( 1 9 3 1 ) 2 7 4 - 9 ; C. K. Barrett, The Holy Spirit and tbe Gospel Tradition ( 1 9 4 7 ) 1 2 6 ; C. H. Kraeling, John tbe Baptist ( 1 9 5 1 ) 5 9 - 6 } ; H. J . Flowers, JBx^T 64 ( 1 9 5 2 - 5 3 ) i 5 5 f . ; E . Schweizer, ExpT 65 ( 1 9 5 3 - 5 4 ) 2 9 ; also T J ^ N T V I 3 9 7 ; M.-A. Chevallier, UEsprit et le Messie dans le Bas-Judaisme et le Nouveau Testament ( 1 9 5 8 ) 55f.;

8

The Expectation of John the Baptist

9

T w o Factors, however, make it quite probable that J o h n foretold a baptism in Spiiit,(even Holy Spirit) and fire. First, the Baptist was not simply a prophet of wrath. F o r all the Synoptic Gospels his ministry is one of good news. F o r Mark it is 'the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ' ( i . i ) , and the note of judgment and wrath is altogether missing from John's message (even the Coming One's baptism is with Holy Spirit alone). In Matthew J o h n preaches the same Gospel as Jesus: 'Repent, for the K i n g d o m of G o d is at band' (3.2; 4.17) which can otherwise be expressed as 'the gospel of the K i n g d o m ' (4.23; 9.35)- L u k e continues the quotation from Isaiah to conclude with the words, 'and all flesh shall see the salvation of G o d ' (3.6), and sums up John's preaching in terms of eüoyyeAt'^eaöai (3.18;^ see also i.i6f., 76f.). N o r can the remission of sins be described as anything other than g o o d news'(Mark 1.4; L u k e 3 . 3 ; 1.77). Destruction is certainly threatened, but the trees about to be axed are those which do not bring forth good fruit (Matt. 3 . 1 0 ; L u k e 3.9). Those who produce fruit that befits or proves their repentance (Matt. 3.8; Luke 3.8) - presumably exemplified for Luke in J o h n ' s replies to his questioners ( 3 . 1 0 - 1 4 ) , but certainly initially signified and ex pressed by Submission to John's baptism (Mark 1 . 4 ; L u k e 3.3) will escape the coming wrath. Again, the picture of winnowing has its 'gospel' side also: the gathering of the wheat into the granary, as well as the buming up of the chaff. There is more room in John's preaching for a gracious Spirit than one would think at fiirst glance. Second, and more important, is the fact that the Qumran sect talked freely of a, or G o d ' s holy spirit (or spirit of holiness) as a cleansing, purifying power ( i Q S 3 . 7 - 9 ; 4 . 2 1 ; i Q H 1 6 . 1 2 ; cf. 7.6; 1 7 . 2 6 ; frag. 2.9, 1 3 ) . J o h n almost certainly had some contact with the sect, even if only peripheral - sufficient at least for him to adopt E . Best, NopTest 4 (i960) 2 3 6 - 4 } ; W. Grundmann, Dat Bvangelium nach Lukas ( 1 9 6 1 ) 1 0 5 ; F. W. Beare, The Barliest Reeords of Jesus (1964) } 9 f . ; W. Bieder, Die Verbeissung der Taufe (1966) 4 1 , j j . See also Taylor 1 5 7 ; E . Schweizer, Das Evangelium nach Markus (NTD 1 9 6 7 ) 1 7 ; R. Schütz, Johannes der Täufer (1967) 85. 3 H. Conzclmann argues that eüoyycAfCeoflou here means simply 'to preach' (Jhe Theology of St Luke [ E T 1 9 6 1 ] 23 n. i). This is special pleading. The stages in salvation-Ustory can still be distinguished eyen when we allow the note of Gospel in John's preaching (cf. Acts 1 . 2 4 - 2 6 ; 19.4). See also Schütz 7of.; W. Wink, John tbe Baptist in tbe Gospel Tradition (1968) 5 1 - 5 } .

lo

Baptism itt the Holy Spirit

(and adapt) some of their ideas.* A n d if, as some believe, i Q S 4.21 recalls the words of Mal. 3.2f.,5 w e shall be hard pressed to find in Jewish sources a closer parallel to Matt. 3 . 1 1 , L u k e 3 . 1 6 . Thus, while the Suggestion that J o h n spoke only of wind and fire is ättractive, there is no really decisive reason for denying the originality of the Q version of the logion.^ A s w e shall see below, the fuller saying makes excellent sense when interpreted in the context of J o h n ' s ministry and against the background of Jewish thought prior to J o h n . What did J o h n mean when he foretold an imminent baptism in Spirit and fire ? T h e two traditional interpretations understood it either of an inflaming, purifying baptism - a purely gracious outpouring of the Holy Spirit' - or of a twofold baptism, of the righteous with the Holy Spirit and of the wicked with fire.^ Neither of these is adequate. In Q the characteristic note of J o h n ' s preach ing is inuninent judgment and wrath (Matt. 3 . 7 , 1 0 , 1 2 ; L u k e 3.7, 9 , 1 7 ) . T i r e ' is a prominent w o r d (its threefold repetition in Matt. 3 . 1 0 - 1 2 is particularly striking), and Standing on either side of the baptism logion it signifies the fire of pTinitive destruction. T h e 'baptism with . . . fire' therefore carmot be solely gracious, and must at least include an act of judgment and destruction. * See H. l&txüxi, Qumran und das Neue Testament (1966) II z(., lof., fot those who see a more or less close telationship between Qumran and the Baptist. Braun himself accepts that the Baptist was quite possibly influenced by Qumran in his expectation of the neamess of the End-time (i if., 2 2 ) . * A . R. C. Leaney, Tie Rtde of Qumran and its Meaning (1966) 1 5 9 ; M. Black, The Scrolls and Christian Origins ( 1 9 6 1 ) i j j . * Cf. J . Delorme in B N T 5 4 - 5 7 ; Ö. tiüll, Greek Words and Hebrev Meanings (1967) 2 4 4 - 7 . For a fuller treatment of this point see my forthcoming atticle in NofTest. ' This derives from Chrysostom, and is still found in the Roman Catholic commentators, M . - J . Lagrange, Evangile selon Saint Matthieu ' ( 1 9 4 8 ) 5 5 : 8 . Leeming, Principles of Satramental Theology ( 1 9 5 6 ) 3 5 ; and P. Gaechter, Das Matthäus Evangelium ( 1 9 6 3 ) 97. * This derives from Origen. In this Century it has been maintaincd by F. Büchsei. Der Geist Gottes im Neuen Testament (1926) i4}f.; B. S. Easton, The Gospel According to St Luke (1926) 4 0 ; W. Michaelis, Täufer, Jesus, Urgemeinde ( 1 9 2 8 ) 32f.; E . Lohmeyer, Das Urchristentum I - Jobmnes der Täufer ( 1 9 3 2 ) 8 4 - 8 6 ; F. Lang, TWNT V I 9 4 3 ; W. F. Arndt, St Luke (1956) i i 6 f . ; W. H. Brownlee in The Scrolls and the New Testament (ed. K. Stendahl, 1 9 5 7 ) 4 3 ; G. Delling, NovTest 2 ( 1 9 5 7 ) 1 0 7 ; J . Schmid, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (1959) 5 8f.; F. V. Filsen, The Gospel According to St Matthew (i960) 6 6 ; F. J . Leenhardt. Le Saint-Esprit ( 1 9 6 3 ) 3 7 ; C. H. Scobic, John the Baptist (1964) 7 1 ; also Tbe Scrolls and Christianity (ed. M. Black 1969) 5 9 - 6 1 ; R. E . Brown, New Testament Er/ayx (1965) i } 5 f . See also C. E . B. Cranfield, i"/Marjfe (1959) 5 1 ; Schweizer, Markus 1 7 .

The Expectation of Job» the Baptist

11

Against tlie view of Origen it is important to realize that J o h n regarded the Coming One's baptism as the complement and folfilment of his o w n : eyo) vfias ßaiTrit,(i> (h>) vSari avTOS ifias ßanrlaei, ev TivevfiaTi äyUo. T w o things should be noted. First, the future baptism is a single baptism in Holy Spirit and fire, the ev embracing both elements. There are not two baptisms envisaged, one with Spirit and one with fire, only one baptism in Spirit-and-fire.^ Second, the two baptisms (John's and the Coming One's) are to be administered to the same people - ujua?. That is to say, Spirit-and-fire baptism is not offered as an alternative to John's water-baptism, nor does one accept John's baptism in order to escape the messianic baptism. Rather one undergoes John's water-baptism with a view to and in prepara tion for the messianic Spirit-and-fire baptism. In which case, the Coming One's baptism caimot be solely retributive and destructive. Those w h o repent and are baptized by J o h n must receive a baptism which is ultimately gracious. In short, if J o h n spoke of a future baptism at all there was both gospel and judgment in it. The most probable Interpretation is that Spirit-and-fire together describe the one purgative act of messianic judgment which both repentant and unrepentant woidd experience, the former as a bless ing, the latter as destruction.^" T h e idea of Immersion in the river Jordan was itself one which was able to convey the ideas of both judgment and redemption, and the baptismal metaphor to describe the Coming One's ministry is obviously taken from the rite which most characterized John's ministry. In the OT the river and the flood are used as metaphors for being overwhelmed by calamities (Ps. 42.7; 6 9 . 2 , 1 5 ; Isa. 43.2). Itis this figure which probably Stands behind Mark 10,38, Luke 12. jo. The Evangelists » Cf. P. Bonnard, L'6.vangile selm Saint Matthieu (1963) 58. 1» iiiäs could be confined to those baptized by John (J. M . Robinson, Tbe Problem of Histoty in Mark [ 1 9 5 7 ] 2 6 ; E . E . Ellis, The Gospel of Luke [1966] 90), but it is more probable that it covcrs all those addressed (ö AaiSs - Luke 3. i jf.), both the impenitent who reftised baptism (as Matt. 3 . 7 - 1 0 , Luke 3 . 7 - 9 imply), and those whose baptism had Uttle or no repentance in it, as well as the truly repentant baptisands. It would be odd if Jolm did not understand the Coming One's judgment to apply to all (cf. G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament [1963] } 8 ) , and it is certainly implied by the immediately foUowing metaphor, which reprcsents the Coming One's ministry as comprehensively as the baptism metaphor.

12

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

•would probably understand this implication since ßavrit,eaQai (some times even jSawTt'^eiv) was popularly used in extra-bibhcal Greek for tribulation and calamity overwhelming someone. But a river can also signify messianic blessing (Ezek. 4 7 . 5 - uScop d4aecüs), and Naaman was healed of his leprosy by immersing himself in the Jordan (II Kings 5 . 1 4 ) . Moreover, John certainly understood his baptism as in some sense a way of escape from the coming wrath, and it prefigured the means the Coming One would use to bless those who truly repented at John's preaching. See also n, 1 9 . That fire means judgment is certain,ii but in Jewish eschatology fire n o t only symbolized the destruction o f the wicked, it could also indicate the purification o f the righteous (that is, judgment but n o t destruction).i2 J u s t as Malachi spoke both o f refining fire and of destructive fire ( 3 . 2 - 3 ; 4 . 1 ) , so it is quite likely that J o h n him self understood the baptism in . . . fire as both refining and destructive.i3 If Malachi illuminates the meaning o f fire in the baptism logion, the other prophet who chiefly features in the Baptist narratives illtmiinates the meaning o f mevua. F o r Isaiah, rüah is often a spirit of purification and judgment (4.4; 30.28), f o r some purely retribu tive (29.10) and destructive ( 1 1 . 1 5 ) , b u t f o r God's people the bringer o f blessing, prosperity and righteousness (3 2.15 - 1 7 ; 44.3). It may well be that Isa. 4.4 was in the Baptist's m i n d " - cleansing Jerusalem 'by a spirit o f judgment and by a spirit o f butning' is n o far cry f r o m a messianic baptism in Spirit and fire. M o r e o v e r , the fact that 'liquid' verbs are one o f the Standard ways o f describing 11 See, e.g., Isa. 3 1 . 9 ; Arnos 7.4; Mal. 4 . 1 ; Jub. 9 . 1 5 ; 3 6 . 1 0 ; Enoch 10.6, i2f.; 54.6; 9 0 . 2 4 - 2 7 ; Sib. 1 1 1 . 5 3 - 5 4 ; 4 Ezra 7 . 3 6 - 3 8 ; Ps. Sol. i5.6f.; in Qumran it is the same, e.g., i Q H 6 . 1 8 - 1 9 . See also above, p. 1 0 . That John could picture judgment as a stream of fire is quite possible (Dan. 7 . 1 0 ; 4 Ezra i3.iof.; i Q H 3.29[?]; in Enoch 6 7 . 1 3 the waters of judgment 'change and become a fire whidi burns for ever'). See also n. 19, i«Isa. 1 . 2 5 ; Zech. 1 3 . 9 ; Mal. 3.2f.; i Q H 5 . 1 6 . See also L . W. Barnard. JTS 8 ( 1 9 5 7 ) 107. On the dual role of fire in the thought of the first Christian centuries see C.-M. Edsman. Le Baptime de Feu (1940) 1 - 1 3 3 . 1* See further I. Abrahams. Studies in Pbarisaism and tbe Gospels 1 ( 1 9 1 7 ) 44f .; N. A . Dahl in Interpretafiones ad Vetus Testamentum Pertinenfes S. Mowinckel ( 1 9 5 5 ) 4 5 ; and on inäs above. This would be even clearer to the first three Evangelists since they all describe John in the language of Mal. 3 . 1 (Mark 1 . 2 ; Matt. 1 1 . 1 0 and Luke 7.27. botii Q). Mal. 4.5 is also referred to John in Mark 9 . 1 2 and Matt. 1 7 . 1 1 . and Luke 1 . 1 7 combines Mal. 3 . 1 with 4 . 5 - 6 in describing John (see also Luke 1.76). " As G. W. H. Lampe suggests (in Studies in tbe Gospels: Essays in Memory ofR. H. Ugbtfoot [ed. D . E . Ntneham. 1 9 5 5 ] 1 6 2 ) .

The Expectation of John the Baptist

13

the gift of the Spirit in the last days^s would make it very easy for John to speak of the messianic gift of the Spirit in a metaphor drawn from the rite which was his own hall-mark. It is quite conceivable, therefore, that J o h n spoke of such a baptism - in which the 'spirit' neither was merely gracious nor bore the sense of storm wind, but was G o d ' s holy spirit, puitgative and refining for those who had repented, destructive (Uke the irvev^a of I I Thess. 2.8 and the slighted Spirit of Acts 5.'i-io) for those w h o remained impenitcnt.16 John clearly regarded himself as a herald of the E n d ; he prob ably saw himself in the role of Elijah, the precursor of 'the great and terrible day of the L o r d ' (Mal. 4.5).!'' The frightening urgency of his tone was due to his beüef not only that his generation stood on the threshold of the messianic age, but also that the end could not be introduced -without gteat suffering and judgraent^^ which, for the unrepentant, would mean destruction. E v e n the repentant would not escape judgment, for their deliverance would only come through a process of refining and winnowing and that would mean suffering enough, but it would affbrd them entry into the blessings of the new age.i» Therefore repent, cried J o h n , that the coming wrath might mean redemption and not utter destruction. In short then, the baptism in Spirit-and-fire was not to be some thing gentle and gracious, but something which burned and consumed, not something experienced by otily J e w or only Gentüe, only repentant or only unrepentant, but by all. It was the fiery nvevfia in which all must be immersed, as it were, and which like a smelting furiuce would burn up all impurity. F o r the unrepentant " Isa. 3 2 . 1 5 ; 4 4 . 3 ; Ezek. 39.29;<Joel. 2.28f.; Zech. 1 2 . 1 0 ; cf. Ezek, 3 6 . 2 5 2 7 ; and see the Qumran references above. " Cf. Kraeling 6 1 - 6 3 ; Dahl 4 5 . " Contra J . A . T. Robinson, Twelt/e New Testament Studies (1962) 2 8 - 5 2 . 1 ' The belief in a period of 'messianic woes' immediately prior to the establishment of the messianic kingdom, in which the people of God suffer great tribulation and which culminates in the destruction of the wicked, can be traced back to Dan. 7 . 1 9 - 2 8 , and is probably best expressed in I Enoch 9 0 . 1 3 - 2 7 and II Baruch 2 4 - 2 9 . 1 ' Kraeling is probably right in his Suggestion that John's water-baptism symbolized the 'fiery torrent of judgment' and that Submission to John's baptism was 'symbolic of acceptance of the judgment which he proclaimed' (5^*7f; cf. Barnard 1 0 7 ) . See also Dahl 4 5 . M. G. Kline has also pointed out that the idea of John's baptism portraying the coming judicial ordeal is supported by the water ordeals of ancient court procedure (Tie Westminster theological Journal 27 [ 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 ] 1 5 1 - 4 ) .

14

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

it w o u l d mean total destruction. F o r the repentant it would mean a refining and purging away of all evil and sin which would result in salvation and quahfy to enjoy the blessings of the messianic kingdom. These were the sufferings which woxild bring in the messianic kingdom; it was through them that the repentant would be initiated into that kingdom. A second important issue is the role of John's water-baptism in all this. In particular, what was its relation to the expected baptism in Spirit-and-fire ? It is important to recognize that John's ministry was essentiaUy preparatory. J o h n himself did not bring in the E n d . It was the Coming One who would do that. With J o h n the mes sianic K i n g d o m has drawn near but it has not yet come. T h e note of the unfulfiUed 'not yet' predominates. J o h n is only the mes senger w h o makes ready the way, the herald w h o goes before arousing attention and calling for adequate preparation. 20 His baptism is thus preparatory also. It does not mark the begirming of the eschatological event;2i it does not initiate into the new age;22 it is the answer to John's call for preparedness: by receiving the Preparer's baptism the penitent prepares himself to receive the Coming One's baptism. 23 It is the latter alone which initiates the K i n g d o m and initiates into the Kingdom. T h e baptism in Spiritand-fire is the tribulation through which all must pass before the K i n g d o m can be established and before the penitent can share in the blessings of the K i n g d o m - the purifying transition from the old aeon to the new. T h e repentant therefore submits to J o h n ' s baptism in order that when the greater one has come he may receive the greater baptism, for only thus and then wül he be initiated into the messianic Kingdom.2« Beyond this w e may say that John's baptism was the concrete 20 A . H. McNeile. Tbe Gospel According to St Matthew ( 1 9 1 5 ) 2 5 ; G. Bomkamm, Theologische Blätter 1 7 (1938) 4 3 ; J . M. Robinson 24f.; C. F. D. Moule, St Mark (1965) 1 0 . S. Talmon has reminded us that in the O T and the Quiman Uterature the desert comes to be viewed as the place of prepara tion (in Biblical Moti/s: Origins and Transformations [ed. A . Alttnann, 1 9 6 6 ] 31-63). 21 Contra Lohmeyer, Das Evangelium des Markus ^''(igö}) 1 9 ; BeasleyMurray 3 2 . 22 Contra A . Gilmore in Christian Baptism (ed. Gilmore, 1959) 7 3 , 23 See J . J . von Allmen, 'Baptism' in VocB. In Mark the only point that John really makes about his own baptism is that it is no more than a prepara tory rite (D. E . Nineham. St Mark [ 1 9 6 3 ] 5 7 ) . 2-«See also Dahl 4 5 .

The Expectation of John the Baptist

ij

and necessary expression of repentance, even that it constituted the act of turning (fierdvoia/Iüh). Mark and L u k e describe it as a ßaTTTioiia fieravoias;

Matthew and Mark teil how all were baptized

in Jordan 'confessing their sins'; and Matthew has the pecuHar phrase about J o h n baptizing eis /icrdvoiav, which is best understood to mean that the actual acting out of the resolve to be baptized helped to crystallize repentance and to stir it up to füll expression. We may not however say that J o h n or the Evangelists con sidered his baptism to be the Instrument of G o d in eifecting forgiveness - as though et? ä^eoiv aixapTimv depended on ßanTicrixa

and not ixerävoia.^^ This is hardly how L u k e understood the phrase when he took it over from Mark, and since Mark nowhere eise speaks of forgiveness (except the irrelevant 3.29) or repentance, Luke must be our guide as to the meaning here. L u k e 24.47 shows that iierävoia

eis a^emv afxapri&v IS z compact phrase and

unitary

concept - repentance bringing or resulting in forgiveness of sins. In 3.3, therefore, it is better to take the whole phrase as a description of jSciTTTta/xa, with eis dependent only on ixeravotas. In other words, it is not a repentance baptism which results in the forgiveness of sins, but J o h n ' s baptism is the expression of the repentance which results in the forgiveness of sins. This is confirmed by a comparison with such passages as Acts 3 . 1 9 ; 5 . 3 1 ; 1 0 . 4 3 ; 1 1 . 1 8 ; 1 3 . 3 8 ; 26.18.27 Moreover, the very idea of a rite which effected forgiveness was whoUy foreign to the prophetic genius of the OT.^s T h e Qumran sect certainly rejected any idea that sprinkled water could be efficacious to deanse from sins and restricted the cleansing effects of water to the flesh, distinguishing that cleansing from the cleans ing from sin which is effected by the holy spirit of the Community 35 Cf. Kraeling 7 1 ; Taylor 1 5 5 ; Moule, Mark 9. Despite Matt. 3 . 1 1 J . Schneider argues that conversion is distinct from and the presupposition of baptism {Die Taufe im Neuen Testament [ 1 9 5 2 ] 2 3 ; cf. T E V ; see also p. 94). On Lohmeyer's view that repentance was received rather than expressed in baptism {Täufer 6 7 - 7 3 , 7 5 - 7 » ; foUowed by Behm, TDNT IV looi), see Beasley-Murray 3 - ^ . 2« So argue Büchsei i39f.; E . Klostermaim, Das Markusevangelium 1 9 5 0 ) ; O. Cullmann, Baptism in tbe New Testament ( E T 1950) 1 1 ; G. Delling, Die Taufe im Neuen Testament (1963) 4 3 . 2' See also W. Wükens, TZ 23 (1967) 33f.; cf. Mark 1 6 . 1 6 (often taken as an addition to Mark pattemed on Luke's narrative of the Gospel's expansion in Acts), where again the decisive element is belief, and baptism can be seen only as an expression of belief. See further in ch. IX. 2* See Kraeling 1 2 1 ; also Barrett, Tradition 3of.; Schweizer, Markus 1 6 ; cf. C. G. Montefiore, Tbe Synoptic Gospels «(1927) I 7.

r6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

( i Q S 3.3-9). According to Josephus, John's baptism was 'not to beg for pardon for sins committed, but for the purification of the body, when the soul had previously been cleansed by right behaviour'.29 T h e unanimity of this witness makes it virtually certain that J o h n would have been the first to reject the idea that his baptism effected or was the means by which G o d bestowed forgiveness. It has become customary in recent years to meet these arguments by an appeal to the idea of prophetic symboUsm: J o h n ' s baptism not only expressed G o d ' s will but also in some small degree effected it.s" T h e resemblance of some prophetic action to mimetic magic is unquestionable (particularly I I K i n g s i 3 . i 8 f . ) , and it is probable that J o h n ' s baptism falls into this category. H o w ever, it should be noted that the great majority of examples cited by Wheeler Robinson are prospective, foretelUng acts - w h i c h symbolize events which will take place some time in the future. Indeed it is difficult to find examples of a prophetic act w h i c h symbolizes something present to the prophet at the time of his action. This confirms what is already obvious from the Baptist's own preaching: that John's baptism is a prophetic symbol not o f present forgiveness, but of the future Spirit-and-fire baptism. John's baptism was a prophetic act in the sense that it was neces sary for this baptism to be administered before the Coming O n e could appear to administer his own baptism (indeed J o h n i . 3 1 - 3 4 impHes as much). I n that sense John's baptism helped to b r i n g about the baptism in Spirit-and-fire. But w e certainly catmot say that John's baptism effected the messianic baptism in the sense in which those w h o bring up this point speak of baptism effecting forgiveness. The fact is that in relation to repentance and forgiveness J o h n ' s baptism was a rite rather than a pro'phetic action,3i and w e must look for its meaning at this point within the context of O T ritual.32 The principal purpose of the O T rites and ceremonies w a s to Ant. 1 8 . 1 1 7 . See again Kraeling 1 2 1 . 3» H. W. Robinson in Old Testament Essays (ed. D . C. Simpson 1 9 2 7 ) 1 5 , JTS 43 (1942) 1 2 9 - 3 9 , and Spirit i<)zß. See further Flemington 2 0 - 2 2 ; N. Clark, Approacb to tbe Theology of tbe Sacraments ( 1 9 5 7 ) 1 1 ; Gilmore 7 5 - 8 3 ; Beasley-Murray 4 3 . R. E . O. White, The Biblical Doctrine of Initiation ( i 9 6 0 ) recogni2«s some of the difficulties of this argtunent ( 8 1 - 8 3 ) . 31 Cf. G . W. H. Lampe, Tbe Seal ofthe Spirit «(1967) 22f.; H. Kraft, TZ 1 7 ( 1 9 6 1 ) 400, 402f. 32 See p. 2 1 ; also Dahl 3 7 - 4 5 .

The Expectation of John the Baptist

17

enable men to 'draw near' to G o d . They cleansed the body and thus removed the ceremonial defilement which prevented access, but they did not cleanse the heart or take away sins.^a They were therefore symbols ofthe cleansing which G o d himself immediately effected apart from this ritual (e.g. Deut. 3o.6;Ps. 5 i ; I s a . 1 . 1 0 - 1 8 ; Joel 2 . 1 2 - 1 4 ) ; but, more than syrnbols, they were also the means God used to encourage the humble and give confidence to the repentant to approacb him, by indicating his gracious will to forgive and receive such. Indeed w e may truly characterize them by saying that they were the means G o d gave to the worshipper to express his repentance and to indicate openly his desire for G o d ' s forgiveness. It was only when they were divorced from that true repentance and genuine desire that the prophets attacked them and called for the repentance without the ritual (e.g. Deut. 1 0 . 1 6 ; I Sam. 1 5 . 2 2 ; Jer. 4.4; 7 . 3 - 4 ; Ezek. 1 8 . 3 0 - 3 1 ; Hos. 6.6; A m o s 5 . 2 1 24), for even then it was evident that it is the repentance which receives the forgiveness, not the ritual, and not even the repentance necessarily expressed in the ritual. But G o d ' s Intention was that both ritual and repentance should be united, the former giving vital expression to the latter, and the latter giving meaning to the former, so that the ritual act in fact would be the occasion, though not the means oi cleansing. In this sense John's baptism was a 'sacrament', an 'effective sign', but not in the sense that it effected what it signified. T o sum Up, John's baptism was essentiaUy preparatory, not initiatory, a prophetic symbol of the messianic baptism, in that it symbolized and prepared the way for the action and experience of the messianic judgment. In its immediate application as a rite it proclaimed G o d ' s willingness to cleanse the penitent there and then and to bring him safely through the coming wrath. Like the rites of the O T it enabled die repentant to draw near to G o d by giving him a visible expression of his repentance and itself express ing symboUcaUy G o d ' s forgiveness. B y helping forward the re pentance and bringing it to fuU flower the rite would provide the occasion for the divine-human encounter in which the forgiveness was received. Otherwise the forgiveness was mediated directiy and independently of the rite, for in prophetic theology it is the re pentance alone which results in and receives the forgiveness, even when it is expressed in the rite (cf. i Q S 3.6-9). The writer to the Hebrews denied that this was even possible (9.9-14;

18

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

A third important question is, What light do the Gospel reeords at this point shed on the Christian understanding of John's prophecy of a future Spirit-and-fire baptism ? Many answer by taking the talk of baptism literally: the prophecy, they say, was referred to Christian baptism.** But this will hardly do. ßa-nrlCeiv in and of itself does not specify water.35 Like the baptism of Mark io.38f., L u k e 12.50, the baptism in Spirit(-and-fire) is obviously a meta phor. It was originated as a rhetorical device to bring out the contrast between John's ministry and that of the Coming One most sharply. A s such it was suitable only because the rite most characteristic of J o h n served as a vivid and expressive figure of the Coming judgment.3« T h e w o r d 'baptize' was not an essential part o f t h e description o f t h e messianic Spirit-and-fire ministry; other metaphors might just as well have been used. T h e Christian fulfilment was, of course, different from the Baptist's expectation,^''' but even with the Christian modification the Baptist's central contrast between water-baptism and Spirit(-and-fire) baptism holds good. This is most obvious in L u k e for whom the baptism in the Spirit continues to be a metaphorical use of 'baptism' and does not refer to a rite at all.38 With Matthew it is in all probability the same, for he seems to share Luke's view of the dispensational divide at the death and resurrection of Jesus,^» and he shares also the same Q tradition of J o h n ' s words with the same contrast between John's waterSee e.g. Bultmann, Hittoiy 2 4 7 ; Cullmann, Baptism 1 0 . 85 G. Kittel, Theologische Studien und Kritiken 87 ( 1 9 1 4 ) 3 1 . See also Delling, NovTest 2 ( 1 9 5 7 ) 9 7 - 1 0 2 , and p. 1 2 9 below. 3* So Wellhausen, Matthaei 6, Das Evangelium Marci (1903) 5. See also Michaelis, Täufer 2 3 ; C. F. D. Moule, Theology 48 (1945) 246; A . E . J . Rawlinson, Christian Initiation ( 1 9 4 7 ) 2 5 ; Best 2 4 2 ; J . Guillet in BNT 9 3 ; M . C. Harper, The Baptism ofFire (1968) lof. 3 ' See ch. III. This meant that the metaphor became less appropriate, and is probably the reason why its useful life as a description of the gift of the Spirit soon came to an end (it is found only once without distinct referencc to Pentecost - I Cor. 1 2 . 1 3 ) . 88 Acts 1 . 5 ; I I . 1 6 . It is especially striking that the two receptions of the Spirit in Acts specifically described as baptisms with Spirit (Pentecost and Caesarea) are the ones most clearly separated from and independent of Christian water-baptism (or any rite). See Part Two. 8» Matthew probably regarded forgiveness as something which John's baptism O n l y foreshadowed, and which could not be given or received until the completion of Jesus' mission, for he omits the phrase eis a^taw anapnäv in his description of John's baptism and Stands alone in including the same phrase in the words of institution at the Last Supper (26.28).

Tbe Expectation of John the Baptist

19

baptism and die Coming One's Spirit-and-fire baptism. He certainly gives no indication that he thought the latter was a form of waterbaptism, or involved such. The assumption must be that he too took it merely as a metaphor. If Mark has consciously shaped the tradition of the Baptist's prophecy to exclude the 'and fire', as indeed all talk of judgment, it implies that he ignored John's own understanding of the future baptism and preserved the saying in the form most familiär to Christian experience, in which case he is almost certainly thinking of Pentecost.40 Moreover, in Mark the contrast between the two baptisms is exceedingly sharp (far more so than in Q ) : iyoj eßamiaa v S a r i avTos ßavTiaei TTvev/Mari aylip.

Here the emphasized words are T and 'He', 'water' and 'Holy Spirit'. Water is set over against Spirit as that which distinguishes John's baptism from the future baptism. It would seriously distort the sense of the logion if Spirit-baptism was equated or conflated with water-baptism. In J o h n , the Baptist three times insists that his baptism is ev SSan. In replying to his questioners, w h o have assumed rightiy or wrongly that baptism has an eschatological significance (i .25),*^ he does not deny that there is an eschatological baptism, but by disclaiming to be an eschatological figure, and by stressing that his baptism is in water, he implies that the Coming One's baptism will be o f a different order (1.26). T h e purpose of J o h n ' s baptism is to reveal Jesus to Israel, and presumably therefore it is only prepara tory to the mis?ion of the Christ ( 1 . 3 1 ) ; the Christ's baptism will not be ev «San but ev TTVEUFTART dyico ( 1 . 3 3 ) . T h e implication is that J o h n ' s water-baptism is only a shadow and symbol of the Christ's Spirit-baptism. *2 T h e contrast between the t w o baptisms is the contrast between J o h n and Jesus - the antithesis of preparation and fulfilment, of shadow and substance. This contrast is probably resumed in 3.31-36. John seems to be o tov (v. 31 - W. BxatT, Johanttesevangelium [HNT 1912] 40; E .

eKvrjsy^s

« Schweizer, TWNT V I 396. *i See R. E . Brown, Tbe Gospel According to John (i-xii) (Anchor Bible, 1966) 4 6 - 5 4 . J . H. Bemard, St John (ICC 1928) 5 i f . ; G . H. C. Macgregor, The Gospel of John (Moffiatt 1928) 2 5 ; R. Schnackenburg, Das Jobannesevangelium I (1965) 304.

20

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Hoskyns, The Fourth Gospel ^ [ 1 9 4 7 ] 2 2 4 ; C. K. Barrett, The Gospel Accord ing to St John [ 1 9 3 5 ] 1 8 7 ; Brown, John i 6 o f . ; J , N. Sanders and B. A . Mastin, The Gospel According to St John [ 1 9 6 8 ] 1 3 5 ; Wink 9 4 ; cf. M . - J . Lagrange, Evangile selon Saint Jean ^ [ 1 9 3 6 ] 9 7 ; M. Black, An Aramaic Approacb to the Gospels and Acts ' [ 1 9 6 7 ] i 4 7 f . ) , and v. 3 4 most likely includes a reference to Jesus' gift of the Spirit to his disciples (p. 3 2 ) . Not only John and Jesus are set in antithesis (v. 3 1 ) , but also their respective ministries: baptism with ü S a r a TTGAACI is set against a giving of the Spirit OVK E'K /ieVpou. W e may n o t therefore reach the Christian sacrament by equating it with Spirit-baptism o r b y fusing the t w o limbs of the Baptist's antithesis. O n the contrary, since, as most agree, Christian waterbaptism derives directly f r o m the Johantiine rite, it is more likely that, in so far as the antithesis carries o v e r into the Christian era, Christian water-baptism takes the place o f J o h n ' s water-baptism as a symbol of and contrast w i t h Christ's Spirit-baptism.^^ A s w e shall see (pp. 99f. below), this is certainly nearer the truth so far as L u k e is concerned. It has sometimes been argued that the Baptist's prophecy w a s fulfilled during Jesus' ministry, whether in the baptism which Jesus is Said to have administered in J o h n 3.22 - a water-baptism which is also the Spirit-baptism foretold in 1 . 3 3 « - o r in the fact that J e s u s ' ministry constituted a sifting and judging of Israelis W i t h regard t o the former, while such a theological overtone w o u l d n o t b e o u t of place in the F o u r t h Evangelist, w e have also t o remember that he does write w i t h at least some semblance of history, and particularly with regard t o the Spirit he has set himself a historical ' n o t yet' in 7.39, which must take precedence o v e r any theological deduction such as the one d r a w n here by his Interpreters. In 3 . 2 2 24 he is relating a piece o f t h e history o f the incamate Christ - v . 24 leaves us in n o doubt o n that score - and as such it falls within the Evangelist's self-imposed f r a m e w o r k o f history. 7.39 therefore rules out any attempt t o see i n 3.22 the fulfilment of 1 . 3 3 . « See also Cranfield, Mark 49. *«C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel {i<)^i) 3tof.; Bauer 3 9 ; Macgregor 89; R. H. Lightfoot, St John's Gospel (1956) 1 1 9 ; Cullmann, Baptism 79f.; Bieder jof., 5 3 . Schütz suggests that the activity ascribed to Jesus in 3 . 2 2 , 26 is baptism in the Holy Spirit, not water-baptism (94-96). «5 This is the thesis which J . E . Yates has argued in connection with Mark {The Spirit and the Kingdom [1963]). C. H. Dodd has supported the basic thrust of his argument (in a private communication dated 28 October 1966).

The Expectation of John the Baptist

21

It is no doubt precisely because of these two facts (Jesus' baptism is Spirit-baptism, and the Spirit was not yet [given]) that the correction of 4.2 was added, whether by the Evangelist or by an editor. The baptism administered by Jesus' disciples was probably a continuation of John's baptism (Bernard 128; Macgregor 90; Lagrange, Jean 9if.; Hoskyns 222, 227; Brown, John 1 5 1 ; M. Barth, Die Taufe - Ein Sakrament? [1951] 39}; Gvdllet in BNT 100; contra R. Bultmann, Das Evangelium des Johannes [195 o] 122 n. 3; Schütz 94-96). If we are to under stand that the dispute of v. 25 was occasioned by a Jew who had been baptized by Jesus and was concerned with the relative merits of John's and Jesus' baptism (H. Strathmann, Das Evangelium nach Johannes ^''[NTD 1963] 77; Schnackenburg 451) then we should note that the description of the discussion as Trepi Kadapiafiov sets both baptisms 'within the Jewish System of purifications' (Barrett, John 182); cf. 2.6 - Kard TOV Kadapiafiov. With regard to the latter, while J e s u s ' ministry certainly had a KpMJis-effect, proof is quite lacking that the EvangeUsts regarded these reactions to Jesus as a fulfilment ofthe saying about baptism in Spirit-and-fire. O n the contrary, in J o h n the two themes are quite distinct, J e s u s ' ministry as Baptizer in the Spirit being expressly postponed until he has been glorified (7.39). Again, the baptism in Spirit(-and-fire) is something which Jesus does, not merely a reaction to his presence. T h e Synoptic writers do not use the Johannine fcpiVis-theme in the construction of their Gospels. In Mark it is absent even from the Baptist's preaching, and Mark 1.8 most clearly reflects the Christian understanding of Spiritbaptism.4« So far as Matthew is concerned, the Separation of g o o d from evil and the destruction of the latter by fire still Hes in the future in relation to the ministry of Jesus, ev rfj awreXeCa TOV aicDvos (Matt. 1 3 . 4 0 - 4 3 ; 2 5 . 4 1 , 46). We have yet to examine the most important instance of J o h n ' s baptism and the way in which L u k e and J o h n treat the theme of Spirit-baptism, but w e can pause at this point to summarize our findings so far as they bear on our debate with Pentecostal and sacramentalist. T h e former must note that in the initial formulation of his favourite metaphor any idea of a baptism in the Spirit as something which those already in the K i n g d o m might yet be Had we Mark alone it would be impossible to link 'baptism in Spirit' with the various reactions to Jesus' ministry - which makes Yates's thesis all the more surprising. I suspect that Dodd is attracted to it by his desire to find Synoptic parallels to Johsumine themes.

22

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

without is totally excluded. T h e baptism in the Spirit was not something distinct from and subsequent to entry into the K i n g dom; it was only by means of the baptism in Spirit that one could enter at all. T o the sacramentalist w e must make t w o points. First, the baptism in Spirit does not refer to water-baptism. It is simply a metaphor which was drawn from John's water-rite and which was chosen primarily with a view to bringing out the contrast with the water-rite most sharply. In the preaching of the Baptist waterbaptism had no part in the future messianic baptism beyond symbolizing it and preparing for it. Second, it is a mistake to say that J o h n ' s baptism g a v e or conveyed forgiveness. It is even imprecise and misleading to say that John's baptism resulted in forgive ness. It is the repentance expressed in the baptism which resulted in forgiveness, and it was G o d who himself conveyed the forgive ness directly to the heart of the repentant. Baptism was the means J o h n used to stimidate repentance and to give it occasion for füll and public expression - he may even have regarded baptism as the necessary form for expressing repentance - but that G o d conveyed the forgiveness through baptism we caimot say on either grammatical or theological groimds.

III T H E E X P E R I E N C E OF J E S U S A T

JORDAN

T H I S event in the life of Jesus is of peculiar importance both for those who speak of baptism in the Spirit as a second experience for Christians, and for those w h o think of the Spirit as given through water-baptism. F o r both Pentecostal and sacramentalist the events at Jordan establish an invaluable precedent and pattern, which has a formative and even normative significance for later Christian doctrine and experience. I f Jesus was baptized in the Spirit at Jordan, an additional blessing to equip him with power for his mission some thirty years after his supernatural birth through the Spirit, how much more should Christians receive the baptism in the Spirit after their birth from above in order to equip them for service, say the Pentecostals.i Sacramentalists, on the other band, see in Jesus' baptism by J o h n the connecting link between John's baptism and Christian baptism: it was Jesus' baptism which united John's water-baptism with the promised Spirit-baptism to form die Christian baptism in water-and-Spirit.2 We shall examine these two views in tum. O n the face of it the Pentecostal has a g o o d case. In view of the birth narratives of Matthew and L u k e one can speak of Jesus' anointing with the Spirit at Jordan (Acts 10.38) as a second 1 See e.g. M. C. Harper, Power for tbe Body of Christ (1964) 1 8 - 2 0 ; Fire 1 5 ; B. Allen, New Life and New Power (1965) 5 ; G. Lindsay, Baptism of tbe Holy Spirit (1964) lof.; L . Christenson, Speaking in Tongues and its Significance for tbe Cburcb (1968) 36f.; and earlier, R. M. Riggs, Tbe Spirit Himself (1949) 38f. For a similar argument used on behalf of Confirmation see Thomton 9 6 - 1 0 0 , I I 0 - 1 8 , 1 2 8 - 3 2 , i39f., i6of. ' A . E . J . Rawlinson, Tbe Gospel According to St Mark ( 1 9 2 5 ) 1 1 ; von Baer 163-9; W. R o b i n s o n , ^ 9 ( 1 9 3 8 - 3 9 ) 3 8 9 ; Bomkamm46; Lampe, J w / 3 4 ; Cullmann, Baptism 2 1 ; Gilmore 9 1 ; Conzelmaim 2 3 ; Grundrnann, Lukas 1 0 8 ; Church of Scotland Commission, Biblical Doctrine 1 8 ; Guillet in BNT 94f.; White 98, io8.

2J

24

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

'experience' of the Spirit. It is quite probable, though not certain, that L u k e means us to understand that Jesus was every bit as füll of the Holy Spirit as J o h n was ( 1 . 1 5 ) , and that Jesus' growth in wisdom and grace was due to his possession of the Spirit_(.2.4o, 52);^ the link between the Spirit and divine sonship (and fihal cö'nsciousness) would also be a pointer in this direction ( l 4 4 4 - i 4 9 ; 3 . 2 2 ; cf. R o m . 8 . 1 5 - 1 6 ; G a l . 4.6).'* Again w e may legitimately speak of the descent of the Spirit on Jesus at Jordan as a baptism in the Spirit ;5 and we certainly cannot deny that it was this anoint ing with the Spirit which equipped Jesus with power and authority for his mission to follow (Acts 10.38).^ It would even be possible to argue that the theme of imitatio Christi, which w e find here and there in the N T (e.g. Mark 10.59; I Cor. i i . i ; I Thess. 1.6; Heb. 2 . i o ; I J o h n 2.6) by implication Covers this part of Jesus' life as well, although there is no real exegetical basis for this inference. Where the Pentecostalist thesis breaks down is in its failure to grasp the fact that w e are dealing here with events whose signifi cance, at least for those w h o record them, lies almost totally in the part they play in salvation-history. There are only a handful of events in all ihxs history which can be called pivotal. Jesus' recep tion of the Spirit at Jordan is one of them: on this pivot the whole of salvation-history swings round into a new course. I n other words, w e are dealing not so much with stages in the life of Jesus, which belong to the same dispensation of salvation-history and so can be appealed to as the pattem for all w h o belong to the same dispensation; we are dealing rather with stages in salvation-history itself. T h e experience of Jesus at Jordan is far more than some thing merely personal - it is a unique moment in history: the beginning of a new epoch in salvation-history - the beginning, albeit in a restricted sense, of the End-time, the messianic age, the new covenant. This means that although Jesus' anointing with the Spirit may possibly be described as a second earperience of the 3 Cf. H. B. Swete, Tbe Holy Spirit in tbe Nev Testament (1909) 3 5 ; Marsh 1 0 3 , 1 0 5 ; J . N. Geldenhuys, Tbe Gospel 0/Luke (1950) i46f. * Cf. Lampe in Studies löyf. * See below pp. 3 1 , 34f.; and J . M. Robinson 2 6 ; Barth, Taufe 7 4 ; P. Carrington, According to Mark (i960) 3 8 ; in addition to those cited in n. 2 . * Rawlinson, Mark 1 1 , 2 5 4 ; Lampe in Studies 1 7 1 ; K . H. Rengstorf, Das Evangelium nach Lukas ( N T D 1958) 5 9 - 6 0 ; Filson, Mattber» 6 8 ; Grundmann, Lukas 108. See also p. 3 2 below.

The Experience of Jesus at Jordan

25

Spirit f o r Jesus, it is n o t a second e ^ e r i e n c e of the new covenant, or of Jesus within the new covenant. It is in fact the event which begins the new covenant f o r Jesus - it initiates the messianic age and initiates Jesus into the messianic age.' Let me demonstrate this m o r e fuUy. {a) Notice first the difference between the preaching of J o h n and that of Jesus. F o r J o h n , as w e have seen, the End-time was still w h o l l y future - imminent, but future; the majestic, messianic figure w h o w o u l d bring in the eschaton and the K i n g d o m through his baptism of judgment had n o t yet come, though he was almost on them. So t o o f o r the Evangelists J o h n is only the foreruimer, the way-preparer, the one w h o rushes ahead to armounce the Coming One's approacb. F o r Luke, in particular, J o h n belongs v e r y definitely t o the old age of the law and the prophets (cf. L u k e 1 6 . 1 6 with Matt. I I . I i ) , f o r the fact that Luke relates the close of the Baptist's ministry before turning to his encounter w i t h Jesus ( 3 . 1 8 20; cf. A c t s 1 0 . 3 7 ; 1 3 . 2 4 - 2 5 ) , even though the climax of his ministry lay in this encounter, implies that Luke wants t o make precisely this point - J o h n belongs in his w h o l e ministry t o the old epoch o f salvation. 8 Mark also seems to distinguish John's ministry from Jesus' fairly clearly (Mark 1 . 1 4 - J . M. Robinson 22f.; cf. Wink 6 ) . eßännaa of 1.8 may indicate that the ministry of the Baptist ends when that of Jesus begins (so most); but it could also be a gnomic aorist = 'I baptize' (Rawlinson, Mark 8; Klostermann, Markus; Black, Aramaic Approacb i28f.; Taylor 64, 157; Cranfield, Mark 48f.). W i t h Jesus, h o w e v e r , it is different. There is still talk o f a Coming One (the Son o f Man), still talk o f a future judgment (e.g. M a r k 1 3 . 2 4 - 2 6 ; Matt. 1 3 . 3 0 ; Luke 2 1 . 3 4 - 3 5 ) . But there is also the ' Cf. von Baer i 6 6 f ; F . J . Leenhardt, L « Bapteme Cbretien (1944) 2 7 ; Kraeling i54f.; Lohmeyer, Markus 2 5 ; Schweizer, TWNT V I 398; Conzcl mann 2 2 - 2 7 ; J . M. Robinson 27f.; H. J . Wotherspoon, What Happentd at Pentecost? {i^i"]) 1 6 ; Hill 244. 8 See Conzelmarm 2 2 - 2 7 ; U. Wilckens, Die Missionsreden der Apostel geschichte ( 1 9 6 1 ) 1 0 1 - 5 ; H. Flender, St LMke: Theologian of Redemptive History (ET 1967) 1 2 2 - 4 - though Conzclmann overstates his case (see e.g. above p. 9 n. 3 , and his treatment of Luke 7.27 - 1 6 7 n. 1 ) . For a more thoroughgoing criticism of Conzelmarm see W. C. Robinson 5 - 4 2 , also Wink 4 6 - 5 7 , who, however, both here and in his treatment of Matthew ( 2 7 - 4 1 ) does not give enough weight to the descent of the Spirit on Jesus as the decisive mark of the Kingdom and beginning of the age of fulülment.

20

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

note of fulfilment. The time of the E n d expected by the prophets has come in some sense at least (Matt, n . 4 - 6 ; L u k e io.23f.). T h e K i n g d o m which for J o h n was wholly future has come upon them and is in the midst of them (Matt. 1 2 . 2 8 ; L u k e i7.2of.). Satan has already been bound and his goods are being plundered (Mark 3.27).* In short, a decisive 'shift in the aeons' has taken place. A n d if w e inquire, A t what point? the answer is clearly, A t Jordan, when Jesus was anointed with the Spirit. It is after this event that the note of fulfilment enters: Jesus' first words in Mark's Gospel are, 'The time {Kaipös - the eschatological time) is fulfilled . . .' ( 1 . 1 5 ) - fulfilled because the eschatological Spirit has come; the year ofthe Lord's favour has arrived because the L o r d has anointed him with the Spirit (Luke 4.i8f.). It is by the compulsion of the Spirit that Jesus goes to meet Satan, and in the power of the Spirit that Jesus defeats Satan (Mark i.izf.; 3.22-30). I t i s this manifestation of power which demonstrates the Kingdom's presence - indeed it is only because the Spirit is present and active in Jesus that the K i n g d o m can be said to be present (Matt. 12.28). This point is important: the fulfilment and K i n g d o m came not with Jesus alone or Jesus in himself (he was already about thirty years of age and the new age had not so far broken in through him), nor with the Spirit alone (who according to Luke was very active at the period of Jesus' birth and filled the Baptist from his birth); the decisive change in the ages was effected by the Spirit Coming down upon Jesus. It is this unique anointing of this unique person which brings in the E n d . That Luke uses the same language (m/üirAij/w) to describe both John's experience ofthe Spirit and that ofthe Christians in Acts does not make the dispensational divide any narrower. John's experience can be des cribed in terms o f t h e spirit and power of Elijah' ^ u k e 1.17), whereas in the post-Pentecost Situation Christians experience 'the Spirit of Jesus' (Acts 16.7). There is a content in Christian experience whidi was wholly lacking in John's. Cf, e.g. Swete 2if.; see also pp. 3if. below. Qj) Then there is the actual narrative of the Spirit-anointing of Jesus. There are several eschatological features here. T h e rending of the heavens, a common feature of apocalyptic writing, indicates a breaking through from the heavenly realm to the earthly.io But » See E . Best, Tbe Temptation ani tbe Passion ( 1 9 6 5 ) 1 1 - 1 5 . 1" Lohmeyer, Markus 2 1 ; Bornkamm 45 ; Taylor 1 6 0 ; H. Schlier, Besinnung und das Neue Testament (1964) a i } ; C. Maurer, TWNT VII 9 6 2 ; Bieder 8 1 , 8 3 .

The Experience of Jesus at Jordan

27

in this instance it is not metely a vision which Jesus sees or a voice which he hears, but the Spirit Iiimself comes upon him. T o link the voice with the Bath qol is to miss the whole point. F o r the 'daughter of the voice' was believed to have taken the place of the direct Inspiration of the prophets by the Holy Spirit. A n d it is in this moment above all that the long drought of knowing the Spirit comes to an end. It is not simply that the age of prophecy returns (according to Luke that had already happened), but rather that the age of the Spirit has now come.

In this moment the eschatological hopes of the prophets for a Spirit-anointed Messiah were fulfilled (Isa. 1 1 . 2 ; 6 1 . r). T h e dove also should probably be given eschatological significance.ii Quite possibly it is intended to recall G e n . 1.2,12 or even the dove sent out by Noah after the Fiood.^^ Either w a y the dove would mean a new beginning, a new epoch in G o d ' s dealings with creation, even a new covenant - in the eschatological circumstances, the new covenant. Finally, thcie is the heavenly voice. I f indeed the words are intended as a combinaüon of Ps. 2.7 and Isa. 42.1 (as most stiU maintain)i4 then w e have to say that the Evangelists regard this as the moment when Jesus is anointed with the Spirit as Messiah.is It is only then that he can properly be called Messiah (the Anointed One), only then that he takes up the function of Messiah, and only then that the messianic age can be said to have begun. (c) We have been touching here on the vexed question of the 11 Beasley-Murray 6 i . 12 The Rabbis sometimes took the dove as a picture of the Spirit 'brooding' over chaos (Lohmeyer, Markus 2 1 , 2 5 ; Barrett, Tradition 3 9 ; Taylor 1 6 1 ) . 18 Von Baer j 8 , 1 6 9 ; J . Kosnetter Die Taufe Jesu (1936) i27f.; Leenhardt, B a p / l w 2 o ; L a m p e , J ' M / 3 6 ; a l s o i 7 r 5 ( 1 9 3 2 ) 167;Grundmann,Da/JBxaÄge/wOT nach Markus (1959) 3 2 . This Suggestion gains in plausibility if John's baptism viras intended to symbolize the coming flood of judgment (see above p. 1 2 n. I I , p. 1 3 n. 1 9 ) , so recalJing the Flood of Noah (cf. I Pet. 3 . 2 0 - 2 1 ) ; for then the dove would signify the end of judgment and the beginning of a new era of grace. This is perhaps another reason why Luke emphasizes the reality of the dove so much. " M . Hooker disputes the allusion to Isa. 4 2 . 1 on the grounds of divergence from the L X X {Jesus and tbe Servant [1959] 6 8 - 7 5 ) , » questionable argu ment in view of Matt. 1 2 . 1 8 ; cf. Acts i.8 where the coming of the Spirit on the disciples equips them to fulfil what is in fact the Servant's mission ims eaxärou Tijs YVS (Isa. 49.6; cf. Acts 1 5 . 4 7 ) . 1» The voice refers to the gift of the Spirit: 'The word of God to Jesus explains the act of God on Jesus' (Büchsei 162).

28

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

messiahship of Jesus and the bearing of this event on it. The quesdon is often posed thus: Was the descent of the Spirit the moment of Jesus' adopdon as Son of G o d and appointment as Messiah or merely the climax and confirmation of a growing conviction that he was Son and Messiah pi' It is not for us to speculate about or defend the messianic self-consciousness of Jesus, but it is important to call attention to the danger of discussing those questions as though their primary importance related to the person of Jesus, or even the personal self-consciousness of Jesus the same mistake as the Pentecostals make. T h e concern of the EvangeUsts is much broader than that, important though it may be; for them the importance of the whole event Ues in its signifi cance for the history of redemption. T h e descent of the Spirit on Jesus effects not so much a change in Jesus, his person or his Status, as the begirming of a new stage in salvation-history. The thought is not so much of Jesus becoming what he was not before, but of Jesus entering where he was not before - a new epoch in G o d ' s plan of redemption - and thus, by virtue of bis unique personaUty, assuming a role which was not his before because it could not be his by reason of the Kaipös being yet unfulfiUed. It is only when w e grasp this point that w e can give fuU signifi cance both to the birth narratives in Matthew and L u k e and to the events at Jordan. Thus, for example, when the adoption formula from Ps. 2.7 is quoted in part at least b y Luke, his principal thought is that the new age brings Jesus a new role. He does not intend to deny what he has already written in chs. i and 2, nor does he naively contradict himself; there is a sense in which Jesus is Messiah and Son of G o d from his birth (1.3 5 , 4 3 , 7 6 ; 2 . 1 1 , 2 6 , 4 9 ) ; but there is also a sense in which he oidy becomes Messiah and Son at Jordan, since he does not in fact become the Anointed One (Messiah) nH then (Isa. 6 1 . 1 - 2 ; L u k e 4 . 1 8 ; Acts lo.^i),^^ and only then does the heavenly voice hau him as Son; just as there is a sense in which he does not become Messiah and Son tUl his resur1« An affirmative answer is given with varying degrees of conviction e.g. by Dibelius 59, 6 3 ; Creed 5 6 ; D. Plooij in Amicitiae Corolla: Essays presented to]. Ä. Harris {cd. H. G. Wood 1 9 3 3 ) 2 4 1 . zja; B. H. Btanscomb, Tbe Gospel ofMark (Moflatt 1 9 3 7 ) 1 6 ; Barrett, Tradition 4 1 - 4 4 ; Klostctmann, Markus 7 ; Nineham 62f. " Likewise e.g. Rawlinson, Mark 1 0 , 2 5 4 ; Taylor 1 6 2 ; Cranfield, Mark 5 5 ; G. B. Cdrd, StUike (1963) 7 7 ; Moule, Mark 1 1 . 1» W. C. van Unnik. NTS 8 ( 1 9 6 1 - 6 2 ) 1 0 1 - 1 6 .

The Experience of Jesus at Jordan

29

rection and ascension (Acts 2.36; 1 5 . 3 5 ) . The answer to these apparent contradictions is not to be found in different Christologies, as though L u k e did not recognize the import of what he was writing, but in the movement of salvation-history. A t each new phase of salvation-history Jesus enters upon a new and fuller phase of his messiahship and sonship. It is not so much that Jesus became what he was not before, but that history became what it was not before; and Jesus as the one w h o effects these changes of history from within history, is himself affected by them. Thus, while giving füll weight to the events at Jordan and their meaning for the EvangeUsts, one can stiU find plenty of room for a messianic self-consciousness and a conviction of divine sonship even before Jordan. We can even say, although w e cannot prove, that it was as a result of this self-awareness that Jesus submitted to John's baptism, thereby conmiitting himself to the fuller messiahship and sonship which foUowed with the descent of the Spirit and the inbreaking of the End-time thus brought by the Spirit. (d) What was this new role, this fuUer messiahship, which came to Jesus through the anointing with the Spirit, and to which he committed himself in his baptism? T h e first three EvangeUsts^* would reply: T h e descent of the Spirit made Jesus the representative of Israel, the new Adam. This foUows from the words spoken by the heavetüy voice, for both the king (of Ps. 2) and the Servant (of Isa. 42) were representative figures,^'' and the three key words (of Mark) - vlos, ayamjTÖs and cuSoiojaa - 'together form a concept which in the O T is appUed only to Israel'.^i Each of the EvangeUsts enlarges on this idea in his own way. Mark has it that the Spirit desccnded Uke a dove eis airov;^^ since 1* The salvation-histoty significance of the Spirit's descent on Jesus is not so cleafly matked in John, who wishes to focus attention on the actual salvation-efFecting events at the close of Jesus' earthly ministry (see ch. X I V ) , but itis implied in such passages as I . J 3 ; 3 . 3 4 (see p. 3 2 below); 6.27 ;cf. i.i6f., where we might easily Substitute wvcw/io for x«s (see p. 1 1 6 below). 20 'The king represents the people to Yahweh' (H. W. Robinson, 'The Hebrew Conccption of Corporate Personality', B Z A W 66 [ 1 9 3 6 ] 56, reprinted as Corporate Personality in Ancient Israel [1964] 1 1 ) ; that the Servant of Isa. 4 2 was seen as a corporate personality = Israel is based on the assumption that the Servant there was equated with the Servant of Isa. 44.if. See further H. H. Rowlcy, Tbe Servant of tbe Lord ( 1 9 5 2 ) 3 3 - 5 8 . 81 Hooker 7 3 . 22 In the light of Markan usage elsewhere this almost certainly means 'into him*, with eh deliberately preferred to ivi.

30

Baptism in t)je Hoiy Spirit

in Jewish tradition the dove is usually a symbol for Israel.^s Mark may intend us to understand that with his recepüon of the Spirit Jesus became the representative of Israel. If the echoes of Isa. 65, particularly w . i if., suggested by S. I . Buse24 could be established, it would suggest that Mark saw the events at Jordan as parallel in significance to the passing through the Red Sea.25 The gift of the Spirit would then parallel the giving of the law at Sinai,^« and the Temptations the wilderness period of Israel (see below). But perhaps more prominent in the immediately foUowing narrative of the Temptations is the idea of Jesus as the new A d a m : whereas at the beginning of the old creation the first A d a m was tempted and feU, at the begirming of the new creation the second A d a m is tempted but conquers (Mark 3.27).27 In Matthew the most striking feature is the Temptation narra tive which again foUows immediately on the reception ofthe Spirit. This passage has recentiy been justly classified as an early Christian midrash on Deut. 6-8.2» A s Yahweh led Israel his Son (cf. E x . 4 . Z 2 - 2 3 ; J e r . 3 r . 9 ; Hos. 1 1 . 1 ) in the wilderness for forty years to humble, to test (frecpä^eiv) and to discipline him (Deut. 8 . 2 - 5 ) , so Jesus is led into the wUderness by the Spiritz» for forty days to be tested (neipdleoßai). Y a h w e h discipUned Israel, because that is what a father does with his son (Deut. 8.5); so Jesus, newly haUed as G o d ' s Son, is tested vigorously at just this point (Matt. 4.3, 6). G o d had made his covenant with Israel and tested him to see if he wovdd be faithful, but Israel faUed the test again and again. N o w 23 Strack-Billerbeck I 1 2 3 - j . 2* JTS 7 (1956) 74f.; cf. Lohmeyer, Markus 2 1 ; A . Feuillet, RB 7 1 (1964) 324. 2« Cf. D. Daube, Tie New Testament andRabbinic Judaism (1956) ruf. and A . R. C, Leaney, The Gospel According to St Luke (1958) 1 0 9 . 2 ' Cf. the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost (see pp. 47ff. below). 2 ' Cf. Jeremias, TDNT I, 1 4 1 ; also ZNW 54 (1963) 278f.; Taylor 1 6 4 ; J . C. Fenton in Studies in tbe Gospels (ed. Nineham) 1 0 6 ; Nineham 6 4 ; Best, Temptation 6 - 1 0 ; Schweizer, Markus zii. 28 B. Gerhardsson, Tbe Testing of God's Son (1966). The central links are at the three decisive points in the narrative - the replies of Jesus - from Deut. 8.3; 6 . 1 6 and 6 . 1 3 tespectively. See also G . H. P. Thomson, JTS 1 1 (i960) 1 - 1 2 ; P. Doble, ExpT 7 2 ( 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 ) 9 1 - 9 3 ; J . A . T. Robinson, Twelpe New Testament Studies (1962) 5 3 - 6 0 . J . C. Fenton, St Matthew (1963), sees Exodus typology in the baptism of Jesus and reminds us of Matt. 2 . 1 5 , 20 (58f.). 2» 'According to the late Jewish expositors, the Spirit of God was partic ularly active among the people of God at the time ofthe exodus and wandering in the wilderness' (Gerhardsson 37). See Isa. 6 3 . 8 - 1 4 ; Num. 9.20; 1 1 . 1 0 29.

The Experience of Jesus at Jordan

31

the new covenant has been introduced and the new Israel is tested to see if he will be faithful. Only when he has been thus tested, proved and found obedient, and the covenant thus alBrmed in himself and for himself, only then can he g o forth in his work as Son and Servant for others (cf. Heb. 5.8f.). We need hardly inquire at what point the new covenant was established: the close cotmection between the descent of the Spirit and the iretpa^«v into which Jesus was led by the Spirit indicates that the former incident is the decisive moment. In Luke similar conclusions could be drawn from the temptation narrative. But perhaps even more striking is the Adamchristology which L u k e employs. It can hardly be an accident that L u k e inserts the genealogy of Jesus between his anointing with the Spirit and his temptation, nor that he traces Jesus' family tree back to 'Adam, the son o f G o d ' . Here is the race o f Adam, the son o f G o d , a race, which, by implication, suffered through his fall.^" But here now is the second Adam, the 'Adam of the End-time',3i newly hailed as Son of G o d , w h o is led forth into the wilderness to do batde with the same Satan, and to reverse the tragic results of the Fall, first by refusing to succumb himself, and then by acting on fallen man's behalf. The point at which this 'Saga of Man, Part T w o ' begins is the moment at which Jesus is anointed with the Spirit and hears the heavenly voice. We see then that the Pentecostals catmot build their case on the experience of Jesus at Jordan. F o r this anointing with the Spirit was essentiaUy an initiatory experience: it initiated the End-time and initiated Jesus into it. This anointing may well be caUed a baptism in the Spirit, for J o h n had expected a baptism in the Spirit to be the means of bringing in the E n d , and the descent of the Spirit on Jesus did in fact bring in the E n d ; but the only thing which this proves is that the baptism in the Spirit is initiatory. It is not something which merely accompanies the begirming of the new age, it is that which effects it. E v e n if it was right for Pente costals to paraUel Jesus' supematural birth with that of Christians, it would be of no avaü. Jesus* birth belongs entirely to the old covenant, the epoch of Israel. Luke makes this very piain: the first two chapters are entirely OT in character and even in thought and phraseology; O T ritual and piety is prominent throughout, and the Spirit is pre-eminently the Spirit of so Thompson yf.

E . Hirsch quoted in Rengstorf 6 1 .

j2

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

prophecy. See H. H. OHver, NTS lo (1964) 202-26; W. B . Tatum, NTS 13 (1967) 184-95; cf. Wink 8 1 . P, S. Minear overlooks this point when he argues tliat 'the mood, resonance, and thrust of the birth narratives are such as to discourage the neat assignment of John and Jesus to separate epochs' (in Essays in honor of Paul Schubert: Studies in Luke - Acts [ed. L. E . Keck and J . L . Martyn 1966] 1 2 0 - } ) . O n l y w i t h the descent of the Spirit does the n e w covenant and new epoch enter, and only thus does Jesus himself enter the new coven ant and epoch. He enters as representative man - representing in himself Israel and even mankind. A s such, this first baptism in the Spirit could well be taken as typical of all later Spirit-baptisms the means by which G o d brings each to follow in Jesus' footsteps. Jesus as representative of the people (<5 Aady - cf. L u k e 2 . 1 0 , 3 2 ; 3 . 2 1 ) is the first t o enter the promise made t o the people. A t the same time, Pentecostals are right to recognize that Jesus' anointing w i t h the Spirit was w h a t eqmpped him f o r his messianic ministry o f healing and teaching (Acts 10.38). This 'empowering f o r Service' should n o t h o w e v e r be taken as the primary purpose of the anointing - it is oidy a corollary t o it. The baptism in the Spirit, in other w o r d s , is n o t primarily t o equip the (already) Christian for service; rather its function is t o initiate the individual into the n e w age and covenant, t o 'Christ' ( = anoint) him, and in so doing t o equip him f o r life and service in that n e w age and c o v e t u n t . In this Jesus' entry into the new age and covenant is the type of every initiate's entry into the n e w age and covenant. For US the most important ministry for which the descent of the Spirit equipped Jesus was his messianic task of baptizing in the Spirit (cf. Grundmann, Markus 3 1 ; J . M. Robinson 29; Beasley-Murray 61). This is most clearly brought out by John 1.33 (Bauer 23; Dodd 3 1 1 ) . It is also implied in 3.34 where the primary reference is no doubt to the Father's gift of the Spirit to Jesus (piK eic iiirpov), but where by careful ambiguity John may also refer to Jesus' administration of the Spirit (StStüCTU'-present, cf. 1.33) (Brown, John 15 8, i6if.; Schnackenburg 399^; Hoskyns 224, 23of.; cf. Sanders and Mastin 136). The addition of »coi fievov in John 1.33 also implies that Jesus is empowered for his whole mission (both as Lamb of God and Baptizer in the Spirit) by the gift of the Spirit (cf. Barrett, John 148). W e t u m n o w to those w h o talk o f Jesus being given the Spirit in, o r even through his baptism, and of this baptism in water-andSpirit as the prototype of Christian baptism. This Interpretation

TJbe Experience of Jesus at Jordan

33

must be firmly rejected. I have deliberately refraitied from etititling this chapter 'The Baptism of Jesus', for an examination of each of the four Gospels makes it quite piain that Jesus' baptism at the hands of J o h n was not the principal interest. N o r can the concer tina be expanded to make 'baptism' embrace the whole event. T h e Fourth Gospel does not even mention the baptism, and the three Synoptics speak of the baptism as a completed act (all aorists) which preceded the main action of the pericope. A s elsewhere 'baptism' means no more than the act or rite of Immersion. T o entitle this paragraph 'The Baptism of Jesus' is therefore a misnomer. It re flects the interest of later ecclesiastics rather than the emphasis of the Evangelists. For the Fourth Evangelist the important thing about the encoun ter between the Baptist and Jesus was the descent of the Spirit on Jesus. Far from implying that this was eflected through or by waterbaptism J o h n focuses attention exclusively on the Operation of the Spirit. It caimot be that the author either wished us to understand that Jesus received the Spirit in and through J o h n ' s baptism or wanted to make Jesus' experience at Jordan a type of 'Christian baptism in water-and-Spirit' for, if he did, his failure to mention Jesus' baptism at 1.3zf. (or 3.34 and 6.27) is incomprehensible. In L u k e it is quite evident that the supreme experience for Jesus was the descent of the Spirit, not the water-rite. In Acts 10.38 the baptism does not come into the pictvure, and in L u k e 3.2if. it is passed over in an aorist participle {^(j.-rmaBhnos)P' T h e aorist participle, of course, often signifies coinddent action, but here the action of ßam-KJÖevros obviously precedes in time the action of the present participle Trpoaevxo/jUvov. Had L u k e wished to link the descent of the Spirit directiy with the baptism he would have said ßam-i^ofievov. A s it is, he evidendy intends us to vmderstand that the descent of the Spirit coincided with the praying of Jesus, not with his baptism, which had already been completed.s3 F o r L u k e the Spirit is given in response to prayer.s* and neither in nor 32 'In consequcnce of the construction used the Performance of baptism on Jesus is not actually related by Luke' (Klostermann, Lukasevangelium 2[HNT 1929] 5 5). Dibelius calls Jesus' baptism in Luke 'an accessory circumstance' (Nebenumstand) (60). «3 Creed 5 7 ; cf. Lampe, Seal 42S.; Ellis 9 1 ; W. C. Robinson 8f.; Feuillet 3 3 3 ; Haenchen, Weg 56; Flender 5 1 ; Wilkens, TZ 23 (1967) 29. 3^ Luke 3 . 2 1 ; 1 1 . 2 (Marcion); i i . i 3 ; A c t s 1 . 1 4 with 2 . 1 - 4 ; 2 . 2 1 with 2.39; 4 . 2 3 - 3 1 ; 8 . 1 5 - 1 7 ; cf. 2 2 . 1 6 .

34

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

through baptism. The whole sentence moves cumbrously forward through three participles to focus attention on the principal action - the experience of the heaven opening, the Spirit descending, and the voice speaking. In Matthew the descent of the Spirit is more closely associated with the baptism, and in Mark even more closely - Kai ißairrLaOr] . . . Kai evdvs dvaßaivwv

. . . etSev . . . TO iTvevfia . , . KaTaßalvov

. . .

The two words which link the descent of the Spirit to the baptism most closely are evOvs and dvaßaivwv. But too much weight should not be laid on these.^s evBvs is one of Mark's favourite words, and, as usually happens when a conjunction or adverb is overworked, it is often used loosely and in the weakened sense of 'then' or 'so then' (e.g. Mark 1 . 2 1 , 2 3 , 28).38 dvaßalvoiv does not describe the emergence above the surface of the water which follows the com plete Immersion; it describes rather the climbing out of the river on to the bank after the rite has been completed. This is implied by Matthew's dveßr] dwo TOV vBaros, which could be translated simply, 'he left the water', and is shown most clearly by Acts 8.39, where both Philip and the eunuch came up out of the water {dveßrjoav e/c Tov vSaTos), and certainly Philip had not been immersing himself (see also Mark 6.51). Matthew and Mark are therefore not really so dÜFerent from Luke. Matthew indeed seems to set the events in sequence - baptized, left the water, experienced the Spirit. Mark's picture is of the heaven opening and the Spirit descending actually while Jesus was climbing out of the water on to the bank, with his baptism completed. The two events are more or less juxtaposed. Three points more should be made. First, it is striking that Mark, the one w h o transmits John's words about the messianic baptism in the form of their actual fulfilment, is also the one w h o most sharply opposes the water-baptism of J o h n to the Spiritbaptism of the new covenant. Indeed w e might well say that he simplifies the Baptist's saying in order to sharpen the antithesis. If then he saw the descent of the Spirit on Jesus as the begiiming of 3 5 Contra, e.g., Lagrange, who concludes: 'The movement of the Spirit depends on baptism' (ßvangile selon Saint Marc '*[i947] 9). 3 * See G. D . Kilpatrick, The Bible Translator 7 (1956) 3f.; cf. D . Daube, The Sudden in the Scriptures (1964) 60. Even if «wWs should here be translated 'immediately' it qualifies the main verb «I8«v rather than the participle (RSV; Daube 46f.).

Tie Experience of Jesus at Jordan

55

the promised baptism in the Spiritj^' it confirms that he saw the two events - water-baptism and Spirit-baptism of Jesus - as fundamentally distinct. Second, in Mark this passage is the second member ofa sequence of three secüons which are bound together by the theme of the Spirit ( w . 4-8, 9 - 1 1 , 1 2 - 1 3 ) 3 8 _ a fact all the more striking in view of the infrequent mention of the Spirit in Mark (only three times more). Clearly then the action of the Spirit is the central feature of this experience of Jesus, and that on which attention should focus.39 Third, in all three Synoptics the eschatological features appear after the baptism. It was what happened after the baptism which brought in the new age. T h e baptism is not part of the eschaton or of its inbreaking. It is still the baptism of J o h n , still the prepara tory rite whose fulfilment lies not in itself but awaits the future. That the fulfilment follows the Performance of the rite in the case of Jesus is due not to the rite but to the person involved in it (see below). It is quite evident, therefore, that much theologizing about the relation between baptism and the Spirit has been based on a funda mental mistake. Indeed, the false conclusions drawn from 'the baptism of Jesus' have been the chief source of the imscriptural views about Christian baptism which for far too long have distorted the Church's tmderstanding of the Holy Spirit. It must be stated emphatically, that the baptism of Jesus and the descent of the Spirit are t w o distinct events - closely related, but distinct. Moreover, the emphasis in any theologizing on these events should fall on the descent of the Spirit: the baptism is oidy a prelitninary to it - a necessary preliminary perhaps, but a preliminary. J o h n ' s baptism remains in the role and with the significance J o h n himself gave it - essentiaUy preparatory for and antithetical to the imminent Spirit-baptism. It was not water-baptism which initiated into the messianic office.^" but otdy the baptism in Spirit. The precise relation between the t w o events in Jesus' case is *' This is altogether likely since TÖ wveO/io of v. 1 0 naturally looks back to the TTwO/to ayiov of V. 8 (von Baer 59), See also p. 3 1 above. 8 ' J . M. Robinson 2 9 ; S. E . Johnson, The Gospel According to St Mark ( 1 9 5 7 ) 35*»See also Büchsei 1 4 9 ; Haenchen, Weg 5 2 . J . M. Robinson 2 7 , and Nineham 58, note the disappearance of all human agents from the narrative. *" Contra Kosnetter 1 1 5 - 1 7 .

36

Baptism in tbe Holy

spirit

fairly straightforward. The bapdsm of Jesus was initially under stood as an expression of repentance (like that of the prophets, identifying themselves w i t h the people and the people's sins), of Submission to G o d ' s will (cf. Matt. 3 . 1 5 ) , and commitment to the work to which he had been c a l l e d . I t was in response to and as a result of this repentance, Submission and commitment that the Spirit was given and the new era was begun w i t h the apocalyptic roll of drums and the heavenly proclamation. If there is a causal connection between the t w o events, in other w o r d s , it is between the attitude of the person w h o was baptized and the Spirit, not between the rite and the Spirit. It was not the rite which made the difference, since many others w e r e baptized by J o h n and heard and saw nothing it was the person w h o made the düFerence. A n d not merely the person, for he had been Hving about thirty years, but the attitude with which he came. The rite played a role, and an important role at that, b u t not the decisive role which most sacramentalists like to give it. It was the occasion of Jesus' commit ment and the means by which he expressed his Submission to bis Father's will. But it was only that. It was n o t the baptism at which the Father expressed his pleasure; it was his S o n w i t h w h o m he was well pleased, because he had s h o w n his willingness f o r his divine mission. It was this attitude which G o d commended, and it was this attitude which resulted in the gift of the Spirit. If then the events at J o r d a n are intended t o be a type of Christian conversion-initiation,'*^ w e should note w h a t it means. It certainly does not mean that the ritual act and experience coincides and is identical w i t h the Spiritual act and experience it 'symbolizes', as Plooij so rashly expressed it. W h a t it does mean is that waterbaptism and Spirit-baptism are distinct events, that any connection *i Cf. Taylor 6 1 8 ; Cranfield, SJT9 ( 1 9 5 5 ) 54; C. F. D. Moule, Tbe Phenomenon of tbe New Testament (1967) 7 4 ; K . Barth, Die kircblicbe Dogmatik I V / 4 6 6 - 7 3 . Note also Rowley's description of proselyte baptism as 'an act of selfdedication to the God of Israel' (From Moses toQumran [1963] 226). If (5 ö/ivös ToC öeoC implies Jesus' death as Sufifering Servant (J. Jeremias, TDNT I 3 3 8 - 4 0 ; Cullmann, Early Christian Worship [ E T 1 9 5 3 ] 6 3 - 6 5 ) or as paschal lamb (Barrett, ]ohn 1 4 7 ) , and it truly derives from the Baptist, it would strengthen the view that Jesus saw his baptism from the first as a dedication to and S y m b o l of his death. 42 Cf. Barrett, Tradition 2 5 . *3 Schweitzer, Tbe Mysticism of St Paul (ßT 1 9 3 1 ) 2 3 4 and Beasley-Murray 64 rightly point out that in the N T the baptism of Jesus is never brought into any kind o f connection with Christian baptism. But our discussion is not in terms o f baptism. See p. 99 below.

The Experience of Jesus at Jordan

37

between them is to be found solely in die repentance, Submission and commitment expressed in the former, and that all die emphasis and attention is to be focused almost entirely on the latter. It might appear to some of the more Catholic tradition that the considerations advanced here favour those who have argued for a high view of Confirmation as distinct from baptism.'** It must be made clear, therefore, that we are dealing here not with two ritual actions but only one - baptism; that the bestowal ofthe Spirit is entirely the action of the Father; that the latter alone can properly be Said to bring in and into the new age and covenant; that the ritual action, while distinct from and subordinate in significance to what follows, nevertheless leads to and results in the bestowal of the Spirit, though not because of any virtue or sacramental efficacy in the rite itself, but rather because of the Submission and com mitment it expresses. A s a type of Christian conversion-initiation, we see that entry into the new age and covenant is a Single com plex event, involving distinct actions of man (baptism) and G o d (gift of Spirit), bound together by the repentance and commit ment which is expressed in the former and results in the latter. 44 Cf. Mason 1 4 - 1 6 ; A . T. Wifgman, Doctrine of Confirmation ( 1 8 9 7 ) 4 0 - 5 3 ; F. H. Chase, Confirmation in tbe Apostolic Age (1909) i4f.; W. K . Lowther Clatke, Confirmation or tbe Laying on of Hands ( 1 9 2 6 ) 1 5 , 1 9 ; Dix, Laying on of Hands 1 5 ; also Tbeology 30.

PART

TWO

IV T H E M I R A C L E OF P E N T E C O S T

P E N T E C O S T is a word which lies close to the heart of every Pentecostal. N o t only does it give him his 'brand' name, but it also provides him with his distincüve (and sometimes most precious) doctrine, it aifords to him the key to a füll Christian life and wit ness, it speaks to him of his most treasured experiences of Christ, and it enables him to express his deepest devotion and praise. Pentecost is the message of the Pentecostal and epitomizes the particular contribution and emphasis he makes to and in the Christian faith. Ernest Williams puts it thus: ' T o be Pentecostal is to identify oneself with the experience that came to Christ's followers on the D a y of Pentecost; that is, to be filled with the Holy Spirit in the same maimer as those w h o were filled with the Holy Spirit on that occasion.'i Pentecostals argue that those w h o were baptized in the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost were already 'saved' and 'regenerate'. Their reception of the Spirit on that day was not their conversion; it was not the beginning of their Christian life. In other words, Pentecost was a second experience subsequent to and distinct from their earlier 'new birth'. A s such it gives the pattem for all Christian experience thereafter. A s the disciples were baptized in the Spirit at Pentecost, an experience subsequent to their 'regeneration', so may (and should) all Chris tians be baptized in the Spirit after their conversion. T h e proof adduced for the claim that Pentecost was a second experience is drawn from the Gospels, principally John. T h e ^The Pentecostal Movement's systematic theologian, writing in Tbt Pentecostal Evangel (15 January 1 9 6 1 ) 1 1 - cited by F. D. Brunet, Doctrine and Experience of tbe Holy Spirit in tbe Pentecostal Movement and Correspondingly in tbe New Testament (Hambutg dissertation 1 9 6 3 ) 3 6 ; cf. K . Hutton, RGG3 II ( 1 9 5 8 ) 1 3 0 3 (-1 O- Eggenberger, TZ 1 1 ( 1 9 5 5 ) 2 7 2 , 2 9 2 ; J . T. Nichol, Pentecostalism (1966) if, 8f.

38

The Miracle of Pentecost

39

passages usually cited include J o h n i3.iof.; 1 5 . 3 ; 20.22 and the Single Lukan reference L u k e 10.20.2 f h e arguments are the same as those used by the old Holiness teachers.^ and closely parallel the teaching of some Catholics that Pentecost was the apostles' Confirmarion.4 The appeal to John's Gospel raises a basic methodological issue: Are w e to approacb the N T material as systematic theologians or as biblical theologians and exegetes? The common error into which too many of the former fall, is to treat the N T (and even the Bible) as a homogeneous whole, from any part of which texts can be drawn on a chosen subject and fitted into a framework and System which is often basically extra-biblical, though it may be constructed from the thought of a single biblical author like Paul. The method of the latter is to take each author and book separately and to (attempt to) outline his or its particular theological emphases; only when he has set a text in the context of its author's thought and Intention (as expressed in his writing), oidy then can the biblical-theologian feel free to let that text interact with other texts from other books. The latter method is obviously the sounder, and though it involves more work, it is always liable to give the truer picture ofthe biblical thought than the former. This means, in our case, that w e caimot simply assume that the Gospels and Acts are all bare historical narratives which complement each other in a direct i :i ratio; nor can w e assume that L u k e and J o h n have the same emphases and aims. They may, of course, but w e cannot assume it without proof. A t any rate, w e cannot Start by relating J o h n 20.22 to Acts 2 : w e must first understand the former in the 2 See Riggs 50; Harper, Power 1 9 n. 4 ; also Fire 1 5 ; D. Ptince, From Jordan to Pentecost (1965) 6 6 ; Christenson 3 7 ; H. M. Ervin, These are not Drmken as je Suppose (1968) 8 9 ; cf. M. Pearlman, Knowing tbe Doctrines of the Bible ( 1 9 3 7 ) ; H. Horton, Tbe Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit ( 1 9 6 1 ) 4 ; Lindsay 34. 3 See especially R. A . Torrey, Tbe Baptism with the Holy Spirit (1896) 1 1 - 1 6 ; A . Murray, The Füll Blessing of Pentecost ( 1 9 0 8 ) ; also The Spirit of Christ (1888) 24-32, 313-254 N . Adler, Das erste christliche Pfingstfest (1938) 1 3 5 . The third-century work On Rebaptism takes the view that Pcter's baptism was in two parts: the first linked with his confession of faith rccorded in Matt. 1 6 . 1 6 , the second taking place at Pentecost (cited in J . Crehan, Early Christian Baptism and tbe Creed [1950] 42f). Altematively, John 20.22 is concerned with the apostles' 'interior consecration', while Luke deals only with 'the outward manifcstation of the Spirit' (X. Lton-Dufour, Tbt Gospels and tbe Jesus of History [ E T 1968] 2 6 1 ) ; cf. J . H. E . HuU, Tbe Holy Spirit in the Acts ofthe Apostles ( 1 9 6 7 ) , who argues that at Pentecost the aposdes only became aware of the gift of the Spirit they had already received (50, 86).

40

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

context o f the Fourth Gospel and the latter in the context of Luke's thought, and only then can w e correlate the individual texts themselves. J o h n w e leave aside f o r the time being; to clarify Luke's understanding of Pentecost is our present task. When w e look at Pentecost in the context of L u k e - A c t s it becomes evident that Pentecostal and Catholic alike have again missed tbe principal significance of the story. F o r once again w e stand at a watershed in salvation-history, the beginning of the new age and n e w covenant, n o t f o r Jesus this time, but n o w f o r his disciples. W h a t J o r d a n w a s to Jesus, Pentecost was to the disciples.5 A s Jesus entered the new age atid covenant b y being baptized in the Spirit at J o r d a n , so the disciples followed him in like marmer at Pentecost.« With the wider enjoyment o f the messianic age made possible b y Jesus' representative death, so at Pentecost the new covenant, hitherto con&ied to the one reptesentative man, was extended t o embrace all those w h o remained faith ful to him and tarried at Jerusalem in obedience t o his command. The 'all' of z.i is almost certainly the 1 2 0 and not just the twelve. The ndvres most naturally refers to the whole body involved in the preceding verses; that more than twelve languages were heard impHes that there were more than twelve Speakers; 2 . 1 5 , and perhaps 2 . 3 3 , probably refers to other than the eleven, who were standing with Peter; the 'us' of 1 1 . i j includes 'the brethren who were in Judea' (i i. i). There is certainly no room for the Catholic view which Singles out the aposdes for special or exclusive endowments ofthe Spirit (contra Adler i 3 7 f . ) , and which makes it possible to regard the apostles as the sole 'Channel' of the Spirit to others. The one gift arid the same gift was common to all, To see this most clearly w e must retrace o u r Steps a little, and, bearing in mind that L u k e - A c t s is the w o r k o f a single author, take a comprehensive l o o k at the total schcme o f the t w o books, Luke sees history as falling into three phases - the period o f Israel, the period o f Jesus, and the period between the coming o f Jesus and his parousia,' Jesus is the one w h o effects these transitions, and in his o w n life each phase is inaugurated b y his entering » Cf. F. J . Foakes-Jackson, Tbe Acts of tbe Apostles (Moffatt 1 9 3 1 ) 9f.; Kraft 4 1 0 ; G. Stählin, Die Apostelgesebicbte^'^ ( N T D 1962) 39. See also p. 99 below. • von Baer 1 6 7 ; see also O. Procksch, TDNT I io3f. ' Coflzelmann, Tbeology 1 5 0 , and earlier von Baer 7 7 - 8 4 .

The Miracle of Pentecost

41

into a new relationship with the Spirit:8 first, when his human life was the creation of the Spirit (Luke 1.35); second, when he was anointed with the Spirit and thus became the Anointed One, the unique Man of the Spirit (Luke 3 . 2 2 ; 4.18);* third, when he received the promise of the Spirit at his exaltadon and poured the Spirit forth on his disciples, thus becoming L o r d ofthe Spirit. The transition from first to second was made possible and 'triggered off' by his Submission to John's baptism; the transition from second to third by his Submission to the bapdsm of the cross. It is important to realize that this threefold scheme of salvationhistory is a development on the older Jewish view of two ages in which the new age and covenant simply succeeded the old. T h e epoch of Jesus as something distinct and unique was unforeseen. J o h n the Baptist expected the Coming One to bring in and into the new age hy hapthzing in Spirit-snd-Rre sttaight off. When this confident prediction was not fulfilled he lost his assurance and began to question whether Jesus was the one whose coming he had foretold and whether his own message was true after all (Luke 7 . 1 8 - 1 9 ) . Jesus reassured him by pointing to other messianic Scriptures (Isa. 29.i8f.; 35.5f.; 6 1 . i ) , thereby reminding J o h n that his ministry was broader than John's conception of it (cf. L u k e 9.54f.). But, none the less, J o h n ' s hope had not been fulfiJQed with the immediacy that J o h n expected. What had happened ? The answer, I suggest, lies in Luke's twofold imderstanding of the events at Jordan. A s we have already seen, the descent of the Spirit upon Jesus was Jesus' om entry into the new age and cove nant. Before he could baptize others in the Spirit he himself had to be baptized in the Spirit.^» In the wilderness Jesus was tempted for himself, not vicariously. T h e new age and covenant had come, but only in him; only he had begun to experience them. H e alone was the Man of the Spirit, the first-fruits ofthe future harvest. Why was this ? This leads to the second aspect of Jesus' experience at Jordan. 8 Cf. G. Smeaton, Tbe Doctrine of tbe Holy Spirit ( 1 8 8 2 , reprinted 1 9 5 8 ) 1 2 1 - 3 6 ; J . Schniewind, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus ( N T D 1956) 2 7 . » He is not yet Lord of the Spirit (contra Schweizer, TWNT V I 4 0 2 . and Conzelmann's odd comment in Tbeology 2 8 ) . Luke does soften the strong words of Mark (TÖ OT^/M» OWTÄ» ^KJSOAA« eis fpvitov), but he still says Jesus 'was led by the Spirit' (Luke 4 . 1 - ^ e r o h T4> mieinan), a phrase which distinctly recalls Christian experience of the Spirit (Rom. 8 . 1 4 ; Gal. 5 . 1 8 ) . Cf. Berkhof 1 8 .

42

Baptism in the Holj Spirit

N o t only was it his own entry into the age of the Spirit, but it was also bis anointing with the Spirit as Messiah and Servant (Luke 3.22; 4 . 1 8 ; Acts 4.27), and his Installation into the messianic office of Servant and Representative of his people.ii F o r Luke this w o r k culminated in the cross where Jesus accepted and endured the messianic baptism in Spirit-and-fire on behalf of his people. T h e key passage here is L u k e 1 2 . 4 9 ^ , where occur the concepts both of fire and of baptism. Here w e have confirmation that John's predic tion regarding the Coming One's ministry is accepted by J e s u s : he came to cast fire on the earth. Here too he is looking for a baptism, one which is to be accompHshed on himself. These two verses are undoubtedly to be taken as parallel members of the one idea: TTvp ^\6ov ßaXelv im rrjvyijv, Kai ri OeXa) el •^Srj dvrj^dT). ßdiTTiarfia Se e)(a) ßaTTTiaOfjvai, Kai ttcüs awe'^^o/LIAT ews otov reAeaö^.

It follows that we must understand the thought of the verses thus: Jesus came to cast fire on the earth, and how he wishes it were already kindled on himself. H o w he longs for the baptism, which he came to administer, to be accomplished on himself. This baptism is undoubtedly to be linked with the cup (of wrath) of L u k e 22.42.12 Thus w e may say that for L u k e Jesus' ministry as Servant and Representative is consummated by his suffering the messianic baptism of fire on behalf of his people.i^ I suggest, therefore, that in Luke's presentation Jesus' fulfilment of the role predicted for him by J o h n - as the one w h o would bring in the N e w A g e and iidtiate into it by baptizing in Spiritand-fire - was delayed for two reasons. First, Jesus must enter that N e w A g e himself by being himself baptized in the Spirit; and must be tested and proved as the new Israel and Son of G o d . Second, having been thus initiated and tested himself, he can take up his role as Servant and Messiah. This role cidminates in his vicarious suffering on the cross, where he received in himself as Representa tive of his people the messianic baptism in fire. It is oidy after fulfilling this role that he can begin to fiilfil the role predicted for him by the Baptist - only after his death, resurrection and ascen sion that he begins to baptize in the Spirit. II See ch. III, and cf. Berkhofs suggestive treatment (i7ff.). 12 Qf. Mark io.}8; 1 4 . 3 6 , and see Taylor 5 5 4 ; Cranfield, Mark 4 3 3 ; Grund mann, Markus z^zi. 1» So Lang, TWNT V I 9 4 3 ; cf. Delling, NovTest 2 ( 1 9 5 7 ) 1 0 3 - 1 2 .

The Miracle of Pentecost

43

The reason for this is, presumably, that whereas Jesus can receive the messianic baptism on his own behalf because he is without sin - so that there is nothing to be refined away and his baptism is only in Spirit - his people are so sinful (cf. L u k e 5.8; 1 8 . 1 3 ) that the messianic baptism would be for them one of destructive weCfia and fire - a cup of wrath so terrible that even Jesus quails before it (Luke 1 2 . 4 9 ^ ; 22.42). Since this would destroy them, Jesus, as Servant, sufiers on their behalf; the fire is kindled on him; he is baptized with the messianic baptism of others; he drains the cup of wrath which was the portion of others. This means that when Jesus comes to baptize others it is a baptism no longer of Spirit and fire, but now only of Spirit: Acts 1.5 ' J o h n baptized with water, but you wül be baptized with the Holy Spirit' - not with Spirit-and-fire, as J o h n had said. Perhaps w e may say that in some sense Jesus has exhausted the &re that was kiadled on him, just as he drained the cup of wrath, so that the means of entry into the N e w A g e is n o w only a baptism in Spirit, not Spirit-and-fire, but a baptism in the Spirit of Jesus, he w h o endured the messianic tribulation which was necessary before the messianic Kingdom covdd be established, and which all must undergo before and if they would see the Kingdom. In terms of Luke's scheme of salvation-history all this simply means that the new age and covenant does not begin for the disciples until Pentecost. In the second epoch oidy Jesus, the pioneer of our salvation, has entered into that age; he alone has been baptized in Spirit. It is only with the third epoch that the disciples enter into the new age; only when Jesus has been exalted that they are initiated into the new covenant by receiving the Spirit; only when Jesus has completed his ministry as Servant and L a m b of G o d that they experience bis ministry as Baptizer in the Spirit. Where up tili then only Jesus had experienced life in the new age, now they too can experience that life - for they share in his Hfe. Where only he had partidpated in the Spirit, now the Spirit comes to all his disdples as his Spirit.i4 StUl with J o h n 20.22 in mind Pentecostals might well ask whether it was not immediately after the resurrection that the disdples were initiated into the new age. If it was then that they " Cf. Conzclmann, Tbeologf 103 nn. i, 2 , 1 7 9 . T o say that 'no real function of the Exalted Lord is expressed in Luke' ( 1 7 6 ) is to ignore the exalted Lord's ministry as baptizer in the Spirit.

44

Baptism in tl)e Holy Spirit

received the new life which he had w o n in his death and resur rection, this would mean that Pentecost was still a second, post-regeneration experience. But this is certainly not Luke's view. {a) F o r Luke Pentecost is the climax of all that has gone before. F r o m the Start of the ministry of Jesus w e are pointed forward, not to the death of Jesus, but beyond that to the baptism which he will give (Luke 3 . 1 5 - 1 7 ) . A n d even at the Ascension w e are still looking forward to that baptism, still unfulfiUed, and still awaited as the culmination of Jesus' ministry (Acts 1.5). The same point becomes evident in Peter's Speech (2.29-33). T h e climax and purposed end of Jesus' ministry is not the cross and resurrection, but the ascension and Pentecost. More precisely, as the exaltation was the chmax of Jesus' ministry for Jesus himself,i5 so Pentecost was the climax of Jesus' ministry for the disciples. It was only at Pentecost by the gift of the Spirit that the benefits and blessings won by Jesus in his death, resurrection and ascension were applied to the disciples. A s Moberiy put it: 'Calvary without Pentecost would not be an atonement to us.'^^ Jesus' death and resurrection go for nothing and are whoUy ineffective without the gift of the Spirit. (b) T h e fact that Pentecost is the climax of Jesus' ministry for the disdples shoidd not blind us into thinking that Pentecost is merely a continuation of what went before. Pentecost is a new beginning - the Inauguration ofthe new age, the age ofthe Spirit that which had not been before.^' L u k e makes this very dear in several ways. First, there is the simple fect that L u k e wrote two books - an Observation of no littie significance.i8 T h e first book is rovmded offby the ascension, and Luke, for one reason or another, is at no pains to separate it from the resurrection. I n the G o s p d the single complex of events, resurrection and ascension, ends the story of Jesus. Then comes a new beginning. Acts marks a new phase, and begins with a new accovint of the ascension. B u t this time it is " Von Baet 9 5 ; cf. Flender 106. also 9 8 - 1 0 6 . Cf. Phil. 2 . 6 - 1 1 ; Heb. 1 2 . 2 . Moberiy 1 5 2 . See also Michaelis 1 3 3 ; Wotherspoon, Ptntecost 2 6 - 3 0 ; Church of Scotland, Biblical Doctrine »jf.; J . A . T. Robinson, Studies 1 6 7 . ^' Cf. C. H. Dodd, Tbe Apostolic Preaching and its Developments ( 1 9 3 6 , reprinted 1963) 2 6 ; Schweizer in B N T E 5 0 3 ^ " As C. K. Barrett shows in LmIu tbe Historüm in Rtcent Study ( 1 9 6 1 ) jsflf.; cf. P. van Stempvoort, NTS j ( 1 9 5 8 ) 3 0 - 4 2 .

The Miracle of Pentecost

45

linked widi Pentecost and what comes after, rather than with the resurrection and what went before.^* In other words, the ascension from one Standpoint brings to an end the story of Jesus, and from another begins the age of the Spirit (Acts 2.33). But, second, that which ushers in the age of the spirit is Pente cost, rather than the ascension. T h e accotmt ofthe ascension at the begitming of Acts is otüy introductory to the account of Pentecost. E v e n in the former the prospect of the Spirit soon to come is the dominant theme (Acts 1.5, 8). One of the many parallels between his first and second book that Luke intends us to see^o is, no doubt, that as L u k e i is essentiaUy a preparation for Luke 2, so Acts I is essentiaUy a preparation for Acts 2.21 Moreover, third, it is evident that L u k e wants to press home upon US this fact, that the ascension is properly the end of the old (or second) epoch of salvation, and Pentecost is the beginning of the new, for he highUghts the significance of the ten-day break between the two events.22 n 5-26 is an Interregnum - a betweentime. In it there is no activity of the Spirit. He has been active in the old epoch ( 1 . 2 , 1 6 ) , and he wiU initiate the new ( 1 . 5 , 8), but in the between-time he is not in evidence. T o emphasize this L u k e relates the election of Matthias, and in the method of election the absence of any mention of or dependence on the Spirit is most noticeable. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the election^» (Luke maintains an impartial sUence, as in 1 5 . 3 6 - 4 0 ; cf. 6 . 1 ; 8.1), L u k e has obviously included his accoimt of it to point the contrast of 'before and after' Pentecost. Before Pentecost choice to oflBce depends on temporal relation to Jesus of Nazareth; after Pentecost it depends on Spirit-possession (6.3). Before Pentecost (the begin ning of the 'Peter section') choice depends on the lot; after " Barrett, Luke 5 6 ; cf. D. P. Fuller, Easter Faith and History ( 1 9 6 5 ) i97f, 80 For parallels between Luke and Acts see Stählin i 3 f . ; J . C. O'Neill, Tbe Tbeology of tbe Acts (1954) 6 5 - 6 7 ; M. D . Gouldet, Type atid Histoty in Acts (1964) 6 1 , 7 4 . 81 R. B. Rackham, Tbe Actsof tbe Apostles " ( ' 9 5 1 ) 1 4 ; F . F. Bruce, Tbe Book of tbe Acts (1954) 5 4 - 5 6 . 88 Li what follows I draw on von Baer, especially 7 8 - 8 4 . 83 Cf. Stählin 2 8 ; E . M. Blaiklock, Tbe Acts oftbe Apostles (1959) 50. One might ask, for example, why a new aposde was elccted in the interval between the ascension and Pentecost, and not appointed by the risen Christ himself, which one would have thought to be die only qualificadon of an aposde which finally differendated hhn from the other early disciples (Luke 6 . 1 3 ; Acts 2 6 . 1 5 - 1 8 ; cf. I Cor. i5.7f.). See also K. H. Rengstorf, Studio Tbeologica 15 (1961) 35-67.

46

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Pentecost ( 1 3 . 2 - the beginning of the 'Paul section') choice depends on the Spirit. 24 It could be argued that for Luke the use of lots has a very high pedigree: an aposüe has to be accredited by the Lord himself (i.24f.) and the 'superhuman' method of lots is the only method adequate to this unique occasion (cf. E. Haenchen, Die Apostelgeschichte [ 1 9 5 6 ] 1 3 1 ) . Yet even if this is so, the contrast between the dispensations remains not a contrast which disparages the earlier as 'inferior', but one which merely highlights the great difference between the two dispensations viz. only in the age ofthe Spirit can guidance be direct and through the Spirit. W. A. Beardslee, however, has suggested that Luke has here taken over an earlier tradition in which Matthias was chosen by the Community (as representatives of Christ) and has objectified the meta phorical language which used 'lot' to mean 'decision' (a usage evidenced in Qumran) (NorTw/4 [ i 9 6 0 ] 2 4 5 - 5 2 ; so also Leaney, cited by HuU 4 3 , and J . Munck, The Acts of the Apostles [Anchor Bible 1 9 6 7 ] 1 0 ; cf. Jackson and Lake, The Beginnings of Christianity Part I, The Acts of the Apostles lY {i<)ii] 1 5 ) . Fourth, the third stage of history does not begin untU Jesus has been given and has received the Spirit, that is, when he becomes L o r d of the Spirit and begins to initiate others into the new age through his ministry as Baptizer in the Spirit (Acts 1 . 5 ; 2 . 3 3 ) . Untü that time he is stiU oidy the Man of the Spirit. Acts 1 . 2 makes this clear: he is stiU dependent on the Spirit for the Inspiration of his teaching (evreiXafievos Tols amoaroXois Std irvevfw.ros dyiov) in a way very similar to that ofthe N T prophets ( 1 1 . 2 8 ; 2 1 . 4 ; cf. 4 . 2 5 ) . A n d this dependency continues right up to his ascension - hence the order of the Greek in 1 . 2 which stresses that this ministry Std irvevfiaTos äyiov continued right Up until the day (d^p* ^? •qij.epas) on which he was taken up. Fifth, and perhaps clearest of aU, it was only at Pentecost that the J o e l prophecy was fulfiUed. In the old two-age view of Jewish eschatology the gift of the Spirit was one of the decisive marks of the new age.25 Certainly for the first Christians the gift of the Spirit was the decisive differentia which marked off the old dispen sation from the new (Mark 1 . 8 ; J o h n 7.39; Acts 2 . 1 7 , 3 3 ; 1 9 . 2 ; «4 Cf. Flender 1 1 9 ; R. Allen, Tcntecost and the World', reprinted in The Ministry of the Spirit (i960) 45. ' 5 E.g. Isa. 3 2 . 1 5 ; 3 4 . 1 6 ; Ezek. 1 1 . 1 9 ; 36.26f.; 3 7 . 4 - 1 4 ; and perhaps Zech. 1 2 . 1 0 , as well as Joel. 2.28ff. "The bestowal ofthe Spirit is the primary charac teristic of the age of final redemption' (Lampe in Studies 162).

The Miracle of Pentecost

47

R o m . 8.9; I I Cor. 3.3, 6-8; Heb. 6.4f.). The l a s t days' did not begin for the disciples tili Pentecost (Acts 2 . 1 7 ) . Only then did they enter into the distinctively Christian dispensation and into the distinctively Christian experience of the Spirit. Dispensationalists often argue that Peter did not consider Pentecost a fiilfiknent of the Joel prophecy; e.g. M. F. Unger: ' "This is that" means nothing more than that "this is (an Illustration of) that which was spoken by the prophet J o e l " ' (Bib.Sac. 1 2 2 [ 1 9 6 5 ] 1 7 7 ) . This is special pleading. Luke (and Peter) clearly regard the outpouring on the 1 2 0 as at least the beginning of the outpouring on all flesh, and the 'last days' in which 'whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved' ( 2 . 2 1 ) have certainly arrived. It is quite probable that they understood the cosmic signs (2. i gf.) as apocalyptic stage-effects which did not belong to the substance of the prophecy or require literal fulfilment (cf. J . M. Kik, Matthew 2 4 - A n Exposition [ 1 9 4 8 ] 7 1 - 7 5 ; J . A . T. Robinson, ]esus and his Coming [ 1 9 5 7 ] 1 5 1 ) . (c) F o r L u k e Pentecost is also the beginidng of the new cove nant for the disciples. Four times he refers to the Spirit given then as 7) eTiayyeXia (Luke 24.49; -Acts 1.4; 2 . 3 3 , 3 8 f . ) , a w o r d often used both by Paul and by L u k e to characterize the covenant promise of G o d to his people (Acts 2.39; 7 . 1 7 ; 1 3 . 2 3 , 3 2 ; 26.6; R o m . 4 . 1 3 , 1 6 , 20; 9.8; Gal. 3 . 1 4 ; etc). Luke seems to share Paul's equation of the 'blessing of Abraham' with the gift of the Spirit (Gal. 3.14), for the words of Acts 2.39 ('the promise is to you and to your children') clearly recall the terms of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 1 7 . 7 - 1 0 ) the covenant of promise^« - and v . 38 identifies the covenant promise with the gift of the Spirit. Implidt here, therefore, is the thought of the Spirit as the new covenant fulfilment of the andent covenant promise. T h e gift ofthe Spirit is now the means whereby men enter into the blessing of Abraham; it is through recdvüig the Spirit that 'all nations of the earth ( = all that are afar off ?)27 shall be blessed' (Gen. 1 2 . 3 ; 2 2 . 1 8 ; Acts 3.25). A m o n g the specific promises of the Father for the messianic time and the new covenant the paralld between Ezek. 36.27 and 8« Note the specific reference to it in the conclusion to the next Petrine sermon - Acts 3.25. 27 The similar ptirase in Acts 22.21 refers to the Gentiles. But Rackliam 3 1 , B. Reicke, Glatdie itnd Leben der Urgemeinde (1957) 5 1 , Stälüin 54, Munck 2 1 , take it as a reference primarily to the Jews ofthe dispersion. Altematively, 'those who are far away' are the new covenant equivalent to the foreigners who were to be included within the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. i 7 . i 2 f . ) .

48

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

J e r . 3 1 . 3 5 is particularly noticeable: both promise ability to keep the law, the law written in the heart (the enabling factor in Jeremiah) being precisely equivalent to the gift of the Spirit (the enabling factor in Ezekiel). In any n e w covenant theology, therefore, the Spirit is to be seen as the agent of the new covenant and its supreme blessing - the one w h o will write the law in their hearts, the one w e may say w h o is the law written in their hearts. M o r e o v e r , in any antithesis between the old and new covenants the external written law will be set against the inward gift of the Spirit. Each Stands as the embodiment and motivating principle of its respective covenant. W i t h the law the old covenant stood o r feil; so it is with the Spirit in the new. This is certairdy Paul's understanding of the Situation (II Cor. 3.3, 6 - 8 ) , but Paul is simply drawing out the logical corollary t o Pentecost - the fulfil ment o f the promise of the Father. It is v e r y probable therefore that L u k e also saw the Spirit as the essence and embodiment of the new covenant, as that which most distinguished it f r o m the old. This w o u l d appear t o be confirmed b y the fact that L u k e presents the outpoiuring of the Spirit as taking place on the Feast of Pentecost. F o r Pentecost was m o r e and m o r e coming to be regarded as the feast which commemorated the lawgiving at Sinai. E . Lohse Claims that the old form of the feast (the bringing of the first fruits to the Temple) would persist tili the destruction of the Temple, and only after AD 70 would the Rabbis give the feast new con tent (EvTh. 13 (1953) 429f.; cf. Stählin 37f.). S. Maclean Gihnour states blundy that 'No association of Pentecost with the Sinai event can be documented from Jewish sources before the second Century' (JBL 8 1 [1962] 65). However, from the middle of the second Century BC Pente cost w a s undoubtedly regarded as the feast of covenant renewal, for the Book of Jubilees celebrated the giving of the Sinaitic covenant (as well as the Noahic and Abrahamic covenants) on the Feast of Weeks (Jub. 6 . 1 7 - 2 1 ; 1 5 . 1 - 2 4 ) , and the aimual renewal o f t h e covenant at Qumran, where they seem to have followed the sacne calendar as we find in Jubilees, most probably feil at the same feast (iQS 2); nor should we neglect the fact that the renewal of the covenant in II Chron. 1 5 . 1 0 - 1 2 took place in the same month as the law-giving at Sinai (Ex. 19.1), and the other evidence which strongly suggests that E x . 19 was an estab lished reading for the Feast of Weeks in t h e Century before Christ (see G. Kretschmar, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 66 [1954-55] 222-9; R. de V a u x , Ancient Israel [ET *i965] 494; N. Adler, Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche 8 [1963] 4 2 1 ; Leaaey, Ru/e 95-107; C. S. Mann in

The Miracle of Pentecost

49

Munck's Acts 2 7 2 ; Hull 5 3 - 5 5 ; J . C. Kirby, Ephesians: Baptism and Pentecost [ 1 9 6 8 ] ; and on the parallels between Acts 2 and Qumran see W . Grundmann Studia Ejiangelica II Part I [ 1 9 6 4 ] 5 9 2 f . ) . Besides, it is unlikely that the Rabbis after AD 7 0 created a new significance for Pentecost de novo; they doubtless took over a tradition of some antiquity and respectabiUty. This does not mean that the concept of the new covenant and of the renewal of the law for Judaism all o v e r the World has 'powerfully moulded the story of the Spirit's first appearance',28 f o r the indicaüons of such a moulding are lacking. But it is fairly safe to conclude that the thought of Sinai is present,^» and it may even be as K n o x suggests, that 'the devout proselytes n o doubt regarded the sending of the Holy Spirit as the giving of the n e w T o r a h written o n the tables of their hearts'.^" A t all events the thought of Pentecost as the giving of the n e w T o r a h (or rather as the writing of the law upon the heart by the Spirit) indicates that f o r Luke Pentecost was the begiiming o f t h e new covenant in the experience of the disciples, and that the Spirit is the essence of the n e w cove nant without w h o m there is n o n e w covenant and n o entry into o r participation in it. {d) Pentecost inaugurates the age of the Q m r c h . F o r Luke Pentecost constitutes the disciples as the n e w covenant people of G o d , and is 'the beginning o f t h e period of the Church'.31 In Luke's eyes the Church is basically a missionary b o d y o r , m o r e accurately, tbe Church is composed of witnesses t o Jesus Christ. That 1.8 is the 'Contents page' f o r the b o o k of A c t s need hardly be reiterated, b u t it is the Spirit o n w h o m the o u t w o r k i n g of this theme depends (the A c t s of the H o l y Spirit), and it is n o t tili Pentecost that the mission begins. N o attempt is made t o start w o r k even o n the first stage o f the 1.8 plan of campaign until the Spirit is given at Pentecost. But w h e n the Spirit comes, then, and only then, the w o r l d - w i d e mission Starts at fuU gallop, and the gospel is preached t o representatives 'from every nation under heaven' (2.5) n o lessl The Christian Church is a confessional Church, and its basic (or one of its basic) confessions is 'Jesus is L o r d ' (Acts 1 0 . 5 6 ; R o m . 2« Schweizer. TWNT V I 4o8f., foUowing W. L . Knox. Tbe Acts of tbe Apostles (1948) 8 1 - 8 4 ; also Hull 5 3 ^

"Kirby 118. 30 Knox. Acts 8 6 ; cf. Rackham 1 8 . 31 Schweizer, TWNT V I 409; so many; 'The Spirit is the reality on which the Church is founded' (E. Stauffer, New Testament Tbeology \B.'V 1 9 5 5 ] r 6 j ) .

50

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

10.9; I Cor. i2.3).32 But this confession only becomes possible with the ascension, when Jesus is made ' b o t i L o r d and Christ' (Acts 2.56). A n d it is no doubt the outpouring of the Spirit which brings the füll and final certainty about Jesus' exaltation and lordship home to the disciples (Acts 2.^1).^ At all events it is not until Pentecost that this foimdational belief of the Church is realized and promulgated, and it is oidy as a result of Pentecost that the invitation of Acts 2.21 ('whosoever calls on the name of the L o r d shall be saved') can be issued in the name of Jesus and the promise of the Spirit be made on condition of repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2.38). N o r can w e say that the other essential notes of the Church are present untü after Pentecost. T h e apostolic teaching cannot properly be said to have begun tiU 2 . 4 2 n o r the Kowuivla (2.42), which for Paul paiticulaily denotes the Christian coiranvmity's common participation in or mutual sharing of the one Spirit (II Cor. 1 3 . 1 4 ; Phü. 2 . 1 ) . Christian water-baptism - that is, baptism in the name of the L o r d Jesus Christ - was certainly not adminis tered tiU after Pentecost ( 2 . 4 1 ) ; nor was the common meal, which may have included the Lord's Supper,85 shared in tiU 2.42. Y e t , no sooner has Pentecost come than w e find these four features suddenly becoming the mark of the primitive Community. It would be premature to say that for L u k e Acts 2.42-47 repre sents the ideal State within the young Chutch,^^ or that in 2.42 w e have necessarüy 'the sequence of an early Christian service'.^' E v e n less can w e say that for L u k e 'the real, primary and enduring result of the Spirit's coming' at Pentecost was 'the "Fellowship" (17 icoivü)via)',38 or that L u k e has a developed theology of the 32 O. Cullmann, Tbe Barliest Cbristian Confessions ( E T 1949) 5 4 - 6 4 ; but see also V . H. Neufeld, Tbe Barliest Cbristian Confessions ( 1 9 6 3 ) . 33 Von Baer 84, 9 3 - 9 5 . Cf. Jesus' own reception of tiie Spirit at Jordan which may properly be said to have brought final certainty to Jesus as to his divine sonship. 3* If I.I5& is upheld as an example of apostolic teaching, it can equally well be argued that it is an example of mistaken teaching (see p. 45 n. 2 3 ) . Besides, it is clear that the apostles' understanding of even basic matters was deficient before Pentecost, in Luke's eyes at least ( 1 . 6 ; and see Wotherspoon, Pentecost 1 9 - 2 6 ; C. S. C. Williams, Tbe Acts oftbe Apostles [ig^-j] 5 6 ; Bkiklock 50). 38 J . Jeremias, Tbe Eucbaristic Words of Jesus 3(ET 1966) 1 2 0 . 3«Adler,P/f»^x//w/i38. 3 ' Jeremias, Eucbaristic Words 1 1 9 . 38 C. A . A . Scott in Tbe Spirit (ed. B. H. Streeter 1 9 1 9 ) 1 3 6 5 . , followed by

The Miracle of Pentecost

ji

Church as the B o d y of Christ (though cf. 9.5). What we can say is that Luke shows us in 2.41 ff. the Church operating in a manner which exemplifies Paul's concept of the Church as the Body of Christ. Luke's history at this point demonstrates Paul's doctrine. We can therefore say that Pentecost is the beginning of the Church and the coming into existence of the Church as the B o d y of Christ. And this is the w o r k of the Spirit; for L u k e evidently intends us to understand 2 . 4 1 - 4 7 as the direct and immediate result of the Spirit's Coming, just as 4 . 3 2 - 3 7 is the immediate and direct conse qucnce of 4 . 3 1 . 3 9 It could be argued that Acts 4.32-37 is simply one of Luke's generalizing summaries. But this need not exclude my point. Certainly the story of Ananias and Sapphira which follows shows that in Luke's view the life ofthe C O M M U N I T Y as depicted in 4.32-37 was the work of the Spirit, for it is precisely the abuse of this Community life which Peter calls a lie to the Holy Spirit and a testing ofthe Spirit of the Lord (5.3.9)In brief, then, the Church properly conceived did not come into existence tmtil Pentecost.^" Apart from everything eise the vital experience and possession of the Spirit, the constitutive life prin ciple and hallmark of the early Church, was lacking. A n d as one caimot say 'Christian' without also saying 'Church', since a Christian is by definition a member of the Church (see chapter V n i ) , non-existence o f the Church prior to Pentecost means that there were no Christians (properly speaking) prior to Pentecost. (e) One further piece of evidence must be caUed in - the testimony of Peter in Acts 1 0 - 1 1 . There Peter teils us not only that Comelius's experience of salvation and forgiveness was precisely that of the 1 2 0 at Pentecost, but also that the spiritual State of the I 2 0 prior to Pentecost was precisely that of Cornelius prior to his reception of the Spirit. A s w e shall see in chapter V I I , no less than L. Dewar, Tbe Holy Spirit and Modem Tbougbt (1959) 46; cf. HuU 7 3 , 7 5 . But see especially J . Y . Campbell, J B L j i (1932) 3 5 2 - 8 0 ; also H. Seesemaim, Der Begriff KOINüNIA

in Neuen Testament ( 1 9 3 3 ) .

ä» Adler, Pfingstfest 1 3 8 . This is not to deny that the Church is foreshadowed and prepared for by Jesus (see e.g. R. N . Flew, fesus and bis Cburcb [1938] 3 5 - 8 8 ) , but even passages like Matt. 1 6 . 1 8 ; 1 8 . 1 7 'ook forward beyond Jesus' departure to Pentecost.

52

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

four times (10.47; i i - i 5 . ^ 7 ; i5-8) is the direct equation between the t w o experiences of the Spirit clearly and firmly drawn. In particular we should note 1 1 . 1 5 , 1 7 : 1 1 . 1 5 : 'The Holy Spirit feil on them as on us at the beginning.' 1 1 . 1 7 : ' G o d gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the L o r d Jesus Christ.' T h e beginning for the apostoHc circle was the beginning of the Church at Pentecost. T h e reception of the Holy Spirit was the beginning of their Christian experience as it was for Cornelius, their baptism in the Spirit into the new covenant and the Church as it was for him. N o t only so, but Pentecost came in the experience of the 1 2 0 'when they beHeved in (morevaaaiv inC) the L o r d Jesus Christ'. N o w marevaai (aorist) im in Luke always signifies the act of faith, the decisive commitment by which one becomes a Christian (Acts 2.44; 9.42; 1 6 . 3 1 ) . I I . 1 7 is no düferent. T h e act of faith which resulted in the gift of the Spirit to the 1 2 0 did not take place tili Pentecost. However highly they esteemed their Master while with him on earth, however deep their insights into his character and person (Luke 5. j ; 9.20), and however greatiy they reverenced him when gone from them (Acts i.2i),*i so far.as Peter was concerned their belief in him and commitment to him as L o r d and Christ did not begin until Pentecost. It was only at that moment of believing committal that they received the Spirit, only at Pentecost that their faith reached the level of Christian committal, only then that they became Christians in the N T sense of that word. T h e conclusions for the Pentecostal theology of Pentecost are piain. Their appeal to the experience of the 120 is a broKcn reed, at least so far as it is based on the record of Luke-Acts. In Luke's understanding of salvation-history the 120 before Pentecost were in a Position analogous to that of Jesus before Jordan. They were in the old epoch of salvation, and while they may well have experienced many of the' blessings of the old age and covenant, they were still outside the n e w - for until Pentecost the new age and covenant had not come into Operation for any but Jesus. Only at Pentecost did they enter into that relationship with the Father The prayer of 1.24 is addressed to God, not Jesus. It is God who is described as Kop&wyvmonjs (15.8).

The Miracle of Pentecost

53

which was made possible through the death, resurrection and exaltation of the Son, and which was effected through the ascension gift of the Spirit. Whatever their old covenant experience of the Spirit, it was only at Pentecost that they entered into what Paul might have called the dj3^d-relationship with the Father, in which the fiUal relation of Jesus to G o d is repeated in the experience of the Christian through his reception of the Spirit of the Son. A n d since it is this relationship which alone may be called 'Christian', it was oidy at Pentecost that the 120 became Christians. Luke 10.20 has to be understood in terms of the blessings of the old covenant. To have one's name written in the book of life or in heaven was as possible in the old dispensation as in the new (Ex. 32.32^; Dan. 1 2 . i ; I Enoch 1 0 4 . 1 ; 108.3). Luke 1 1 . 1 3 is to be referred either to the once-for-all occasion of Acts 1.14, 2.1, or to the frequent request of the Christians for a renewed 'filling' with the Spirit, as in Acts 4.29-31. T h e epochal significance of Pentecost raises the whole course of salvation-history to a new plane. A s the beginning of the new age of the Spirit, the new covenant, the Church, it is what happened at Pentecost and not before which is normative for those w h o woidd enter that age, covenant and Church. T h e (pre-Christian) experi ence of the 120 prior to Pentecost can never provide a pattem for the experience of new Christians now. A s well w e might make the civilization of the Roman Empire the Standard for civilization today as make the experience of the earthly contemporaries of Jesus the Standard for spiritual experience today. T h e new age has come, and in comparison the old age reeks of condemnation and death (II Cor, 3.6-8). It is Pentecost which opens the door to that realm of faith and experience which the N T caUs Christian. F o r those who live in the Pentecostal age there is no going back through that door. 'There is no genuine Christianity " o n the wrong side of Pentecost".'^2 In one sense, therefore, Pentecost can never be repeated - for the new age is here and cannot be ushered in again. But in another sense Pentecost, or rather the experience of Pentecost, can and must be repeated in the experience of all w h o would become Christians. A s the day of Pentecost was once the doorway into the new age, so entry into the new age can only be made through that doorway, that is, through receiving the same Spirit and the same « G. Johnston, TWBB 239, citing W. R. Forrester, Conversion 5.

54

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

baptism in tbe Spirit as did the 120.43 Tiiis, of course, is w h y die great thing which Peter offers above all at the conclusion of his sermon is the gift of the Spirit (Acts 2.38). A s the 120 received the benefits of the death and resurrection of Christ at Pentecost through receiving the outpoured Spirit, so do all now become Christians by receiving the same Spirit. A s in the case of Jesus' experience at Jordan the Pentecostals are quite right to emphasize that Pentecost was an experience of empowering (Luke 24.49; Acts i.8).'*4 However, they, and by no means only they, are again wrong in making Pentecost only and primarily an experience of empowering. On the contrary, the Baptism in the Spirit, as always, is primarily initiatory, and only secondarily an empowering. T h e fact is that the phrase 'baptism in Spirit' is never directiy associated with the promise of power, but is always associated with entry into the messianic age or the Body of Christ. The positive value of the Pentecostal's emphasis is his highlighting of the dramatic nature of the initiating Spirit-baptism: the Spirit not only renews, he also equips for service and witoess. Y e t , however correct Pentecostals are to point to a fresh empowering of the Spirit as the answer to the Church's sickness, they are qvüte wrong to call it 'the baptism in the Spirit'. One does not enter the new age or the Christian life more than once, but one may be empowered by or filled with the Spirit many times (Acts 2.4; 4.8, 3 1 ; 9 . 1 7 ; 1 3 . 9 ; E p h . 5.18). <3 To talk of becoming membets of the Spitit-baptized Chutch as a means of maintaining that there was only one Baptism in the Spirit is a hopeless device. It was not a structure or institution which was baptized in the Spirit at Pentecost, but people, and others became (spiritually) one with that group only by themselves being baptized in Spirit (Acts 1 1 . 1 6 ; I Cor. 1 2 . 1 3 ) . « Cf. N. H. Snaith, ExpT 43 ( 1 9 3 1 - 3 2 ) 3 7 9 ^

V T H E R I D D L E O F S A M A R I A

T H E p r o b l e m o f A c t s 8, l o n g t h e chief s t r o n g h o l d o f Pentecostal ( b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit) a n d C a t h o U c ( C o n f i r m a t i o n ) alike, centres o n t w o facts: t h e Samaritans believed a n d w e r e b a p t i z e d ; t h e y d i d n o t receive t h e Spirit u n t i l s o m e t i m e later. T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t i n the c o n t e x t o f the rest o f the N T these facts appear t o b e m u t u a l l y exclusive a n d w h o l l y irreconcilable. I f t h e y believed a n d w e r e b a p t i z e d ( v . 12) i n t h e n a m e o f t h e L o r d Jesus ( v . 16) t h e y m u s t b e called Christians. B u t i f t h e y d i d n o t receive t h e H o l y Spirit t U l later t h e y c a t m o t b e called Christians u n t i l that t i m e ( m o s t explicitly R o m . 8.9). T h e usual covirse has b e e n t o b u i l d o n t h e f o i m d a tions o f w . 4 - 1 3 a n d t o call in q u e s t i o n t h e Statements o f w . 1 4 - 2 4 : i n L u k a n t h e o l o g y the l a n g u a g e o f w . i2f. means t h a t t h e S a m a r i tans b e c a m e Christians a t that p o i n t ; therefore, i t is said, the State m e n t s o f w . 1 4 - 1 7 c a r m o t m e a n w h a t t h e y seem t o m e a n . E i t h e r ( 1 ) t h e Samaritans h a d already received t h e S p i r i t a n d w . 1 4 - 1 7 r e c o r d o i d y a charismatic m a n i f e s t a t i o n , i o r (2) t h e y r e c o r d a s e c o n d reception o f the Spirit 1 Most recentiy, Beasley-Murray 1 1 9 ; earlier, Bruce, Book iZzf., and J . E . L . Oulton, ExpT 66 ( 1 9 5 4 - 5 5 ) 2}8f.. who refers back to F. J . A. Hort, Tbe Cbristian Ecclesia (1897) 54. TTiis Interpretation has been most populär among commentators of the Reformed sdbool: e.g., Calvin, Tbe Acts of tbe Apostles (Torrance edition 1965) 2 3 5 f ; J . C. Lambert, Tbe Sacraments in tbe New Testa ment (1903) 95f; N . B. Stonehousc, Paul Before tbe Areopagus ( 1 9 5 7 ) 7 8 - 8 0 ; R. A. Finlayson in Tbe Encyclopedia of Christianity (ed. E . H. P^mer, 1 1 9 6 4 ) 5 3 9 ; A. M . Stibbs and J . I. Packer, Tbe Spirit Witbin You (1967) 3 5 . Similarly the Lutheran, R. C. H. Lenski, Tbe Interpretation oftbe Acts oftbe Apostles (1934) 324f. Hull argues that the Samaritans in fact had the Spirit prior to the visit of Peter and John, but that in Luke's eyes the Spirit had not come unless he manifested himself visibly (106-9). «The view of most Pentecostals and many Catholics: e.g., Riggs 5 2 ; Ervin 9 2 - 9 4 ; B. Neunheuser, Baptism and Confirmation ( E T 1964) 1 9 ; P. T. Camelot in New Catbolic Encyclopedia (1967) IV 1 4 5 , 1 4 8 .

55

j6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

o r (3) the gift o f the Spirit b e l o n g s o n l y t o t h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s ; o r (4) L u k e has separated w h a t w a s i n fact j o i n e d ; o r (5) G o d i n his s o v e r e i g n t y w i t h h e l d t h e Spirit f r o m Christians. I. T h i s hypothesis f o u n d e r s o n the explicit Statements o f L u k e , that b e f o r e Peter's a n d J o h n ' s appearance the Spirit h a d ' n o t y e t fallen o n a n y o f t h e m ' (v.i6), a n d that o n l y w h e n P e t e r a n d J o h n laid h a n d s o n t h e m w a s the H o l y S p i r i t g i v e n ( v . 18) a n d received ( w . 1 5 , 1 7 , 19). C h a r i s m a t i c manifestations are i m p l i e d , o f course, b u t o n l y i m p l i e d , a n d , as elsewhere i n A c t s , t h e y c o m e mth t h e S p i r i t a n d are the i m m e d i a t e result a n d i n d i c a d o n o f his coming (2.4; io.45f.; i i - i J j 19-6). T h e f o r c e o f this a r g u m e n t c a n n o t b e b l u n t e d b y t a k i n g -nvevfia dyiov t o m e a n o n l y ' t h e charismata o f the Spirit'.3 A s I s h o w o n p p . 68ff. b e l o w , o n e carmot so easily d r i v e a w e d g e b e t w e e n TÖ irveOna T6 ayiov a n d 4 T h e clearest i n d i c a t i o n o f all t h a t f o r L u k e these are e q u i v a l e n t titles o f the H o l y Spirit is t h e fact t h a t h e identifies the irveviia dyiov o f w . 1 5 , 1 7 , 19 a n d TO iTvevfia o f V. 18 w i t h ij 8wped TOV 0eov, w h i c h i n L u k e a l w a y s refers t o the H o l y Spirit ( A c t s 2.38; 10.45; " - i ? ) - T h e true f o r m u l a is n o t irveviia ayiov — charismata (alone), b u t TTvevfw. dyiov = H o l y Spirit + charismata, o r m o r e precisely, t h e H o l y S p i r i t b r i n g i n g a n d m a n i f e s t i n g his c o m i n g a n d presence b y charismata. I t w a s n o t m e r e l y charismata w h i c h t h e exalted L o r d p o u r e d o u t o n t h e disciples at P e n t e c o s t (2.33), b u t t h e S p i r i t o f t h e L o r d (2.i7f.), w h o m a n i f e s t e d h i m s e l f a n d his c o m i n g b y these gifts. A s M a s o n o n c e p u t i t : ' I t is t h e H o l y G h o s t H i m s e l f w h o falls u p o n m e n , a n d n o t H i s gifts.'« C e r t a i r d y P e t e r a n d J o h n m i s s e d t h e manifestations, b u t t h e y c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e Samaritans lacked t h e Spirit, n o t spiritual gifts. N o gifts m e a n t n o Spirit.« A n d i n the e v e n t w h a t t h e y actually p r a y e d f o r a n d w h a t the S a m a r i t a n s actually received w a s t h e H o l y Spirit. T o claim t h a t P e t e r a n d J o h n w e r e interested o i d y i n gifts is t o exalt charismata f a r a b o v e their N T Status, t o ' o u t - P e n t e c o s t a l i z e ' t h e Pentecostals. P e t e r a n d 8 Contra Beasley-Murray 1 1 9 , who points to Luke 1 1 . 1 3 as a parallel case; see also the authors cited in A
The Riddle of Samaria

57

J o h n acted because the H o l y Spirit h a d n o t y e t fallen o n t h e m , a n d o n l y w h e n t h e y acted d i d the Samaritans receive t h e Spirit. 2. L i k e t h e first, this Suggestion c a n n o t stand b e f o r e L u k e ' s u n e q u i v o c a l Statements: the Spirit h a d n o t yet fallen o n t h e m = n o t o n e h a d received t h e g i f t o f the H o l y Spirit. T h e parallels b e t w e e n 8.5-13 a n d 2 . 4 1 - 4 7 , a n d t h e miracles a n d j o y present among the Samaritans (8.6-8) d o n o t indicate that t h e y already possessed the Spirit o r w e r e already c o n v e r t e d . ' H . Schlier tries t o cut the k n o t by distinguishing b e t w e e n the ' g r u n d l e g e n d e P n e u m a ' , which L u k e does n o t mention, and the ' C h a r i s m e n g e i s t ' , ^ a n d it has sometimes b e e n a r g u e d that imm-rrTeiv im a n d perhaps Xafißdveiv here carry i n themselves the t h o u g h t of a special second c o m i n g o f the Spirit. 9 B u t w h e n w e c o m p a r e L u k e ' s l a n g u a g e here w i t h his description o f t h e Spirit's c o m i n g elsewhere (see p p . 7off. b e l o w ) , it b e c o m e s e v i d e n t , first, t h a t L u k e k n o w s o f «0 earlier Coming o f t h e Spirit t h a n the o n e h e describes b y u s i n g Xaixßaveiv, immnTw a n d hlZoaBai, a n d s e c o n d , t h a t L u k e k n o w s o f no other Coming o f the Spirit t h a n the o n e t h u s described (apart f r o m t h e 'filling' w i t h the S p i r i t , w h i c h is n o t relevant h e r e ) . ! " T h i s c o m i n g o f the Spirit is described i n v a r i o u s w a y s a n d m a y manifest itself i n v a r i o u s w a y s , b u t i t is essentiaUy o n e a n d the same c o m i n g . A s there is n o g r o u n d f o r distinguishing b e t w e e n irveu/xa dyiov a n d TO nvetJ/m TO dyiov, SO there is n o g r o v m d f o r distinguishing b e t w e e n the 'grundlegende P n e u m a ' a n d the 'Charismengeist'. F o r L u k e it is the o n e Spirit a n d t h e o n e c o m i n g . P e r h a p s s o m e are p r e p a r e d t o say that L u k e ' s r e p o r t i n g w a s s o superficial that o i d y t h e external a n d visible w o r k i n g s o f the S p i r i t interested h i m (see n . i ) ; that the first c o m i n g , e v e n t h o u g h t h a t w a s w h a t m a d e a m a n a C h r i s t i a n , h a d such Uttle significance f o r h i m that h e n e v e r m e n t i o n e d i t ; " t h a t t h e reaUy i m p o r t a n t e v e n ' S. I. Bnse in CbrisiianBapfitm (ed. A . Gilmore 1959) 1 1 8 f ; Adler Taufe 8 3 ; contra Oulton 238f; Beasley-Murray i i 8 f ; Horton 4. 8 Die Zeit der Kirche (1956) i i 6 ; cf. Haenchen 2 6 1 ; A . Wikenhauser, Die Apostelgeschichte ( 1 9 6 1 ) 9 8 ; O. Kuss, Auslegimgund Verkündigung (1^6^) 1 0 0 - 2 ; also Lampe in Peake 7 8 2 gh. The equivalent Pentecostal distinction is between the regenerating Spirit and the empowering Spirit. * So Wirgman 6 3 ; G. C. Richards, Baptism and Confirmation ( 1 9 4 2 ) cited in Lampe, Seal 66; Oulton 2 3 8 {enmimto'); and Th. Zahn, cited in Adler, Taufe 8 3 ; Dewar 53 (Xanßdoew). 'To receive the Holy Spirit' has become the Pente costals' technical phrase for Spirit-baptism. 1» Contra Ervin; see pp. 7off. below. Cf. Wikenhauser 98.

58

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

essential c o m i n g o f the S p i r i t w a s t h e o n e w h i c h resulted in a display o f spiritual gifts.12 B u t this w i l l h a r d l y d o . F o r L u k e t h e o n e r e c e p t i o n o f , f a l l i n g u p o n , gift o f t h e S p i r i t is t h e beginning oi a m a n ' s C h r i s t i a n experience a n d life. T h e S p i r i t is received as G o d ' s gift w h e n a m a n repents and c o n m i i t s h i m s e l f t o Jesus C h r i s t ( A c t s 2.38), is ^ven w h e n a m a n p u t s his t r u s t in t h e L o r d Jesus C h r i s t ( 1 1 . 1 7 ) , a n d falls upon h i m t o b r i n g h i m f o r g i v e n e s s and s a l v a t i o n (io.43f.; i i.i4f.).i3 I t is precisely because the Spirit, who usually c a m e t h u s at i n i t i a t i o n , had notjet (ovSenco) c o m e u p o n any of t h e m , and t h e otdy Qj,6vov) thing t h e y had experienced was their w a t e r - b a p t i s m ('that and n o t h i n g m o r e ' - v . 16 N E B ) , that the two senior aposdes c a m e d o w n hot-foot f r o m J e r u s a l e m t o r e m e d y a Situation w h i c h had g o n e seriously w r o n g s o m e w h e r e . 3. W h y w a s t h e S p i r i t n o t y e t received t h r o u g h Philip's m i n i s t r y ? W h y w a s the p r o m i s e o f A c t s 2.38 n o t fulfilled w h e n its c o n d i t i o n s seem t o h a v e b e e n m e t ? S o m e t a k e t h e bull by the h o r n s a n d r e p l y : Because f o r L u k e t h e S p i r i t c o u l d b e c o n f e r r e d o r d y t h r o u g h t h e l a y i n g o n o f apostolic h a n d s . i * B u t this v i e w c a n n o t stand i n t h e face o f L u k e ' s o t h e r r e p o r t s , let a l o n e t h e rest o f t h e N T . H o w a b s u r d t h a t L u k e s h o v d d g o t o such lengths t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e S p i r i t is g i v e n o t d y t h r o u g h a p o s d e s , a n d t h e n i m m e d i a t e l y g o o n t o relate t h e c o n v e r s i o n a n d w a t e r - b a p t i s m o f t h e e v m u c h b y t h e same u n q u a l i f i e d P h i l i p ! O r does h e m e a n u s t o believe t h a t the E t h i o p i a n never received the Spirit P a i d certainly w a s n o t 'confirmed' b y an aposde. L a m p e does ascribe t o Ananias apostolic Status ' f o r this particular task', thatis, of ministering to P a u l (Seal 68; cf. Swete 9 5 f.). B u t this is surely to destroy the v e r y thing w h i c h the ideas of ' A p o s d e ' a n d 1« This is a necessary corollary, otherwise Peter and John would not have been so anxious here (like Paul in Acts 19) for the disciples they met to receive the Spirit; and obviously no one was satisfied with the Samaritans' Christian Standing tili they burst forth in tongues and prophecy, or whatever it was. 1» Cf. R. Schnackcnburg,.&»^/ww in tbe Tboi^bt of St Paul (ET 1964) 109. w K . Lake, Beginnings I V 92, V 5 3 ; Foakes-Jackson yzf; G. H. C. Macgre gor, JB 9 (1954) i i o ; Williams 1 1 6 ; Flcmington 4 1 ; von Allmen, VocB. 3 2 f ; Munck, Acts 7 5 ; C. E , Pockncc. VTater and tbe Spirit (1967) 28. It is an ex planation long populär in some Catholic cirdes - e.g. Chase 2 6 ; Lowther Clarke 8; Adler, Taufe 9 7 , i i o f ; Rackham 1 1 6 ; Leeming 2 1 6 - 2 1 8 ; Dewar 51-57" But cf. the Western text: 'The Holy Spirit feil on the eunuch, and an angel of the Lord seized Philip'; and see p. 93 below.

The Riddle of Samaria

j9

'apostolic cotifirmation' are designed to safeguard. F o r it means that any Christian may be commissioned b y G o d as an apostle for some particular task; and since this joins the distinctive essence of apostolicity to apostolic work rather than persans, it means that all w h o are sent by G o d to d o apostolic w o r k are apostles - a definition which I prefer. A g a i n in A c t s 1 1 . 1 9 - 2 4 , t b e Situation m o s t parallel to A c t s 8, there is complete silence a b o u t a n y c o n f i r m a t o r y c o m i n g of the S p i r i t : B a r n a b a s does not act to r e m e d y a defective Situation, but r a t h e r a c k n o w l e d g e s a n d rejoices o v e r t h e already matiifest grace o f G o d . i ^ T h e picture o f apostles s c u r r y i n g h i t h e r and t h i t h e r up and down the eastern end of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n i n an a t t e m p t t o keep Up with the rapid e x p a n s i o n of the C h r i s t i a n g o s p e l , w i t h little t i m e for anything but ' c o n f i r m a t i o n Services', is a m u s i n g but incredible. N o r can t h e d a y b e s a v e d b y deleting 'apostolic' and a t t r i b u t i n g the gift of t h e S p i r i t m e r e l y t o t h e l a y i n g on of h a n d s . F o r b a p t i s m is the o t d y ritual a c t i o n r e q u i r e d f o r t h e Spirit t o b e r e c e i v e d i n 2.38,18 a n d is usually the o t d y rite p e r f o r m e d (2.41; 8.38; 10.48; 1 6 . 1 5 , 3 3 ; i8.8). L u k e ' s t r e a t m e n t o f the e u n u c h w o u l d t h e n b e a l m o s t as inconsistent as before,^* a n d t h e case o f C o r n e l i u s ( a n d P a u l ?) is h a r d l y possible.20 Besides, w h y d i d P h i l i p n o t lay his o w n h a n d s on t h e Samaritans ? F a r f r o m a n s w e r i n g o u r q u e s t i o n this t h e o r y m a k e s t h e delay o f t h e S p i r i t e v e n m o r e i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e , T h e P e n t e c o s t a l o f t e n i g n o r e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f ritual a c t a n d argues s i m p l y t h a t t h e Samaritans s h o w reception o f s a l v a t i o n t o be distinct f r o m r e c e p t i o n o f t h e Spirit,21 B u t i f M a r k i6.i5f. is cited as p r o o f t h a t t h e y w e r e saved,22 w e m u s t call a t t e n t i o n t o t h e m u c h m o r e relevant A c t s 2.38, T h e S p i r i t is p r o m i s e d o n t h e same c o n d i t i o n s as s a l v a t i o n (cf. 1 6 . 3 1 - f a i t h - r e p e n t a n c e b e i n g t w o sides 1« See Beasley-Murray 93. " See further G. B. Caird, Tbe Apostolic Age (195 5) 6 9 - 7 1 ; Beasley-Murray 1 1 3 - 1 5 ; Lampe, Seal 67. 1* Contra Lowther Clarke 17, 2 1 . 1» See Oulton 239. 20 Dewar 53 and A . Richardson, Introduction to tbe Theology of tbe New Testament (1958) 356, both speak of Cornelius being confirmed before his baptism. God apparently does not observe correct ecdesiastical procedure! 21 Prince, JordM 68; also Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit (1965) 1 3 ; J . D. Stiles, Tbe Gift oftbe Holy Spirit (n.d.) 67; Horton 4 ; Harper, Power 26f; Allen, Ufe 9f; D. Basham, A Handbook on Holy Spirit Baptism (1969) i;f., 1 7 . They thus have the unhappy precedent of Christians who have done all that God requires of them and yet have still not received the Spirit - a Situation they are all too familiär with in their own asscmbUcs Cchronic* seekers - Lindsay 57). 22 Prince, Jordan d-fi; Lindsay 34.

6o

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

o f the same c o i n ) , a n d L u k e k n o w s n o o t h e r c o n d i d o n r e q u i r e d o f the i n d i v i d u a l f o r his r e c e p ü o n o f the S p i r i t ( 1 1 . 1 7 ; 1 9 - 2 ; cf. J o h n 7 . 3 9 ; G a l . 3.2).23 I f t h e a r g u m e n t is p o s e d i n these t e r m s , t h e n either the Samaritans w e r e n o t ' s a v e d ' p r i o r t o v . 1 7 , o r eise t h e y r e c e i v e d the S p i r i t w h e n t h e y b e H e v e d a n d w e r e b a p t i z e d . 4. H a s L u k e h i m s e l f created the difficulty b y e x p a n d i n g a straight f o r w a r d story a b o u t P h i H p a n d S i m o n , i n w h i c h the Samaritans received the Spirit t h r o u g h P h i l i p ' s m i i ü s t r y , a n d i n w h i c h P e t e r a n d J o h n d i d n o t o r i g i n a l l y feature at all P^^ T h e disappearance o f P h i l i p f r o m the s t o r y a f t e r v . 1 3 is certainly s t r i k i n g , as is the v e r y p r o b l e m w e are d e a l i n g w i t h - the l o n g delay b e t w e e n b a p t i s m a n d the r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t . 25 H a s L u k e s i m p l y a d a p t e d the a u t h e n tic(?) P h i l i p t r a d i t i o n i n o r d e r t o present a p i c t u r e o f a u n i f i e d C h u r c h w i t h J e r u s a l e m as t h e f o u n t a i n h e a d o f a u t h o r i t y a n d m i s s i o n ?26 T h e a r g u m e n t s i n f a v o u r o f a n affirmative a n s w e r f a U t o r e c k o n w i t h L u k e ' s t r e a t m e n t elsewhere. I t is characteristic o f L u k e ' s style that i n r e c o r d i n g a n i n d d e n t w h i c h i n v o l v e d a n u m b e r of p e o p l e h e concentrates o t d y o n the central figure(s). In the Peter and John narratives ( 3 . 1 - 4 . 2 2 ; 8 . 1 4 - 2 4 ) John almost fades entirely from view, although as active as Peter ( 4 . 1 3 ; 8 . 1 8 ) ; all attention is on Peter. So with Paul. W e know, e.g., that Silas became his companion after the breach with Barnabas ( i 5 . 3 9 f . ) , but i n 1 5 . 4 1 ; 1 6 . 1 Luke speaks of their travels soldy i n terms of Paul - 'he w e n t . . . he came'(see also 1 6 . 3 ; 1 8 . 7 , 1 1 ) , After Timothy joins them ( 1 6 . 3 ) his name is mentioned again only on occasions when they parted or reunited ( 1 7 . 1 5 ; 1 8 . 5 ; 1 9 . 2 2 ) . 1 9 . 2 2 shows that Paul must have been accompanied by helpers on most of his journeys, but w e hear nothing of his companions, except when the narrative uses the all but anonymous 'they* or the self-effecing 'we' - and these occur usually i n the travd notes linking the inddents i n which Paul alone figures. It is often only these t r a v d notes which show that Paul was not alone. «8 Acts 5.3 2 is no exception. Either the obedience is the obedience (feoucoiJ««) to the faith = conversion of 6.7 (cf. Rom. 1 . 5 ; 1 0 . 1 6 ; 1 6 . 2 6 ; II Thess. 1.8); or

eise the obedience is the sott described in 5.29 {itaOapxlia) and the gift of the Spirit spoken of is the filling of the Spirit for bold witness (4.8, 3 1 ) . «4 M. Dibelius, Studies in the Acts of tht Apostles (ET 1956) 1 7 ; Haenchen 2 6 3 - 6 5 ; H. Conzclmann, Die Apostelgeschichte ( 1 9 6 3 ) 54f. «"i E. Preuschen, Die Apostelgeschichte ( 1 9 1 2 ) 5 0 . E. Käsemann, Essays on New Testament Themes (ET 1964) i 4 5 f ; also RGG» II ( 1 9 5 8 ) 1 2 7 7 ; Haenchen 265f; Stählin 1 2 2 - 4 ; Conzelmarm, Apg. 5 5 ; E.

Dinkler RGG» VI (1962) 6 3 4 ; A. Ehrhardt, Tbe Framework of the New Testament Stories (1964) 7 9 , 9 2 .

The"Riddleof Samaria

6i

T h e fact that a p e r s o n is n o t m e n t i o n e d b y L u k e i n a n a r r a t i v e therefore does n o t necessarily i m p l y t h a t p e r s o n ' s absence. S o h e r e , P e t e r holds the centre o f the s t a g e ; J o h n is barely n o t i c e d i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d ; a n d P h i l i p is i g n o r e d i n the w i n g s . M o r e o v e r , it is v e r y p r o b a b l e that the ' t h e y ' o f the t r a v e l n o t e i n v . 25 includes P h i l i p , i n accordance w i t h L u k e ' s h a b i t . F o r the c o m m a n d o f v . 26 is that P h i H p s h o u l d ' g o s o u t h w a r d s on (im) t h e r o a d that goes d o w n f r o m J e r u s a l e m t o G a z a ' , ^ ' a n d is best u n d e r s t o o d as a c o m m a n d t o leave Jerusalem. P h i H p ' s j o u m e y f r o m S a m a r i a t o J e r u s a l e m is a l m o s t certainly c o v e r e d b y v . 25. A s t o the s u p p o r t i n g a r g u m e n t s : K ä s e m a n n has n o g r o u n d s f o r his t w o assertions, that L u k e stigmatizes P h i H p ' s b a p t i s m as defective,28 a n d that f o r L u k e the Spirit 'is accessible solely w i t h i n the b o u n d a r i e s o f the a p o s t o H c f e l l o w s h i p ' . ^ » I d o n o t deny that Jerusalem exercised, at least initially, a general supervision o v e r the expanding w o r k o f evangelization ( 8 . 1 4 ; ii.iflF., 22). B u t f o r L u k e the authorization o f the Spirit is always m o r e i m p o r tant than any a u t h o r i z a t i o n b y Jerusalem ( 1 0 . 1 - 1 1 . 1 8 ; i 3 . i - 3 ; c f . 2 6 . 1 6 18). A n d the signs and wonders performed b y Philip i m p l y that the Spirit was using h i m and had therefore authorized h i m (cf. 1 0 . 3 8 ; R o m . i j . i S f . ; H e b . 2,4). M o r e o v e r , it is L u k e himself w h o shows us that the Hellenists spear-headed the w i d e r mission while the aposdes remained m Jerusalem ( 8 . 1 4 ; 1 1 . 1 9 - 2 1 ) , and he can hardly have c o n sidered the great majority o f t h e churches i n Judea, Samaria, Phoenicia and Syria t o be unauthorized (cf. Beasley-Murray i i j f . ) . L u k e casts n o slur o n P h i H p ' s b a p t i s m : i t w a s a d m i t ü s t e r e d o n confession o f f a i t h a n d i n t h e n a m e o f t h e L o r d , as w e r e a U t h e o t h e r C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m s i n A c t s ; i t w a s n o t repeated, a n d the rest o f A c t s offers n o p r o o f f o r the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t the S p i r i t must h a v e c o m e w i t h o r b e e n ' c o n f e r r e d ' b y P h i H p ' s b a p t i s m i n the o r i g i n a l t r a d i t i o n (2.4; io.44-48).8'> A n d as f o r L u k e ' s alleged desire t o p r e s e r v e a n u n b l e m i s h e d p i c t u r e o f t h e Una sancta, w e n e e d o r ü y p o i n t t o 8.26-40; 9 . 1 - 1 9 ; 1 1 . 1 9 - 2 4 ; 18.24-28 t o s h o w h o w ill i t accords w i t h L u k e ' s o v e r - a l l p r e s e n t a t i o n . *' Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings I V 9 5 ; Munck, Acts 3 7 ; J B . Essays 1 4 6 . Schlier calls it a 'half-baptism' (Zeit 1 1 6 ) . Essays 1 4 5 . 30 Cf. Kittel 3 5 ; Bieder 1 2 7 . Even in 2.38 baptism is only a condition for receiving the gift ofthe Spirit. For Bultmaim, History 247 n. i, and Conzelmarm, •^PS- 55> nmintain that this passage really 'presupposes' and 'teaches the inseparability and solidarity of baptism and Spirit' is really too extraordinary for words. See fiirther in ch. I X .

62

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Haenchen's argument that Simon must have dealt with Phiüp since he would desire the power of miracles more than the authority to give the Spirit ( 2 6 4 ^ ) ignores the clear implication that the descent of the Spirit on the Samaritans was rather spectacular, 5. One of the most influential EngUsh interpretations in recent years has been that of Lampe, w h o stresses that Samaria was a unique Situation and one of the chief turning points in the mis sionary enterprise. Before Samaria, a region long at odds w i t h the J e w s , could be estabUshed as a nucleus f o r further expansion, the continuity w i t h Jerusalem had to be matntained, otherwise the uiüty of the Spirit-possessed Community w o u l d be impaired.^i U n doubtedly the most satisfactory o f t h e explanations so far proposed, yet I must confess that it leaves me unconvinced. The conversion of the Ethiopian evmuch was an advance o f n o Uttle sigiüficance, yet absolutely nothing is made o f it in terms o f continuity w i t h Jerusalem. A n d w h y did the Spirit await apostoHc 'confirmadon' in the case o f the Samaritans w h e n he did n o t do so with CorneUus ? Again, A n t i o c h was at least as sigiüficant a centre of expansion as Samaria, and, as the Springboard f o r the most important expansion of aU (Pavd's missions), even m o r e important than Ephesus, yet L u k e does n o t so much as mention the Spirit in connection w i t h A n t i o c h (except in his description o f Barnabas). N o r is there any cementing of die apostoHc unity b y the Spiritin the case of ApoUos, surely t o o Strategie a figure t o be left unattached t o Jerusalem.32 A b o v e aU, this v i e w shows us a considerable number of baptized believers w h o d o not h a v e the Spirit and w h o are not yet incorporated into the Church.83 This means that beUef and baptism 'in the 31 Lampe, Seal 7 0 - 7 2 , and xxf,; also in Peake 782h. Those who follow Lampe's line more or less include Bruce, Book 182S.; Oulton 2 3 9 ; Caird, Age 7if.; Williams i i 6 ; Richardson 356,' White 1 9 8 ; Hill 264. It is very dose to the Heilsgeschicbte Interpretation of Schweizer, TWNT V I 4 1 2 and Wilkens, r 2 23 (1967) 2 7 , which sees the coming of Peter and John from Jerusalem as proof of Luke's desire to link the revelation of God to Jerusalem as the centre of salvation-history (cf. n. 26, and Bieder 1 2 9 , i 3 7 f . ) . 32 The weak link in Wilken's exposition is his treatment of Apollos, who is Pneumatiker before his meeting with Ptisdlla and Aquila ( 3 7 - 3 9 ) . Any Heilsgeschicbte thesis which postulates a necessary dependence on Jcrxxsalem comes to grief on the contrasts central to the twin stories of Apollos and the twelve 'disdples' (see ch. VIII). 33 There seems to bc some confusion at this point. Were the Samaritans not incorporated into the Church until the laying on of apostolic hands (Lampe, Seal 7 2 ) , or were they merely being assured 'that they bad really become members of the Church' (69f)? Similarly Beasley-Murray 1 1 8 .

The RJdd/e of Samaria

63

n a m e o f t h e L o t d J e s u s ' d o not residt i n t h e gift o f t h e Spirit ( c o n t r a r y t o 2.38) a n d d o not i n c o r p o r a t e i n t o t h e C h u r c h ( c o n trary t o 2.41 a n d t h e descriprions o f t h e C h r i s d a n c o m m u i d t y as ol moTevoavres - 2.44).** I n s h o r t , w e are b a c k at the same d i l e m m a as faced t h e C a t h o H c a n d Pentecostal a b o v e : C a n w e r e g a r d as Christians those w h o h a v e not received t h e Spirit a n d h a v e not b e e n incorporated into the C h u r c h ? T h e usual m e t h o d o f treating A c t s 8 - o f accepting w h a t w . i2f. seem t o say and calling i n q u e s t i o n w h a t f o l l o w s - has thus l e d t o a serious impasse. I t m a y be that A c t s 8 Stands i n c o m p l e t e c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o P a u l , a n d i n d e e d t o t h e rest o f t h e N T so far as i t sheds H g h t o n these matters. L u k e m a y b e m u c h more d e p e n d e n t on and f a i t h f u l t o his sources t h a n is o f t e n b e l i e v e d , a n d m a y b e c o n t e n t s i m p l y t o s h o w that t h e Samaritans w e r e i n t h e e n d f u l l y accepted, w i t h o u t specidating o n t h e i r spiritual stams a n d State b e t w e e n their b a p t i s m b y P h i l i p a n d t h e m i s s i o n o f P e t e r a n d John.35 B u t b e f o r e resigning ourselves t o this c o n c l u s i o n w e s h o u l d t r y r e v e r s i n g t h e strategy. V e r s e s 1 4 - 1 7 h a v e p r o v e d u n y i e l d i n g i n their implications. P e r b a p s t h e p r e c e d i n g section w ü l y i e l d a f e w clues. W e r e the Samaritans Christians b e f o r e P e t e r a n d J o h n a r r i v e d ? P h i H p ' s p r e a c h i n g seems t o h a v e b e e n n o different f r o m t h a t r e c o r d e d elsewhere i n A c t s . T h e S a m a r i t a n s ' response seems t o h a v e b e e n entirely satisfactory. A n d their b a p t i s m w a s f u U y C h r i s t i a n . H o w e v e r , there are a n u m b e r o f reasons f o r b e H e v i n g n o t o i d y that their response a n d c o m m i t m e n t was defective, b u t also that L u k e i n t e n d e d his readers t o k n o w this. (a) F o r t h e S a m a r i t a n s ' k i n g s h i p w a s . . . s o m e t h i n g special', and they looked f o r the coming o f a 'Messiah', o r T a h e b , w h o w o u l d i n t r o d u c e *a p e r i o d o f d i v i n e f a v o u r , a s e c o n d K i n g d o m ' , b y u n i t i n g all Israel, c r u s h i n g h e r enemies a n d e x a l t i n g t h e S a m a r i t a n people.36 J u d g i n g b y their response t o S i m o n ' s m a g i c a n d t h e ** Beasley-Murray calls this view 'a theologically impossible abstraction' (118).

86 Cf. White i94f. 3« See J . Macdonald, Tbe Tbeology of tbe Samaritans (1964) 74f., 7 9 £ , 3 5 9 - 7 1 . While Macdonald's survey is drawn chiefly from documents deriving from a period later than that covered in Acts, there is no reason to doubt that the traditions they embody are in esscntials much older and have their roots in the centuries before Christ. Comparison with John 4 . 1 9 - 2 6 and the adulation accotded by the Samaritans to Simon (8.10) give strong support to the view that the beliefs we have cited were prevalent in Samaria at the time of Christ

04

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

h i g h - s o u n d i n g title t h e y g a v e h i m ( v . ^o),3'' t h e S a m a r i t a n s ' e x c i t e m e n t a n d eschatological e x p e c t a t i o n niust h a v e b e e n r o u s e d t o n e a r f e v e r - p i t c h . I n t o this s i t u a d o n c a m e P h i l i p p r o c l a i m i n g t h e C h r i s t a n d p r e a c h i n g a b o u t t h e K i n g d o m o f G o d . N o w 6 xp^orös simpliciter is always u s e d i n A c t s o f t h e M e s s i a h o f p r e - C h r i s t i a n e x p e c t a t i o n (2.31, 36; 3 . 1 8 ; 4.26; 9.22; 1 7 . 3 ; 26.23), a n d w h e n t h e K i n g d o m is preached elsewhere t o n o n - C h r i s t i a n s it is a l w a y s w i t h reference t o t h e K i n g d o m o f J e w i s h expectations (19.8; 28.23, 3 1 ; cf. 1 . 3 , 6 ; 20.25).

T o t h e Samaritans P h i l i p ' s message c o u l d o n l y b e a b o u t t h e T a h e b , a n d m u s t m e a n that t h e l o n g - a w a i t e d s e c o n d K i n g d o m w a s a b o u t t o b e u s h e r e d i n . C o m i n g as P h i l i p d i d i n succession t o S i m o n , w o r k i n g e v e n greater signs, t h e y w o u l d w e l c o m e h i s p r e a c h i n g enthusiastically ( v . 8) a n d accept i t u n r e s e r v e d l y ; b a p t i s m w o u l d p r o b a b l y b e üeen t b e xJte o f mtiy into t b e K i n g d o m ( v . 12) a n d t h e t o k e n o f allegiance t o Jesus t h e T a h e b , a n d as such w o u l d b e s u b m i t t e d t o gladly. T h i s does n o t m e a n that P h i U p ' s p r e a c h i n g w a s defective, o i d y that his particular emphasis (perhaps d u e t o a desire t o speak i n terms f ^ m i h a r t o his audience) c o u l d w e l l h a v e g i v e n t h e Samaritans a false I m p r e s s i o n a n d r e sulted i n a response w h i c h w a s sincere a n d enthusiastic, b u t w r o n g l y directed. {b) T h e Samaritans seem t o h a v e b e e n a rather superstitious p e o p l e . T h e i r response t o S i m o n w a s certainly o f this n a t u r e , i n d i c a t i n g v e r y little d i s c e r n m e n t a n d d e p t h ( w . 9 - 1 1 ) . T h e w h o l e area — e v e n TÖ IÖVOS Tiis SapuipLas • - • diro fuKpoü ews ixeydXov ( w . 9f.) - seems t o h a v e b e e n c a u g h t u p i n a w ^ v e o f mass e m o t i o n . I t is significant t h e n that L u k e describes their Response t o S i m o n w i t h precisely t h e same w o r d as h e uses f o r t h e i r response t o P h i l i p (yrpoadxo ~ w . 6, l o f . ) . T h i s suggests t h a t their reaction t o P h i l i p w a s f o r t h e same reasons a n d o f t h e same q u a l i t y a n d d e p t h as t h e i r reaction t o S i m o n (cf. w . 6-8 w i t h l o f , ) . Xt is h a r d l y t o b e c o m p a r e d w i t h L y d i a ' s response t o P a i d ' s message (16.14), a n d t h e i m p l i c a t i o n is that t h e S a m a r i t a n s ' acceptance o f b a p t i s m w a s and after. Samaria cannot have escaped influence from the current apocalyptic expectations in Judaism. Josephus also teils us tljat 'Pontius Pilate lost his office in Palestine because of the savage way in vhich he quelled a riot in Samaria, which arose as the result of one claLming to be the expected "Messiah" * (Macdonald 3 6 1 , citing Ant 1 8 . 8 5 - 8 9 ) . 3 ' See Bruce, Book 1 7 9 ; Conzelmann, Apg. 5 3 .

The Riddle of Samaria

65

p r o m p t e d m o r e b y t b e herd-instinct o f a p o p u l ä r m a s s - m o v e m e n t {oixoBvimhov - V. 6) t b a n b y t b e seif- a n d w o r l d - d e n y i n g c o m m i t m e n t w h i c h usually characterized C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m i n the early years. (c) mareveiv also c a n n o t bear t h e w e i g h t usually p u t o n it. I t is not here mareveiv eis o r em TOV Kvpiov, b u t emcTevuav TW 0tAwT7rüj; and w h e n mareveiv g o v e r n s a d a t i v e object (except p e r h a p s Kvpios or 9e6s) it signifies intellectual assent t o a Statement o r p r o p o s i t i o n , rather t h a n c o m m i t m e n t t o G o d (24.14; 26.27).38 T h i s use o f mareveiv, u n i q u e i n A c t s , can surely b e n o accident o n L u k e ' s part. H e indicates t h e r e b y that the S a m a r i t a n s ' response was s i m p l y an assent of the m i n d t o the acceptability of what P h i ü p was saying and a n acquiescence t o the course o f a c t i o n he a d v o c a t e d , rather t h a n that c o m m i t m e n t distinctively described elsewhere w h i c h alone deserves the n a m e ' C h r i s t i a n ' (cf. J o h n 2.23-25). (/i) As i f t h J 5 was not eoDugh, Lake J m m e d i a t d / aädsoBe Zl^u»> Kai avTos eTTiaTevoev, Kol ßamiaQeis • • ; a n d t h e n i n the sequel reveals just h o w Httle his p r o f e s s i o n a n d a c t i o n m e a n t . D e s p i t e his b e ü e f a n d b a p t i s m S i m o n h a d neither p a r t (jjiepls) n o r l o t (icA^po?) i n the m a t t e r o f salvation ( v . 2 1 ) ; that is, h e n e v e r h a d b e c o m e a m e m b e r o f the p e o p l e o f G o d . ^ ^ H i s heart w a s n o t r i g h t b e f o r e G o d ( v . 2 1 ) b u t w a s c r o o k e d a n d i m b e ü e v i n g ü k e t h a t o f the Israeütes w b o w e r e cast o f f i n the w ü d e m e s s ( P s . 78.37).*" H e w a s ' d o o m e d t o taste t h e b i t t e r f r u i t (xoAijv mKplas) a n d w e a r the fetters o f sin' ( v . 23 N E B ) , f o r , ü k e E s a u ( H e b . 1 2 . 1 5 - 1 7 ) , h e h a d 'a r o o t b e a r i n g p o i s o n o u s a n d b i t t e r f r u i t ' (ev x o A ^ K a i ev mKpla) a n d there f o r e w o u l d k n o w n o t t h e p a r d o n b u t the a n g e r o f t h e L o r d ( D e u t . 29.18-20). I n o t h e r w o r d s , S i m o n h a d n o t really f u l f i U e d the c o n d i t i o n s f o r the g i f t o f the Spirit ( A c t s 2.38), a n d h a d so U t t l e spiritual u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f these matters that h e t h o u g h t i t ( o r at least the p o w e r t o b e s t o w it) c o u l d b e b o u g h t (8.20). H e w a s a C h r i s t i a n i n o u t w a r d f o r m o i d y , n o t i n the N T sense o f the w o r d . H i s p r o f e s s i o n a n d b a p t i s m m e a n n o t h i n g i n face o f the d e v a s t a t m g e x p o s u r e 3 » See Arndt and Gingrich. Acts 5 . i 4 ( ? ) ; 1 3 . 1 2 ( 0 ) ; 1 6 . 3 4 ; 18.8 should also probably be given the sense of accepting Ä e disdosures about rather than commitment to. Cf. the distinction between irapaXaußai^ui and Xanßdvtai especially as it bears on Col. 2.6 (see p. 95). 8» Cf. Col. 1 . 1 2 ; Acts 2 6 . 1 8 . The verse recalls Deut. 1 2 . 1 2 , and indicates not excommunication from the Church (contra Haenchen 2 6 2 ; Lampe in Peake 782i), but that Simon had never possessed a 'sliare (/«/)«) in the inheritance («A^/ws) of the saints'. *o 8.21 is almost a direct quotation of Ps. 7 8 . 3 7 . Cf. Acts 1 3 . 1 0 ; II Peter 2.15.

66

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

b y P e t e r . H i s o n l y h o p e - a n d a f o r l o r n o n e - w a s the repentance w h i c h h e h a d n o t so far experienced ( v . zz)M W h a t b e h e f h e h a d w a s f r o m start t o finish centred o n m a n - first P h i l i p ( v . 13) t h e n P e t e r ( v . 24); h e h a d n o idea o f w h a t i t w a s t o repent b e f o r e G o d a n d t o p u t his trust i n the L o r d . ' ' ^ A n d L u k e m a k e s it clear ( w . i2f.) that S i m o n ' s faith a n d b a p t i s m w e r e precisely ü k e those o f the o t h e r S a m a r i t a n s , as i f t o say, N o t e c a r e f u U y w h a t I say, a n d d o n o t miss the p o i n t : t h e y a ü w e n t t h r o u g h the f o r m b u t d i d n o t e x perience the reaüty. {e) I t is n o t sufficiendy r e a U z e d that i n N T times the possession o f the Spirit w a s the h a l l m a r k o f the C h r i s t i a n . C o r n e ü u s ' s recep t i o n o f the Spirit w a s u n q u e s t i o n a b l e p r o o f o f his acceptance b y G o d ; just as the E p h e s i a n s ' lack o f the Spirit i n A c t s 19 w a s u n questionable p r o o f that t h e y h a d yet t o c o m e t o f u U Christian faith. T h u s w e are n o t surpidsed that P h i ü p d i d n o t c o n c l u d e , as m a n y w o u l d t o d a y , ' T h e y h a v e b e e n b a p t i z e d , a n d therefore t h e y h a v e received the Spirit, e v e n t h o u g h neither w e n o r t h e y k n o w it.' F o r possession o f the Spirit w a s n o t i n f e r r e d f r o m b a p t i s m , b u t the genuineness ( o r o t h e r w i s e ) o f the f a i t h expressed i n b a p t i s m w a s p r o v e d b y the reception ( o r o t h e r w i s e ) o f the S p i r i t : i f G o d res p o n d e d t o t h e b a p t i z a n d ' s c o m m i t m e n t b y g i v i n g the Spirit, his acceptance o f the c o m m i t m e n t s h o w e d i t t o b e g e n u i n e (the lesson P e t e r l e a m e d w i t h C o m e ü u s [ 1 1 . 1 7 ] a n d P a u l practised w i t h t h e Ephesians).48 I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e Spirit's absence f r o m a n d c o m i n g t o t h e Samaritans is the critical f a r t o r i n this narrative. L u k e ' s a i m is t o h i g h ü g h t t h e difference b e t w e e n t r u e a n d false C h r i s t i a i ü t y , a n d h e does so b y d e v o t i n g m o s t a t t e n t i o n t o S i m o n ( n o t P h i ü p a n d n o t P e t e r ) i n o r d e r t o d r a w o u t t h e u l t i m a t e contrast b e t w e e n h i m a n d the Samaritans. T h e n a r r a t i v e alternates b e t w e e n t h e Samaritans ( w . 5-8, 1 2 , 1 4 - 1 7 ) a n d S i m o n ( w . 9 - 1 1 , 1 3 , 1 8 - 2 4 ) . A t first each step t a k e n b y t h e Samaritans is paraUeled b y a s i m Ü a r It is unlikely that Simon theteupon repented and was converted (contra Foakes-Jackson 73). Such a notable success for the gospel would surely have been recorded. And all other availablc traditions about Simon are unanimous against this Suggestion. 42 Stählin notes that Simon still thinks as a magician: he believes that Peter's prayer will have greater magical power than his own; and his prayer is not for forgiveness but fot escape ( 1 2 5 ) . See also Wikenhauser 9 8 ; and cf. Blaiklock 80. *ä Xhis was why Philip was not wrong to baptize those who came to him with enthusiastic and sincere desire for baptism. Only God is Kopäuryvmanis (15.8).

The Riddle of Samaria

67

Step t a k e n b y S i m o n : t h e y t u m f r o m m a g i c t o P h i ü p , so does h e ; t h e y b e ü e v e P h i ü p , s o does h e ; t h e y are b a p t i z e d b y P h i ü p , s o is he. B u t t h e n their paths d i v e r g e - they receive the Spirit, whereas S i m o n receives o n l y a curse.** T h i s contrast is t h e c l i m a x o f the w h o l e incident - t h e Samaritans receive t h e Spirit, w h i c h indicates that t h e y h a v e c o m e t o g e n u i n e faith, b u t S i m o n continues t o see a n d b e interested i n o r d y the external. F o r L u k e , as f o r P a u l , t h e great difference b e t w e e n t h e C h r i s t i a n a n d n o n - C h r i s t i a n is that o n l y t h e f o r m e r has received t h e S p i r i t ; t o ülustrate this f u n d a m e n t a l b e ü e f is o n e o f L u k e ' s p r i n c i p a l reasons f o r i n c l u d i n g this narrative. ( / ) P e r h a p s the f u U flowering o f the S a m a r i t a n s ' f a i t h w a s also delayed b y the c o l d w i n d o f r e ü g i o u s a n d racial a i d m o s i t y w h i c h b l e w f r o m J e m s a l e m t o Samaria :'*5 t h e y lacked the assurance that they w e r e r e a ü y accepted into a Christian Community so far composed o f J e w s a n d proselytes,** a n d the fact that their e v a n g e ü s t w a s a H e l l e i d s t i n d e p e n d e n t o f J e m s a l e m ( 8 . 1 - 3 ) * ' ' c o i d d n o t dispel their fears. T h i s w o i d d b e a fixrdier r e a s o n w h y the t w o m o s t senior aposdes w e r e sent t o Samaria.*» A n d i t w o u l d o t d y b e w h e n P e t e r a n d J o h n , as chief representatives o f t h e J e m s a l e m C h t i r c h , p r o f f e r e d t h e r i g h t b a n d o f f e U o w s h i p that this particular s t u m b ü n g b l o c k was r e m o v e d a n d t h e y c a m e t o fullness o f f a i t h i n the O n e w h o h a d d i e d a n d risen a g a i n a t J e m s a l e m . I t is u n f o r t i m a t e that L u k e has c o m p r e s s e d the a c c o u n t o f P e t e r a n d J o h n ' s m i s s i o n so m u c h . E v i d e n d y h e w a n t s t o m a k e o r d y t w o p o i n t s : the Samaritans received the S p i r i t o i d y t h r o u g h t h e apostles' m i n i s t r y (reiterated six times i n six verses), a n d t h e e x p o s u r e o f ** It is imptobable that Peter and Jolin laid hands on Simon (Haenchen 262). The tenses of vv. i yf., imply that Simon followed Peter and John about, carefuUy observing their actions and 'technique', tintil his amazement and gteed got the bettet of him and led him to make his fateful request. 46 The Satnaritans were the ancient enemies of the Jews, detested by them as racial and religious half-breeds (Lampe in Peake 872c). *' Cf. Lampe, Seal e^i.; Bruce, Book iSz£. The persecution arose largely as a result of the Hellenists' views on the Temple, expressed by Stephen, and it was principally they who were scattered. 8 . 1 - 3 luarks somethkig of a cleavage in the ranl^ of the Christians themselves (cf. O. Cullmann, Tbe Early Cburcb [ E T 1 9 3 6 ] i9of;. L . Goppelt, Jesus, Paul arid Judaism [ E T 1 9 6 4 ] io7f.).

When Peter and John discovered that the Spirit had not been given is not clear. But the fact that the senior apostles were sent (contrast 1 1 . 2 2 ) suggests that the Information came with the original news. It is probably most just to assume that the apostles' chief purpose was to do what they in fact did o'tims KaraßävTts •npooifiiavro trefu airä)» . . .).

68

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

S i m o n , H e stops f o r n o t h i n g eise. N o explanations are g i v e n as t o w h y the Spirit w a s n o t r e c e i v e d b e f o r e , n o indications as t o w h a t reaction greeted the n e w s that the Spirit h a d n o t b e e n g i v e n , n o h i n t o f w h a t P e t e r a n d J o h n said o n arrival (contrast i i . i f f . , 2 3 ; 1 9 . 1 ff.). C e r t a i n things are m a d e d e a r : t h e y h a d o n l y b e e n b a p t i z e d ; t h e y h a d n o t received the S p i r i t ; S i m o n ' s c o n v e r s i o n w a s s p u r i o u s . C e r t a i n things are i m p U e d : the ideas P h i l i p u s e d , the n a t u r e o f their response, t h e d r a m a t i c n a t u r e o f t h e Spirit's c o m i n g . A n d certain conclusions d r a w n f r o m L u k e ' s t h o u g h t overall h a v e t o b e a p p l i e d t o the passage: the S p i r i t b o t h as the h a l l m a r k o f the n e w age a n d o f the C h r i s t i a n , t h e m a n o f the n e w a g e , a n d as G o d ' s response t o the act o f f a i t h (see p p . 9 i f . b e l o w ) . T h e mistake o f m a n y c o m m e n t a t o r s is t o assume that because the c o n d i t i o n s o f 2 . 3 8 h a d a p p a r e n t l y b e e n fulfilled, therefore t h e y w e r e Christians a n d / o r the Spirit h a d b e e n g i v e n . T h e N T w a y is rather t o s a y : Because t h e S p i r i t has n o t b e e n g i v e n , t h e r e f o r e t h e c o n d i t i o n s h a v e n o t b e e n m e t . T h i s is w h y L u k e p u t s so m u c h emphasis o n the S a m a r i t a n s ' r e c e p t i o n o f the Spirit ( w . 1 5 - 2 0 ) , f o r i t is God'^s g i v i n g o f t h e S p i r i t w h i c h m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n , a n d , i n the last analysis, n o t h i n g eise.

A D D I T I O N A L /.

NOTES

TTVevfui Syiov, TO irveOfia, TO irvevfw. TO ayiov, TO ayiov mievfw,

A s indicated above (p. 56 n. 4) the opinion has sometimes been oflfered that L u k e makes a distinction between nvevua ayiov w i t h the artide and the same phrase without. T h e most recent and fidlest presentation o f the argument is to be f o u n d in N . T u m e r ' s Grammatical Insights into the New Testament ( 1 9 6 5 ) 1 7 - 2 2 , where he takes the fiiller phrase to signify 'the third person o f the T r i n i t y ' and the shorter phrase t o signify 'a h o l y spirit, a divine influence possessing m e n ' ( 1 9 ) . I n m y opinion such a distinction is unjustified. Consider the f o l l o w i n g parallels: (a) Jesus' promise to the disdples before his ascension is p u t in tvro w a y s : A c t s 1 . 5 : A f t e r n o t m a n y days y o u w i l l be baptized ev w e v / t o n ayu^. A c t s 1 . 8 : Y o u shall r e c d v c p o w e r inekdovros TOO dyiov rrvev^aTos. I n the event their experience is described thus: A c t s 2 . 4 : T h e y were all filled m>ev/xaros ayiov, a n d J o d 2.28ff. is said to be thereby fulfilled: G o d says eK^tSt iiro TOV rrvevfiaTos iwv.

The Riddle of Samaria

69

(b) With Acts 2.4 and the othet examples of •nvevfux ayiov with m/iwAij/it (4.8; 9 . 1 7 ; 1 3 . 9 , 52)

cf. Acts 4 . 3 1 : errX-qaOriaav dnovres rov äyiov weviiaros (hardly an anaphoric reference to 4 . 2 5 ) . (f) The experience of the Samaritans is described not just in terms of TTvevixa äyiov. Cf. Acts 8 . 1 7 : they laid their hands on them and iXdußavov irvevua äyiov, and Acts 8 . 1 9 : Give me also this power, that anyone on whom I lay my hands Xafißdvrj m/eviia äyiov, with Acts 8 . 2 0 : You thought you could obtain TTjv Scupeäv rov deov with money! In other occurrences of the phrase 97 Swped rov deov ( 2 . 3 8 ; 1 0 . 4 5 ; 1 1 . 1 7 ) it is clearly the Holy Spirit who is referred to. (d) The experience of Cornelius is described in a variety of ways: Acts 1 0 , 4 4 ; 1 1 , 1 5 : TO TTvevua TO dytov feil on them justas o n u s a t t h e beginning; Acts 1 0 , 4 5 : 1^ Swped TOV TtvevpMTos dyiov had been poured out; Acts 1 0 , 4 7 : who had received TÖ irvevfia TO äyiov just as we have; Acts 1 5 , 8 : giving them TÖ irvev/to rö dytoi' just as he did to us, But in Acts 1 1 , 1 6 Peter connects the incident with Acts 1 , 5 : Y o u shall be baptized ev nvev/jMri dyiw, (e) Luke's descriptions of Jesus' own experience are also interesting: Luke 3 . 2 2 : TO wevfia TO ayiov descended on him; Acts 1 0 . 3 8 : God anointed him irvevfMTi ayiai Kai Swdju«. ( / ) He then goes on to teil how: Luke 4 . 1 : Jesus was füll irveviMTos äyiov, and Luke 4 . 1 4 ; he retumed in the power TOI? irveiifiaros;

surely the same irveviia as in Luke 4 . 1 8 : irvevua KVpiov is upon me. (g) Luke uses Xaiißdveiv four times out of five with mevua äyiov ( 8 , 1 5 , 1 7 , 1 9 ; 1 9 , 2 ) , but in 1 0 . 4 7 he describes the Gentiles as those who have received TÖ irveüfw. TÖ äyiov. (h) Interesting too is the comparison o f Luke 1 . 3 5 : vveviia. äyiov eireXeJaerai im ae, with Acts 1 . 8 : iTteXBovros TOV dyiov TTvevp/iTos e^' vpjSs. (;') Finally w e might compare Acts 1 . 1 6 : irpoevirev ro irveOpui TO äyiov Sid aropuiTOS AaveiB, with Acts 4 . 2 5 : 0 . . . 8id TTvevpM.TOs äyiov aröfiaTOS AaveiZ . . . eiirwv. This evidence indicates that for Luke at least there is no significant difference between irvevfm äytov and TÖ irveCfia ro äyiov - for the same experience and same kind of experience can be described variously by m>evfia äyiov with or without the article. A t most the difference could mean the Holy Spirit in personal capacity and the Holy Spirit manifesting

-JO

Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit

himself in an impersonal way - in power, or charismata, or inspired utterance. inievfjM äyiov certainly caimot mean a power or influence or spirit distinct and separate from the Holy Spirit. It is incredible, for example, that Luke should suggest that the experience of the \zo on the Day of Pentecost ( 1 . 5 ; 2.4) was different from and less significant than their experience with others in 4 . 3 1 (see (b) above). And, indeed, it is incredible that for Luke holy spirit should be something different from the Holy Spirit (cf. C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of the New Testament [1959]

II2f.).

The true explanation seems to be that the Variation is due to stylistic reasons and lacks any real theological significance. I therefore accept Adler's conclusion: 'Where irveOfw. äyiov confronts us in the NT it never designates a charismatic endowment without the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit himself' (Taufe 8 6 ) .

2. The Pbrases used by L^ke to Describe tbe Coming of the Spirit in Acts {a) ßanTi^eadoLi ev vveij/iari äyito 1 . 5 ; 1 1 . 1 6 (b) (eiT)ep-j(eadai TO wevfsxi äyiov 1 . 8 ; 1 9 . 6 (c) irXrjodijvaiTn'evuaTOs äyiov Z.4; 4.i, 3 i ; 9 . i 7 ; 1 3 . 9 , 5 2 {eirXijpovvTo) (d) tK^eeiv ätri) TOC TTvevuaros 1 8 , 3 3 ; 1 0 . 4 5 (c/cice^vrai) (e) Xafißdveiv rrvevim äyiov 2 . 3 8 ; 8 . 1 5 , 1 7 , 1 9 ; 1 0 . 4 7 ; 1 9 . 2 ( / ) 8 t 8 o v o i irveviw. äyiov 5 . 3 2 ; 8 . 1 8 (Si'Socröat); 1 1 . 1 7 ; 1 5 . 8 ( j ) emniirreiv TO irvev/ia TO äyiov 8 . 1 6 ; 1 0 . 4 4 ; n - i j I do not include 1 0 . 3 8 - xp^eiv irvevfJMTi äyim - since it refers to Jesus' anointing with the Spirit and not to a post-Pentecostal reception o f t h e Spirit. The seven different verb-ph»ses are used in Acts 2 7 times; most Pentecostals would probably say 23 times in reference to the baptism in the Spirit, since the third phrase is used of the same person more than once (e.g. Riggs 6 3 ; Prince, Jordan 68f.). Ervin is the principal exception: he focuses attention on wi/iTrATjfii as the key description of Spiritbaptism and argues that to be filled with the Spirit was a once-for-all experience. 4 . 3 1 he refers solely to the 3,000 converts of the day of Pentecost, who did not receive the Spirit tili then14.8 and 1 3 . 9 he refers back to Peter's and Paul's earlier Spirit-baptism (wAijaöeiy - who had been filled). 1 3 . 5 2 he takes to signify that Ä c disciples were filled one after another with joy and with the Holy Spirit ( 5 9 - 6 7 , 7 1 - 7 3 ) . But while his Interpretation of 1 3 . 5 2 is quite possible (cf. 8 . 1 8 ) his treatment of 4 . 3 1 involves some rather unnatural and tortuous exegesis which cannot be accepted. The 'all' of 4 . 3 1 obviously includes the Christian comminity as a whole and Peter and John in particular - all in fact who

The Riddle of Samaria

71

took part in the prayer of 4.24-30. As for the formula wÄijaöeis irv&Jiunos äyiov etrrev, when an aorist participle is used with elnev, it always describes an action or event which takes place immediately prior to or which leads into the act of speaking (e.g. Acts 1 . 1 5 ; 3 . 4 ; 5 . 1 9 ; 6.2; 9.17, 40; 10.34; 1 6 . 1 8 ; 1 8 . 6 ; 2 1 . I i ) . So with 4.8 it describes the sudden Inspiration and empowering ofthe Spirit which Jesus had promised for the special occasion (Luke iz.ui.: ev alnfjrrj wpq) and which would not last beyond the hour of need. The same is probably true of 13.9. When Luke wants to indicate a lasting State of 'fullness' resulting from a past 'filling' the word he uses is nXrjprjs (Luke 4 . 1 ; Acts 6.3, 5, 8; 7 . 5 5 ; 11.24). When we turn to the more usual Pentecostal view, several comments are called for. First, a number of these different phrases are often used t o describe the same incident. All 7 are used for Pentecost ( 1 . 5 ; 1 . 8 ; 2.4; 2 . 1 7 ; 10.47; i i ' i ? ; i i ' i j ) ; for Samaria 3, for Caesarea 5, for Ephesus 2. This means that they are all equivalent ways of describing the same Coming of the Spirit - a coming which was such a dramatic and overpowering experience that it almost exhausted Luke's vocabulary to find language which would give an adequate description of its richness and fullness. Second, these 7 phrases are the only ones Luke uses to describe a Coming ofthe Spirit. Luke knows of no other coming of the Spirit than that described in these phrases. In all the key incidents Luke says nothing of an earlier coming of the Spirit. For hiJtn there is only the one Coming ofthe Spirit which he describes in various ways. In other words, in every one of the 23 occurrences which the Pentecostal claims for his second distinctive work of the Spirit, Luke is describing what is for him the first Coming of the Spirit. Third, the two incidents which involve all or most of the six key phrases (Pentecost and Caesarea) are the two in which this coming of the Spirit is most obviously bound up with conversion and entry into the Christian life. I think, for example, o f t h e iriar&Saacnv eni of 1 1 . 1 7 and the Sovs TO Ttvevua TO äyiov = in the parallel verse rfj irioTei Kadapiaas TOS KOf^iaf air&v of ij.8f. (see the füll treatment of these incidents). The variety of phrases used and the stress on the parallel with Pentecost rules out the expedient of interpreting the coming o f t h e Spirit in Acts 10 merely in terms of a charismatic display. All that the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost was for the original disciples, the outpouring of the Spirit at Caesarea was for Cornelius and his friends, (The Catholic is in a cleft stick when he comes to Interpret the 'falling upon' of the Spirit in Acts 8 and 10. If he takes the former of Confirmation, what of Acts 10 ? If he takes the latter merely as a charismatic manifestation, does the 'confirmation' of Acts 8 result only in a charismatic display?

72

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Similarly, the equivalence of these phrases means that the Catholic cannot cling on to Acts 2.58 and 9.17^ as proof texts [the only ones possible in Acts] for the belief that the Spirit is given through waterbaptism, while at the same time arguing that the reception of the Spirit in 8 is a second [confirming] coming of the Spirit.) Fourth, it will not help the Pentecostäl to abandon his claim to all 6 ofthe phrases as descriptions of Spirit-baptism in order to pin his hopes on one or two key phrases. ßaTTTi^eadai is used only of the same two incidents (Pentecost and Caesarea) and is clearly initiatory, both as a metaphor and in the event (cf. I Cor. 12.13). Xafißdvetv is used in 2.38 where the gift of the Spirit is equivalent to the promise of salvation in 16.31 (cf. Rom. 8.15; Gal. 3.2f., 14). The e'm-verbs - (iTT)epxea0ai, eKxdeiv im, and immirrw are the ones which most suggest the dramatic empowering impact ofthe Spirit's coming, particularly in view of 1.8. But they certainly do not imply a second distinct work of the Spirit, simply the dynamic nature of his first coming (cf. Tit. 3.5-7 - the only Pad.ine [?] use of an em'-verb with the Spirit). I conclude that in the 23 instances in question these 7 different phrases describe not different Operations or experiences of the Spirit (contra Unger, Bib.Sac. l o i [1944] 235-6, 484^), but rather different aspects of the same Operation and experience - tihe first initiating, i.e. baptizing work of the Spirit.

VI T H E

C O N V E R S I O N

O F

P A U L

f a v o u r i t e passage a m o n g Pentecostals is the s t o r y o f P a u l ' s c o n v e r s i o n . T h e i r case is a g a i n s i m p l e : P a u l w a s c o n v e r t e d o n the r o a d t o D a m a s c u s a n d three days later h e w a s b a p t i z e d i n the Spirit.i T h e v i e w that P a u l ' s c o n v e r s i o n w a s instantaneous a n d that h e w a s o t d y later filled w i t h the S p i r i t is v e r y c o m m o n , ^ b u t i t is o n e w h i c h m u s t b e sharply q u e s t i o n e d . T h e a r g u m e n t s i n f a v o u r o f this v i e w are principally that P a u l called Jesus ' L o r d ' (9.5; cf. I C o r . iz,^)? a n d that AJnatdas greeted h i m as ' b r o t h e r ' (9.17; 22.13).* B u t i n each case (9.5; 22.8, 1 0 ; 26.15) i t is t h e v o c a t i v e K u p i e that P a u l uses, a n d Kvpie o f t e n m e a n s s i m p l y ' S i r ' - a tide o f respect rather t h a n a confession o f faith.« A n d since P a u l does n o t r e c o g i d z e w h o has thus c o n f r o n t e d h i m ( ' W h o are y o u , Kvpie ?') w e can h a r d l y say that h e calls Jesus ' L o r d ' . ANOTHER

1 Riggs 1 1 0 ; Stiles 68; Harper, Power 27; Etvin 9 7 - 9 9 ; Basham 1 7 . For the same arguments by Holiness teachers see A . J . Gordon, Tbe Ministry of tbe Spirit (1894) 9 0 ; J . Eider Cumming, Tbrougb the Eternal Spirit (n.d.) 1 4 6 ; M. James, I Believe in tbe Holy Ghost (1964) j i . However, another stream of Holiness teaching holds that Paul was only arrested and convicted on the Damascus road, and was not converted and renewed until ministered to by Ananias. G. C. Morgan, Tbe Spirit of God ( 1 9 0 1 ) 1 7 5 ; C. W. Carter and R. Barle, The Evangelical Bible Commentary of Acts ( 1 9 5 9 ) . 2 Many commentators cxplicidy entitie the section 9 . 1 - 8 or 3 - 9 'Paul's conversion' - e.g. Weiss 1 9 0 ; C. T. Wood, Tbe Life, Letters and Religion of St Pa«/2(1932) 1 7 - 2 2 ; J . Kaox,Chapters in a Life of Paul (igi4) 6 1 ; Blaiklock 87. 3 'Paul acknowledges Jesus as Lord' (Lampe in Peake 7 8 3 b ) ; cf. Bruce, Book 4 4 1 , 4 9 2 ; Wikenhauser io8f. * 'The meaning would really be given better by "my fellow Christian"' (Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings IV 104); so Macgrcgor, IB 9 (1954) 1 2 4 ; Haenchen 281 n. 1 ; StäUin 1 3 7 ; Williams 1 2 4 ; Lampe in Peake 784b. 5 e.g. Matt. 1 3 . 2 7 ; 2 1 . 2 9 ; *5'ii. ^o. 24; Luke 1 3 . 8 ; 1 4 . 2 2 ; 1 9 . 1 6 , 1 8 , 20. In Acts note 10.4 and 16.30. Jesus is often csilied «Twein Luke's Gospel, but it is very unlikely that the word ever signifies more than a respectful form of address (see Cadbury, Beginnings V 360; C. F. D . Moule, Studies in Luke-Acts [1966] i6o).

73

74

Baptism in tlie Holy Spirit

R a t h e r , l i k e C o r n e l i u s , c o n f r o n t e d b y a g l o r i o u s , majestic b e i n g , h e addresses h i m w i t h awe, ' S i r ' (10.4). I t is h a r d l y U k e l y that the Kvpi€ o f 22.10 m e a n s m o r e - scarcely credible, i n d e e d , that t h e f ü l l implications o f J e s u s ' r e p l y s h o u l d h a v e been g r a s p e d by a d a z e d a n d s h o c k e d m a n a n d translated i n t o f ü l l C h r i s t i a n c o m m i t m e n t all i n a m a t t e r o f seconds.* A s f o r A n a n i a s addressing P a u l as ' b r o t h e r ' , it is possible that h e is s i m p l y hailing his f e l l o w J e w w i t h the w o r d o f racial k i n s h i p . dSeA^o's is used 57 times i n A c t s - 33 times equivalent to ' m y f e U o w Christian(s)' (leaving aside 9.17 and 22.13), and 19 times in reference to the national/spiritual kinship o f J e w to J e w . But the absolute use of Ol oBeX^oi— 'Üie Christians' does not become established until 9.30 (and in 22.5; 28.21 the same formula is applied = 'fellow J e w s ' ) , and i n the 18 cases where dSeA^o's is used in the vocative (as here), 13 mean 'fellow J e w s ' and only 5 = ' f e U o w Christians'. O n the w h o l e , h o w e v e r , i t is m o r e p r o b a b l e that A n a n i a s w a s s i m p l y p u t t i n g P a u l a t ease - telling h i m t h a t his past was not h e l d against him, s o m e t h i n g w h i c h m a y w e l l h a v e w o r r i e d P a u l as h e t h o u g h t t h i n g s t h r o u g h i n the d a r k (cf. 9.i3f., 26).' I t is u n l i k e l y that h e w o u l d call ' C h r i s t i a n ' o n e w h o h a d neither yet r e c e i v e d t h e S p i r i t n o r y e t b e e n b a p t i z e d . H i s p r o c e d u r e is just that o f P e t e r w i t h C o r n e l i u s : as P e t e r put C o r n e l i u s a t ease b y a n n o u n c i n g a t o n c e that the latter w a s acceptable b o t h t o G o d and t o h i m s e l f (10.28, 34f.), s o A n a i u a s does likewise b y calling P a u l ' b r o t h e r ' . I n n e i t h e r case d o the w o r d s m e a n that t h e p e r s o n addressed w a s already a C h r i s t i a n ; i n b o t h cases t h e y indicate that h e w a s in tbe process of b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n . , T h r e e factors indicate that P a u l ' s t h r e e - d a y experience w a s a u i ü t y , that h i s c o n v e r s i o n , p r o p e r l y s p e a k i n g , w a s a crisis e x perience e x t e n d i n g o v e r t h e three days f r o m t h e D a m a s c u s t o a d t o his b a p t i s m . F i r s t , A c t s 2 2 . 1 6 : i n A n a i d a s ' s eyes P a u l had y e t t o t a k e t h a t step w h i c h w o u l d d i n c h his c o m n ü t t a l and f o r g i v e n e s s . W e h a v e n o r e c o r d w h a t s o e v e r o f P a u l t a k i n g the d e d s i v e step prior t o his b a p t i s m ; but w e do h a v e A n a i u a s e x h o r t i n g him t o t a k e that Step - t o h a v e his sins w a s h e d a w a y b y calling o n t h e n a m e o f the L o r d Jesus (cf. 2 . 2 1 ; 9.14, 2 1 ; also R o m . 1 0 . 1 3 , i4)short, *Kvpie, used by Paul twice in consccutivc sentences which together contain six words, will almost certainly have the same significance each time. ' Brother - 'the word of forgiveness' (Rackham 135).

The Conversion of Paul

75

P a u l d i d n o t b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n - o n e o f those 01 cwocciAoiyievot TÖ ovo/xa KVpiov - w a s n o t saved (2.21), u n t i l h e cirwcaAe'ffeTOt TÖ ovoiw. avTov. T h e P a u h n e b a p t i s m a l references ( R o m . 6.4; C o l . 2.12) reflect a v e r y personal a n d p r o f o u n d experience a n d i m p l y that f o r h i m s e l f P a u l ' s o w n b a p t i s m w a s the m e a n s o f his c o m m i t m e n t t o C h r i s t a n d the m o m e n t o f his u i u o n w i t h C h r i s t i n his d e a t h . S e c o n d , P a u l ' s c o m m i s s i o i ü n g : P a u l seems t o m a k e n o distinct i o n b e t w e e n w h a t c o m m i s s i o i ü n g h e received outside D a m a s c u s , a n d the c o m m i s s i o i ü n g h e received t h r o u g h A n a n i a s . » I n c h . 9 the c o m m i s s i o n i n g c o m e s solely t h r o u g h A n a n i a s ; i n c h . 22 A n a n i a s ' s role is m o r e e x p ü c i t , t h o u g h a n earüer direct w o r d is p r e s u p p o s e d i n v v . i 4 f . ; i n c h . 26 A n a n i a s is n o t m e n t i o n e d a n d t h e w h o l e c o m m i s s i o n is received outside D a m a s c u s . P a u l , i t appears, i n l o o k i n g b a c k t o his c o m m i s s i o n i n g , d i d n o t distinguish the m e a n s a n d the times o f G o d ' s dealings w i t h h i m . T h i s is m o s t U k e l y because i t w a s a U t h e o n e e v e n t a n d experience, a n d as such i t w a s impossible t o disentangle t h e v a r i o u s elements i n it. A n d since w e can n o m o r e separate P a u l ' s experience o f c o n v e r s i o n f r o m his experience o f c o m m i s s i o n i n g , » w e c a n n o t say that P a u l w a s c o n v e r t e d o n the D a m a s c u s r o a d a n d c o m m i s s i o n e d three days later, b u t m u s t r e c o g n i z e that P a i d ' s c o n v e r s i o n - c o m m i s s i o n i n g w a s o n e experience w h i c h e x t e n d e d o v e r three d a y s ; his c o n v e r s i o n w a s c o m p l e t e d t h r o u g h A n a n i a s just as m u c h as w a s his c o m m i s s i o n i n g . T h i r d , P a i d ' s blindness spans three days a n d f o r m s t h e c o n n e c t ing link between w h a t happened o n the h i g h w a y and w h a t happ e n e d i n t h e h o u s e o f J u d a s . T h e blindness w a s o b v i o u s l y d u e , o n the p s y c h o l o g i c a l level, t o the s u d d e n s h o c k o f b e i n g c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t b e g l o r y o f o n e w h o m h e t h o u g h t o f as a b l a s p h e m c r a n d law-breaker justly d o n e to death. T h e brilHance o f t h e Ught also had its physical aflfect (22.11); but he alone was blinded, although his companions also saw the U g h t (22.9). H i s neither eating n o r d r i n k i n g d u r i n g the next three days (9.9) is best explained as the consequcnce and Symptom o f a S t a t e o f shock ( L a k e and C a d b u r y , Beffnnings I V 102; B r u c e , The Acts of the Apostles (1951) 198; WiUiams 1 2 3 ; L a m p e in Peaike 783c). I t is w e U k n o w n that serious mental shocks often have physical conscquences. W h e n w e realize h o w this e n c o u n t e r w i t h Jesus c u t t o the v e r y ' J . Munck, Paut and tbe Salvation of Mankind ( E T 1 9 5 9 ) 1 9 . » G. I. IngUs, Tbeology 36 ( 1 9 3 7 ) zz$;c£. J . Knox 98.

76

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

roots o f Paul's personality a n d w o r l d - v i e w i t becomes impossible t o t h i n k that h e w a s c o n v e r t e d i n a n instant. S o m e speak as t h o u g h k l a m a t t e r o f seconds P a u l t h r e w o v e r e v e r y t h i n g h e h a d h i t h e r t o h e l d dear, b r o k e d o w n e v e r y t h i n g o n w h i c h h e h a d b u i l t his life, transferred his allegiance t o a n e w master, a n d w o u l d h a v e b e e n o f f i n t o D a m a s c u s t o p r e a c h his n e w faith w i t h i n the h o u r i f t h e L o r d h a d p e r m i t t e d h i m l^o T h i s is h a r d l y the P a u l w e k n o w . P a u l ' s loyalties a n d affections r a n d e e p , a n d h e c o u l d n o t s w i t c h their object i n a m a t t e r o f seconds. H i s e n c o u n t e r w i t h the risen Jesus w a s n o t a slight transaction o f s h a l l o w consequences c o m p l e t e d i n a f e w seconds - o t h e r w i s e the blindness w o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n so severe - rather it w a s the e n t r y i n t o his m i n d a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a n e w f a c t o r w h i c h called i n q u e s t i o n all that he s t o o d f o r a n d w h i c h m u s t b e the m o s t i m p o r t a n t factor i n the radical r e - t h i n k i n g o f the n e x t f e w days. T h e D a m a s c u s r o a d experience w a s n o t s i m p l y H k e r o u n d i n g a sharp c o r n e r , b u t rather U k e r u n n i n g i n t o a s o U d object w h i l e i n f u U f ü g h t . P a u l d i d n o t w a n t at o n c e t o b e u p a n d p r e a c h i n g a n e w f a i t h ; h e n e e d e d t i m e a n d quiet t o coUect h i m s e l f a n d his t h o u g h t s ; h e w a n t e d t o b e a l o n e t o t h i n k t h i n g s t h r o u g h , a n d t o let the pieces o f his shattered life reassemble t h e m selves r o u n d the n e w a n d central fact w h i c h h a d b r o k e n i n u p o n h i m . I t w a s o n l y w h e n this w a s d o n e , w h e n t h e t u m i d t i n t h e d e p t h s o f his b e i n g h a d b e e n c a k n e d , a n d his f a i t h h a d b e e n reo r d e r e d f r o m its deepest levels - o n l y t h e n w a s h e r e a d y t o t a k e that Step o f c o m m i t m e n t after w h i c h there w a s no» g o i n g back.^i I n s h o r t , I d o n o t d e n y t h a t P a u l ' s w h o l e Weltanschauung c h a n g e d as a result o / t h e single i n c i d e n t o n the D a m a s c u s r o a d ; I d o d e n y t h a t i t c h a n g e d i n a single moment. L u k e p r o b a b l y r e g a r d e d t h e three days o f blindness as s y m b o H c , f o r c o n v e r s i o n w a s f r e q u e n d y t h o u g h t o f as b r i n g i n g sight t o t h e s p i r i t u a U y b l i n d Q o h n 9 . 3 9 - 4 1 ; A c t s 26.18; I I C o r . 4.4-6; H e b . 6.4; 10.32). N o t e the constant harping o n sight i n Paul's commission: 9.17; 22.i4f.; 26.16. I n these f o u r verses opdxa is used six times; and in 26.18 the commission Stands thus: T send y o u to open their eyes that they m a y 10 E.g. W. von Loewenich, Paul: His Ufe and Work (ET i960) 45; Wikenhauser io8f. 11 Cf. C. G . Jung's analysis of Paul's conversion cited in Williams 123 especially this sentence: 'Unable to conceive of himself as a Christian, he became blind and eould only regain bis sigbt tbrougb . . . complete Submission to Cbristianity' (my italics).

The Conversion of Paul

-j-j

turn from darkness to light. . .' Moreover, biblical writers frequently regard sight and light as symbolic spiritual terms (e.g. Isa. 42.6f.; Rom. I I . 1 0 ; C o l . 1.12) and Luke is no exception (e.g. Acts 26.23; 28.27).

I f P a u l ' s blindness is s y m b o l i c h e r e i t s y m b o l i z e d a sitnultaneous spiritual blindness a n d indicates a t i m e o f spiritual t u r m o i l a n d g r o p i n g f o r the t r u t h . P a u l , as i t w e r e , p l u n g e d b e l o w the surface o f his f a i t h t o reconstruct i t r o u n d the n e w fact, a n d o n l y after three days w a s that basic r e c o n s t r u c t i o n c o m p l e t e e n o u g h f o r h i m to surface again. A s the l a y i n g o n o f A n a i d a s ' s h a n d s b r o u g h t t o an end his physical blindness, so his r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t b r o u g h t to an end his spiritual blindness (cf. p p . 13 3f. b e l o w ) . M o r e o v e r , the three days p r o b a b l y recalled J e s u s ' three days i n the t o m b ; i 2 a n d as J e s u s ' d e a t h a n d resurrection are n o t p r o p e r l y t o b e r e g a r d e d as t w o separate events b u t t w o sides o f the o n e e v e n t , s o the three d a y s ' blindness d o n o t separate t w o distinct experiences b u t t i e the events at each e n d o f the three days i n t o a single indivisible whole. P e r h a p s the simplest w a y t o r e g a r d P a u l ' s blindness, so f a r as s y m b o U s m g o e s , is t o see it as indicative o f the deep a n d c r u s h i n g sorrow and conviction which must have weighed h i m d o w n Uke a m i U s t o n e d u r i n g these three days. H e h a d s o u g h t t o devastate the C h u r c h o f G o d ( G a l . 1 . 1 3 ) ; h e h a d b e e n resisting the H o l y S p i r i t and had approved the murder o f G o d ' s Righteous O n e (Acts 7.51 f . ) ; h e h a d a U that time g o n e o n persecuting the risen L o r d . D o those w h o t h i n k P a t d w a s c o n v e r t e d i n a n instant b e U e v e that h e c o u l d s w e e p aside t h e e n o r m i t y o f his m a n i f o l d c r i m e i n a n instant? T h e three d a y s ' abstinence a n d i n a c t i v i t y are d i f f i o d t t o e x p l a i n o n such a h y p o t h e s i s ; b u t t h e y m a k e excellent sense w h e n seen as the occasion o f a deep heart-searching a n d repentance.i^ W e c o n c l u d e t h e n t h a t P a u l ' s c o n v e r s i o n w a s o n e single e x perience lasting f r o m t h e D a m a s c u s r o a d t o t h e m i n i s t r y o f A n a n i a s . A s J o h n W e s l e y - n o stranger t o instantaneous c o n v e r s i o n - says o f t h e three days, ' S o l o n g h e seems t o h a v e b e e n i n the p a n g s o f t h e n e w b i r t h . ' " T h e experience o f b e i n g fiUed w i t h the S p i r i t w a s as m u c h a n integral p a r t o f his c o n v e r s i o n as his m e e t i n g 12 Cf. Rackham I32f.; Lampe in Peafse 783c. The comparison is certainly present to Paid himself (Rom. 6.4; Col. 2.12). IS See Weiss 194; cf. Wikenhauser 109. 1* Wesley, Notes on tbe New Testament (1754) on 9.9; cf. Beasley-Murray, Baptism Today and Tomorrow (1966) 38.

78

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

w i t h Jesus and the thtee days of solitude and prayer. Paul's con version was only completed when he called on Jesus as Lord, was filled with the Spirit and had his sins washed away; then, and only then, can he be called a Christian.^« 15 Luke's failure to relate Paul's actual reception of the Spirit makes it impossible to decidefinally-whether it happened at the laying on of Ananias's hands ( 9 . 1 7 ; cf. 8 . 1 7 ; 19.6) or at his baptism ( 9 . 1 8 ; cf. 2 2 . 1 6 ) . 9 . 1 7 ^ cannot therefore be used as positive evidence for the reladonship either between Spirit-baptism and water-baptism, or between the gift of the Spirit and the laying on of hands.

VII T H E

C O N V E R S I O N

O F C O R N E L I U S

o f the k e y passages w h i c h , o n t h e face o f it, g i v e s t r o n g s u p p o r t t o t h e Pentecostal case h a v e , o n closer e x a m i n a t i o n , t o l d a rather different story. W i t h A c t s l o the Pentecostal is i n difficulty f r o m t h e start: there appears t o b e n o ^ r a s p b e t w e e n t h e c o n v e r sion o f C o r n e U u s a n d his Spirit-baptism. Pentecostals u s u a U y a r g u e a l o n g o n e o f three lines: {a) C o r n e U u s ' w a s b o m again b e f o r e P e t e r p r e a c h e d t o h i m ' . i Q>) C o r n e U u s came t o f a i t h a n d w a s cleansed i n heart (15.9) d u r i n g Peter's s e r m o n . T h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit f o U o w e d i n close succession, b u t as a distinct act o f grace. 2 ( f ) T h e t w o t h i n g s h a p p e n e d simultaneously, a n d t h o u g h indistinguishable i n this case, t h e y w e r e e v e n here distinct acts o f G o d . ^ (fl) T h i s is o b v i o u s l y n o t L u k e ' s v i e w . I t w a s o n l y t h r o u g h P e t e r t h a t the message w h i c h led t o C o m e U u s ' s b e ü e f a n d salvation came ( 1 1 . 1 4 ; 15-7); o o i y t h e n that G o d ' v i s i t e d t h e G e n t i l e s , t o t a k e o u t o f t h e m a p e o p l e f o r his n a m e ' ( 1 5 . 1 4 ) ; o n l y t h e n that G o d ' g r a n t e d l i f e - g i v i n g repentance t o t h e G e n t ü e s ' ( 1 1 . 1 8 N E B ) a n d 'cleansed their hearts b y f a i t h ' (15.9). L u k e w o u l d b y n o m e a n s w i s h t o q u e s t i o n t h e spiritual s t a n d i n g o f a n O T saint o r o f a p i o u s J e w b e f o r e G o d (e.g. L u k e 18.14). C o r n e U u s c a m e u p t o t h e highest Standards o f J e w i s h piety,* a n d e v e n b e f o r e his m e e t i n g w i t h P e t e r was 'acceptable t o G o d ' (10.55; see 1 0 . 2 , 4 ; cf. 1 0 . 1 5 ; 1 1 . 9 ) . B u t THREE

1 K. Southworth, Tbe Pentecostal 1 No. 4 (1965) 7. 2 Pearlman 3 i 7 f . ; Riggs i i i ; D . G«e, Pentecost ( 1 9 3 2 ) 2 0 ; Lindsay 3 2 ; Ervin loof.; Basham 1 6 , Äough see also 4 1 . For equivalent interpretations in Holiness teaching see J . McNeil. Tbe Spirit-Filled Ufe (1894) 5 5 ; A . T. Robertson, Epocbs in tbe Ufe of Simon Peter ( 1 9 3 3 ) 2 3 3 ; James 3 7 . Similarly Lenski 4 3 1 . 3 Stiles 6 9 ; Prince, Jordan 7 1 ; Harper, Power 2 8 ; and in Holiness teaching, A. T. Pierson, Tbe Acts oftbe Holy Spirit (n.d.) 86. * Cf. Bruce, Acts 2 1 5 ; Williams 1 3 3 .

79

8o

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

f o r L u k e w h a t m a d e a m a n a C h r i s t i a n a n d b r o u g h t h i m i n t o the salvation o f the n e w age (the before-and-after w a t e r s h e d f o r t h e N T generally), w a s b e h e f i n Jesus C h r i s t a n d the gift o f the H o l y S p i r i t (see c h . I X ) . P e t e r w a s r e a d y t o accept C o r n e h u s i n t o his Company a n d friendship f r o m the first,^ but o n l y w h e n the S p i r i t feil upon h i m did P e t e r reahze that h e m u s t n o w accept C o r n e l i u s i n t o the Community as a Christian as w e l l . Wilckens (66) has argued that the speech o f i o. 3 4-43 is reaUy addressed to Christians since the Spirit feil o n them at the beginning o f Peter's Speech (11.15), B u t why then did L u k e relate the outpouring o f the Spirit in 10.44 as t h o u g h it interrupted Peter when he was well set in his Speech ? H e hardly intended his readers t o understand that there were two outpourings ofthe Spirit. T o read such an inference from 11.15 is surely t o o pedantic. Is i i.i 5 any more than a v i g o r o u s w a y o f speaking intended to highlight the suddenness and unexpectedness o f t h e Spirit's Coming (cf. Haenchen 307), the Zuvorkommen Gottes, and to be taken n o more literally than our T had hardly started speaking when . . .' ? Q)) a n d ( f ) T h e e v i d e n c e w i l l h a r d l y a c c o m m o d a t e either t h e s e c o n d o r the t h i r d o f the Pentecostal a r g u m e n t s . N o t i c e when the S p i r i t feil o n C o r n e h u s : i t w a s w h i l e P e t e r w a s s p e a k i n g o f t h e f o r g i v e n e s s o f sins w h i c h the b e U e v e r receives (io.43f.). P e t e r h a d said n o t h i n g o f the gift o f the Spirit (as h e d i d i n A c t 2.38), b u t h a d just b e g u n t o speak o f b e U e f a n d f o r g i v e n e s s . T h e n a t u r a l i m p l i c a t i o n is that C o r n e l i u s a t that m o m e n t reached o u t i n f a i t h t o G o d f o r forgiveness a n d received, as G o d ' s response, the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 1 . 1 7 ; 15.9), n o t instead o f the p r o m i s e d f o r g i v e n e s s b u t as t h e bearer o f i t (cf. G a l . 3.2f.). T h e S p i r i t w a s n o t s o m e t h i n g a d d i t i o n a l t o G o d ' s acceptance a n d f o r g i v e n e s s b u t c o n s t i t u t e d that acceptance a n d f o r g i v e n e s s . T h e S p i r i t t h u s g i v e n affected C o r n e U u s i n v a r i o u s w a y s , b u t i t w a s t h e o n e gift. S i m i l a r l y i n ii.i4f. T h e o b v i o u s i m p U c a t i o n is t h a t t h e g i f t o f the S p i r i t is w h a t effected the salvation o f C o r n e U u s ; f o r t h e m e s sage, w h i c h C o r n e U u s h a d b e e n t o l d w o u l d residt i n his s a l v a t i o n , i n t h e e v e n t resulted i n h o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e o u t p o u r i n g o f the Spirit. W i t h t h e o u t p o u r i n g o f the S p i r i t c o m e s eschatological s a l v a t i o n , f o r t o possess t h e S p i r i t t h u s r e c e i v e d is t o U v e i n ' t h e last d a y s ' a n d t o k n o w s a l v a t i o n b o t h as a present experience a n d 6 10.15 and 11.9 are, of course, talking about ritual defilement. The cleansing of the heart takes place only during Peter's visit (15.8f.).

The Conversion of Cornelius

81

a f u t u r e h o p e . " Significantly also, o n h e a r i n g that G o d h a d g i v e n the same g i f t t o C o r n e l i u s as h e h a d g i v e n t o themselves, t h e J u d e a n Christians c o n c l u d e d : ' T h i s m e a n s that G o d has g r a n t e d l i f e - g i v i n g repentance t o the G e n t i l e s also' ( i i . i 8 N E B ) - the g i f t o f the Spirit w a s also G o d ' s gift o f ixerdvoia eis ^orqv.'^ T h e m e e t i n g w i t h G o d , w e m i g h t say, w a s d i v i n e l y effected o n b o t h sides, a n d the d i v i n e e x e c u t o r w a s the Spirit g i v e n t o those w h o h e a r d o f G o d ' s salvation a n d y e a r n e d after it. i i . 14-18 concentrates e x clusively o n G o d ' s acceptance o f C o r n e h u s ; C o r n e l i u s w a s s a v e d , was b a p t i z e d i n the Spirit, w a s g i v e n the Spirit, w a s g r a n t e d re pentance u n t o life - all s y n o n y m o u s w a y s o f s a y i n g : C o r n e U u s became a C h r i s t i a n . T h e b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit therefore w a s n o t the consequence o f a f u r t h e r step o f f a i t h o n C o r n e U u s ' s p a r t , f o r he k n e w o t d y o f b e U e f u n t o s a l v a t i o n ; b u t w h e n he thus b e U e v e d h e received the s a v i n g , U f e - g i v i n g b a p t i s m i n the Spirit. A s else w h e r e i n L u k e a n d P a u l the o r d e r o f salvation is c o m m i t m e n t t o the L o r d Jesus residting i n G o d ' s g i f t o f t h e Spirit. A U this is c o n f i r m e d b y i5.8f. I t is clear that the t w o verses are synonymous: V. 8: d Öeos e/xaprvpijaev airois

KaOws KCU tj/liiv 8OVS

TO vveviia

TO

dyiov. V. 9 : (d Oeds) ov SieKpivev juerofu ij/ioiv r e KM aiTuv Kaßapiaas Tag KapSias avTÖJv.

P e t e r is o b v i o u s l y s a y i n g the same t h i n g i n t w o w a y s . G o d ' s bear i n g witness is e q u i v a l e n t t o his n o t d i s c r i n d r u t i n g ; the o u t p o u r i n g o f the S p i r i t w a s b o t h his t e s t i m o n y t o P e t e r o n b e h a l f o f C o r n e U u s , a n d h i s d i s s o l v i n g o f t h e difference b e t w e e n P e t e r a n d C o r n e U u s . B y g i v i n g C o r n e U u s t h e S p i r i t G o d h i m s e l f accepted C o r n e U u s , a n d , b y t h u s r e m o v i n g the decisive d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the p i o u s G o d - f e a r e r a n d the C h r i s t i a n J e w s , s h o w e d that t h e y t o o m u s t accept h i m as o n e o f themselves.» L i k e w i s e , G o d ' s g i v i n g o f * See Acts 2 . 1 7 - 2 1 and p. i5obelow;also van Unnik, iVi5«'r«/4(i96o)44-55. ' Note the equivalence of the exptessions in vv. i 7 f . : 6 6fis ISaiKtv airois rriv unpi Scoptmi ms Kai ^/iiy. 6 Beds €Sa)Ktv rots tOvfaw KOX T^ ftcnifotav « s Jo»^. /xeravoia tts {ö«i» has hcre a füllet sense than simply 'repentance': it embraces the whole of Comelius's conversion (see p. 91 below). T E V ' s 'God has given to the Gentiles also the opportunity to repent' will not do. * Sovs and KoBapioas are 'simultaneous' participles (cf. Bruce, Book }o6 n. ^3).

82

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

the H o l y Spirit is e q u i v a l e n t t o his cleansing o f their h e a r t s ; these t w o are o n e - t w o w a y s o f describing the same t h i n g . G o d cleansed their hearts b y g i v i n g t h e Spirit. G o d g a v e t h e Spirit t o cleanse their hearts.» M o r e o v e r , this gift o f the Spirit w a s i n response t o f a i t h : t h e f a i t h o f 15.9 is the s a v i n g faith o f 10.43; " - i ? ; 15.7 t o w h i c h G o d gives t h e Spirit o f f o r g i v e n e s s a n d cleansing. T h e c o r m e c t i o n b e t w e e n v v . 7 f . i m p U e s that G o d b o r e w i m e s s t o C o m e l i u s ' s belief; h e w h o k n o w s the heart s a w that C o r n e h u s h a d c o m e t o the p o i n t o f f a i t h {marevaai - aorist), a n d testified t o P e t e r a n d his c o m p a n i o n s that i t w a s s o b y g i v i n g h i m the Spirit. N o t e also 1 5 . 1 4 : w h a t P e t e r s p o k e o f w a s G o d ' s gift o f the Spirit t o C o r n e l i u s ; i t w a s i n this w a y that G o d 'visited the G e n t i l e s t o take o u t o f t h e m a p e o p l e f o r his n a m e ' . I n s h o r t t h e n , C o r n e h u s is a p r i z e e x a m p l e o f o n e w h o h a d r e s p o n d e d t o G o d as far as i t w a s possible f o r h i m t o r e s p o n d , b u t w a s n o t y e t a C h r i s t i a n . H i s repentance a n d f a i t h h a d n o t y e t reached that level o r b e e n t u m e d t o that object, w h i c h w o u l d enable L u k e t o call t h e m ^erdvoia eis ^toiji' a n d mans eis Xpicnov 'Irqaow; a n d so h e w a s w i t h o u t the f o r g i v e n e s s a n d salvation t h e y b r i n g . H e o n l y entered i n t o this C h r i s t i a n experience w h e n h e received t h e Spirit. T h i s experience w a s t o h i m w h a t P e n t e c o s t w a s t o the 120 - the e n t r y i n t o the n e w a g e a n d c o v e n a n t , i n t o t h e p e o p l e o f G o d . i " A n d i t w a s this experience w h i c h L u k e o n c e a g a i n specifically designates ' t h e b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit'. H e r e a t least, therefore, the b a p t i s m i n the S p i r i t is G o d ' s act o f acceptance, o f f o r g i v e n e s s , cleansing a n d s a l v a t i o n , a n d n o t s o m e t h i n g separate f r o m a n d b e y o n d that w h i c h m a d e C o r n e l i u s a C h r i s t i a n . » Cf. Bruce, Book 306 n. 2 5 ; Carter and Barle 1 4 8 . 1" Note how frequendy die parallel between Pentecost and Caesarea is reiterated - no less than four times in the six verses which cover Peter's report of the incident ( 1 0 . 4 7 ; 1 7 1 iJ-8). It was the same faith, the same Holy Spirit, the same baptism in the Spirit, the same manner of his outpouring, the same manifestations of his coming, the same results.

VIII T H E

'DISCIPLES' A T E P H E S U S

is t h e o t h e r f o i m d a t i o n a l passage f o r Pentecostal t h e o l o g y o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . A s t r o n g case w o u l d c o n t a i n three m a j o r Strands: ( ä ) T h e t w e l v e E p h e s i a n s w e r e Christians (ßadijrai, ol marevoavres) b e f o r e P a i d m e t t h e m - Christians, that is, w h o h a d n o t received t h e H o l y Spirit.^ (b) P a u l ' s q u e s t i o n i n 19.2 seems t o i m p l y t h a t f o r P a u l o n e c o u l d b e a C h r i s t i a n a n d y e t n o t h a v e (received) t h e Spirit. 2 (c) T h e t i m e i n t e r v a l b e t w e e n the E p h e s i a n s ' b a p t i s m a n d P a u l ' s l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s m e a n s that there w a s a t i m e i n t e r v a l b e t w e e n c o n v e r s i o n ( w h i c h precedes b a p t i s m ) a n d t h e c o n d n g o f the Spirit ( w h i c h f o l l o w e d t h e lajdng o n o f hands).^ (a) D i d L u k e r e g a r d t h e t w e l v e E p h e s i a n s as already Christians b e f o r e their e n c o u n t e r w i t h P a u l ? T h e i r i g n o r a n c e o f t h e H o l y Spirit a n d a b o u t J e s u s , a n d t h e fact t h a t P a i d d i d n o t c o i m t their earüer b a p t i s m sufficient b u t h a d t h e m u n d e r g o b a p t i s m i n t h e n a m e o f the L o r d J e s u s , indicates a n e g a t i v e a n s w e r . B u t w h a t o f A C T S 19.1-7

1 E . C. Miller, Pentecost Examined (1936) 5 1 ; H. G. Hathaway, A Soundfrom Heaven (1947) 3 2 ; Horton 5 ; Pierson 1 2 6 - 8 . That tuuBip-ai means 'Christians' is widely agreed by commentators; see e.g. Käsemann 1 3 6 , and the authors cited by him ( 1 3 6 n.3). The equivalent CathoUc Interpretation is that the twelve were Christians who lacked 'this completion of Qiristian life' (Rack ham 346). 2 Harper, Power 2 9 ; Prince, Jordan 6gt.; Riggs 5 4 ; Stiles 8 ; Lindsay 3 5 ; in Holiness teaching see e.g. Cumming i43f. The Pentecostal exposition has the weighty support of Lake, Beginnings V 5 7 and W. L . Knox, Acts 88 at this point. For an equivalent Catholic Interpretation in terms of Confirmation, see Chase 3 2 . 3 Prince, Jordan 7 0 ; Harper, Power 2 9 ; Ervin 103f . For equivalent Calvinist Interpretation in support of their polemic against any hint of baptismal regeneration see Stonehouse 1 3 ; and for equivalent Catholic Interpretation in favour of Confirmation see Mason 2 6 ; Leeming 2 1 7 . 83

84

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Luke's description of them as

/«löijTai?

I t is true that in A c t s

fiaO-qrai usually equals 'Christians', b u t the 1 9 . 1 usage is unique: it is the only time that ij.a97)raCis not preceded by the definite article. N o w ol naßrjTal used absolutely always has the sense in A c t s o f the whole Christian Community o f the city o r area referred t o , n o t just 'Christians' generally, b u t the w h o l e body o f disciples as a single entity: f o r example, 01 iiaörjTal ev lepovaaXtjn (6.7); o t iv AayiaoKW / i t t ö i ^ r a t ( 9 . 1 9 ) ; ol jxadrjTaX\ev 'lonrnj] (9.38); 01 p/xB-qral dm Kaiaaplas ( 2 1 . 1 6 ) . ol p.a6riral is almost a tecbnical term f o r Luke. 'The dis ciples' act as one (19.30), are ministered t o and consulted as one (20.1), are one as the target f o r the false teachers (20.30), are o n e so far as the decisions of the councU affect them (neck - singular 1 5 . 1 0 ) . W h e n h e wishes t o speak of a smaller group than the w h o l e body, L u k e either qualifies his description o f 01 ixad-qTal precisely (as in 9.2 5) o r eise he speaks o f 'some of the disciples' (KOI TWV iiaBriT&v - 2 1 . 1 6 ) . Luke's description o f the t w e l v e as nves juaÖT^rai therefore probably imphes that the t w e l v e did not belong t o 'the disciples' in Ephesus - a fact confirmed b y their ignorance o f basic Christian matters. Indeed, I w o u l d suggest that L u k e deHberately describes them in this w a y in order t o indicate their relation, o r rather, lack of relation t o the church at Ephesus. N o r need the •niarevaavTes mean a n y m o r e than a mistaken ( o r charitable) presumption o n Paul's part* - a ndstake which Paul quickly discovered and rectified by putting them through the complete iiütiation procedure, as w i t h all new converts. O n the other band, w e may n o t simply dub them 'disciples o f J o h n the Baptist';5 the use o f (mOi^ral requires some coimection w i t h Christiaiüty, and presumably Paul must have had some reason f o r addressing them as ol maTevaavres. That they had received 'the baptism of John' hardly proves that they were disciples of the Baptist. It is probably a generic name for the rite originated by John and taken over by others including Jesus and his disciples (Marsh 1 3 6 ; cf. Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings I V 2 3 1 , 238; Kraeling 2o8f.). On the question of whether there was a group of Baptist disciples at Ephesus see especially J . A . T. Robinson, Studies 49-51 n. 49. In the natural course o f events there must h a v e been many * But see below. «Contra Rengstorf, TDNT I V 456f.; Käsemann 136; Haenchen 498; Williams 220; Scohic,Baptist 188; Schütz 105,130.

The 'Disciples' at Ephesus

85

p e o p l e w h o h a d s o m e contact w i t h J o h n o r Jesus o n l y at a certain p o i n t i n their miidstries. T h e y h a d h e a r d e n o u g h t o b e d e e p l y impressed a n d received ' t h e b a p t i s m o f John'. B u t s o o n afterwards they h a d t o leave the area w h e r e J o h n o r Jesus w a s w o r k i n g a n d lost contact w i t h t h e w h o l e m o v e m e n t . T h e r e w o u l d i n e v i t a b l y b e a very wide s p e c t r u m c o v e r i n g all w h o h a d r e s p o n d e d i n s o m e w a y and at some t i m e t o the gospel. F o r e x a m p l e , there w o u l d be t h o s e who knew o n l y the repentance b a p t i s m o f J o h n ; those who k n e w and b e ü e v e d i n n o m o r e t h a n J o h n ' s t e a c h i n g ; those w h o k n e w Jesus only at some particular p o i n t i n his m i n i s t r y and through some particular i n c i d e n t ; those w h o k n e w Jesus o n l y i n the flesh and had n o t yet realized the significance o f his death o r h e a r d o f his resurrection; t h o s e w h o k n e w o t d y the early p r e a c h i n g a n d teaching o f the first f e w days after P e n t e c o s t ; a n d t h o s e w h o s e f a i t h was d e v e l o p i n g a n d d e e p e i d n g i n different directions. A n d w h e n w e include t h e others w o n b y t h e teaching o f these g r o u p s , w i t h s o m e stressing o n e aspect o f t h e message a b o v e t h e rest a n d others i g n o r i n g o r f o r g e t t i n g i m p o r t a n t parts o f t h e message ( n o t t o m e n t i o n i n t e r a c t i o n a m o n g the different g r o u p s ) the s p e c t n m i Covers a n infinite v a r i e t y . T h i s i n h e r e n t l y p r o b a b l e speculation is s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t e d b y the e v i d e n c e o f M a r k 9.38-40; M a t t , y . z z f . ; A c t s 1 9 . 1 3 - 1 6 ; « a n d f r o m w h a t L u k e says o f t h e m - their descrip tion, their b a p t i s m , t h e i r (lack o f ) k n o w l e d g e - the t w e l v e E p h e s ians are m o s t n a t u r a l l y seen as c o m i n g f r o m this c o n t e x t . P a i d ' s q u e s t i o n - h a r d l y his o p e t d n g g a m b i t i n e v e r y a n d a n y c o n v e r s a t i o n - is intelligible otdy against s u c h a b a c k g r o t m d ; h e r i g h t l y presupposes a n act o f c o m m i t m e n t a t s o m e stage i n t h e past. I n s h o r t , t h e y are disciples, b u t d o n o t y e t b e l o n g t o the disciples; that is, t h e y are n o t y e t Christians. fmBrfrfis must have been used w i t h greater o r less strictness b y different groups, and so l o n g as there were people stiU alive w h o had k n o w n or k n o w n about Jesus, and w h o looked u p to h i m w i t h some degree o f loyalty, (laBriTqs must have been a rather loose term. B y confining ot nadrfTai t o Christian communities L u k e precisely deÜmits Christians f r o m other g r o u p s ; and b y his unique use o f ixaßTjrai here he is able to preserve the distinctive Christian tide while at the same time acknowledging the (albeit imperfect) discipleship o f others w h o were hterally 'behind the times*.

(b) T h i s a r g u m e n t assumes that P a u l t h o u g h t he was dealing • Cf. DibeUus, Täufer 95f.

86

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

w i t h Christians, a n d so a s k e d a q u e s t i o n a p p r o p r i a t e t o Christians. B u t this a s s u m p t i o n is n o t firmly g r o u n d e d . F o r t h e P a u l o f t h e E p i s t l e s it w a s impossible f o r a m a n t o b e a C h r i s t i a n imless h e h a d received t h e Spirit ( R o m . 8.9). T h e P a u l o f A c t s 19 is n o differenf, f o r his second q u e s t i o n i m p h e s that t h e S p i r i t is received i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h b a p t i s m ; it w a s inconceivable t o h i m that a C h r i s t i a n , o n e w h o h a d c o m m i t t e d h i m s e l f t o Jesus as L o r d i n b a p t i s m i n his n a m e , c o u l d b e y e t w i t h o u t t h e Spirit. T h i s is w h y t h e t w e l v e h a d t o g o t h r o u g h t h e f ü l l i n i t i a t i o n p r o c e d u r e . I t w a s n o t that P a i d accepted t h e m as Christians w i t h a n i n c o m p l e t e e x p e r i e n c e ; i t is r a t h e r that t h e y w e r e n o t Christians at all. T h e absence o f the S p i r i t indicated that t h e y h a d n o t e v e n b e g u n t h e C h r i s t i a n life. A n d t h e P a u l w h o w o u l d n o t accept Spirit-less disciples a n d believers as Christians c o u l d h a r d l y b e said t o h a v e anticipated m e e t i n g Spiritless Christians. H e w h o b e h e v e s that o i d y those are Christians w h o h a v e t h e Spirit w i l l n o t g o r o u n d a s k i n g Christians w h e t h e r t h e y h a v e received t h e Spirit. T h i s i m p U e s t h a t P a u l ' s o p e n i n g q u e s t i o n w a s o n e o f suspicion a n d surprise, a Suggestion w h i c h is b o r n e o u t b y L u k e ' s descrip tion o f t h e t w e l v e a n d b y t h e f o r m o f t h e q u e s t i o n itself. T h e Tives fiaBrjToi d i d n o t b e l o n g t o t h e C h r i s t i a n g r o u p (01 fiaB-qTcu) at E p h e s u s . P a u l k n e w o f n o Christians w h o w e r e outside t h e b o d y o f t h e C h r i s t i a n Community i n a n y place, a n d therefore w a s p u z z l e d : w h a t sort o f beUevers w e r e t h e y ? S o h e s t r a i g h t a w a y pinpointed the question which w o u l d s h o w whether they were Christians o r n o t . H e a s s u m e d ( o n w h a t g r o u n d s L u k e does n o t say) their c o m m i t m e n t , b u t h e queries w h e t h e r it w a s C h r i s t i a n c o m m i t m e n t . T h e q u e s t i o n itself indicates a t o n e o f surprise, f o r Trvcvfw. ayiov is i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f e m p h a s i s : ' D i d y o u receive t h e Holy Spirit w h e n y o u b e l i e v e d ? ' T h e r e w a s n o e v i d e n c e i n their o w n b e a r i n g o r i n their Company that t h e y h a d t h e S p i r i t ;7 w a s t h e n t h e i r act o f f a i t h that w h i c h resulted i n the gift o f the S p i r i t ? T h e i r a n s w e r q u i c k l y c o n f i r m e d his suspicions: t h e y w e r e n o t Christians. I n s h o r t , i n 19.2 P a u l is n o t a s k i n g Christians w h e t h e r t h e y have received t h e S p i r i t (a necessary b u t o p t i o n a l e x t r a ) ; rather h e is a s k i n g t w e l v e 'disciples' w h o profess belief w h e t h e r t h e y a r e Christians. The argument that the aorist participle marevaavrfs indicates an action prior to the Xanßdveiv (Riggs 53f.; Stiles 8; Miller 49; cf. Ervin ' Cf. Schweizer. TWNT VI 408.

The 'Disciples' at Ephesus

87

102 n. 47) betrays an inadequate grasp o f G r e e k grammar. " T h e action denoted b y the A o r i s t Participle m a y be . . . antecedent t o , coincident w i t h , o r subsequent t o the action o f the principal v e r b ' ( E . de W . B u r t o n , New Testament Moods and Tenses [1898] 59f.). E x a m p l e s o f the aorist participle e ^ r e s s i n g action identical w i t h that o f the main v e r b are M a t t . 19.27; 27.4; I C o r . 15.18; E p h . 1.9, 20; H e b . 7.27 (and the numerous instances o f the phrase diroKpideis etnev). In A c t s see 1.8; 10.33; 27.3. A s most commentators recognize, moTevaavres i n 19.2 is a coincident aorist; it is Paul's doctrine that a m a n receives the Spirit when he believes. (c) T h e a r g u m e n t that w . 5f. relate t w o quite separate p r o cedures falls t o r e c o g n i z e t h e fact that b a p t i s m a n d t h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s here are t h e one c e r e m o n y . W h e n P a u l learned tbat t h e y h a d n o t received t h e S p i r i t h e i m m e d i a t e l y i n q u i r e d after their b a p t i s m , n o t their faith, a n d not a n y o t h e r c e r e m o n y . V e r s e 3 there f o r e i m p H e s a v e r y close c o i m e c t i o n b e t w e e n b a p t i s m a n d receiv i n g t h e Spirit. M o r e o v e r , a l t h o u g h t h e t w e l v e w e r e fwßryrai a n d their essential lack w a s t h e S p i r i t , P a t d d i d n o t s i m p l y l a y h a n d s o n t h e m , b u t first b a p t i z e d t h e m . » T h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s i n v . 6 m u s t therefore b e t h e c l i m a x o f a single c e r e m o n y w h o s e m o s t i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t is b a p t i s m , a n d w h o s e object is t h e r e c e p t i o n o f the Spirit. T h i s is b o r n e out b y t h e f o r m o f w . 5 f., w h i c h c o u l d b e translated: '. . . t h e y w e r e b a p t i z e d i n t h e n a m e o f t h e L o r d Jesus a n d , P a t d h a v i n g laid h a n d s o n t h e m , t h e H o l y S p i r i t c a m e o n t h e m . ' T h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s is a l m o s t p a r e n t h e t i c a l ; t h e sequence o f events is ' b a p t i s m (resulting i n ) . . . S p i r i t ' . C e r t a i n l y t h e o n e a c t i o n leads i n t o a n d reaches its c o n c l u s i o n in t h e o t h e r w i t h n o discemible break.» N o r can w e c o m p a r t m e n t a H z e t h e experience o f the t w e l v e o r distinguish d Ü f e r e n t Operations o f the Spirit. I t w a s a single ( c o n v e r s i o n ) e x p e r i e n c e , ! " the h i g h p o i n t s o f w h i c h w e r e their c o m m i t m e n t t o the L o r d Jesus i n b a p t i s m a n d their r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t 8 Barth's attempt to equate John's baptism with Christian baptism (Jaufe jGj-fz; also SJT 12 (1959) }6i.) is inadmissiblc. Baptism 'in the name of the Lord Jesus' signifies that the water-rite is related to Jesus in a manner impos sible before his Coming (and exaltation). J . K. Parratt's attempt to equate the two is tather more acceptable, but still falls to grasp the significance of the specifically Christian ( = post-Pentecost) formula {RxpT 79 [1967-68] i82f.). • Cf. Wilkens, TZ 23 (1967) 42. So today in many Protestant Churches the conclusion to the ceremony of admission to füll membership is the giving and receiving of 'the right band of fellowship*. In the next chapter I shall take up ihc Pentecostäl reply that the twelve

88

Baptism in tl)e Holy Spirit

- the only coming (upon) of the Spirit that w e read of here. Ordy w i t h the reception of tbe Spirit did the (uxBr^ral become Christians.ii The twelve Ephesians are therefore further examples of men w h o w e r e not far short of Christiatdty, but w e r e n o t yet Christians because they lacked the vital factor - the H o l y Spirit. The issue facing Paul (and the reason presumably for Luke's inclusion o f t h e narrative) w a s : 'How are such groups to be merged w i t h the main stream of Christiarüty ?' Paul's answer was t o point to w h a t was for him the final and absolute criterion: only those w h o had received the Spirit w e r e Christians.12 A n d w h e n he discovered that the Spirit was lacking, all his energies w e r e directed towards the object of bringing the twelve into the Christian experience of the Spirit. T h e parallel case of A p o l l o s is v e r y instructive. He too 'knew only the baptism of J o h n ' and needed fuller Instruction about 'the w a y of G o d ' (i8.25f.). But unhke the t w e l v e naOrjTol he was n o t re-baptized,!» for he differed f r o m them in one, the one c r u d a l respect: he already possessed the Spirit (18.25), whereas they did not. ^ e W Tü) nvev/xaTi Stands between two phrases which describe Apollos as a disciple of Jesus. It is presumably therefore itsdf a descrip tion of Apollos as a Christian, and irveu/to must be taken as (Holy) Spirit rather than (human) spirit. Käsemarm adds that Rom. 1 2 . 1 1 implies that the phrase was current in the language of Christian edification to indicate Inspiration by the Spirit (143). See also W d s s 316; Dibelius, Täufer 95; Preisker 301; Lake and Cadbury, Be^nnings I V 233; Lampe in Studies 198; also in Peahe 796f.; Conzelmarm, Apg. 109; Beasley-Murray i i o ; Stählin 250, 252; Flender 128; Bieder 47, 49. Haenchen notes that to Interpret the phrase in terms of 'a fiery temperament' is a very unusual use oi mevius. (491 n. 10). were converted and regenerate before their baptism, so that no matter how closely connected were the two ritual acts, the gift of the Spirit must have been subsequent to their conversion. 11 Cf. the experience of Jesus at Jordan, and that of the Ethiopian eunuch (8.J9 - should the Westem text be original). 12 Perhaps it was with the memory of sudi a group as these twelve, or even this very group, that Paul wrote Rom. 8.9. G . C. Darton has argued that Luke's method 'is always to convey the large momentous lesson by the small particular story about real people' (St Jobn tbe Baptist and tbe Kingdom of Heaven [1961] 39f). " Dibelius, Täufer 95f; H. Preisker, ZNW jo (1931) 302; Flemington 41; Conzelmann, Apg. 109; Beasley-Murray 112; Bieder 49.

The 'Disciples' at Ephesus

89

A s w i t h t h e disciples a t P e n t e c o s t , t h e p r o m i s e o f A p o l l o s ' s J o h a n n i n e b a p t i s m h a d b e e n fulfilled b y the g i f t o f the S p k i t , a n d so he d i d n o t n e e d C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - b a p t i s m ; b u t the t w e l v e dis ciples' J o h a n n i n e b a p t i s m c o u n t e d f o r n o t h i n g because t h e y h a d n o t received the Spirit, a n d so t h e y h a d t o u n d e r g o the c o m p l e t e C h r i s t i a n initiation, just iike all o t h e r such disciples o f J o h n a n d the earthly Jesus w h o h a d h e a r d a n d experienced n o t h i n g o f Pentecost.i4 L u k e has clearly j u x t a p o s e d these t w o narratives t o h i g h l i g h t the p o i n t h e is m a k i n g : n a m e l y , that 'in the b e g i n r ü n g the Spirit was the decisive factor i n early C h r i s t i a n i t y ' . O n this single p o i n t b o t h stories t u r n ; this single issue determines w h e t h e r t h e y are Christians w h o n e e d fuller I n s t r u c t i o n , o r n o n - C h r i s t i a n s w h o m u s t b e treated as n e w enquirers. i"" This Interpretation goes back to Dibelius, Täufer 9 5 f. It was most strongly expressed by Preisker 3 0 1 - 4 , and it has recentiy been championed by Beasley-Murray 1 1 0 - 1 2 . See also Bieder 49, and cf. Schweizer's thesis about Luke's (mis)understanding of the Apollos narrative {EvTh 15 [ 1 9 5 5 ] 2 4 7 - 5 4 ) 1^ Preisker 304. These t w o episodes s h o w us 'a stage of early Christianity where neither cult nor office is decisive, but where the possession of the Spirit is everything' (303). On Käsemann's attempt to refute Preisker here see pp. 9off. and n. 3 2 . In forcing through his Una sancta thesis and dismissing 1 8 . 2 5 c as 'a Lukan fabrication' (144) Käsemann has missed Luke's real point.

IX C O N V E R S I O N - I N I T I A T I O N I NT H E A C T S O F T H E

A P O S T L E S

T HE RE are f e w p r o b l e m s so p u z z l i n g i n N T t h e o l o g y as that p o s e d b y A c t s i n its t r e a t m e n t o f c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n . T h e relation b e t w e e n t h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit a n d w a t e r - b a p t i s m is particularly confixsing - sometimes sharply contrasted ( 1 . 5 ; 1 1 . 1 6 ) , sometimes q u i t e i m c o i m e c t e d (2.4; 8.i6f.; 18.25), sometimes i n l u t u r a l sequence (2.38; i9.5f.). sometimes t h e o t h e r w a y a b o u t (9.i7f.(?); 10.44-48). T h e role a n d sigiüficance o f b o t h J o h n ' s b a p t i s m a n d t h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s are c o m p ü c a t i n g factors. O u r s t u d y so f a r has suggested a Solution t o this p r o b l e m , a n d t o c o m p l e t e o u r treat m e n t o f A c t s w e m u s t enlarge u p o n i t a üttle m o r e f u U y . O u r discussion w i U start f r o m A c t s 2.38 w h i c h I h a v e left t i U n o w since i t raises issues w h i c h can b e best dealt w i t h i n a b r o a d e r t r e a t m e n t t h a n t h e debate w i t h P e n t e c o s t a ü s m has so f a r p e r m i t t e d . M o r e o v e r , L u k e p r o b a b l y intends A c t s 2.3 8 t o estabüsh t h e p a t t e m a n d n o r m f o r C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n i n his p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Christianity's b e g i n n i n g s . A t t h e close o f t h e first C h r i s t i a n s e r m o n the l e a d i n g apostle sets t h e precedent f o r t h e I n s t r u c t i o n o f enquirers.i Peter is the one w h o breaks the n e w g r o u n d ( 1 0 . 1 - 1 1 . 1 8 ) , and his lead is followed i n the decisive issues o f missionary outreach (i 5 . 7 - 1 1 , 14fr.). I n A c t s 3.i9f., the second Christian sermon, the patternis repeated in equivalent terms, since the Katpoi ava^^etas are best understood as the period o f respite ä n d blessing prior t o a n d culmmating i n t h e parousia, that is, die last days which the Spirit ushers i n and into and w h i c h lead u p t o the last d a y ; cf. also 5.32. I f these Statements and the numbers converted are historical, it also means that the great majority of the first Christians h a d been received into the C h u r c h in accordance 1 See Stählin 5 3 ; Hull 88,95! and cf. Dodd, Apostolic Preaching 2 3 .

90

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

91

with this pattern. A n d h a v i n g f o u n d it effective themselves they w o u l d see in it the pattern to be copied w h e n they i n t u r n did the w o r k o f evangelists (e.g. 8.4). The sermon in A c t s 2 m a y also be intended t o be a pattern for kerygmatic preaching (Lampe in Studies 159).

Furthermore, it is the o n l y verse i n A c t s w h i c h directly relates t o one another the three m o s t i m p o r t a n t elements i n c o n v e r s i o n initiation: repentance, w a t e r - b a p d s m , a n d the gift o f the S p i r i t repentance and faith being the o p p o s i t e sides of the same c o i n . The three principal words used by Luke to describe man's act of faith are fieravoeiv, imurpe^eiv and mcreveiv. Each describes the act from a different angle: neravoelv always has the sense of turrdng away from (OTTO) sin; emarpe^eiv always has the sense of turning to (em) God; and moTiveiv has essentiaUy the sense of commitment to (eis) Christ. They can be used singly, when they may have a fuUer sense (e.g. 2.38; 9 . 3 5 ; II.18; 16.31), or they may be used in pairs (e.g. 3.19; 26.20; 2.38 with 2.44; 20.21; II. 21; 26.18). In the former cases they o b v i o u s l y o f t e n comprehend the whole act of faith; in the latter, their sense is m o r e restricted in the way already suggested. {d7ro)bexeaBai, (2.41; 8.14; 1 1 . 1 ; 17.11) and npomxew (8.6, 1 1 ; 16,14) also describe the response to the preached word (Xoyos).

Of these three elements o n l y o n e each can p r o p e r l y b e said t o b e performed b y each o f t h e tbree parties i n v o l v e d : d i e i n i d a t e , t h e C h r i s t i a n Community, a n d G o d , 2 I n n o r m a l C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n each o f these parties plays a distinctive r o l e , a n d unless each p a r t y plays its p a r t the c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n is i n c o m p l e t e . pxTav
c>2

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

w h i c h first attracted t h e c r o w d , a n d that w h i c h is t h e essence o f the n e w age a n d c o v e n a n t (2.39). T h e S p i r i t is t h e bearer o f sal v a t i o n , f o r t h e p r o m i s e o f 2.38 m u s t include t h e p r o m i s e o f 2.21 ( a n d 1 6 . 3 1 ) . T h i s is c o n f i r m e d b y the fact that 2.39c clearly alludes t o t h e close o f J o e l 2.32, t h e v e r y verse at w h i c h t h e q u o t a t i o n o f A c t s 2 . 1 7 - 2 1 left off;* t h e d e ü v e r a n c e ' i n those d a y s ' P e t e r interprets o f eschatological salvation i n 2.21 a n d o f t h e gift o f t h e S p i r i t i n 2.38f. W e h a v e already seen that f o r L u k e as f o r P a u l t h e g i f t o f the Spirit is the m e a n s w h e r e b y m e n enter i n t o the blessing o f A b r a h a m . A l s o , i n so far as J e s u s ' experience at J o r d a n is at this stage ( o f L u k e ' s w r i t i n g ) consciously a t y p e o f C b r i s t i a n c o n v e r sion-irdtiation, w e m u s t recall that there the a n o i n t i n g o f the Spirit w a s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t , w i t h b a p t i s m filüng o n l y a p r e l i m i n a r y role. T h a t t h e g i f t o f t h e S p i r i t is f o r L u k e t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t i n C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n is also s h o w n b y f o u r o f the incidents w e h a v e e x a m i n e d . W i t h t h e 120, i t is the g i f t o f the S p i r i t w h i c h u s h e r e d t h e m i n t o t h e n e w age a n d c o v e n a n t ; w a t e r b a p t i s m b y J o h n m a y be p r e s u p p o s e d , b u t i t does n o t feature a t all i n their actual e n t r y i n t o the age o f t h e Spirit. W i t h the S a m a r i t a n s , Christian water-baptism h a d been administered, b u t it d i d n o t a m o u n t t o a f u U o r v a h d c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n , a n d i n t h e absence o f t h e Spirit its significance w a s m u c h r e d u c e d ; i n the e v e n t i t w a s t h e Coming o f t h e S p i r i t w h i c h w a s s o u g h t a b o v e all eise. W i t h C o r n e U u s , i t w a s t h e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t w h i c h b r o u g h t sal v a t i o n , f o r g i v e n e s s a n d cleansing o f h e a r t ; it w a s t h a t w h i c h settled t h e q u e s t i o n o f his acceptance b y t h e C h r i s t i a n Community ( w a t e r - b a p t i s m is n o t e v e n m e n t i o n e d i n 1 1 . 1 4 - 1 8 ) ; w a t e r - b a p t i s m w a s s i m p l y m a n ' s catching u p w i t h a n d a c k n o w l e d g m e n t o f t h e p r i o r decisive act o f G o d . W i t h A p o U o s a n d the E p h e s i a n s , it w a s possession o r absence of t h e S p i r i t w h i c h decided w h e t h e r t h e i r J o h a n n i n e b a p t i s m w a s sufficient; f o r t h e o n e , C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m w a s imnecessary, f o r his possession o f t h e S p i r i t indicated t h a t b c w a s already a C h r i s t i a n ; f o r t h e others, Q i r i s t i a n b a p t i s m w a s necessary, f o r t h e absence o f t h e S p i r i t indicated that t h e y w e r e n o t Christians. I n Paul's conversion it is naturaUy his unique encounter w i t h the risen Jesus (cf. I C o r . ij.8) w h i c h commands the centre o f the stage. * Bruce, Acts 99; also Book 78; Haenchen 152; Stählin 54; Conzelmann, Apg. 51.

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

95

We may assume that all the other examples of conversion-initiation recorded by Luke follow the pattern of Acts 2.} 8. The gift of the Spirit need not be mentioned - though it may be implied by die 'rejoicing' of the Ethiopian eunuch and the PhiHppian jailor (Lampe in Studies 198) since fulfilment of the conditions (repentance/behef and baptism) results in the Spirit being given and received. It was only because the majority did receive the Spirit at the time of their water-baptism or immediately after, that water-baptism later became the sacrament of the gift of the Spirit. In a similar way baptism need not be mentioned but can be assumed (e.g. 9.42; 1 1 . 2 1 ; 17.34). It has become evident, in fact, that one of Luke's purposes in recording these unusual instances is to show that the one thing which makes a man a Christian is the gift of the Spirit. Men can have been for a long time in Jesus' Company, can have made profession of faith and been baptized in the name of the L o r d Jesus, can be w h o l l y 'clean' and acceptable t o G o d , can even be 'disciples', andj*?/ not be Christians, because they lack and until they receive the Holy Spirit. In the last analysis the only thing that matters in deciding whether a man is a Christian o r not is whether he has received the Spirit o r not. {b) It is important t o grasp the relation between faith, the act of believing into (irurrevaai eis) Chnst, and the gift of the Spirit. Much of o u r argimient so far may have failed t o convince Pente costals, most o f w h o m seem to b o l d w h a t to them is the classic Reformed v i e w o f the order of salvation, namely, that the Spirit w o r k s in o r w i t h a person prior t o his conversion, enabling him t o repent and beüeve, at which point he receives Jesus into his heart and life. T o these t w o distinct w o r k s of grace tbe Pentecostal adds a third in his theology of the baptism in the Spirit.^ Thus in such cases as 2.38, 19.5 f., tiie Pentecostal beüeves his case t o be sovmd because baptism is a confession o f a conversion which has already taken place, and conversion indicates that the Spirit is already operative in a man's life, so that the Spirit received at o r after * An extreme example would be the Blessed Trinity Society's pamphlet ^by . . .: 'Once we have accepted the Lord Jesus Christ, there is a further S t e p which is necessary to receive the füll promise of God, and that is the acceptance of the Gift of the Holy Spirit' (cited in Tbe Cburcbman 80 [1966] 304); cf. Ervin 93 n. 15. In Holiness teaching see A . B. Simpson, Tbe Holy Spirit or Power from OH Higb (1896) II 28; and on the Catholic side see the quotations from F. H. Elpis and H. Coopcr in Lampe, Seal xxiiif.; cf. Rackham 116; D k , Tbe Sbape oftbe Liturgy (1945) 260; Thomton 173.

94

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

b a p t i s m is a w o r l i o f g r a c e d i s t i n c t f r o m a n d s u b s e q u e n t t o conversion. * Many conservative theologians take the classic Reformed position to be that in the ordo salutis regeneration precedes conversion and is that which enables a man to convert. Thus e.g. Smeaton quotes Wesley with approval:'. . . every man, in order to believe unto salvation, must receive the Holy Ghost' (199, from Wesley's Works VIII 49, my italics). See also A . Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit (1900, reprinted 1956) 283353, especially 295^; E. H. Palmer, The Holy Spirit {ic))i) 79, 83; J . H. Gerstner, The Biblical Expositor (ed. C. F. H. Henry i960) 217. This initial reception of the Spirit is distinguished from his later coming to bestow charismata (Lambert 133, 144; Warfield i22f.; Stonehouse 82; Lenski 431, 780; Gerstner 218; J . K . Parratt, The Seal of the Spiritin the New Testament Teaching (London University dissertation 1965); cf. p. 57 n. 8, and the sacramentalist Interpretation of Acts lo which distinguishes the 'ecstatic Spirit' from the 'baptismal Spirit' - Haenchen 307 n. 4; Schlier, Zeit ii5f.; Kuss i02f.; see also Oulton 239^, and cf. FoakesJackson 95). Parratt seems to distinguish a third reception ofthe S p i r i t before, in and after the act of faith (72, 74f., i63f.). Lenski falls into the same inconsistency in his Interpretation of Acts 10 (431, 434). Barth's last work shows a somewhat similar confusion as to whether waterbaptism is the human response to the divine initiative of Spirit-baptism, or Spirit-baptism the divine response to the human petition of waterbaptism; see e.g. his comment on Acts io.46f. (Dogmatik IVI4 85). I d o n o t d e n y that the Christian theologian m a y quite p r o p e r l y speak o f the convicting w o r k o f the Spirit p r i o r t o a n d leading u p t o c o n v e r s i o n ( e v e n i f J o h n 1 6 . 8 - 1 1 , a n d p e r h a p s I C o r . i4.24f.,* are a b o u t t h e o n l y passages w h i c h c a n b e q u o t e d i n s u p p o r t ) . ' H o w e v e r , I affirm m o s t emphatically that f o r t h e N T writers w h o s p e a k o n this m a t t e r , t h e g i f t o f s a v i n g g r a c e w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l receives i n c o n v e r s i o n , t h a t is, o n b e l i e v i n g , is t h e H o l y S p i r i t . T h e decisive gift o f t h e Spirit w h i c h makes a m a n a Christian a n d • E.g., Riggs, jif., 55, 58f.; Miller 5of.; Horton 1 3 , 1 8 ; Harper, Walk in tbe Spirit (1968) 15; also Fire 2if. ' Robinson, Spirit 209; Schweizer, TWNT V I 425. Contrast Bultmann, who denies that Paul ever attributes faith to the Spirit (Tbeology of tbe New Testament [ E T 1952] I 330). In Luke and Paul it wovdd bc more precise to say that faith is stirred up tlürough the (inspired) proclamation of the Gospel. This will become evident in our study of Paul. In Acts it is enough to notice the prominencc of Aoyos - used about thirty-six times for the proclaimed Gospel. As Büchsei points out: reception ofthe Spirit without a prior preach ing of the Gospel is unknown to Luke (256-63); cf. Barrett, Luke 68.

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

95

w i t h o u t w h i c h h e is n o C h r i s t i a n c o m e s neither b e f o r e n o r after c o n v e r s i o n b u t in c o n v e r s i o n , T h e N T k n o w s o f n o p r i o r recep t i o n , » S o far as P a u l is c o n c e r n e d , R o m . 8.9 n d e s o u t the possib i ü t y b o t h o f a « ö « - C h r i s ü a n possessing t h e Spirit a n d o f a C h r i s t i a n not possessing t h e S p i r i t : o t d y the r e c e p t i o n a n d c o n s e q u e n t posses sion o f the S p i r i t m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n . F o r J o h n , spiritual b i r t h means b e i n g b o r n o f the Spirit w h o comes f r o m a b o v e , n o t o f a Spirit already present (3.3-8), f o r t h e irvevixa is t h e b r e a t h o f G o d (20.22) w h i c h b r i n g s life a n d is U f e (cf. 4 . 1 0 ; 6.63; 7.38f.). A U t h a t the b e U e v e r receives i n c o n v e r s i o n - s a l v a t i o n , f o r g i v e n e s s , justification, s o n s h i p , etc. - h e receives because h e receives the S p i r i t (cf. ch. V I I ) . T h e Pentecostal a t t e m p t t o e v a d e t h e N T emphasis b y distin g u i s h i n g the acceptance o f Jesus at c o n v e r s i o n f r o m the later gift o f the Spirit is i n fact a d e p a r t u r e f r o m N T teaching. F o r the N T nowhere speaks o f c o n v e r s i o n as ' r e c e i v i n g C h r i s t ' (despite t h e f r e q u e n t use o f this phrase i n p o p u l ä r e v a n g e U s m ) . J o h n 1 . 1 2 refers p r i m a r ü y t o t h e historical w e l c o m e w h i c h a f e w o f 'bis o w n ' g a v e h i m , i n contrast t o the rejection o f the m a n y ( i . i i f . ; cf. 5.43; 6 . 2 1 ; 13.20). I n C o l . 2.6 the w o r d u s e d is napaXafißdvw w h i c h p r o p e r l y m e a n s t h e r e c e i v i n g o f a heritage o r t r a d i t i o n ; P a i d r e m i n d s the Colossians h o w t h e y received t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n o f Jesus as L o r d ( A r n d t a n d G i n g r i c h ) - 'since J e s u s w a s d e U v e r e d t o y o u as C h r i s t a n d L o r d ' ( N E B ) . R e v . 3.20, a l t h o u g h m u c h b e l o v e d as a n e v a n g e U s t i c i U u s t r a t i o n , is w r i t t e n , o f course, t o Christians. P a u l a n d J o h n d o speak o f C h r i s t i n d w e l l i n g a p e r s o n a n d o f a C h r i s t i a n ' h a v i n g C h r i s t ' , b u t t h e m o r e precise w a y o f s p e a k i n g is t h a t C h r i s t i n d w e ü s the b e U e v e r i n a n d b y h i s S p i r i t a n d the C h r i s t i a n has t h e S p i r i t o f C h r i s t . F o r t h e S p i r i t f r o m t h e ascension o n w a r d s is peculiarly the S p i r i t o f Jesus ( A c t s 1 6 . 7 ; R o m . 8.9; G a l . 4.6; P h i l . 1.19). W h a t o n e receives at c o n v e r s i o n is the S p i r i t a n d life o f the risen exalted C h r i s t . C f . also J o h n ' s talk o f the Spirit as the oAAos wapoKAijros w i d i 1 4 . 1 8 24. N o t e I C o r . 15.45 and the w a y i n w h i c h Paul can use the terms 'Spirit', 'Spirit o f G o d ' , 'Spirit o f Christ', and 'Christ' interchangeably in R o m . 8,9f. M . Bouttier, En Cl}rist (1962) has s h o w n that o n balance Paul prefers t o speak o f I/we in Christ and the Spirit in me/us, rather than Christ in me/us and I/we in the Spirit (see M o u l e , Fhenomenon 2426). H e can ordy speak interchangeably o f 'Christ in the beUever' and * See further, p. 120 below.

96

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

'the Spirit in the behever' because these t w o phrases mean precisely the same thing. H e does not simply identify Christ and the Spirit - oiüy in experience. T h e equivalence lies in the total phrases - Christ's life in the beUever is effected b y his Spirit. See p p . i 4 8 f . below. T o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n , i n s h o r t , is t o receive t h e Spirit o f C h r i s t , the H o l y Spirit. W h a t the Pentecostal attempts t o separate i n t o t w o w o r k s o f G o d is i n fact o n e Single d i v i n e act. F o r L u k e the relation between f a i t h and the Spirit can b e expressed s i m p l y thus: i n c o n v e r s i o n o n e beheves, c o m m i t s oneself t o C h r i s t , and receives the Spirit from C h r i s t . M a n ' s act i n c o n v e r s i o n is to repent, t o turn and t o b e h e v e ; ^ G o d ' s act is t o g i v e the Spirit t o man o n b e l i e v i n g ( A c t s 2.38; 1 1 . 1 7 ; 1 5 . 9 ; 1 9 . 2 ; cf. J o h n 7.39; G a l . 3.2). T h e t w o t o g e t h e r are t h e essential c o m p o n e n t s o f c o n v e r s i o n , b u t i n the last analysis it is G o d ' s gift w h i c h alone counts. F a i t h w o u l d n o t justify i f G o d d i d n o t g i v e his Spirit. F a i t h is o n l y the r e a c h i n g o u t o f a n e m p t y b a n d t o r e c e i v e ; i t is w h a t is received w h i c h alone ultimately c o u n t s . I f , t h e n . B r u n e r is correct i n saying that ' t h e t r u t h o f P e n t e c o s t a h s m ' s d o c t r i n e o f the S p i r i t rests o r falls o n t h e exegesis o f the k n o t t y p n e u m a t i c passages i n A c t s ' (43), o u r c o n clusion can o i d y b e t h a t the doctrine falls. {c) I f o n e c a n n o t separate the act o f f a i t h f r o m the g i f t o f the S p i r i t , w h a t is the role o f b a p t i s m w i t h i n t h e e v e n t o f c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n ? F i r s t w e m u s t e x a m i n e t h e relation b e t w e e n f a i t h repentance a n d b a p t i s m . I n A c t s f a i t h a n d b a p t i s m are n o r m a l l y closely U n k e d (2.38, 4 1 ; 8.i2f.; 8.37^ ( D ) ; i6.i4f., 3 1 - 3 3 ; 18.8). I n t h e case o f the E p h e s i a n s t h e sequence o f P a u l ' s questions indicates that marevaat a n d ßaTmaO'^vai are interchangeable w a y s o f describing the act o f f a i t h : b a p t i s m w a s t h e necessary e x p r e s s i o n o f c o m m i t m e n t , w i t h o u t w h i c h t h e y c o u l d n o t b e said t o h a v e t r u l y ' b e ü e v e d ' . i ö T h i s is also i m p l i e d b y the use o f C h r i s t ' s n a m e i n t b e rite. E n q u i r e r s o n t h e d a y o f P e n t e c o s t w e r e b a p t i z e d e m o r e v T Ö I ovofuiTi '/ijCToC XpioToO. im p r o b a b l y m e a n s that the b a p t i s a n d i n w a t e r - b a p t i s m called u p o n the n a m e o f t h e L o r d (2.21; 22.16), a n d e'v that the n a m e w a s n a m e d o v e r the b a p t i s a n d ( d d s b e i n g the f o r m u l a a n d t e c h n i q u e i n healing miracles a n d exorcisms - 3.6; * See p . 91 above. These words always describe man's act away from sin and towards God. God does not perform these O p e r a t i o n s - though we may

say they are God's doing (see j.26; 5.31; 11.18; 16.14; cf. 4.12; 11.14; 2.41, 47; 11-24; cf. A . Weiser, TWNT V I 187). 1 ' 'The idea of an unbaptized Christian is simply not entertained in N T ' (Bruce, Book 77); cf. Käsemann 144.

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

97

4.7, 1 0 ; 1 9 . 1 3 - 1 5 ) . W a t e r - b a p t i s m is tberefore t o b e r e g a r d e d as the occasion o n w h i c h the iidtiate called u p o n the L o r d f o r m e r c y , a n d the means b y w h i c h h e c o m m i t t e d h i m s e l f t o the o n e w h o s e name was n a m e d o v e r h i m . Properly administered water-baptism m u s t h a v e b e e n t h e climax a n d act o f f a i t h , t h e expression o f repentance a n d the vehicle o f c o m m i t m e n t . i i As we have seen, Paul's water-baptism must have been the moment of surrender and death for the old seif and entry into the new life of the Spirit (cf. Rom. 7.6 with 6.4). Hull, however, has argued that the conditions to be fulfilled for the gift of the Spirit, both for Peter and Luke, were repentance, faith in Jesus, and the readiness to be bapti^^ed (9 3ff.).This does not really Square with the importance of baptism, even for Luke. A t the same time, w h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t o n e c a n n o t say ' f a i t h ' w i t h o u t also s a y i n g ' w a t e r - b a p t i s m ' , w e m u s t r e c o g n i z e that o f the t w o it is the f o r m e r w h i c h is the significant element. B a p t i s m gives expression t o f a i t h , b u t w i t h o u t f a i t h b a p t i s m is meaningless, a n e m p t y s y m b o l . I t is false t o say that w a t e r - b a p t i s m c o n v e y s , confers o r effects f o r g i v e n e s s o f sins.12 I t m a y s y m b o l i z e cleansing, b u t it is the f a i t h a n d repentance w h i c h receives t h e f o r g i v e n e s s , a n d t h e H o l y Spirit w h o c o n v e y s , confers a n d effects it. L u k e n e v e r m e n t i o n s w a t e r - b a p t i s m b y itself as t h e c o n d i t i o n o f o r m e a n s t o receiving f o r g i v e n e s s ; h e m e n t i o n s it o n l y i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h s o m e o t h e r attitude (repentance - L u k e 3 . 3 ; A c t s 2.38) o r act (calling o n his n a m e - A c t s 22.16). B u t w h e r e a s w a t e r - b a p t i s m is n e v e r s p o k e n o f as t h e sole prereqtdsite t o receiving f o r g i v e n e s s , L u k e o n a n u m b e r o f occasions speaks o f repentance o r f a i t h as the s o l e p r e r e q u i s i t e ( L u k e 5.20; 24.47; A c t s 3 . 1 9 ; j . 3 1 ; 1 0 . 4 3 ; ^3-38; 2 6 . 1 8 ; cf. 4.4; 9.35, 4 2 ; 1 1 . 2 1 ; 1 3 . 4 8 ; 1 4 . 1 ; 1 6 . 3 1 ; 1 7 . 1 2 , 34). I n o t h e r w o r d s , w a t e r - b a p t i s m is neither t h e sole p r e l i m i n a r y n o r i n itself a n essential p r e l i m i n a r y t o r e c e i v i n g f o r g i v e n e s s . M o r e o v e r , w e h a v e already seen i n chapter I t h a t i n L u k e w h e r e repentance is j o i n e d t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m it is t h e f o r m e r a l o n e w h i c h is really d e d s i v e f o r f o r g i v e n e s s . S o i n 2.38, ' P e t e r ' s basic a n d 11 Beasley-Murray 102, and his quotation from von Baer (121); see also R. P. Martin. Worsbip in tbe Early Cbureb (1964) 100; White i34f. 18 Contra e.g. Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings IV 26; Rackham Ixxvi; Wikenhauser jjf.; Bultmann, Tbeology I 140; J . G. Davies, Tbe Spirit, tbe Cburcb and tbe Sacraments (1954) laSf.; Dewar 53; Kuss 121, 122, 132, 148; Delling, Taufe 62. The view lands in confusion in the case of CorneUus (cf. Mason 38; Schlier, Zeit 115^).

98

Baptism in tite Hoiy Spirit

p r i m a r y d e m a n d is f o r repentance' the f o r g i v e n e s s o f sins can b e p r o m i s e d t o the b a p t i s a n d o n l y because his b a p t i s m is his act a n d e x p r e s s i o n o f repentance.^* L i k e w i s e i n 22.16, the o t h e r f a v o u r i t e verse o f the sacramentahst i n A c t s , the w a s h i n g a w a y o f sins is a c h i e v e d o n the h u m a n side n o t b y w a t e r b u t b y the c a l h n g u p o n the n a m e o f the L o r d ; n o t t h e rite itself b u t t h e attitude a n d c o m m i t m e n t ( f o r w h i c h i t g a v e occasion a n d t o w h i c h i t g a v e expression) m a d e t h e decisive contact w i t h t h e L o r d w h i c h resulted i n cleansing. The

imKaXeadfievos TO OVO/MI avrov goes principally w i t h the aTroXovaai diiaprias aov, as the balance o f the sentence also suggests - dvaards . . . ßäiTTioai, diToXovaai,, imKaXeadfievos. A c t s 22.16 shows that jÖaTTTi^eiv and dnoXaveiv are not S y n o n y m s . N o r is there any requirement TOS

in the text itself t o take the t w o actions described b y these verbs as causally related = be baptized and (in and b y that action) have y o u r sins washed away. T h e y are co-ordinate actions, related through the imKaX eadfievos KTX. I n fact, w e have once again the three elements o f conversion-initiation - water-baptism, the Spirit's cleansing, and the individual's appeal of faith. F i n a l l y w e m a y n o t e t h a t i n A c t s Christians are called ' t h o s e w h o h a v e b e U e v e d i n the L o r d ' , a n d ' t h o s e w h o call u p o n t h e n a m e o f the L o r d ' , b u t n e v e r ' t h e baptized'.^s T h e essential characteristic o f the C h r i s t i a n a n d that w h i d i matters o n t h e h u m a n side is i n t h e last analysis f a i t h a n d n o t w a t e r - b a p t i s m . T h e sacrament 'acts o n ' f a i t h , b u t o t d y f a i t h 'acts o n ' G o d . S c h w e i z e r is therefore correct w h e n h e states: ' F o r L u k e b a p t i s m is s i m p l y a natural episode i n w h a t h e regards as m u c h m o r e i m p o r t a n t , n a m e l y c o n v e r s i o n ' . ^ * (d) F i n a U y , w h a t is the relation b e t w e e n b a p t i s m ( w h i c h e x p r e s ses faith) a n d S p i r i t ( w h o is g i v e n t o faith) ? T h e sacrament a n d t h e . h e a v e n l y g i f t m u s t certairdy n o t b e i d e n t i f i e d . 1 ' A s w a t e r - b a p t i s m 13 Stonehouse 84; Bruce, Book 75. See also Lambert 89; Lake and Cadbury, Beginnings I V 26; Kittel 39-41. " Cf. Kittel 40-42; Wilkens, TZ 23 (1967) 33f. w Lambert 90. 16 r r w r v i 411; cf. Munck, Paiä i8 n. i. 1 ' 'All Christian baptism is baptism in the Holy Spirit' (Richardson 350; cf. Schlier, Zeit 114; von Allmen 32). It is fairly commonplace to say that water-baptism 'confers', 'gives', 'is the source of', 'mcdiates', 'cotnmunicates', 'procures', 'imparts', 'brings' or 'bcstows' the Spirit - e.g., O. C. Quick, Tbe Cbristian Sacraments (1927) 184; Marsh i54f.; Confirmation Today (1944) 9f.; Bornkamm 46, 48; Lampe, Seal 33, 66; Cullmann, Baptism 10; Kuss i04f.; Davies 104; Bultmann, Theology 1 1 3 8 ; Beasley-Murray 1 1 2 ; Haenchen 498f.; Conzelmann, Theology 100; Wikenhauser 54.

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

99

does not convey forgiveness, so it does n o t convey the Spirit. There is absolutely n o g r o u n d for saying that the Holy Spirit is given by o r through water-baptism - especially in Luke. W i t h Jesus the baptismal rite was only preparatory to bis anointing w i t h the Spirit, which t o o k place after it was completed and while he was praying. If, as seems most hkely, the Christian practice of water-baptism f r o m the first was simply a continuation and adaptation o f t h e Johaimine rite,i8 and if, as also seems most hkely, Jesus' o w n baptism was seen as the pattern, then it should be noted that the essentiaUy preparatory nature of the Johaimine baptism is carried o v e r into Christian baptism. A l t h o u g h the fulfilment comes at once, because baptism in the name of the L o r d Jesus expresses commitment t o Jesus as L o r d , the water-baptism itself does n o t effect entrance into the new age and Christian experience but only points f o r w a r d and leads u p t o the messianic baptism in Spirit which alone effects that entrance, as J o h n had said. As John 5.22,26; 4.2 indicate, Jesus' disciples seem to have continued John's baptism after joining Jesus, for a time at least. After Pentecost they would simply resume the practice, though with a deeper significance and as a rite of initiation. Although there is a high degree of continuity between the two rites they caimot simply be equated, otherwise the Samaritans' baptisms would have been repeated m Acts 8 as that ofthe Ephesians was in Acts 19. See also pp. 2of., 87 n. 8. It is only when the emphasis is put in its proper place in the complex of conversion-initiation - viz. on the anointing with the Spirit - that the paraUel between Christian conversion-initiation and Jesus' experience at Jordan becomes clear. This paraUel seems to be drawn in the NT, whereas that between Christian baptism and Jesus' baptism is not (II Cor. 1.21; I John 2,20, 27; also the way in which sonship is closdy linked with the reception of the Spirit in b o t h - R o m . 8.15; Gal. 4.6). One becomes a Christian by sharing in the 'christing' of the Christ. The preparatory nature of Christian baptism is d e a r l y indicated by the fact that the baptism i n the Spirit (with its p u r d y metaphorical use of 'baptism') continues into the Christian era t o be regarded as the fulfilment o f J o h n ' s water-baptism, and continues t o be set 1* 'Had John not baptized there would probably bc no Christian baptism' (Büchsei 141). See further H, Mcntz, Tattfe und Kirche in ihrem ursprünglichen

Zusammenhang (i960) 54, 41-52; and c£. G. Braumann, Vorpaulinische Taufverkändigung hei Paulus (1962) 30-50, 8of.

loo

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

i n contrast w i t h t h e latter ( A c t s i . j ; i i , i 6 ) . i 9 T h a t is t o say, i n L u k e ' s v i e w , the f u l f i l m e n t o f J o h n ' s w a t e r - b a p t i s m is not C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - b a p t i s m , 20 f a r less that curious h y b r i d u n k n o w n t o t h e N T , C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - a n d - S p i r i t baptism,2i b u t S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . 22 A n d i n the C h r i s t i a n era C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - b a p t i s m takes o v e r the subsidiary a n d p r e p a r a t o r y role p r e v i o u s l y filled b y J o h n ' s w a t e r - b a p t i s m still a b a p t i s m o f repentance, still a c o n d i t i o n o f receiving t h e Spirit (2.38).23 I n A c t s the t w o baptisms r e m a i n distinct; f o r it is a s t r i k i n g fact that i n n o case is t h e Spirit g i v e n t h r o u g h w a t e r baptism o r even simultaneously w i t h water-baptism. F o r L u k e there are o n l y t w o b a p t i s m s - w a t e r - b a p t i s m a n d S p i r i t - b a p t i s m ( L u k e 3 . 1 6 ; A c t s 1 . 5 ; 1 1 . 1 6 ) . I n t h e f o r m e r , ' b a p t i s m ' means o n l y the rite o f I m m e r s i o n ( o r perhaps effusion) a n d n o t h i n g m o r e ; i n the latter, i t m e a n s o n l y t h e (manifest) g i v i n g o f t h e Spirit a n d n o t h i n g m o r e . T h e v i e w w h i c h regards 2.38 as p r o o f that w a t e r b a p t i s m is the vehicle o f the S p i r i t is o n e w h i c h has n o f o u n d a t i o n except i n t h e t h e o l o g y o f later cenmries. B a p t i s m m a y b e a neces sary expression o f faith, b u t G o d gives t h e S p i r i t directly t o f a i t h , as t h e case histories o f t h e 120 a n d C o r n e U u s m a k e a b u n d a n t l y clear. T h e h i g h l y critical audience i n 1 1 . 1 5 - 1 8 w e r e n o t a t a U c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e issue o f C o r n e U u s ' s w a t e r - b a p t i s m . O t d y o n e b a p t i s m is m e n t i o n e d - S p i r i t - b a p t i s m ; G o d h a d b a p t i z e d t h e m , a n d that w a s a U that m a t t e r e d . I f L u k e is t o b e o u r g u i d e , t h e r e f o r e , w a t e r - b a p t i s m can p r o p e r l y b e described as t h e vehicle o f f a i t h ; b u t not as t h e vehicle o f t h e Spirit. I t enables m a n t o a p p r o a c b G o d , a n d represents w h a t G o d has d o n e f o r m e n a n d stiU does i n m e n , b u t o t h e r w i s e i t is n o t t h e chaimel o f G o d ' s grace o r t h e m e a n s o f his g i v i n g t h e S p i r i t , as. A c t s 8 m a k e s clear. W e c a t m o t d i v o r c e t h e S p i r i t f r o m f a i t h , n o r ( n o r m a U y ) w a t e r - b a p t i s m f r o m f a i t h ; b u t i f o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g is t o b e clear a n d o u r teaching t r u e ( t o L u k e at least) w e m u s t distin" Cf. Wilkens, TZ 23 (1967) 32,43f. The repeated contrast between John's water-baptism and Christ's Spirit-baptism in 11.16 coincides too closely with the distinction between Christian water-baptism and the outpouring of the Spirit in the Cornelius episode to be coincidental. Contra e.g. Foakes-Jackson 18; Bultmatm, History 247; Oepkc, TDNT I 543; Wilkens 105. 81 Contra Williams 291; Rackham 30; S. Bailey, Tbeo/ogy 49 (1946) 1 1 ; Lampe, Seat 33; Clark 19; Richardson 357. 88 This was why the 120 and Apollos did not need to receive Christian water-baptism. 83 Cf. C. F . D. Moule, Tbeology 48 (1945) 247.

Conversion-initiation in the Acts of the Apostles

loi

guish the S p i r i t f r o m w a t e r - b a p t i s m . F a i t h reaches o u t t o G o d i n and t h r o u g h w a t e r - b a p t i s m ; G o d reaches o u t t o m e n a n d meets that faith i n a n d t h r o u g h his Spirit. T h u s f a r o n t h e p u r e l y i n d i v i d u a h s t i c level, b u t w e m u s t n o t forget t h e t h i r d p a r t y i n t h e c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n e v e n t - t h e C h r i s t i a n Community. S p e a k i n g i n g e n e r a l i z e d terms, t h e C h u r c h , through its representative, plays a role i n r e g a r d b o t h t o b a p t i s m and to the gift o f the Spirit. O n the o n e b a n d b a p t i s m is also t o b e seen as the rite o f e n t r y into t h e C h r i s t i a n C o m m u n i t y and means by which the Community receives the initiate into its f e l l o w s h i p (2.41; 10.48). O n the other band, the Community can play an i m p o r t a n t role i n the gift a n d reception of the Spirit. L u k e stresses that the Spirit comes directly f r o m G o d ( A c t s 2.4, 3 3 ; 10.44; II. 17), but also notes that o n s o m e occasions t h e Spirit c o m e s 'tbrougb' the action ( w h i c h expressed the f a i t h a n d acceptance) o f m e n already S p i r i t - b a p t i z e d (8.17; 19.6; cf. L u k e 8.45-48). A s L u k e c o u l d n o t c o n c e i v e o f a C h r i s t i a n w i t h o u t t h e Spirit - t h e p o i n t o f A c t s 8 a n d 18.24-19.7 - s o h e c o u l d n o t c o n c e i v e o f a local C h r i s t i a n n o t i n the Company a n d f e l l o w s h i p o f the C h r i s t i a n Community g a t h e r e d there. B y the g i f t o f the Spirit G o d accepted the i n d i v i d u a l i n t o his C b u r c b a n d b a p t i z e d h i m i n t o the B o d y o f Christ (in Pauline terms); b y water-baptism (and sometimes the l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s ) t h e C h r i s t i a n Community accepted the i n d i v i d u a l i n t o t h e C h u r c h . I n a n d b y his w a t e r - b a p t i s m the i n d i v i d u a l c o m m i t t e d h i m s e l f b o t h t o C h r i s t a n d t o his p e o p l e . C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - b a p t i s m , t h e r e f o r e , as L u k e p o r t r a y s it, w a s t h e m e a n s o f e n t r y i n t o t h e C h r i s t i a n C o m m u n i t y , a n d , as the m e a n s o f c o m m i t m e n t t o C h r i s t , resulted i n t h e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e Spirit. I n t h a t m o m e n t G o d , t h e C h u r c h , a n d t h e i n d i v i d u a l w e r e all i n v o l v e d . A s a result it can p r o p e r l y b e said t h a t the Spirit c o m e s n o t o n l y directly from G o d b u t also t h r o u g h the C h u r c h , i n the sense that t h e l o v e , w e l c o m e a n d p r a y e r o f t h e C h u r c h ' s representatives ( h o w e v e r expressed) enables t h e i n d i v i d u a l t h e m o r e f u l l y t o c o m m i t h i m s e l f t o t h e risen C h r i s t a n d h i s cause a n d t h e m o r e readily t o receive his Spirit. T o s u m Up, i f w e are t o u n d e r s t a n d the L u k a n teaching, w h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g tiiat w a t e r - b a p t i s m has a n essential role w i t h i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n , a n d that it is (usually closely) related t o S p i r i t - b a p t i s m t h r o u g h the f a i t h w h i c h it expresses, w e m u s t n e v e r theless a c k n o w l e d g e b o t h that S p i r i t - b a p t i s m a n d w a t e r - b a p t i s m

I02

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

are distinct entities a n d tiiat t h e focus a n d nerve-centre o f Ciiristian c o n v e r s i o n - i n i d a t i o n is t h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit. A t this p o i n t certairdy L u k e w a s n o 'early C a t h o U c ' , a n d t h e a t t e n t i o n w h i c h theologians have d e v o t e d t o water-baptism o n the assump t i o n ( i m p U c i t o r e x p U c i t ) that i t is t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t i n c o n v e r s i o n - i t d t i a d o n a n d that the salvation gifts o f G o d ( i n c l u d i n g the S p i r i t ) are s o m e h o w d e p e n d e n t o n it, is t o b e regretted. L u k e ' s w r i t i n g rather reflects t h e early experience a n d practice o f t h e C h r i s t i a n c o m m u i d t y w h e n the t o u c h s t o n e o f authenticity w a s n o t the still formless p a t t e r n o f ritual b u t t h e S p i r i t u n f e t t e r e d b y rite a n d c e r e m o n y . W e m a y characterize that experience^* a n d practice b y n o t i n g that t h e first q u e s t i o n P a u l a s k e d t h e t w e l v e E p h e s i a n s w a s , ' D i d y o u receive t h e S p i r i t w h e n y o u b e U e v e d ?' Only then d i d h e g o o n t o ask, ' I n t o w h a t w e r e y o u b a p t i z e d ?' H a d the first b e e n a n s w e r e d i n the affirmative, there w o u J d h a v e b e e a no neeä oi the second. P r e i s k e r p u t the p o i n t w e l l w h e n h e w r o t e , ' E a r l y C h r i s t i a n i t y d i d n o t adjust itself i n accordance w i t h a cultic act, b u t i n accordance w i t h t h e act o f G o d r e v e a l e d i n t h e g i v i n g o f t h e

Spirit.'25 84 It goes without saying that in Acts the reception of the Spirit was a very

vivid and 'concrete' experience (2.4; 8.17-19; 10.44-46; 19.6); see P. G. S. Hopwood, The Religious Experience of the Primitive Church (1936). 8s Preisker 304; cf. Schweizer, TWNT V I 4 U ; A . Schlatter, Die Apostel geschichte (1948) 135; and especially Newbigin 95; see also Allen, Spirit 9.

P A R T

T H R E E

X T H E

E A R L Y

P A U L I N E S

A s w e h a v e seen, P e n t e c o s t a ü s m is b u ü t f o u r s q u a r e o n A c t s . S o far as its d o c t r i n e o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m is c o n c e r n e d P a u l n e e d n o t h a v e w r i t t e n a n y t h i n g . I n d e e d P a u l seems t o b e m o r e o f a n embarrassm e n t t h a n a n asset, so that t i m e a n d a g a i n e x p o s i t i o n s o f this d o c t r i n e c o n v e i ü e n t l y i g n o r e h i m , apart f r o m a f e w face-saving references w h i c h are n o t always relevant t o the d o c t r i n e as such. T w o exceptions are u s u a U y I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 a n d E p h . 1 . 1 3 , w h i c h b y m e a n s o f o f t e n r a t h e r superficial exegesis are t a k e n t o c o n f i r m the d o c t r i n e already extracted f r o m A c t s . T h i s m e a n s t h a t w b ü e o u r p r i m a r y task w ü l b e t o e x a m i n e the role o f the Spirit a n d the gift o f t h e Spirit i n c o n v e r s i o n - i r ü t i a t i o n , m o s t o f t h e actual debate w i U be n o t w i t h Pentecostals b u t w i t h sacramentaüsts, w h o , g e n e r a U y s p e a k i n g , h a v e f o v m d i n P a u l a richer, m o r e consistent a n d m o r e satisfying p i c t u r e t h a n t h e o n e p r e s e n t e d b y L u k e . A n i m p o r t a n t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n m u s t b e r e s o l v e d at the ü u t s e t : H o w are w e g o i n g t o set a b o u t d i s c o v e r i n g P a u l ' s m i n d o n this subject? I t w o u l d b e easy t o decide o n a h y p o t h e s i s , a n d t h e n t o b e g m w i t h t h o s e passages w h i c h best s u p p o r t that hjrpothesis. T h e o t h e r , m o r e 'difficult' a n d m o r e ' o b s c u r e ' passages ('difficult' a n d ' o b s c u r e ' so f a r as the h y p o t h e s i s is c o n c e r n e d , o f course) c a n t h e n b e üiterpreted i n the ü g h t o f t h e 'clear' passages. F o r e x a m p l e , o n the q u e s t i o n o f b a p t i s m , b y starting w i t h I C o r . 15.29 it c a n b e argued that Paul's v i e w o f baptism was magical; o r b y giving central emphasis t o I C o r . 1 . 1 4 - 1 7 it can b e a r g u e d that P a u l g a v e no weight whatsoever to baptism; o r b y making R o m . 6 , 1 - 1 1 d e t e r m i n a t i v e f o r P a u l ' s t h e o l o g y o f b a p t i s m a d e e p l y mystical v i e w o f b a p t i s m can b e f o r m u l a t e d . I t is o b v i o u s that t o treat e v i d e n c e i n this w a y is t o p r e j u d g e the issue. W h a t a priori g r o v m d s are there f o r a s s u m m g t h a t a n y o f 103

I04

Baptism in the Hoiy Spirit

these passages is t h e m o s t characteristic o f o r has t h e m a x i m u m significance f o r P a u l ' s t h o u g h t o n the subject ? T h e p o s s i b ü i t y m u s t be b o r n e i n m i n d that these passages stand at t h e extremes a n d n o t at t h e heart o f his v i e w s o n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n ; o r a g a i n , that t h e y are m e r e l y ad hominem a r g u m e n t s a n d d o n o t lead us i n t o t h e centre o f P a u l ' s o w n u n d e r s t a n d i n g . A m o r e serious defect o f t o o m a n y m o d e r n treatments o f b a p t i s m is their failure t o appreciate t h e fact that b a p t i s m is o n l y o n e element i n t h e total c o m p l e x e v e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n . T o focus a t t e n t i o n o n b a p t i s m , a n d t o e x a m i n e o n l y those passages w h i c h h a v e i m m e d i a t e b e a r i n g o n b a p t i s m necessarily distorts t h e t o t a l picture. M o s t s t r i k i n g a n d m o s t questionable is t h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e g i f t o f the S p i r i t is t i m e a n d again s u b o r d i n a t e d t o a n d i n t e r p r e t e d i n t h e l i g h t o f b a p t i s m . S u c h treatments b y their u n b a l a n c e d a p p r o a c b inmiediately cause a q u e s t i o n m a r k t o b e p u t against their conclusions. Since P a u l c a n speak o f b a p t i s m w i t h n o m e n t i o n o f t h e Spirit a n d f a i t h (e.g. R o m . 6.4), o f f a i t h w i t h n o m e n t i o n o f the S p i r i t a n d b a p t i s m (e.g. I C o r . 1 5 . 1 - 2 ) , a n d o f t h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit w i t h n o m e n t i o n o f f a i t h a n d b a p t i s m (e.g. I I C o r . 1 . 2 1 - 2 2 ) , it is n e e d lessly m i s l e a d i n g t o speak o f ' b a p t i s m a l c o n t e x t s ' ( o r o f Spirit- o r faith-contexts f o r that m a t t e r ) . W h a t w e w a n t are c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n c o n t e x t s , w h a t e v e r d e m e n t s are present o r absent. T h e m o s t suitable a p p r o a c b , therefore, w o u l d seem t o b e t o e x a m i n e t h o s e passages w h i c h deal w i t h c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n ( f r o m w h a t e v e r angle) i n a c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r . i A l t h o u g h w e c a n h a v e n o certainty a b o u t t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r o f t h e Pavdine letters, i t s o h a p p e n s that tljie m o s t i m p o r t a n t passages f o r o u r subject are t o b e f o u n d i n t h o s e letters ( a n d parts o f letters) about w h o s e c h r o n o logical sequence there is w i d e a g r e e m e n t . O f course it w o u l d b e a fallacy t o expect that this a p p r o a c h w i l l i m c o v e r a neat d e v d o p m e n t i n P a i d ' s t h o u g h t ; but so l o n g as w e k e e p i n m i n d t h e p r i m e i m p o r t a n c e o f d r c u m s t a n c e s ( b o t h o f w r i t e r and readers) f o r t h e sbape a n d Statement o f a t h e m e , it w o u l d a p p e a r that this a p p r o a c h g i v e s US t h e best c h a n c e o f l a y i n g bare P a u l ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n , a n d o f detecting a n y d e v d o p m e n t s and variations therein. Since questions o f date a n d a u t h o r s h i p d o n o t c o n c e r n us here I w i l l s i m p l y f o l l o w t h e sequence suggested by K ü m m e l in his I I Cor. 15.29 cannot properly be regarded as a conversion-initiation

Tbe Ear/j Paulines

105

Introduction to tbe New Testament ( E T 1966): T h e s s a l o n i a n s , G a l a tians, I a n d I I C o r i n t h i a n s , R o m a n s , Colossians, E p h e s i a n s , Pastorais. W e shah n o t e a n d consider each passage w h i c h bears o n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . I n this w a y w e s h o u l d b e able t o d i s c o v e r w h a t are the elements i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n a n d w h a t are their respective F u n c t i o n s a n d relative i m p o r t a n c e , i n so far as t h e y can b e v i e w e d separately. I Thess. i.j-p;

2. iß

T h e elements i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n o f w h i c h P a u l speaks here a r e : the W o r d p r e a c h e d , the response o f faith, a n d the H o l y Spirit. I t is i m p o r t a n t t o notice that the S p i r i t is active i n b o t h preachers a n d behevers. I t w a s its p r o c l a m a t i o n i n the p o w e r o f the S p i r i t w h i c h g a v e the G o s p e l its effect ( a n d P a t d his confidence), a n d the T h e s s a l o t d a n s ' r e c e p t i o n o f t h e G o s p e l w a s m a r k e d b y their rejoicing i n the H o l y Spirit. P a u l does n o t say h o w o r w h e n t h e y r e c e i v e d the S p i r i t , a l t h o u g h the r e c e p t i o n o f the Spirit seems t o b e closely l i n k e d t o the reception o f the W o r d ; b u t i t w a s certairdy a v e r y v i v i d , p e r h a p s e v e n e m o t i o n a l , experience ( v . 6). I Thess. 4.yf.

H e r e G o d is described as the o n e w h o is the g i v e r o f t h e Spirit.^ implies t h a t P a u l regards t h e S p i r i t as i n s o m e sense possessing a n d t h e possession o f each i n d i v i d u a l C h r i s t i a n a t Thessalordca. H e w h o Uves a n i m p u r e life disregards G o d b y i g n o r i n g the H o l y S p i r i t w h o s e c o m i n g set h i m ev äyiaaiiw. P a u l p r o b a b l y has the c o n t e x t o f E z e k . 37 i n n d n d i n 4.8,3 as w e l l as the eis vfias

passage. I take it tobe an ad hominem argument referring to a practice of wlüch Paul by no means approved. See Beasley-Murray 1 8 5 - 9 2 ; also Schnacken burg 9 5 - 1 0 2 ; Delling, Taufe 4 1 1 . 2 J . E . Frame, Thessalonians (ICC 1912) 1 5 6 ; G. Milligan, St Paul's Epistles to tbe Thessalonians (1908) 52; W. Pfister, Das Leben im Geist nach Paulus (1963) 15 f. This is prefcrable to 'the Holy Spirit which God is giving you every day' (W. Neil, Thessalonians [Moffatt 1950] 84; so Lightfoot, Notes on the Epistles of St Paul [1895] 5 8; Swete 1 7 2 ; L . Morris, Tbe Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians [1959] 128), since Paul elsewhere thinks of the giving of the Spirit as a oncefor-all action at conversion (Rom. 5.5; II Cor. 1.22; 5.5; [II Tim. 1.7]), and since it is almost certainly a reference to Ezek. 37.14 (jcaX Sdato TO rveSna eis iiiSs - s e e c g . J . Grassi, N T J 1 1 [1964-65] 163). Cf.Tivpud/«»o>'(i.io-'ourdeliverer' N E B ) ; and tovkoXoSvtos (2.12). B. Rigauz,Lesipitresaux Tbessaloniciens(1956) prefers to read Uvra instead of 8i8<5«« (514). ' Cf. Grassi, and the more general hypothesis of C. H. Dodd, According to tbe Scriptures (1952).

io6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

actual w o r d s o f E z e k . 37.14 (hence the u n u s u a l eis); that is t o say, h e is t h i n k i n g o f G o d as t h e o n e w h o g i v e s life t o the (spiritually) d e a d b y t h e g i f t o f his S p i r i t - t h e S p i r i t b e i n g t h e b r e a t h o f (spiritual) life (37.8-10, 14). W e n o t e also h o w closely G o d ' s call is l i n k e d w i t h bis g i v i n g o f t h e Spirit. G o d ' s call is effectual* because i t comes i n t h e W o r d o f G o d w h i c h t h e Spirit a p p ü e s p o w e r f u U y t o the conscience a n d heart o f m a n so that h e r e s p o n d s t o t h e call b y receiving t h e W o r d a n d t h e Spirit. II Thess. 2.ißf. H e r e w e h a v e a passing m e n d o n o f t h e w a y i n w h i c h G o d b r i n g s t o present effect his eternal election. I t c a n b e expressed i n o n e o f t w o w a y s : as G o d ' s effectual call t h r o u g h the G o s p e l ; a n d as t h e Spirit's consecration, a n d their belief i n the t r u t h . I n the latter case w e see h i g l d i g h t e d the t w o chief means t o a n d elements i n b e i n g s a v e d : t h e Operation o f t h e Spirit i n setting apart, a n d t h e Opera tion o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l i n b e l i e v i n g t h e t r u t h p r o c l a i m e d i n t h e G o s p e l . T h e r e is n o o r d e r o f salvation here (äyioa/ios irvevfmTos, TrioTis aXtiBeias), Otdy a n o r d e r o f i m p o r t a n c e . W a t e r - b a p t i s m is entirely absent f r o m T h e s s a l o t d a n s . T h e call a n d t h e W o r d , t h e S p i r i t a n d b e h e f are t h e i m p o r t a n t elements i n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n i n w h a t are p r o b a b l y P a u l ' s earUest w r i t i n g s . Braumann thmks that the Statements about the resurrection and about redemption from the coming judgment correspond to the Situa tion and proclamation of baptism (53); but, as w e shall see, baptism in Paul is never associated directly with the thought of resurrection.

Gal.

2.16-21

T h e r e is n o d o u b t that w e h a v e here a c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n p a s sage (2.16), b u t it is n o t a n e x p o s i t i o n o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m . « R a t h e r P a t d is t h i n k i n g o f t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i c h is c o n v e r s i o n . H e recalls w h a t b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n m e a n t i n h i s o w n case (eyw V. 19)8 - i t w a s a n eiqjcrience o f spiritual d e a t h ( t o t h e l a w ) « See K . L . Schmidt, TBNT iii 489; MilUgan 26. » Cf. P. Bonnard, U&pitre de Saint Paul aux Galates (1933) 88f.; R. C. Tannehill, Dying and Rising vitb Christ (1967) 59; contra H. Schlier, Der Brief an die Galater^ (1965) 99-103 (who even tefers iuauaQ» [2.16] to baptism [89f.]); Schnackenburg 62-65 i B . Latsaon, Christus als Vorbild (1962) 93-94; J . D. H. Downing in Stu^ Evangelica II Part i j 5 sf. See also pp. 115,150 bdow. • See H. Lietzmann, Galaterbrief* (HNT 1923) 16; A . Oepke, Der Brief des Paulus an Galater* (1957) 62; cf. E . de W. Burton, Galatians (ICC 1921) 152.

The Early Paulines

107

resulting i n n e w life (centred o n a n d d e t e n n i n e d b y the i n d w e l H n g C h r i s t ) . I t w a s n o t s o m e t h i n g w h i c h h a p p e n e d o b j e c t i v e l y 'outside o f ' P a u l , o p e r a t i n g e x t e m a l l y o n h i m ; i t w a s essentiaUy a subjective experience, a spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n the c o t e o f his p e r s o n a U t y . T h e experience m a y w e U h a v e h a p p e n e d a t , o r better, i n c l u d e d b a p t i s m ; b u t t o speak o f it as s a c r a m e n t a U y m e d i a t e d ( w h a t e v e r that m e a n s ) has n o justification i n the t e x t . ' I f w a t e r - b a p t i s m is n o t m e n t i o n e d neither is the Spirit. Y e t the w o r k o f the S p i r i t is i m p U e d m o r e s t r o n g l y t h a n the rite o f b a p t i s m . F o r o n e t h i n g , z . i p f . is a d e v e l o p m e n t o f the t h e m e o f justification by faith, n o t b y w o r k s ( v . i6) - a t h e m e w h i c h P a u l i m m e d i a t e l y takes Up a g a i n i n t e r m s o f t h e S p i r i t (5.2, 5). F o r a n o t h e r , the U f e w h i c h is ' C h r i s t i n m e ' is the same t h i n g as the life o f the Spirit i n m e ( c f . 5.25). F o r Paul ^o)^ is v e r y m u c h the result o f the Spirit's Operation ( G a l . 3. 1 1 - 1 4 ; 5.25; 6.8; R o m . 8.2, i o ; n C o r . 3 . 3 , 6 ; c f . 5.4f.). T h e thought of

G a l . 2.20 is closely paraUel to that o f R o m . 8.10 w h i c h is an alternative w a y of expressing 8.9 - 'the Spirit of G o d dweUs i n you'. C f . H . N . Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (1953) 106. See pp. 95f., 103.

A n d f o r a n o t h e r , t b e crucifixion m e t a p h o r is t a k e n u p a g a i n i n 5.24 as the c o n c l u s i o n t o the e x h o r t a t i o n : ' W a l k b y the S p i r i t a n d d o n o t g r a t i f y t h e desires o f the flesh' (5.16-24). T h e S p i r i t p r o b a b l y does n o t f e a t u r e h e r e because P a u l wishes t o p u t his p r i m a r y emphasis o n C h r i s t ; » b u t so f a r as t h e Pentecostal is c o n c e r n e d , i t m u s t b e e m p h a s i z e d t h a t the m o m e n t w h e n C h r i s t b e g a n t o *Uve in m e ' caimot b e distinguished f r o m t h e reception o f the Spirit w h o is the life o f ' C h r i s t i n m e ' . A s m i g h t b e e x p e c t e d w h e r e justification is t h e u n d e r l y i n g t h e m e , f a i t h is p r o n a i n e n t as t h e m e a n s b y w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l receives this justification a n d U v e s o u t t h e life o f ' C h r i s t i n m e ' . Gal. ß.i-j,

14

T h e s e verses a r e a c r u s h i n g r e j o i n d c r t o P e n t e c o s t a l ideas a b o u t the r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t . (i) T h e r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t is the b e g i n n i n g o f the C h r i s t i a n ' Contra Schlier, Galater 99 n. 5. Cf. G. S. Duncan, Tbe Epistle to tbe Galatians (Moffatt 1934) 71.

* Duncan 72.

io8

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

life ( w . 2 - 5 ) . evdpxoixai c a n n o t refer t o a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n the m o m e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n ; the reception o f the S p i r i t b y f a i t h is the b e g i i m h i g o f G o d ' s g o o d w o r k w h i c h h e w i l l b r i n g t o c o m p l e t i o n b y the same Spirit ( P h i l . i.6).9 ( ü ) T h e gift o f the Spirit a n d justification are t w o sides o f the o n e coin.io T h e blessing o f A b r a h a m is e q u a t e d w i t h the latter i n w . 8f., a n d w i t h the f o r m e r m v . 14.11 B o t h times the means g i v e n is faith. (üi) T h e p r o m i s e d Spirit is w h a t g i v e s hfe.12 T h e l a w h a d n o p o w e r t o b e s t o w life ( v . 21). L i f e a n d righteousness c o m e b y p r o m i s e a n d faith, a n d the Spirit is the c o n t e n t o f that p r o m i s e i ^ as experienced b y m a n w h e n received b y faith ( w . 14-22). ( i v ) I t f o l l o w s that the g i f t o f the Spirit is w h a t m a k e s us sons o f A b r a h a m , sons o f G o d a n d p u t s us iv Xpiarw. F o r the p r o m i s e t o A b r a h a m has a d o u b l e fulfilment. I t is fulfilled b o t h i n C h r i s t as the p r o m i s e d seed ( v . 16), a n d i n the r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t b y i n d i v i d u a l s ( v . 14). T h e t w o are c o m p l e m e n t a r y : the p r o m i s e is fulfilled i n tbe i n d i v i d u a l w h e n he b e c o m e s iv Xpiorw = w h e n h e receives t h e S p i r i t b y faith. I t is b i r t h Kard m>£Vfj.a w h i c h g i v e s participation i n the c o v e n a n t o f p r o m i s e , a n d m a k e s the i n d i v i d u a l a c h i l d o f p r o m i s e (4.28f.), a s o n a n d a n h e i r a c c o r d i n g t o p r o m i s e (5.18, 29; 4.7).

B e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n is therefore essentiaUy a m a t t e r o f receivi n g the Spirit. A n d the Spirit is received b y the exercise o f the f a i t h w h i c h the message o f C h r i s t stirs u p (i$ oKorjs nUn-fcos - 3.2). T h e m o s t significant t h i n g a b o u t w a t e r - b a p t i s m here is that it is n o t m e n t i o n e d . " F a i t h a l o n e is the critical f a c t o r o n the h i m i a n side i n • Cf. C. H. Pinnock, Tbe Concept of Spirit in tbe Epistles of Paul (University of Manchester Dissertation, 1963) lyaf.; R. A . Cole, Tbe Epistle of Paul to tbe Galatians (1965) 90. Pliil. i.6 is the only other place in the N T where both evafyxofuu and the antithesis mpxofuu . . . imreXdu occur. 10 Cf. Büchsei 428; Oepke, Galater 71. *i The two iwi-clauses do not express distinct, thoughts: the second expounds and explains the first (M.-J. Lagrange, £pitre aux Galates^ [1926] 73; Oepke, Galater 76; Schlier, Galater 140; H. W. Beyer and P. Althaus, Der Brief an die Galater* [ N T D 1962] 27; Ridderbos 128). 1* N E B ; Burton, Galatians 176; Schlier, Galater t^of. See p. 107 above. IS Schlier, Galater i 4 i f . ' " Cf. Bonnard öaf.; K . Stalder, Das Werk des Geistes in der Heiligung bei Paulus (1962) 79f. Flcmington, among others, often calls attention to an aorist tense in such a context, as though that in itself implied baptism (so with reference to 3.2 [62]). Thomton calls iXißtn 'a baptismal aorist' (9); so White 205; cf. A . Wikenhauser, PauJine Mysticism ( E T 1960) 121. But there are more aorist actions in conversion-initiation than baptism, and the one which matters for Paul, here at least, is the reception of the Spirit.

The Early Paulines

109

t h e c o n v e r s i o n c o m p l e x w h i c h here t e v o l v e s r o u n d p r e a c h i n g , f a i t h a n d t h e Spirit. aK(yTf can be used both for a message heard and passed on (Rom. lo.iöf.; I Thess. 2 . 1 3 ) and for the act of hearing (I Cor. 1 2 . 1 7 ) . The latter is the more appropriate sense here (Burton 1 4 7 ; Lagrange 58f.; Schlatter, Erläuterungen ^um Neuen Testament 7 Teil [i928] 6 9 ^ ; Ridderbos 113 n. 3): the emphasis is on the one who hears the message, and marig can hardly be the content o f t h e message; moreover, the contrast with 'works of the law*, the parallel with v. 1 4 , and the KaBcLs in v . 6 ('As Abraham also believed') imply that v v . 2 - 5 are talking about the Galatians' act of faith - the response of those who heard the message. J . K . Parratt, ExpT 79 ( 1 9 6 7 - 6 8 ) suggests that 6 is not God or Christ but a particularly gifted individual who had the ability to bestow the charismatic Spirit - perhaps Paul himself - and that he conveyed the gift by the laying on of hands ( 1 5 2 ) . But 'faith' in this context must be that of the Galatians, and it is very doubtful whether Paul would ever describe anyone other than God or Christ in such terms.

Gal. }.26f. W e n o w m e e t the i m p o r t a n t v e r b ßairrileiv f o r t h e first t i m e . I n V. 27 P a u l explains w h y h e c a n speak o f t h e G a l a t i a n s as b e i n g ev XpioTw 'I-qaov. T h e reason is {yap) that 'as m a n y o f y o u as w e r e b a p t i z e d eis Xpunov h a v e p u t o n Christ*. G a l . 3.27 does describe t h e rite o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m as a ' p u t t i n g o n Christ* o r State that i n b a p t i s m w e p u t o n Christ.i5 I n m y o p i i d o n ßwirrll^eaBax eis Xpiarov is s i m p l y a m e t a p h o r d r a w n f r o m t h e rite o f b a p t i s m t o describe t h e e n t r y o f t h e b e U e v e r i n t o C h r i s t i a n experience - o r , m o r e precisely, t h e e n t r y o f t h e b e U e v e r i n t o t h e spiritual relationship o f t h e C h r i s t i a n w i t h C h r i s t , w h i c h takes place i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . evSvaaaOai Xpiarov is o b v i o u s l y a m e t a p h o r . ^ « I t is d r a w n f r o m 1* Contra e.g. Lagrange 92; Lampe, Seal n a ; Sdmackenburg 6i,io6f., 205. K. Lake, Tbe Earlier Epistles of St Patä (1911) thinks that this verse indicates an ex opere operato view of baptism (385). Beasley-Murray i47f.; cf. Schnackenburg 24. Christ is hardly thought of either as the water of baptism which the baptisand 'puts on' by being immersed (cf. R. T. Stamm, IB 10 [193 5] 5 i8f.; D . MoUat, and Y . B. Trcmel in BNT 73, 192), ot as the tobe which the initiate puts on after his baptism. Flcmington expounds: 'As they robed themselves again, it meant that in tbat very moment they "put on Christ"' (57, my italics). But it is highly imlikcly that the initiate's action in te-robing had güned a formal ceremonial or sacramental significance at this early stage (IJghtfoot, Galatians^" [1890] 2 7 ; H. A . A .

IIO

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

H e b r e w t r a d i t i o n w h e r e the figure o f c h a n g i n g clothes t o represent a n i n w a r d a n d spiritual c h a n g e w a s c o m m o n ( e . g . Isa. 6 1 . 1 0 ; Z e c h . 3 . 3 ^ ) . ! ' A s t h e m i d d l e v o i c e a n d the parallel uses (especially R o m . 1 3 . 1 4 ; C o l . 3 . 1 0 ; E p h . 4.24) indicate, i t signifies a n act o f t h e w i l l a responding t o Christ a n d a commitment t o Christ whereby the h f e a n d character (that is, t h e Spirit) o f Jesus is received (hencef o r t h t o b e manifested i n a n e w w a y o f life), a n d w h e r e b y p a r d c i p a d o n i n t h e Kann) KTIOIS (6.15), i n t h e n e w h u m a n i t y o f C h r i s t is g r a n t e d (3.29). Q u i t e possibly t h e m e t a p h o r w a s suggested b y t h e baptisand's action o f u n c l o t h i n g b e f o r e a n d r e c l o t h i n g after baptism.18 B u t i t n o m o r e refers t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m as such t h a n i t does i n R o m a n s , Colossians a n d E p h e s i a n s . ivSvaaaOai Xpiarov c a n b e r e p e a t e d ; b a p t i s m is n o t - o r w a s P a u l r e q u i r i n g his R o m a n readers t o b e r e b a p t i z e d ? ' T o p u t o n C h r i s t ' is s i m p l y a figuradve usage t o describe m o r e expressively t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a d o n w h i c h m a k e s o n e a C h r i s t i a n . I t neither describes a ritual act, n o r does i t say that a r i m a l act h a d this spiritual effect. Beasley-Murray 147, and O e p k e , Galater 89, are w r o n g t o drive a wedge between the use o f evSvaaadai here and elsewhere i n Paul. T h e action b y which a m a n conmiits himself to Christ, so that he becomes i n Christ and begins to share the family Hkeness, is the same as the action b y w h i c h he renews his commitment to Christ each day and so becomes m o r e U k e Christ. T h e spiritual reaUty o f w h i c h P a u l is t h i n k i n g is p r o b a b l y t h e g i f t o f the Spirit, a n d h e w o u l d p r o b a b l y e q u a t e p u t t i n g o n C h r i s t w i t h receiving t h e S p i r i t o f Christ.^» (i) T h e c o m i n g o f t h e S p i r i t i n terms o f a n e n c l o t h i n g is f o u n d b o t h i n t h e O T a n d i n early C h r i s t i a n t h o u g h t . 20 ( ü ) R e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t is p r o m i n e n t i n t h e Kennedy, St Paul and tbe Mystety Rtligiotis [1913] i88f.; W. L . Knox, St Paul and tbe Cburcb of tbe Gentiles [1939] 138; Schnackenburg 25; Oepke, Galater 89; Delling, Taufe 120). All such interpretations suffer from a pedantic and unimaginative Uteralism. 1' Beasley-Murray 148; see references in Lightfoot 150; Flemington 58.

1« C. F. D. Moule, Worsbip in tbe New Testament (1961) 52; Beasley-Murray 148. 1* Lampe, Seal 61; cf. Barth, Taufe 355-7. Lietzmann 23, and Ridderbos 148 n. 9, suggest that 'to put on Christ* is another expression for XofißAvtiv mw/M vlo$ealas (Rom. 8.i4f.); cf. A . Grail, R B 58 (1951) 508; J . Bligh, Galatians (1969) 325^ so judg. 6.34; I Chron. 12.18; n Chron. 24.20 - the Spirit 'put on* (MSvotv) Gideon, Amasai, Zechariah; Luke 24.49; Herm. Sim. 9.24.2.

The Early Paulines

111

p r e c e d i n g c o n t e x t , a n d i t is tied u p w i t h b o t h sonship a n d inheritance (the t w i n t h e m e s o f this section) i n t h e conclusion (4.6f.) t o the p a r a g r a p h o f w h i c h 3.26f. is a p a r t . (iii) u/^eis Xpiarov o f 3.29 is v e r y similar t o R o m . 8.9: el Se ns Trvevfia Xpiarov OVK e)(ei, oSros OVK eariv airov.^ ( i v ) F o r P a u l , C h r i s t is experienced b y o r as the irveOixa

(cf. 2.20 a n d 4.6 - 'the Spirit o f his Son').22 But if ßairri^eaOai

ivSvaaoOai eis

Xpiarov

is a m e t a p h o r , t h e same is t r u e o f

Xpiarov.

(i) T h e c o r m e c t i o n b e t w e e n v . 27a a n d v . 27b is so close t h a t w e m u s t take the phrases as alternative a n d interchangeable expressions f o r the same r e a h t y :23 t o b e b a p t i z e d i n t o C h r i s t is t o p u t o n C h r i s t . T h e sense is d i s r u p t e d i f w e take o n e as a m e t a p h o r a n d o n e as a hteral description o f a physical act. ( ü ) T h e c o n t e x t r e v o l v e s r o u n d t h e contrast b e t w e e n t h e o l d c o v e n a n t , w h e r e relationship w i t h G o d is t h r o u g h the l a w a n d w h i c h is entered b y a n o u t w a r d , physical rite, a n d t h e n e w c o v e n a n t , w h e r e relationship w i t h G o d is t h r o u g h t h e Spirit o f C h r i s t a n d w h i c h is entered b y t h e a c t o f b e h e v i n g ; t h e contrast, i n fact, b e t w e e n s o n s h i p Karä odpKa a n d s o n s h i p Kard. TTvevixa (4.28f.).

(iii) P a u l m a k e s his contrast b e t w e e n circumcision a n d f a i t h , nof b e t w e e n circumcision a n d b a p t i s m . I f b a p t i s m w a s a n 'effective s y m b o l ' w h i c h a c h i e v e d w h a t d r a i m c i s i o n c o u l d n o t achieve, P a i d c o i d d h a v e m e t his o p p o n e n t s b y p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t i n b a p t i s m all t h a t t h e y h o p e d t o achieve b y circumcision h a d already b e e n a c h i e v e d . B u t P a u l ' s contrast is b e t w e e n circumcision a n d faifh. H e covdd n o t attack o n e material rite as h e does here i f at the same t i m e h e b e H e v e d t h a t a n o t h e r w a s necessary f o r the r e c e p t i o n o f the Spirit.24 T h e C h r i s t i a n does n o t say t o t h e J e w , ' Y o u r rites are ineffective, b u t o u r s are effective.' H e p o i n t s rather t o the cross a n d t h e resurrection, t o f a i t h a n d the Spirit. ( i v ) T h e subject o f the a c t i o n d e n o t e d b y ißairriaOTjre is G o d , as c o m p a r i s o n w i t h I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 a n d I I C o r . 1.21 indicates. I t is G o d w h o effects t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o C h r i s t , a n d h e does i t b y «1 So Schlier, Galater 1 7 5 . 8* See I. Hermann, Kyrios und Pneuma (1961); and pp. 95f., 107 above. «8 L . Ccrfeux, Cbritt in tbe Tbeology «f St Paul ( E T 1959) 336; cf. BeasleyMurray 148, Contrast Barth, Taufe 361. " Cf. Bonnard 89. See J . Bligh, Tbe Hiytbrop Journal 7 (1966) 6 1 ; also Galatians 32jf.; Pinnock 173. Cf. also Dean Alford's waming in Greek Testa ment I I 122: Barth, Dogynatik IVI4 127.

112

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

b a p t i z i n g ev nvevfiari, SO that e n t r y i n t o the n e w relationship (ycMvq KTÜjis - 6.15) is b i r t h Karo, irvevfia (4.29).25 ( v ) W h e r e a s ßairrLieaOai eis ro w o / x o refers p r i m a r i l y t o t h e b a p tismal rite as such (see p p . i i y f . b e l o w ) , ßam-iCeadai eis i n e v i t a b l y carries a local o r i n c o r p o r a t i v e significance. ßanrl^eiv eis Xpiarov is a figurative w a y o f describing the act o f G o d w h i c h p u t s a m a n ' i n Christ'. On each of the three occasions which are decisive for its meaning the context requires ßa-miUoOai eis to bear the sense of 'baptized into' baptized so as to become a member of the Second Adam (Rom. 6.3), of the Body of Christ (I Cor. 1 2 . 1 3 ) , of Christ the sole seed of Abraham (Gal. 3 . 2 7 ) . I Cor. 10 can hardly be determinative for the other oc currences, since it occurs in a midrashic allegory. Paul can speak of ßaiTTi^eaßat eis TOV M
Phenomenon 3 8 , 7 5 ) . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t o b e b a p t i z e d i n t o C h r i s t is the same t h i n g as p u t t i n g o n C h r i s t . T h e s e phrases b e l o n g t o t h a t w h o l e series o f m e t a p h o r s o n w h o s e v a r i e t y a n d richness P a u l d r a w s i n a n a t t e m p t t o describe as f u l l y as w o r d s p e r m i t t h e w o n d e r a n d miracle o f b e c o m i n g a Christian, a son o f G o d and offspring o f A b r a h a m . 2 6 N o n e o f t h e m is t o b e t a k e n hterally. T o focus a t t e n t i o n o n the b a p t i s m a l rite is therefore t o m a k e d i e n d s t a k e o f the c h ü d w h o r e m e m b c r s the Illustration b u t pays t o o üttle h e e d t o the m o r a l d r a w n f r o m it. T h e rite p r o v i d e s a n d ües b e h i n d the m e t a p h o r , b u t w e c a t m o t say f r o m G a i . 3.26f. that i t effects w h a t i t t h u s figuratively describes. T h i s does n o t m e a n t h a t b a p t i s m w a s a 'bare s y m b o l ' . T h e fact t h a t P a u l can d r a w a m e t a p h o r f r o m i t indicates tiiat t h erituala c t p l a y e d a n i m p o r t a n t role i n the c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n o f t h o s e addressed, a n d that its s y m b o ü s m s p o k e t o t h e m i n the m o m e n t o f their i i ü t i a t i o n e n a b l i n g t h e m t o y i e l d t h e m o r e fvdly t o t h e i n c o r p o r a t i n g action o f G o d . I t also clearly plays a role c o m p l e « Cf. Unger, BibJat. 101 (1944) 2 4 4 - 7 ; J - B- Walvoord, The Holy Spirit^ (1958) 1 3 9 . 8 « The others are death and crucifixion (2.i9f.), redemption from slavery (4- 3. 5 > 9.) and coming of age (4.2), birth (4.2 7-29) and creation (6.15). In fact, Aa/^v«v TÖ m-eC/to is the oaüLj description of conversion wfiich is not meta phorical.

The Earlj Paulines

113

m e n t a r y t o the m o r e h n p o r t a n t faith. ^7 T h e balance o f emphasis i m p h e s that b a p t i s m is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as the expression o f faith, as a n 'act o f faith',28 a n d that o n l y as such is it v a ü d . B u t so far as this verse goes it is n o t possible t o say that b a p t i s m plays a m o r e i m p o r t a n t role t h a n t h e p u t t i n g o n o f clothes after b a p t i s m , f o r b o t h actions equally p r o v i d e m e t a p h o r s f o r the o n e e v e n t o f enter i n g i n t o spiritual u t d o n w i t h O u r i s t . Gal. 4.6f.

Strange t h o u g h it may seem, G a l . 4.6, the o t d y verse i n P a u l w h i c h p r o v i d e s s t r o n g s u p p o r t f o r Pentecostal t h e o l o g y , has o n l y recentiy been pressed i n t o service b y the neo-Pentecostals,^» t h o u g h those w h o h o l d a h i g h v i e w o f C o n f i r m a t i o n h a v e b e e n q m c k to seize u p o n it. W h a t does P a u l m e a n w h e n h e says, 'Because y o u are sons, G o d has sent the Spirit o f his S o n i n t o y o u r hearts . . .' ? T h e Sugges tion that 4.6 refers either t o the sense o f assurance w h i c h G o d gives n o t at b u t after conversion,30 o r t o a second stage o f iiütia t i o n = C o n f i r m a t i o n , 3 i m u s t b e rejected i n v i e w o f w h a t P a i d has said i n G a l . 3 a n d o f t h e paraUel i n R o m . 8 , 1 4 - 1 6 . A s w e h a v e seen, t h e g i f t o f the Spirit is f o r P a u l the same as justification b y f a i t h ; it is that w h i c h b r i n g s the i n d i v i d u a l i n t o t h e c o v e n a n t o f p r o m i s e , that w h i c h begins his C h r i s t i a n life (3.3, 14). I t is clear that this reception o f the Spirit w a s a c o n s d o u s experience (3.2, 4); a n d P a u l gives n o indication that h e is t h i n k i n g i n 4.6 o f a different c o m i n g o f the Spirit t h a n that referred t o i n c h . 3. R o m . 8.15f. certaüdy c a n n o t b e u n d e r s t o o d o f a later c o m i n g o f the Spirit after c o n v e r s i o n , f o r t h e n 8.14 w o u l d b e c o m e unintelügible.32 I t is possible that o « here has t h e d e d a r a t i v e sense, ' t h a t ' , o r ' t o 87 In Gal. 3 faith is mentioned 15 times, ßairrlitoOai once. Paul might have said, 'You are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus; for as many as have believed into Christ have put on Christ.' Cf. Lambert 15 0-2; Kennedy 250. 88 Lagrange 92. 8» J . Baker, Baptized in One Spirit (1967) i3f.; Harper, Fire 16. But Riggs calls it 'a piain Statement that the Holy Spirit comes into one's heart at conversion' (43)! »"Hermann 9jf.; Burton, Galatians 222; Parratt, EQ 41 (1969) 165. Cf. Schlatter 104; Duncan 130; Bouttier, Cbristianity according to Paul ( E T 1966) 51 n. 24; Barth, Taufe 325. 329; F . Prat, Tbeologf of St Paul ( E T 1945) 11 134 n. r. 81 Thomton iif., following Mason 45; Chase 87f.; Neunheuscr 49f. 88 Contra Hermatm 95f.

114

Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit

p t o v e that',83 b u t e v e n i f w e take o n = 'because' t b e m o r e plausible Interpretation is t b a t 4.6 refers t o tbe gift o f t b e Spirit at c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n w h e r e b y t h e objective fact o f s o n s h i p a c c o m p ü s h e d b y the Coming {i^aniareiXev) o f t h e S o n b e c o m e s t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l possession i n his subjective experience. (i) T h e sequence o f t h o u g h t i n this section is logical, n o t c h r o n o logical. I t is s i m d a r t o the logical sequence, ' i f . . . t h e n ' ( v . 7). A s it is the logical consequence o f b e i n g a s o n that y o u s h o u l d b e a n heir too, so i t is t h e logical consequence o f b e i n g a s o n that y o u s h o u l d possess t h e Spirit. Büchsei points out that Paul's use o f iari (instead o f ijre) indicates that he is not thinking o f a chronological order o f events (428 n. 5). I f J . D . Hester, Paul's Concept of Inheritance (1968) is correct i n thinking that Paul has i n m i n d the R o m a n f o r m o f adoption w i t h the Spirit sent to act as witness i n the adoption 'transaction' (60-62), it w o u l d mean that the gift o f the Spirit was part o f that 'transaction'. ( ü ) T h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n faUs t o g r a p p l e w i t h t h e c o n f u s i o n o f Paul's m e t a p h o r s . I n 4 . 1 - 7 P a u l c o m b i n e s t w o m e t a p h o r s w h i c h d o n o t really cohere. I n t h e o n e h e t h i n k s o f Christians as heirs b e f o r e their c o n v e r s i o n - o t d y , heirs u n d e r age a n d n o b e t t e r t h a n slaves; i n fact, actually slaves t o the elemental spirits o f t h e u i d v e r s e . I n t h e o t h e r h e takes u p the slavery m e t a p h o r : b e f o r e their c o n v e r s i o n t h e y w e r e slaves; C h r i s t w a s sent t o r e d e e m t h e m so t h a t t h e y m i g h t receive a d o p t i o n t o the Status o f s o n s h i p . I n t h e first, b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n is seen i n t e r m s o f t h e heir coming of age; i n t h e s e c o n d , i t is seen i n terms o f the slave b e c o m i n g a n adopted son. B u t there is n o t a clean b r e a k b e t w e e n t h e t w o m e t a p h o r s . F o t t h e idea o f slavery is identified w i t h t h a t o f m i n o r i t y ( w . 3f.). T h u s t h e t i m e o f a d o p t i o n is t h e same as t h e t i m e w b e n t h e s o n a n d h e i r c o m e s o f age. T h i s e n t r y u p o n t h e f ü l l rights a n d e x perience o f sonship is effected b y the s e n d i n g o f the S p i r i t o f t h e Son. (iii) W h a t vmites t h e t w o m e t a p h o r s is their application t o t h e stages o f salvation-history. T h a t w h i c h is m i r r o r e d i n t h e first m e t a p h o r a n d i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n v e r s i o n is t h e single b r e a k Lietzmann 25; Lagtange lojf; Lampe, JTi' 6 (1955) 113; Moule, Idiom Book 147; J . Jeremias, The Prayers of Jesus (ET 1967) 65 n. 74; A. Duprcz, Recberchesde ScienceRe/igieuse ^z{1964)421-31 ;NEB; JB;TEV;cf. Schweizer, TWNT

VI 424 n. 624.

Tbe Eariy Paulines

115

between the covenant o f law a n d works, and the covenant o f p r o m i s e a n d faith. B u t the actual b r e a k b e t w e e n t h e t w o c o v e n a n t s w a s i n t w o stages - t h e s e n d i n g o f the S o n (e|a7re'<7T«Ä€v - v . 4) at the i n c a m a t i o n , a n d the s e n d i n g o f t h e S p i r i t o f the S o n (e^aneareiXev - V. 6) at Pentecost.** A n d this is m i r r o r e d i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n v e r s i o n , i n t h e t w i n aspects o f a d o p t i o n a n d t h e Spirit w h i c h h e receives at that t i m e . G a l . 4 . 1 - 7 is therefore a n o t h e r c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n c o n t e x t , i n w h i c h the m e t a p h o r s u s e d b u i l d u p t o the c u l m i n a t i n g t h o u g h t o f the reception o f the Spirit, a n d the correlative concepts o f sonship a n d inheritance.

Gal. J.24f. T h i s passage differs f r o m 2.20 i n t w o w a y s : t h e crucifixion o f the flesh is self-mflicted, a n d the life is referred t o the S p i r i t ( ' i f the Spirit is t h e source o f o u r life' - N E B ) . T o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n is t o enter u p o n a life d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e S p i r i t , a n d so d e t e r m i n e d f r o m its first m o m e n t s . I f b a p t i s m is i n m i n d , ^ ^ t h e t h o u g h t is o f the i n d i v i d u a l ' s act o f c o m m i t m e n t b y m e a n s o f b a p t i s m . B u t a g a i n the Spirit is m o r e p r o m i n e n t , as v . 25, the p r e c e d i n g c o n t e x t , a n d the parallel w i t h R o m . S's s h o w s . C l e a r l y f o r P a v d a n d his c o n verts there w a s n o n e e d t o speak o f b a p t i s m as s u c h ; i t w a s m u c h m o r e simple t o speak directiy o f their spiritual experience a n d conmiitment. T o s u m Up o u r s t u d y o f P a u l s o far, w e can affirm w i t h confi dence that i n h i s early w r i t i n g , t h e correlatives o f t h e S p i r i t a n d f a i t h w e r e t h e d o m i n a n t themes i n his t h o u g h t a b o u t c o n v e r s i o n iidtiation. T h e r e is n o talk o f a s u b s e q u e n t c o m i n g o f t h e S p i r i t , a n d ßaTTTi^eiv is u s e d o n c e as a m e t a p h o r f o r t h a t e n t r y i n t o u n i o n w i t h C h r i s t w h i c h w e o t h e r w i s e call c o n v e r s i o n . S4 Cf. R. B. Hoyle, Tbe Holy Sptrit in St Paul (1927) 81.

Sdilier, Galater 263; Lietzmann 24; Oepke, Galater 143; Beyer-Althaus 49; Downing 5 $3-6; E . Kamiah, Die Form der katalogiscben Paränese im Neuen

Testament (1964) 16. S« Ol ToO XpunoS: cf. Rom. 8.9; iaravpatam rljn oropico: cf. Rom. 8.13.

XI T H E

C O R I N T H I A N

L E T T E R S

T H E Corinthian correspondence provides us w i t h m a n y c o n v e r s i o n - i i d d a t i o n passages, i n c l u d i n g a n u m b e r o f k e y texts f o r b o t h Pentecostal a n d sacramentahst. ICor. 1.4-^

H e r e c o n v e r s i o n is t h o u g h t o f i n t e r m s o f a g i f t o f grace, a n e n r i c h i n g w i t h spiritual gifts, a c o n f i r m i n g o f the message, a b e i n g called i n t o the f e l l o w s h i p o f Jesus C h r i s t . A l l these terms are closely related t o t h e Spirit. (i) xdpis a n d m>€Vfm o v e r l a p i n m e a i d n g w h e r e each has the sense o f a concrete gift o f G o d t o m a n . I n several places x^pis c o i d d b e replaced b y mevua w i t h o u t sigidficant alteration o f sense ;i a n d i n oliier passages x^pis is best seen as t h e ' c l o t h m g ' w i t h w h i c h t h e S p i r i t c o m e s , as that w h e r e b y h e matdfests h i m s e l f i n charismata ( R o m . 1 . 5 ; 1 5 . 1 5 ; I C o r . 3 . 1 0 ; E p h . 3.2, 8; 4.7). T h e latter l i n k - u p is m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e here smce w . 5-7, w h i c h e x p a n d a n d e x p l a i n V. 4, speak o f charismata i n general a n d o f t w o i n particular - Ädyos and

yvwais.

( ü ) T h e S p k i t ia his c o m i n g i n t o t h e h v e s o f t h e C o r i n t h i a n s e n r i c h e d t h e m w i t h the spiritual gifts o f Äoyo? a n d o f yvcoais b y w h i c h h e m a n i f e s t e d himself, s o t h a t e v e r since t h e y h a d h a d n o lack o f charismata i n their assembUes ( I C o r . 1 2 . 8 ; 14), (iü) ißeßauödri refers t o t h e assurance w h i c h t h e S p i r i t b r i n g s ( c f . I I C o r . 1 . 2 1 ) , b o t h w i t h i n (cf. R o m . 8.15) a n d a s a result o f t h e charismata (cf. I T h e s s . i.5f.; I C o r . 2.4f.). ( i v ) T h e l i n k w i t h eKXqO-qre (see p . 106 a b o v e ) a n d Kowmv'uj. (cf. I I C o r . 1 3 . 1 4 ; P h i l . 2 . 1 ) also suggests t h a t t h e u n d e r l y i n g 1 See Bultmann, Tbeology I 290, also 15 6, 3 3 5; N. P. Williams, Tbe Grace of God (1930) iiof.; Hoyle 39; cf. J . K. Mozley, Tbe Gospel Sacraments (1933) 54.

116

The Corinthian Letters

117

thought m V. 9 is still centred on the Spirit; the gift of grace (v. 4 ) is the effectual call of G o d by means o f the Gospel and the Spirit. Thus again w e see that in conversion-iidtiation w h e r e neither the Spirit n o r baptism^ is mentioned, it is the thought of the Spirit which ües nearest to the surface.

ICor.

i.io-iy

This passage is a battlefield w h e r e b o t h sacramentaüsts and their opponents claim the v i c t o r y , v . 1 3 being the stronghold of the one, and v . 1 7 that of the other. W h a t does it say about baptism } (i) ßanriCeiv eis TO ovofia clearly means 'to baptize into aUegiance t o the person named' and indicates that baptism in the name of Christ is the formal act wherein and whereby the baptisand gives himself t o Christ. F o r one thmg, eydi Se IlavXov (v. 1 2 ) obviously means the same as eyct) ißaTn-laö-qv eis T6 OVOIM riavXov (v. 13).3 Since the former describes the attitude of disciple t o leader, the latter, t o be a rebuke, must describe the action by which allegiance is given.* F o r another, the regulär use of the phrase eis ro ovofia in contemporary transactions had the meaning, 'to the account of'.s Since Corinth was a city whose very üfe depended on trade and commerce this meaning of the phrase must inevitably have coloured the Corinthians' understanding o f w . 1 3 - 1 5 . Beasley-Murray and Schnackenburg follow Bietenhard in deriving the phrase from i'Iem, but when they end up with the sense 'so as to belong to' (in discipleship) it rather indicates that i'Iem ('for the sake of') has been influenced by eis ro Svofia (denoting a transference in ownership). Delling suggests that the phrase * E . Dinkler in Neotestamentiea et Patristica (O. Cullmann Festschrift 1962) 173-91, thinks that I Cor. i.6f. refers implicidy to the event of baptism (177 n. 2). Schlier, TDNT I 603, similarly speaks ofthe 'bapdsmal tcrminology' of I Cor. 1.8; but Schlier looks at all such passages through baptismal spectocles. ä See RSV, N E B , T E V , and 3.23. Deissmann quotes the parallel where Kataapos means 'belonging to the Emperor' (Light From tbe Ancient Bast [ E T 1927] 377). See also Lietzmann and Kümmel, An die Korintber* (HNT 1949) 7-8; H. Conzelmann, Der erste Brief an die Korintber (1969) 50. * Cf. M. Gogucl, The Primitive Cburcb ( E T 1964) 299. 8 See Moulton and M i l l i ^ ; Oepke, TDNT I 539^; Prat II 465; E.-B. AUo, Premihe £pltre aux Corintbiens' (1956) 1 1 ; E . Lohse, Ketygma und Dogma I I (1965) 313 and n. 17; and particularly HcitmüUer, Im Namen Jesu (1903) ioo£f.; cf. A . D . Nock, Early Gentile Cbristianity and its Hellenistic Backgyotmi (1964) 125; E . Best, One Body in Christ (1955) 66; Moule. Worsbip 53; A . M. Huntcr, Paul and bis Predecessors* (1961) 69; C. K. Barrett, Tbe First Epistle to tbe Corinthians (1968) 47.

118

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

really means that the baptisand appropriates f o r himself the saving event o f the cross (Jaufe 115-18). B u t this is based o n a n overstrained I n terpretation o f V . 13 (see below), and falls t o d o justice b o t h t o the phrase itself and t o the context. W e n e e d n o t press t h e actual p h r a s e : w h a t is i m p o r t a n t is the idea it c o n v e y s - o f a c h a n g e i n o w n e r s h i p . B a p t i s m is such a trans a c t i o n , w h e r e t h e b a p t i s a n d f o r m a l l y gives h i m s e l f i n t o t h e h a n d s o f a n e w M a s t e r . P a u l therefore is challenging t h e C o r i n t h i a n s t o r e m e m b e r that their b a p t i s m w a s p e r f o r m e d i n the n a m e o f C h r i s t , a n d that t h e r e b y t h e y are all c o m m i t t e d t o C h r i s t a n d n o t t o parties o r apostles. H e is t b e source a n d centre o f their f e l l o w s h i p ( v . 9) a n d his n a m e is t h e b a n n e r u n d e r w h i c h h e seeks t o unite t h e m ( v . 10). ( ü ) T h e fact that P a u l fastens o n t h e cross a n d b a p t i s m (as w e l l as t h e i m i t y o f C h r i s t ) as sticks w i t h w h i c h t o b e l a b o u r the C o r i n thians f o r their divisiveness a n d false partisanship, s h o w s that t h e cross a n d b a p t i s m are i n s o m e senses d e t e r m i n a t i v e o f t h e C h r i s tians' i m i t e d l y b e l o n g i n g t o C h r i s t . A s such t h e y are o b v i o u s l y related t o each o t h e r . B a p t i s m w e h a v e seen t o b e t h e m e a n s o f c o m n d t m e n t t o C h r i s t ' s l o r d s h i p so as t o b e l o n g t o h i m . J e s u s ' d e a t h o n t h e cross, o n t h e o t h e r l ü m d , w a s t h e purchase price (6.20; 7.23; cf. G a l . 3 . 1 3 ; 4.5).« T h e n e w o w n e r takes possession o f his p r o p e r t y b y s e n d i n g bis S p i r i t t o d w e l l t h e r e m (6.19). T h e S p i r i t comes w h e n the individual commits himself to Christ's lordship i n baptism. T o deduce f r o m v . 13 that Christian iiütiation gives the iidtiate a share i n the salvation event o f Calvary reads t o o m u c h f r o m the text and involves the m o r e p r o f o u n d ideas o f R o m . 6 ; and the different formulae 08. eis T6 ovofM as opposed t o ß. e « ) forbids us t o g o t o o far along this üne. W h U e the association o f the t w o questions i n v . 13 is suggestive, any link between the event o f the cross and that o f baptism must b c based o n firmer g r o i m d than 1.13 affords (contra C u l l m a t m , Baptism 15; H . - W . Bartsch, Ei>Ti 8 [1948-49] 91; R o b i n s o n , SttuHes 170; D e l l i n g , Taufe 115). (iü) W h i l e b a p t i s m c a n p l a y a n i m p o r t a n t role i n i n i t i a t i o n , v . 17 m a k e s i t clear that w c m u s t n o t g i v e i t t o o m u c h i m p o r t a n c e . F o r there t h e tosk o f b a p t i z i n g is contrasted w i t h p r e a c h i n g . N o w f o r P a u l i t is t h e p r e a c h i n g o f the g o s p e l w h i c h is t h e v i t a l m e a n s t o » H. D. Wendland, Die Briefe an die Korintber^o (NTD

1964) 48.

Tbe Corinthian Letters

119

salvation. 7 A n d since h e b a p t i z e d o t d y a h a n d f u l , i t m u s t h a v e b e e n t h r o u g h his p r e a c h i n g ( a n d their response t o i t ) that h e b e c a m e t h e C o r i n t h i a n s ' father (4.15) a n d t h e y his w o r k n i a n s h i p a n d the seal o f his apostleship ( 9 . 1 - 2 ) , a n d i t m u s t h a v e b e e n b y t h e g o s p e l that h e w o n m e n a n d s o u g h t t o save m e n (9.19, 2 2 ; R o m . 1.16). F o r F a i d , the v i t a l e l e m e n t , o n t h e h u m a n level, i n w i n i d n g m e n t o C h r i s t is t h e presentation o f t h e gospel. I n short, v . 1 7 sets w a t e r b a p t i s m i n antithesis w i t h that t h r o u g h w h i c h the Spirit w o r k s t o effect salvation. 8 I t has s o m e t h n e s b e e n a r g u e d that i t is n o t b a p t i s m w h i c h P a u l regards as a n d n o r m a t t e r b u t the q u e s t i o n o f w h o p e r f o r m s i t , since the essential t h i n g i n b a p t i s m is G o d ' s w o r k a n d n o t the role o f the b a p t i z e r . » B u t w h i l e there is s o m e t r u t h i n this - i n that the divisions i n C o r i n t h w e r e based o n w h o ( o r w h o s e associates) h a d b a p t i z e d w h o m - it m u s t n o t b e o v e r l o o k e d that this seems t o h a v e i n v o l v e d a false u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f b a p t i s m itself (cf. 15 .z^).^° T h i s is w h y P a u l contrasts n o t t h e ' p e r f o r m e r s ' o f b a p t i s m ( G o d o r m a n ) , b u t the w o r k o f b a p t i z i n g itself ( w h i c h h a d b e e n d i v i s i v e s i m p l y because i t w a s so m u c h the w o r k o f m a n ) , w i t h the w o r k o f p r e a c b i n g ( w h i c h is t h e i n s t m m e n t o f G o d ) . A n d t h a t is w h y P a u l q u i c k l y p o i n t s o u t that h e has n o interest i n b a p t i z i n g - his task is t o p r e a c h t h e g o s p e l ; b a p t i s m is n o t a t t h e heart o f his s a l v a t i o n strategy - the k e y w o r k there is g i v e n t o t h e g o s p e l . S o , just as t h e abuse o f c i r c u m c i s i o n l e d h i m t o dispense w i t h c i r c m n c i s i o n altogether a n d t o exalt faith, i n a similar w a y , w h e n b a p t i s m w a s a b u s e d a n d its role m i s u n d e r s t o o d , h e t u m e d a w a y f r o m i t a n d p u t its f u n c t i o n i n p r o p e r perspective b y h i g h U g h t i n g t h a t w h i c h really m a t t e r e d i n t h e m i i d s t e r i n g a n d r e c e i v i n g o f salvation. T h e g o s p e l b r o u g h t salvation to C o r i n t h , b u t baptism b r o u g h t division. T h e r e f o r e P a u l thaidts G o d t h a t h e d i d n o t b a p t i z e , a n d directs a t t e n t i o n a w a y f r o m that w h i c h h a d divided t h e m towards that w h i c h h a d b r o u g h t t h e m all t o t h e o n e C h r i s t , p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t so f a r as his 7 Rom. 1.16; 10.17; 1 5 . 1 8 ; I C o r . 1.21; 2.4f.; 4 . 1 J ; i4.24f.; 15.if.; II Cor.

2.14-17; 4.4-6; Gal. 3.2, 5; Eph. 5.26; 6.17; Col. i.jf.; I Thess. 1.5; 2.13; n Thess. 3.1; (LI Tim. 2.9). See also Friedrich. TDNT

II 730-3.

«Cf. Hoylci52f. * Lietzmaim-Kümmel 168; Wendland 15 f.; Lampe, Seal 5 4; Schnackenburg 169; DeUing, Taufe x i 8 . " Cf. J . MofiEatt, Tbe Firsf Epistle ofPaul to tbe Corintbiaiu (Moffintt 1938) 1 1 - 1 2 ; Lictzmann-Ktimmel 8; J . Höring, Tbe First Epistle of St Paut to tbe Corintbians ( E T 1962) 7; Lohse 5i4f., Ktlmmel, lutroduttion 201; Conzelmann

49f.

120

Baptism in tlie Holy Spirit

m i s s i o n w a s c o n c e r n e d b a p t i s m b a d n o indispensable role a n d o n l y the g o s p e l m a t t e r e d . i i I n b r i e f , f o r P a u l as f o r L u k e , b a p t i s m appears t o b e a f u n c t i o n o f faith, m a n ' s means o f response t o t h e g o s p e l o f G o d . B a p t i s m as an act d% TÖ ÖVO\M 'Irjaov Xpiarov is m a n ' s w a y o f accepting G o d ' s offet o f salvation a n d o f ' c U n c h i n g t h e b a r g a i n ' w i t h G o d . W h e n w e l o o k f o r G o d ' s means o f effecting salvation w e f i n d t h e m i n the S p i r i t a n d the gospel. W e can therefore say that h e is the vehicle o f G o d ' s s a v i n g grace as b a p t i s m is the vehicle o f m a n ' s s a v i n g faith. I C o r . I.I7 may not m e r e l y b e w a v e d aside and the role it gives to b a p t i s m s i m p l y b e d i s c o u n t e d i n f a v o u r o f those passages which are a m e n a b l e t o a h i g h d o c t r i n e of b a p t i s m . N o d o u b t t h e verse comes at o n e e x t r e m e o f P a u l ' s d o c t r i n e o f b a p t i s m , a n d his State m e n t o f it here has b e e n d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e d r c u m s t a n c e s h e is addressing, b u t , nevertheless, i t b e l o n g s t o that doctrine, a n d unless w e g i v e i t d u e w d g h t w e shaU fall t o reach the r i g h t i m d e r s t a n d i n g o f Paul's total v i e w o f baptism. ICor. 2.12

T h i s sentence has b e e n q u o t e d i n s u p p o r t o f t h e v i e w that there is a g i v i n g a n d r e c d v i n g o f t h e S p i r i t p r i o r t o f a i t h i n o r d e r t o i m p a r t faith.12 B u t i n I C o r . 2,10-3.4 the basic contrast is b e t w e e n the C h r i s t i a n (rrvevimriKos i n v i r t u e o f his r e c e p t i o n o f the Spirit) a n d the n o n - C h r i s t i a n (tlmxiKos because h e is ' d e v o i d o f t h e S p i r i t ' - J u d e 19). T h e r e is a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n Christians w h o are wevfjuirntoi i n t h e sense o f ' m a t u r e ' a n d Christians w h o are y e t aapKiKoi - b u t there is n o t h o u g h t o f a n o n - C h r i s t i a n b e i n g wevfiariKos (as h a v i n g r e c d v e d t h e Spirit w h o t h e n proceeds t o i m p a r t faith). Parratt also dtes I I Thess, 2,13; I I C o r . 4,13; G a l , 5,5; I C o r . 12,3; A c t s 6.5; 11,24. B u t I I Thess. 2.13 gives the chief dements i n conversion in order o f importance, n o t i n order o r stages o f salvation. O n I C o r . 12.3 see p, 151, T h e other references are n o t r d e v a n t . T h e fact remains that the ordy reception o f the Spirit w h i c h the N T talks about is the gift o f the Spirit t o the m a n w h o believes (iriorevaas), the gift w h i c h makes h i m a Christian. See'p, 94 above. ICor. 6.11

F o r m o s t c o m m e n t a t o r s this is ' a b a p t i s m a l s a y i n g ' b y w h i c h 11 Cf. W, Marxsen in Apophortta (E, Haenchen Festschrift 1964) 173. " Parratt, Seal 67,

The Corinthian hetters

izi

m a n y u n d e r s t a n d t h a t b a p t i s m is the k e y t o its interpretation. B u t i n fact P a u l is n o t t a l k i n g a b o u t b a p t i s m a t all - h e speaks r a t h e r o f the great spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f c o n v e r s i o n w h i c h t u m e d the C o r i n t h i a n s ' h v e s inside o u t a n d m a d e i m m o r a l a n d i m p u r e m e n i n t o saints, cleansed a n d justified b y the a u t h o r i t y a n d p o w e r o f G o d . W e m a y n o t assume that w h e n Christians i n the N T a r e recalled t o the b e g i n n i n g o f their C h r i s t i a n h v e s the reference is therefore t o their b a p t i s m . C o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n w a s a m u c h richer a n d f u U e r experience t h a n the r i m a l act, a n d s i m p l y t o refer all aorists w h i c h o c c u r i n such contexts t o ' b a p t i s m ' is q u i t e u n j u s t i fied. C o n v e r t s k n e w that s o m e t h i n g h a d h a p p e n e d t o t h e m , n o t as a d e d u c t i o n f r o m a c e r e m o n y p e r f o r m e d ' a c c o r d i n g t o the b o o k ' , b u t i m m e d i a t e l y i n t h e i r consciousness o f the Spirit, o f his cleans i n g , t r a n s f o r m i n g p o w e r . I n this t o t a l e v e n t b a p t i s m h a d a p a r t , b u t d i d n o t p l a y the k e y role. T o start b y a s k i n g the q u e s t i o n , ' W h a t does this passage teach a b o u t b a p t i s m ? ' is therefore t o l e a d o f f o n the w r o n g f o o t . (i) äneXovaaxjBe is clearly t o b e u n d e r s t o o d o f spiritual cleansing rather t h a n o f t h e w a s h i n g o f the b o d y w i t h b a p t i s m a l w a t e r . i » T h e decisive factor here is t h e c o n t e x t . T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f aTreXovaaaBe c a i m o t b e d i v o r c e d f r o m the p r e c e d i n g üst o f v i c e s : these are w h a t h a v e b e e n w a s h e d a w a y ; a n d these are m o r a l a n d spiritual m a t t e r s . W h a t e v e r washes t h e m a w a y is a cleansing o f t h e heart a n d c o n science (cf. M a r k y . i i f . ; A c t s 1 5 . 9 ; H e b . 9 . 1 4 ) . dmXovoaxjde, ü k e riytdadr)T€ a n d «StKawuöijTe, therefore deals p r i m a r i l y w i t h m a t t e r s o f the heart a n d spiritual relationships a n d does n o t h a v e its first reference t o b a p t i s m , " a l t h o u g h i t m a y b e i m p H e d that w a t e r b a p t i s m w a s t h e occasion w h e n this cleansing t o o k place. ( ü ) T h e o t h e r phrase w h i c h suggests t h e rite o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m is ev T<3 6v6fM.Ti TOV Kvplov 'Ir} T^ ovofian therefore is t h a t the n a m e is a n e x p r e s s i o n o f the p o w e r a n d a u t h o r i t y o f t h e p e r s o n w h o bears it. T o a c t ' i n the n a m e ' o f s o m e o n e is t o exercise his a u t h o r i t y a n d p o w e r as his agent.i5 T b c s a m e is t m e i n P a i d ' s use o f the phrase ( I C o r . 13 Contra Flcmington 56; Pfister 19; D . E . H. Whiteley, Tbe Tbeo/ogy ofSt Paul (1964) 177. Cf. p. 98. " Cf. Asait and Gingrich; Barrett 141; Schnackenburg 3.

1« See Bietenhard 270, 276f.

122

Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit

5.4; E p h . 5.20; P h i l . 2 . 1 0 ; I I T h e s s . 3.6). B u t i n I C o r . 6.11 there are t w o significant features. F i r s t l y , i t is t h e o n l y t i m e that P a u l uses it w i t h passive v e r b s , w h e r e G o d is d e a r l y t h e subject. T h e t h o u g h t is t h e n n o t s o m u c h o f man e x e r d s i n g J e s u s ' a u t h o r i t y , o r o f m a n c o m i n g t o G o d b y Jesus, b u t rather o f God c o m i n g t o man b y Jesus, b y v i r t u e o f his p o s i t i o n a n d p o w e r . S e c o n d l y , P a u l a l w a y s uses t h e phrase w i t h Kvpios ( m d u d i n g P h i l . 2 . i o f . , w h e r e ' t h e n a m e ' is Kvpios). S o h e r e , P a u l uses the n a m e w h i c h w a s g i v e n t o Jesus a t his exaltation as a result o f h i s obedience t o d e a t h . H e n c e the t h o u g h t i n I C o r . 6.11 is that G o d acts t o cleanse, sanct i f y a n d justify b y the p o w e r o f Jesus, crucified, raised a n d exalted, b y the v i r t u e o f that d e a t h , resurrection a n d exaltation, a n d b y t h e a u t h o r i t y t h e r e b y w o n o v e r sin, d e a t h a n d the w o r l d l y p o w e r s (cf. J o h n 14.26; 16.23'»Acts 4 . 1 0 ; 10.43 > I J o h n 2.12). I t f o l l o w s t h e r e f o r e , t h a t w h a t P a u l is really t h i n k i n g o f i n his use o f the phrase €vr&6v6iw.ri . . . i s n o t t h e r i t e o f b a p t i s m , b u t the w o r k o f G o d e x e r d s i n g t h e a u t h o r i t y a n d p o w e r w h i c h Jesus g a i n e d b y h i s v i c t o r y o n the cross o v e r t h e sin that h a d so defiled the C o r i n t h i a n s . (iü) T h e final phrase, iv irvev/ian TOV öeoü •qp.iöv, s h o u l d p r o b a b l y b e translated ' i n d i e S p i r i t o f o u r G o d ' . T h e S p i r i t is t h e n seen as t h e a g e n t a n d e x e c u t o r o f G o d ' s a c t i o n : h e acts i n ( t h e person o f ) o r t h r o u g h ( N E B ) the Spirit, exerdsing the authority o f t h e L o r d Jesus C h r i s t t o d e a n s e , sanctify a n d justify. I t is t h e S p i r i t w h o effects these things.^« W h e t h e r h e does s o i n c o n j u n c tion w i t h w a t e r - b a p t i s m is n o t i n P a u l ' s m i n d a t this p o i n t . P a i d does n o t l o o k t h r o u g h w a t e r - b a p t i s m t o speak o f t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w r o u g h t i n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n . H e l o o k s directiy at t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n itself. A l l three v e r b s refer, o f c o u r s e , t o t h e o n e e v e n t ( o f c o n v e r s i o n initiation) a n d are a l l q u a U f i e d b y t h e t w o A^-phrases.i' T h e amXowraaOe iv rip irvtvftari t h e t e f o r e Speaks m o r c o r less directiy o f the b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit^* w h i c h effects t h e d c a n s i n g o f the heart ( A c t s 15.9) as w e l l as i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t h e B o d y o f C h r i s t Q. C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 ) . W c scc also t h a t 'sanctification' is a n irdtial w o r k o f t h e S p i r i t a t c o n v e r s i o n , w h e n h c sets a m a n apart t o ü v e f o r G o d (cf. n T h e s s . 2.i3f.). T h a t justification also takes place i n t h e S p i r i t is ^* Cf. Schnackenbutg j , 29; Conzelmann 130 n. 46. 1' Contra Chase yyf.; C. A. A. Scott, Cbristianity accorJii^ to St Paid (1927) 120; F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on tbe First Epistle to tbe Corintbians (1953)

141. Cf. Braumann 37.

The Corinthian hetters

123

i m p o r t a n t , since it is such a p r o m i n e n t t h e m e m P a u l ' s letters.i» B u t it m e r e l y c o n f i r m s w h a t w e f o u n d i n G a l . 5 . 1 - 1 4 . T h e s e facts k n o c k t h e Pentecostals' case on t h e h e a d . T h e h n k between the Spirit a n d justification is v e r y strong: e.g., in Paul is almost certainly to be confined i n its sense t o these t w o meanings; see G a l . 3.1-5, 14; 5 . 5 ; II Cor. 3.8f.; R o m . 8.9f.; cf. R o m . 6.13-20 w i t h 8, and R o m . 6.17 w i t h II Thess. 2.i3f.; also I T i m . 3.16; T i t . 3.6f. W i t h I Cor. 6.11 cf. R o m . 14.17.

Swped

W e s h o u l d n o t f o r g e t that f a i t h is i m p ü e d i n t h e m i d d l e a n d in t h e inclusion o f eSiKaiwBtjTe.'^^ S o here o n c e again w e h a v e t i e d t o g e t h e r t h e three elements o f c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n w h i c h w e f o u n d i n A c t s . T h e difference is that in A c t s L u k e gives all three p r o m i n e n c e b u t distinguishes t h e m v e r y clearly f r o m o n e a n o t h e r ; w h e r e a s in his letters P a u l does n o t b o t h e r t o distinguish t h e m b u t p u t s all t h e emphasis o n t h e spiritual trans f o r m a t i o n w h i c h G o d effects t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t by the a u t h o r i t y o f the L o r d Jesus C h r i s t . aTreXovaaoBe,^^

ICor.

6.14-20

T h i s is n o t really a c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n c o n t e x t , b u t it speaks directiy of t h e State a n d t h e relationship i n t o w h i c h t h e believer enters w h e n he b e c o m e s a C h r i s t i a n . I n particular, Pentecostals should note: (i) V e r s e s 15 and 1 9 are o b v i o u s l y parallel a n d say t h e same t h i n g : t o be a t e m p l e of the H o l y S p i r i t is to be a m e m b e r of C h r i s t . A s i n 1 2 . 1 5 the r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t is w h a t constitutes a n i n d i v i d u a l a m e m b e r of C h r i s t . (ii) 6 . 1 7 is especially n o t e w o r t h y , for h e r e P a u l speaks o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n as e q u i v a l e n t , o n t b e spiritual p l a n e , to m a r r i a g e o r ^0 There are no really adequate reasonsfortaking S tKauSoi in a sense difiletent from Paul's normal usage (Beasley-Murray 165; Barrett 142; Conzelmann 129; contra Arndt and Gingridi; Bultmatm, Theology I 136). 8» Lightfoot, Notes 215; A . Robertson and A . Plummer, I CoriutbiaHs* (ICC 1914) 119; Beasley-Murray 164, 166; Barrett i4if.; Lambert 156; Kennedy 252-3; Prat n 251. But since occurrences of the passive are exceedingly rare (Liddell and Scott, Moulton and Milligan, Arndt and Gingrich give no examples; Lampe, PatristitLexieo», gives only one, and that from the fourth Century A O ) it suggests that the middle can setre fortihepassive. Tbe sense is simply, 'to let or allow oneself be . . .' (Blass-Debtunnet-Funk 314, J17). M Beasley-Murray 164,166; Schrenk, TDNT II 216.

124

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

physical u n i o n o n t h e physical plane.22 C o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n unites the i n d i v i d u a l personally t o C h r i s t i n such a close a n d ü i t i m a t e way, that i n the resulting relationship o f u n i o n t h e y are o n e Spirit - n o t t w o spirits, the behever's a n d Christ's - just as i n m a r r i a g e the resulting u n i o n is o n e flesh. S o close is t h e u n i o n o f the C h r i s tian w i t h his L o r d that h e shares the Spirit o f C h r i s t , h e has the Spirit o f Christ. A s w i t h physical u n i o n , there results 'a n e w creation that has its life o n l y in their union'.^s 6 . 1 7 therefore s h o w s beyond dispute that the i n d w e l l i n g Spirit is inseparable from u n i o n with Christ,24 and that the gift of the Spirit is what effects this union. (iü) T h e cormection o f t h o u g h t b e t w e e n w . i 9 f . indicates that Christ's purchase of the i n d i v i d u a l (the purchase price b e i n g h i s death) is m a d e effective b y the Spirit. T h e Spirit is the Steward w h o comes o n b e h a l f o f t h e L o r d Jesus t o t a k e possession o f t h e p r o p e r t y p u r c h a s e d o n the cross; it is the Spirit w h o appües the salvation a n d r e d e m p t i o n w o n b y Jesus i n his d e a t h a n d resurrect i o n . T h i s is w h a t i t means t o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n - t o receive G o d ' s Spirit a n d thus c o m e u n d e r Christ's l o r d s h i p . ICor.

lo.i-f

T h i s is u s u a U y t a k e n as a w a m i n g against false s a c r a m e n t a ü s m : t h e Israeütes h a d sacraments as w e have,^« a n d y e t t h e y d i d n o t p r e serve t h e m f r o m d e s t m c t i o n ; so let u s b e w a r e . B u t this reaUy misses t h e p o i n t : P a u l is n o t saying that t h e Israeütes h a d sacram e n t s ; n o r is h e saying that i t is possible t o p a r t a k e o f the C h r i s t i a n sacrament a n d y e t b e d e s t r o y e d . W h a t h e is saying is that t h e Israeütes h a d m i g h t y e3q)eriences o f r e d e m p t i o n a n d o f G o d ' s grace, a n d y e t f e U i n t o i d o l a t r y a n d sin a n d w e r e d e s t r o y e d . T h e s e great r e d e m p t i v e acts o f grace p o i n t t o a n d are a n a U e g o r y o f t h e experience o f r e d e m p t i o n a n d grace i n t h e C h r i s t i a n era a n d i n C h r i s t , a n d t h e y w a r n us that there is always t h e p o s s i b i U t y o f those w h o h a v e experienced that r e d e m p t i o n a n d grace falling similarly 8» Union with Christ 'is the eschatological fixlfilmcnt of Gen. 2.24' (N. A . Dahl, BNTE 439). 88 Filson. on Matt. i9.4ff.; cf. L. Cerfaux, Tbe Cbristian in tbe Tbeologf of St Paul (ET 1967) 297. 8* A . Schlatter, Paulus der Bote Jesifi (1962) 205. See also Percy, cited in Lietzmann-Kümmel 175. 8» So Schweitzer 2of.; Mo£Fatt 129; Wendland 70 (though see 73); Best, Body 72; W. E . Moore, NTS 10 (1963-64) 5 1 1 ; Barrett, 221-3. The great majority of commentators refer 10.1-5 direcdy to the Chtisdan sacraments.

TAe Corinthian Letters

125

i n t o sin a n d b e i n g rejected b y Cbrist.2« T b a t is t o say, t h e w h o l e passage is a n Illustration (iwot - v . 6) i n a n e x h o r t a t i o n t o disciphne a n d perseverence based o n (ydp - v . i ) 9.24-27.2' T h e k e y t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g this passage is t o realize that P a u l is u s i n g t h e events o f the E x o d u s a n d t h e wilderness w a n d e r i n g s as a n allegory o f Christian experience. (i) T h e R o c k w a s C h r i s t . H e is n o t t a l k i n g a b o u t C h r i s t ' s p r e existence here.^s N o r is h e saying that C h r i s t was the material r o c k o r w a s i n t h e r o c k , o r p r o v i d e d t h e IsraeUtes w i t h w a t e r . ^ » H e is s i m p l y saying that C h r i s t is t h e source o f our spiritual sustenance. T h e e q u i v a l e n t i n the wilderness w a n d e r i n g s w a s the R o c k . H e n c e , t o Interpret t h e a U e g o r y h e gives u s t h e e q u a t i o n : t h e r o c k = Christ. T h a t he says ' T h e rock was (ijv) Christ', and n o t 'is (iariv) Christ' (cf. G a l . 4.25; I I C o r . 3.17) is not significant, since he makes n o attempt to extend the figures o f manna, rock, etc. into his o w n time, as he does w i t h the figures o f H a g a r and the veil i n G a l . 4.25 and I I C o r . 3.14. ( ü ) TTveviiariKov ßpüiM/iröfia. P a u l is n o t s a y m g that the IsraeUtes p a r t o o k o f spiritual sustenance, n o r t h a t t h e m a i m a a n d w a t e r w e r e a n y m o r e t h a n m a i m a a n d w a t e r . H e is s i m p l y u s i n g t h e m a i m a a n d w a t e r , t h e v e r y real sustenance w h i c h t h e IsraeUtes received f r o m G o d , as a n i U u s t r a t i o n o f the spiritual sustenance Christians receive f r o m C h r i s t , their U v i n g H e a d . T h e inunediate reference o f the aUegory is not t o the elements o f the L o r d ' s Supper, f o r then the equation w o u l d have been d r a w n between the ßp&ijui and the TTO/WI o n the one b a n d , and the b o d y and b l o o d o f Christ o n the other. B u t i n v . 4 Christ is equated not w i t h the spiritual f o o d (cf. I2.i2f.), rather w i t h the sourte o f the spiritual drink. (iü) ißairrtaavro eis rov Motvafjv. A g a i n , P a u l is n o t s a y i n g that t h e Israeütes w e r e r c a U y bapti2cd, f a r less t h a t t h e y w e r e b a p t i z e d «» "The real point of connection lay in the act of grace on God's part* (C. T. Craig, IB 10 [1953] 108). " See Beasley-Murray 181-3; also J . C. Hutd, Tie Oriffn of I Corinthians (1965) 131-42. «« M. M. Bourke, StuMorum Paulinortm Congressus Intemationalit Catbolieus

1961 (1965) 1 3 7 J - 5 ; contra H ^ g 85; Lietzmann-Kttmmel 45; Wendland 70; Allo 231; Braumann 20; Barrett 223; Conzelmann 196. *» Contra H. J . Schocps, PaidfßT 1961) 153; cf. Robertson-Plummer 201; Mofiatt 130.

126

Baptism in tbe Holy Spirit

i n t o M o s e s o r i n t o a relation w i t h M o s e s ^ " o r a l o y a l t y t o M o s e s . ^ H e is rather thinlcing o f t h e Christian's b a p t i s m i n t o C h r i s t a n d u s i n g t h e E x o d u s as a n i U u s t r a t i o n o f the Christian's i n c o r p o r a t i o n m t o Christ.32 T h e rationale b e h i n d this sort o f C h r i s t i a n 'midrash'33 is t h a t O T events a n d sayings are v i e w e d f r o m t h e Standpoint a n d i n t h e h g h t o f t h e r e v e l a t i o n b r o u g h t a n d t h e r e d e m p t i o n effected b y C h r i s t . T h e techidque is also iUustrated i n G a l . 5.8; 4 . 2 1 - 3 1 ; I C o r . 9.8-10; I I C o r . 3 . 7 - 1 8 . G a l . 3.8: A b r a h a m d i d n o t i n fact hear t h e g o s p e l itself. T h e w o r d s h e h e a r d c a n o n l y be called ' g o s p e l ' w h e n seen i n t h e U g h t o f C h r i s t ; t h e y d r a w their sigiüficance as g o s p e l f r o m Jesus a n d his r e d e m p t i v e acts. S o w i t h Isaac a n d I s h m a e l i n G a l . 4: t h e m e a n i n g P a u l sees i n their births is entirely d r a w n f r o m N T categories - /COTO nvev/ia a n d Kard adpKa. L i k e w i s e t h e v c d o f M o s e s referred t o i n I I C o r . 3 h a d n o n e o f t h e significance w h i c h P a u l there sees i n i t f o r t h e o l d d i s p e n s a t i o n ; its entire significance ües i n t h e n e w dispensation (it is t h e same v e U - 3.14). Paxd m i g h t w e U h a v e said o f these passages w h a t h e says o f t h e M o s a i c l a w r e g a r d i n g o x e n : i t w a s n o t w r i t t e n f o r t h e sake o f t h e o x e n , b u t f o r Ours; i t w a s n o t r e a U y s p e a k i n g a b o u t o x e n , b u t a b o u t m i n isters o f t h e g o s p e l ( I C o r . 9.8-10). S o i n G a l , 4 h e is n o t r e a U y t a l k i n g a b o u t Isaac a n d I s h m a e l as s u c h , b u t a b o u t b i r t h KOTO irvevua a n d b i r t h Kard aapKa. I n I I C o r . 3 h e is n o t reaUy t a l k i n g a b o u t t h e v e ü o f M o s e s , b u t a b o u t t h e v e i l o v e r Israel's heart. S o i n I C o r . 1 0 t h e R e d Sea crossing a n d t h e wilderness e x periences are o n l y 'sacraments' because t h e y are seen i n t h e U g h t o f a n d d r a w their sigrdficance as 'sacraments' f r o m t h e spiritual »0 Contra Delling, Tauft 126. '1 Contra Moffittt 129. This would have been expressed by efe -nJ & o / w t ToC MaüaiiDs (see pp. 1 lyf.). '8Cf. Beasley-Murray 185; H&ing 86; Lietzmann-Künunel 45; Barrett 221; Marsh 79f.; A . George in B N T 18; Tannehill 23f. ßait. tU has its füll sense (contra Schnackenburg 22f.; Delling, Taufe 112 n. 405); see p. 112 above. Both Moses and the Rock = Christ in the allegory; but that does not mean that the Iiraelittt were baptized into Christ (contra Best, Body 72). One may not Interpret the allegory so literally. Nor may we speak of two bs^tisms here, one in Spirit (cloud) prior to one in water (contra Dix, Laying on of Hands 9; J . Brooke, Light on tbe Baptism of tbe Holy Spirit [n.d.] 20), or of baptism in sea (Christian baptism) and baptism in cloud (Confirmation - before baptism I) (contra Lowther Qarke i j n. 13). The doud above and the sea on either side together constitute the IsraeUtes' 'baptism' (see Lietzmann-Kttmmel 44, tSo; Schnackenburg 92f.). 3» W. D. Davies. Paul and Rabbinie Judaism* (1953) l o j ; Wendland 69,

Tbe Corinthian Lgtters

izj

realities o f the n e w age, the Q i r i s t i a n eta (hence t h e y are w r i t t e n f o r our i n s t r u c t i o n , w h o U v e i n eschatological d a y s ) . I n these verses P a u l is n o t really t a l k i n g a b o u t m a n n a a n d w a t e r , b u t a b o u t t h e spiritual n o u r i s h m e n t w h i c h Christ g i v e s Q i r i s t i a n s ; h e is n o t reaUy t a l k i n g a b o u t a ' b a p t i s m ' i n the R e d Sea t o M o s e s , b u t o f b a p t i s m i n the Spirit i n t o Christ.^* F o r the IsraeUtes these events w e r e n o t sacraments; t h e y w e r e the events o f d e U v e r a n c e t u k e d a n d simple. B u t w e can r e g a r d t h e m as 'sacraments', i n the same w a y as w e can r e g a r d the IsraeUtes as ' o u r fathers' ( v . i ) , because their concrete experience o f (Uterai, physical) r e d e m p t i o n is a n allegory o f our concrete experience o f (spiritual) r e d e m p t i o n . I n the same w a y , our Uterai, physical I m m e r s i o n a n d eating o f b r e a d a n d w i n e are sacraments because t h e y p o i n t t o o u r r e d e m p t i o n i n C h r i s t . I n s h o r t , P a u l is n o t addressing t h o s e w h o think t h e y are Christians because t h e y h a v e p a r t i d p a t e d i n the sacraments, b u t those w h o are Christians ( w h o h a v e b e e n b a p t i z e d i n t o C h r i s t a n d receive spiritual n o u r i s h m e n t f r o m C h r i s t ) , a n d h e is w a r n i n g t h e m t h a t they m a y f a U . H e is contesting n o t s o m u c h a false sacram e n t a U s m as f a ü u r e t o persevere a n d eadaic.^ A s elsewhere, P a u l t h i n k s first a n d f o r e m o s t o f the r e d e m p t i o n effected b y the Spirit w h e n h e b r i n g s t h e b e U e v e r i n t o i m i o n w i t h the greater M o s e s i n his greater E x o d u s . O f this r e d e m p t i o n b o t h the R e d Sea crossing a n d w a t e r - b a p t i s m are 'sacraments'. T h e y are n o t t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h it, n o r d o t h e y effect it. B u t t h e y are s u p e r b aUegories o f it. ICor. 1 2 . 1 }

A s the o n e passage i n P a i d w h i c h speaks c x p U d t l y o f b a p t i s m i n the Spirit, I C o r . 12.13 is c r u d a l f o r t h e Pentecostal. V a r i o u s a t t e m p t s h a v e b e e n m a d e t o b r i n g this verse i n t o ü n e w i t h his theology. (i) P a u l is here s p e a k i n g n d t h e r o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m n o r o f b a p t i s m i n the Spirit, b u t o f a t h i r d b a p t i s m - b a p t i s m hy the S p i r i t , w h i d i is a n o t h e r n a m e f o r c o n v e r s i o n . ^ ' T h i s is chiefly based o n the R S V ^ Paul may have mentioned the doud first because he is thinking of the whole as baptism in the Spirit, «ince according to Ex. 13.21 -,0^ the Lord was in the doud (cf. Lietzmaim-Kummei 181; Wcndland 71; Delling, lat^e 112 n. 405); Conzelmann 196. See p. 30 n. 29 above. s» lo.i-i 3 continues the waming and exhortation which b^an with rfiyifn - keep running - 9.24. Cf. the similar exhortation in Gal. j.7. s« Riggt j8; D . J . du Plessis, Tbe Spirit Bode Me Go (1963) 70; Lindsay 6; and see Bruner 40. The neo-Poitecostals have for the most part abandoned this interpretation.

128

Baptism in the Hoiy Spirit

translation, b u t t b e a r g u m e n t tbat ev bas i n s t r u m e n t a l force is s u p p o r t e d b y m a n y scbolars.s' H o w e v e r , t b e interpretation is a l m o s t certainly t o b e rejected. I n t b e N T eV w i t b ßanTi^eiv n e v e r designates t h e o n e w h o p e r f o r m s t h e b a p t i s m ; o n t h e c o n t r a r y , i t always indicates t h e element i n w h i c h t h e b a p t i s a n d is i m m e r s e d ( o r w i t h w h i c h h e is d e l u g e d ) - except, o f course, w h e n i t is p a r t o f a fuller phrase H k e eV rfj eprjiuü o r ev T S I ovonan. A n d i n each o f the six o t h e r passages w h i c h speak o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m ( M a t t . 5 . 1 1 ; M a r k 1.8; L u k e 3 . 1 6 ; J o h n 1 . 3 3 ; A c t s 1 . 5 ; 1 1 . 1 6 ) t h e Spirit is t h e element used i n the Messiab's b a p t i s m i n contrast t o the w a t e r u s e d in J o h n ' s baptism. ( ü ) A m o r e subtle a r g u m e n t is t o g i v e eis t h e force o f ' i n ' , ' f o r (the sake o f ) ' , o r ' w i t h a v i e w to'.^s B u t w h i l e L u k e o f t e n uses eis instead o f iv i n a local sense, t h e c o n f u s i o n is rare i n P a u l , so that w e can always assume that k i P a u l it has t h e basic sense o f 'motion t o w a r d s o r i n t o ' s o m e goal.s» I n this case t h e goal is t h e o n e b o d y , a n d t h e effect o f b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit is i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t b e ' B o d y , o r a l t e m a t i v e l y v m i o n w i t h C h r i s t (so G a l . 3.27; R o m . 6.3f.). P a u l is t a l k i n g a b o u t t h e Operation a n d effect o f Spirit b a p t i s m , n o t the place o f its P e r f o r m a n c e . I n n o case c a n ßairrl^eiv eis bear t h e sense o f ' t o b a p t i z e (as already) i n ' . « » N o r c a n w e take eis = ' f o r ' here. T h e object o f ek is a State n o t a n a c t i o n (as i n M a t t . 10.10), a n d after a v e r b ö f m o t i o n like ßairrLt,eiv, eis can otdy h a v e the sense o f m o v e m e n t t o w a r d s so as t o be in. T h e r e is n o real parallel there fore w i t h M a t t . 10.10 a n d I C o r . 1 6 . 1 . E r v i n , 44-47, recognizes the force o f the eis, and admits that Paul's Statement cannot accommodate even an impUcit (Pentecostal) distinc»' E.g. Kennedy 239 f.; Oepke, TDNT I 539: Moffatt 186; Cullmann, Baptism 30; Schnackenburg 28f.; Cerfaux, Christian 302; T E V . Those who take iy = 'in' include Robertson-Pliunmer 272; Lietzmaim-Kümmel 63; Höring 129; J . J . Meuzelaar, Der Leib des Messias (1961) 90; Delling, Taufe 119; Bieder 120; Barrett 288; N E B ; J B ; and the neo-Pentecostals Baker 7f,; Harper, Fire 8; Ervin 42f. S8 W. F. P. Burton, My Personal Experience of Receiving the Holy Spirit (n.d.); K. Southworth, Tbe Pentecostal I No. 5 (1965) 8-9; Prince, Baptism 8; also Jordan 53-55; Baker 18-20; Harper, Fire 8f., uf.; cf. Barth, Taufe 352. Passages referred to for comparison are Matt. 3 . 1 1 ; 10.10; Acts 2.38; Rom. 6.4; I Cor. 16.1; Gal. 3.27. 8» See Turner, Grammar III 255. *" It is the sense of 'baptized (as already) in* fot which Prince is striving. Hc has obviously forgotten Mark 1.9. Hc and Baker likewise misundcrstand Matt. 3.11 and the significance of N T baptism as the Rubicon step of commit tal without which fidth and rqjcntance were dead. See pp. i4f., 96f. above. On Rom. 6.4 see p. 141 below.

The Corinthian hetters

129

tion between conversion and Spirit-baptism (contra Harper, Power 44f.; Baker 1 5 ; cf. B. Allen 8f.). In an attempt to safeguard his Pentecostal doctrine he is forced to argue that Paul's use of the phrase is quite dif ferent in meaning from that of the Gospels and Acts - an argument which undermines rather than Supports that doctrine. In short, once the initiatory and incorporative sigrdficance o f the metaphor is grasped, the Pentecostal arguments faU t o the ground. F o r Paul, t o become a Christian and t o become a member o f the B o d y o f Christ are synonymous. Thus, unless r e course is had t o semantic sleight-of-band w i t h iv o r et?, there is n o alternative t o the conclusion that the baptism in the Spirit is w h a t made the Corinthians members o f the B o d y o f Christ, that is, Christians.'*! O n the other front, the most populär v i e w o f I Cor. 1 2 . 1 3 is that Paul is describing Christian water-baptism which conveys the Spirit and which incorporates the baptisand into the B o d y o f Christ.42 But ßanriluv in itself does n o t specify »^fl/^r-baptism. If it invariably signified Lmmersion in water, even in its metaphorical usage, we would have contradiction in sense in Mark 1 0 . 3 8 ; Luke 12.50; Acts 1.5; I Cor. 10.2 and here, and tautology in John 1.26, 3 1 . J . Schneider's rendering o f I Cor. 12.13 as, 'In one Spirit were w e all (by means of baptism) baptized into one body' (Baptism and Church in the New Testament [ET 1957] 35) betrays his awareness that the verse can not bc presented as a straightforward reference to baptism as it Stands, without the addition of some such phrase as he employs. Pavd is thinking o f baptism in the Spirit; h e is n o t speaking about water at all.*8 A n d t o say that Paul did n o t distingvdsh o u t w a r d rite and spiritual reaüty^* completely ignores the fact that such a distinction Hes a t the heart o f bibHcal piety f r o m the prophets o n w a r d s , « a distinction o f which Paul was v e r y w e l l aware (Rom. Cf. Moffatt 186; Flemington 37; Best, Body 6^.; Beasley-Murray 171; Schnackenburg 27; Kuss 139. « Bultmann, Ti6i;o/o^I 138,335; Schlatter, P<»«/«x 346; Höring 130; BeasleyMvwray 169, 273; Schnackenburg 126; Käsemann 1 1 3 ; Clark 23; Hill 268; cf. J . R e i l i n g , ^ 19 (1961-62) 343^ Surprisingly the neo-Pentecostal Christen son also refers v. 13a to water-baptism (40). *» Kittel 45; Wendland 97; Barth, Taufe 322, 328; Best,Bo^ 73; Etvin 42. See also p. 18 above. ** Beasley-Murray 168; see also his Baptism Today and Tomerro» 56. «» 0«^ke, TDNTl 340; A . W. Argyle, ExpT 68 (1956-57) 196-9. See also pp. i3f. above. Wc can identify the two only if wc say with Thomton that the Spirit acts upon and through the water of baptism (16).

130

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

2.28f.). I t is their experience o f the S p i r i t ( n o t o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m ) w h i c h p r o v i d e s t h e j u m p i n g - o f f p o i n t f o r P a u l ' s appeal t o t h e C o r i n t h i a n s f o r a r i g h t attitude t o w a r d s t h e exercise o f spiritual gifts. I t is their experience o f the one S p i r i t ( n o t w a t e r - b a p t i s m ) w h i c h is the basis o f their unity.*^ P a u l m u s t h a v e b e e n f a m i h a r w i t h t h e idea o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . T h e t r a d i t i o n is c o m m o n t o a U f o u r G o s p e l s a n d p r o m i n e n t i n the t r a d i t i o n o f P e n t e c o s t . R o m . 5.5 (e'jf/ce'xuTat - the ' P e n t e c o s t - w o r d ' ) a n d T i t u s 5 . 5 - 6 (efe^eev), i f P a u l i n e , s t r o n g l y suggest that P a u l w a s f a m i h a r w i t h this t r a d i t i o n ; I C o r . 6 . I I ( a n d p r o b a b l y 10.2) i m p l y t h o u g h t o f b a p t i s m i n t h e S p i r i t ; a n d there are absolutely n o g r o u n d s f o r d e n y i n g that this is w h a t he is t a l k i n g a b o u t h e r e . * ' T h i s b e i n g s o , it is v e r y m u c h t o the p o i n t t o r e m e m b e r that i n the six o t h e r e x p h c i t references t o S p i r i t - b a p t i s m t h e contrast is always m a d e w i t h the rite o f the B a p t i s t . P a u l h i m s e l f does n o t repeat the antithesis b u t speaks o n l y o f the S p i r i t - b a p t i s m w h i c h G o d o r C h r i s t administers. L a m p e argues that 'Pauline t h o u g h t affords n o g r o u n d f o r t h e m o d e r n theories w h i c h seem t o effect a Separation i n the one action and t o distinguish a "Spirit-baptism" and a "water-baptism", n o t as the i n w a r d and o u t w a r d parts o f the one sacrament, b u t as independent entities' {Seal 57). B u t w h a t is the 'one action'? T h e ' m o d e r n theories' are as old as J o h n the Baptist! T h e fact is that f o r P a u l j3flwrTi{«v has o n l y t w o m e a n i n g s , o n e Uterai a n d the o t h e r m e t a p h o r i c a l : i t describes either the water-rite p u r e a n d simple ( I C o r . 1 . 1 5 - 1 7 ) o r t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i c h p u t s t h e b e U e v e r ' i n C h r i s t ' , a n d w h i c h is t h e eflfect o f r e c e i v i n g the g i f t o f the S p i r i t (hence " b a p t i s m i n t h e S p i r i t ' ) . T h e m e t a p h o r is d r a w n f r o m t h e rite, just as i t w a s i n t h e Baptist's ( a n d L u k e ' s ) talk o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m a n d i n Jesus* talk o f a b a p t i s m o f d e a t h . B u t neither h e r e n o r there does t h e m e t a p h o r i n c l u d e t h e ritual act w i t h i n itself. I n u s i n g the m e t a p h o r P a u l is n e v e r c o n c e r n e d w i t h the relation b e t w e e n w a t e r - b a p t i s m a n d t h e g i f t o f t h e S p i r i t : h e does n o t say h o w close o r h o w distinct t h e y are. O i d y i n R o m . 6.4 a n d C o l . 2.i2.is t h e rite e x p U d t i y related t o t h e r e a ü t y . T h a t P a u l is s p e a k i n g o f spiritual rraütics a n d spiritual relation ships i n m e t a p h o r i c a l l a n g u a g e is c o n f i r m e d by 1 2 . 1 3 c , w h e r e TTOTifeiv also refers s i m p l y t o the C o r i n t h i a n s ' experience o f t h e S p i r i t i n c o n v e r s i o n (aorist) - not t o b a p t i s m , t h e L o r d ' s S u p p e r , « Cf. Marsh 15a.

«' Cf. Beaslej-Muttay 203.

The Corinthian Letters

151

o r c o n f i r m a t i o n , as m o s t c o m m e n t a t o r s seem t o think.48 Trorijetv has t w o c o m m o n m e a n i n g s : t o g i v e t o d r i n k , a n d t o w a t e r o r irrigate. P a u l k n o w s b o t h m e a t d n g s ( I C o r . 3.2, 6-8), a n d h e r e h e uses i t i n t h e s e c o n d sense. (i) In bibhcal Greek die passive occurs only three times, and on the other two occasions the land is the subject (Gen. 1 3 . 1 0 ; Ezek. 32.6). (ii) nori^eiv is used with irvevua on oidy one other occasion in bibhcal Greek (Isa. 29.10), and this is the only time that irori^eiv is used to translate näsak; but näsak never has any other sense than 'to pour out'. (iii) In populär Greek irorl^eiv as a common agricultural term was its most frequent use (Moulton and Milligan). The use of an agricultural metaphor may seem crude to us, but it would not ring so harshly then. He has already used the same metaphor in I Cor. 3.6-8, and he may draw in another agricultural metaphor in Rom. 6.5, as he does in Rom. 1 1 . i yff.

E v i d e n t l y i n v . 1 3 c P a u l is t a k i n g u p t h e O T Images w h e r e t h e golden age t o c o m e is seen i n terms o f a l a n d a n d a p e o p l e o n w h o m the Spirit has b e e n p o u r e d (Isa. 3 2 . 1 5 ; 44.3; E z e k . 39.29; J o e l 2.28). A s i n G a l . 3.27 h e Switches f r o m t h e m e t a p h o r o f b a p t i s m t o a second m e t a p h o r , a l m o s t as expressive i n itself, a n d here e v e n m o r e expressive because o f its O T a s s o d a t i o n s . C o n v e r s i o n , f o r P a t d a n d t h e C o r i n t h i a n s , w a s a n experience o f the Spirit w h i d i w a s U k e t h e o u t p o u r i n g o f a s u d d e n flood o r r a i n s t o r m o n a p a r c h e d g r o u n d , and w h i c h made t h d r Uves U k e a weU-watercd garden ( J e r , 3 1 . 1 2 ) , T h i s i m a g e r y w o i d d b e perfectiy c o m p r e h e n s i b l e t o P a u l ' s readers; i t is o n l y w h e n c o m m e n t a t o r s b e g i n t r y i n g t o equate o r Square i t w i t h w a t e r - b a p t i s m t h a t difficulties arise, T h e r e is n o t h o u g h t o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m here w h a t s o e v e r , II Cor. 1.21J. T h i s passage has b e e n v a r i o u s l y i n t e r p r e t e d as a description d t h e r o f b a p t i s m o r t h e b a p t i s m a l experience, o f C o n f i r m a t i o n o r a p o s t - b a p t i s m a l experience, o r o f a c o m b i n a t i o n o f these. O n c e a g a i n t h e p r o p e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is o f t h e experience o f the Spirit i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . W a t e r - b a p t i s m ( f a r less C o n f i n n a t i o n ) does n o t entcr t h e t h o u g h t a t a U . * » *« Cf, Lampe, J"W j6; Lambert 163; Kennedy 239; Schweizer, TWKI

VI

424 n. 626. *» Cf. J . Höring, Tbe SecondEpisth ofStPa$ilto tbe Corintbians ( E T 1967) 1 2 ; P. E . Hughes, Paut's Seeond Epistle to tbe Corintbians (1962) 43-45. Contra H. Windisch, Der ^»eitt Korintberbrief (1924) 73; Wendland 148; Dinkler in Neotestamentiea et Patristica (1962) 173-91.

13 2

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

(i) T h e d o m i n a n t n o t e o f the passage is assurance - the certainty w h i c h is b a s e d o n the faithfuhiess o f G o d as expressed i n C h r i s t a n d i n the guarantee o f the Spirit. 60 T h i s does n o t m e a n that the C o r i n thians received o r r e v i v e d their assurance b y l o o k i n g b a c k t o s o m e ceremony, whether o f water-baptism o r o f laying o n o f hands, o r b o t h . T h e experience o f r e c e i v m g the S p i r i t w a s v i v i d e n o u g h i n itself, b o t h i n its external a c c o m p a i d m e n t s ( G a l . 3.5; I C o r . 1.4-9), moral transformation (II Thess. 2.13; I C o r . 6.9-ri), eidightenm e n t ( I C o r . 2.12), j o y ( I T h e s s . 1.5-9), l o v e ( G a l . 5-22; R o m . 5.5), consciousness o f s o n s b i p ( G a l . 4.6; R o m . 8.15), sense o f h b e r t y a n d life ( I I C o r . 3 . 1 7 ; R o m . 8.2), a n d generally i n the conscious ness o f bis presence a n d p o w e r ( I T h e s s . 1 . 5 ; 4.8; G a l . 3 . 1 - 5 , 1 4 ; I C o r . 2.4f.; 6 . 1 7 - 1 9 ; etc). I t is i m p o r t a n t t o r e a h z e that f o r P a i d ( a n d J o h n ) o n e o f t h e h i g h e s t a n d best w o r k s o f the S p i r i t is t h e assurance o f salvation.^! T o refer t h e experience o f assurance t o a n y o t h e r source is t o confess i g n o r a n c e o f t h e nature o f N T C h r i s t i a n experience. (ii) o Se ßeßai&v rums avv Vfilv « V Xpurrov. S o m e h a v e a r g u e d that eis Xpurröv i m p h e s a reference t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m . ^ ^ O n the c o n t r a r y w e m u s t say that i t speaks o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m ( I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 ) - o f t h a t act o f G o d t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t w h e r e b y h e i n c o r p o r a t e s us i n t o t h e B o d y o f C h r i s t ( G a l . 3.27). T h e present tense i m p U e s t h a t this u t d o n w i t h C h r i s t o n c e effected at c o n v e r s i o n is s t r e n g t h e n e d a n d m a d e closer w i t h t h e passing o f time.58 T h i s process eis Xpurröv is best u n d e r s t o o d i n t e r m s o f a g r o w i n g likeness t o C h r i s t ( G a l . 4 . 1 9 ; I I C o r . 3.18). O u r a t t a c h m e n t t o C h r i s t is o n l y m a d e firm, a n d t h e d o w n w a r d p u U o f t h e flesh a n d sin o v c r c o m e b y o u r b e c o m i n g m o r e and m o r e like Christ. A n d b o t h the victory a n d t h e m e t a m o r p h o s i s are t h e w o r k o f t h e S p i r i t ( G a l . 5 . 1 6 - 2 5 ; R o m . 8 . 1 3 ; I C o r . 1 3 ; I I C o r . 5.18). T h e r e f o r e , w e m a y say t h a t as t h e S p k i t c o n f i r m s (ißeßauoe^) t h e p r e a c h i n g o f C h r i s t t o t h e h e a r t ( I C o r . 1.6; cf. 2.4f.), a n d is t h e m e a n s G o d uses t o b r i n g m e n i n t o "o See W. C. van Unnik in StuJia Paulina Q. de Zwaan Festschrift 1953)

215-34. »1 D. von Dobschütz, Monättcbrift flir Pastoral Tbeohfft 20 (1924) 232. "Flenüngton 67; J . C. Hindlcy, India» JoumaJ of TbeologD 9 (i960) i i j . Dinkler claims that ß^ßcMS» is rooted in baptismal language, but all he cites in the N T are I Cor. 1.8 and the irrelevant II Thess. 2.17; Heb. 13.9 (179 n.i). ' S Cf. the idea of putting on Christ, which though accomplished at conver sion-initiation (Gal. 3.27) has to be continually repeated (Rom. 13.14).

The Corinthian hetters

15 3

C h r i s t ( I C o r . 12.13), s o h e is G o d ' s i n s t r u m e n t m estabhshing t h e m into Christ. (iü) Kol xpüräs rifias. Since xp>^ elsewhere i n the N T is used o n l y o f J e s u s , P a u l ' s choice o f it here is n o accident b u t a deüberate p l a y o n w o r d s - eis Xpiarov KOI xfii^'^s- P a u l is a l m o s t certaitüy t h i n k i n g o f J e s u s ' a n o i n t i n g w i t h the Spirit at J o r d a n ( L u k e 4.18; A c t s 4.27; 10.38). T h e a n o i n t i n g o f G o d w h i c h m a d e Jesus the C h r i s t is the same as the a n o i n t i n g o f G o d w h i c h m a k e s m e n Christians.^'* Since t h e a n o i n t i n g o f Jesus is n o t t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h o r m a d e a p a r t o f J e s u s ' b a p t i s m , it f o U o w s that P a u l i n u s i n g xp"^ is t h m k i n g o f b a p t i s m i n the Spirit, n o t water-baptism.55 ( i v ) ö KoX apayiaedp,€VOS rjfiäs. I n the H g h t o f E p h . 1 . 1 3 ; 4.50 this can o n l y refer t o the seal w h i c h is the Spirit. I t is quite false t o say that P a u l understands the seal as water-baptism.^« W e m u s t rather say w i t h Schnackenbvu:g that ' t h e a c t u a U t y a n d fulness o f the Spirit o f G o d . . . d o m i n a t e s t h e A p o s t i e ' s field o f v i s i o n ' . ^ ' W h a t e v e r the c o i m e c t i o n w i t h w a t e r - b a p t i s m is, i t does n o t feature i n this passage. T h a t a seal impües an external m a r k (cf. E z e k . 9.4; R e v . 7.3) does not mean that Paul thought o f baptism as the seal. N o r is the patristic usage any mdication o f the meaning here. I stress again that the recep t i o n o f the Spirit i n N T days was an event o f which recipient and o n looker could not b u t bc aware ( I Thess. 1 . J - 9 ; G a L 3 . 1 - 5 ; I C o r . 1.4-9; see also p. 102 n. 24; p. 132 a b o v e ; J o h n 3.8; and cf. A r n d t and G i n g rich, a^poyi'Cw; J . K . Parratt, 23 [1969] m - 1 3 ) . T h a t the Spirit usuaUy came at the event o f baptism is p r o l » b l e , b u t it is o n his c o m i n g alone that Paul fastens attention b o t h hcre and in E p h . 1.13. I t was only w h e n the U v i n g consciousness and experience o f t h e Spirit became less immediate and m o r e a conclusion t o bc d r a w n f r o m a ceremony righdy performed that the seal tcrminology came t o bc appüed t o the visible and pubUc rite performed b y men. T h e same is probably true o f ^Htrrutyu&s'. ^fiSs refers to Christians generaUy, as in w . 20 and 22. For a similar emphötic use of il/tfis oth» ifü» where air means 'including' see 4.14. «« Cf. A . Plummer, IlCormtbians ([CC 1915) 40; DeUing, Taufe 107; contra Schlier, TDNT 1603; Lampe. Seal 5 2; Wendland 148; Hindley 1 1 5 ; Dinkler

175, 180-2. ** The Epistle of Barnabas (second Century A D ) is the first to use the seal imagery of baptism itself ( A . Benoit, Le Bapttme Cbrifieu au Second Siicle [195 3] 46).

»' Schnackenbiug 91. See also DeUing, Taufe lojf.; Lohse 316 n. 25; Fitzcr, TWNT V I I 930. Cf. Lambert 166-8; Plummer 4 1 ; Lampe. Seal 5;

Hindley ii6f.; P. W. Evan«, BQ 16 (1955-56) 172-4.

134

Baptism in tlie Hoiy Spirit

as something given by the nveviia from G o d (Eph. 1.18 - where the clause containing ire^aynafievovs is a variant for the preceding clause Beasley-Murray 245), and as the enlighteidng power of the gospel shining in our hearts with the glory of Christ (II Cor. 4.4, 6; cf. 3.18), it is closely connected in Paul's thought with the Holy Spirit. Likewise in Heb. 6.4 (cf. Acts 9.17^; Eph. 3.3-5; iQS 4.2; iQH i z . i i f . ) . xpiaßa in I John 2.20, 27 is the same. All three refer to reception of die Spirit and its effects. S o m e refer the seal of the Spirit to Confirmation on the basis of the busmess parallel and R o m . 4.1 i.^s But as to the latter, the seal of the Spirit is t o be equated not with any external rite, but rather w i t h the circumcision of the heart which was the token of the new covenant predicted b y the prophets.^» A n d the point about the seal in business transactions is that the transaction is not completed imtil the seal is affixed. Thus, in the 'transaction' of conversioninitiation it is impossible t o say that the individual is a Christian until he has received the Spirit. The Spirit is the one w h o effects participation in the n e w covenant and in the K i n g d o m o f the E n d - he marks the transition into the eschatological State, «o His Coming effects and marks the change in ownership and lordship - his presence protects God's p r o p e r t y and makes it k n o w n as G o d ' s . (v) O f the final phrase w e need say no m o r e than that the Spirit thus given is the guarantee and security f o r the füll salvation still to come; that God's giving of his guarantee is his side of the 'transaction' of salvation; and that possession of the Spirit thus constitutes this salvation in so far as it can be enjoyed n o w ^ the first instalment, the 'down-payment'.«i I t is the Spirit, then, and all that h e eflfects b y w a y of assurance and protection, transforming and empowering, w h o alone fills Paul's thought and tcrminology in these verses. W h e t h e r faith and baptism play any part in these events is quite inmiaterial to the thought and Intention of this passage. ' 8 Thomton 29-32. See also his Cotifirmation Today 7 and the authors cited by Lampe, Sial ^i.; Schnackenburg 91. Chase refers both x/daas and o^. to the outward sign of Confirmadon (82), whereas Allo te£us ^ baptism and o^. to Confirmation {ßtcondt Epjtrt aux Corintbiens* [1956] 29-30); J . H. Crehan, however, suggests referring ippaßtiv and o^. to biptism, and ßtß. and Xp'uras to Confiraiation {A Catbolit Dietümaty of Tbeo/og/ II [1967] 89)! Lampe, StaJ i6,j6; cf. Beasley-Murray 174. *o The eschatological connotation of a^paiyk is important; see BeasleyMurray 175 f. •1 See Moulton and Milligan, appaßdar.

The Corinthian Letters

13 5

II Cor. j

T h i s is a c r u d a l chapter i n a n y a t t e m p t t o u n d e r s t a n d P a u l ' s p n e u m a t o l o g y . I t certairdy cuts t h e g r o u n d a w a y f r o m u n d e r t h e feet o f the Pentecostal. (i) V e r s e 3. T h e C o r i n t h i a n s are m a i d f e s d y a letter w r i t t e n b y C h r i s t w i t h t h e Spirit o f G o d o n their hearts. F r o m t h e w a y h e speaks i t is d e a r that P a u l is t h i n k i n g o f t h e m o r a l a n d m a n i f e s t t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w r o u g h t i n t h e h v e s o f t h e C o r i n t h i a n s b y their c o n v e r s i o n ( I C o r . 6 . 9 - r r ) . I t is this w h i c h p r o v e s that P a u l ' s m i n i s t r y a n d p r e a c h i n g is o f G o d . C h r i s t effected t h e t r a n s f o r m a tion o f the C o r i n t h i a n s b y t h e a g e n c y o f the Spirit t h r o u g h P a u l ' s p r e a c h i n g . U n u s u a l l y f o r P a u l C h r i s t is seen here as t h e g i v e r o f t h e Spirit. (ü) V e r s e s 3, 6. I n his talk o f a w r i t i n g KapSiais aapKivais a n d o f a KoxvTi 8iad-QK7), a n d i n his contrast b e t w e e n t h e M o s a i c l a w a n d t h e Spirit, P a i d is o b v i o u s l y t h i n k i n g o f J e r . 3 1 . 3 1 - 3 3 ; E z e k . 36.26.62 T h e n e w c o v e n a n t is centred o n t h e Spirit. A s the w r i t t e n l a w w a s t h e f o u n d a t i o n - s t o n e a n d g o v e n u n g p r i n d p l e o f the o l d c o v e n a n t , so t h e S p i r i t is the basis a n d heart o f t h e n e w c o v e n a n t . W i t h o u t t h e Spirit there is n o n e w c o v e n a n t . W i t h o u t r e c d v i n g t h e Spirit i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o p a r t i d p a t e i n t h e n e w c o v e n a n t . W i t h o u t the leading o f t h e Spirit i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o c o n t m u e w i t h i n t h e new covenant. (iii) V e r s e s 6f. T h e S p k i t g i v e s life. W i t h o u t t h e Spirit there is n o life. T h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit is n o t a n o p t i o n a l e x t r a f o r Christians. W i t h o u t h i m t h e i n d i v i d u a l is still u n d e r t h e l a w a n d i n t h e disp e n s a t i o n o f d e a t h ; t h a t is, h e is n o C h r i s t i a n . C o m p a r i s o n w i t h J e r . 3 1 . 3 1 - 3 3 a n d E z e k . 36.26 m a k e s i t d e a r t h a t n o t o i d y is t h e S p i r i t t h e o n e w h o b r i n g s life, b u t h e is h i m s e l f that life.«* Hc h i m s e l f has replaced t h e l a w as t h e r e g u l a t i n g p r i n d p l e o f life. ( i v ) V e r s e 8. C h r i s t i a t d t y ^ s t s i n a c o m p l e t d y new d i s p e n s a t i o n ; Christians U v e i n a t i m e that is w h o l l y different a n d m i r a c u l o u s t h e t i m e o f t h e E n d . « * T h i s is because, a n d o t d y because t h e y h a v e t h e Spirit, T h i s is also t h e dispensation o f righteousness ( v . 9), w h i c h c o n f k m s w h a t w e h a v e already c o n d u d c d f r o m G a l . 3 : t h a t possession o f righteousness a n d possession o f life = t h e S p i r i t , are •» Windisch 109; Lictzmann-Kümmd i n ; Wcndland i j j ; Allo 81; Höring 22; Schrenk, TDNT I 766; Behm, TDNT H 130. M Cf, Windisch 106,110, «« C£. Behm, T D N T HI 449.

136

Baptism in the Hoiy Spirit

s y n o n y m o u s ( G a l . 3.21). J u s t i f i c a t i o n is i m p o s s i b l e w i t b o u t receiv i n g tbe S p i r i t , f o r the g i f t o f t h e S p k i t effects the righteousness which constitutes a r i g h t relationship w i t h G o d . (v) Verses i6f. I t is by t u r t d n g t o the S p i r i t t h a t the t e m p o r a r y a n d d e a d l y n a t u r e of the o l d c o v e n a n t is r e c o g t d z e d . Verse 16 is a pesher citation of Ex. 34.34. Verse 17 is therefore best interpreted as an explanatory note, expounding the passage cited, in terms of the central theme of the chapter: 'Now "the Lord" in this passage is the Spirit o f w . 3, 6, 8.' Of more recent commentators, see particularly M. DibeUus, Botschaft und Geschichte II (1956) 128-33; Lietzmann-Kümmel 200; J . Schildenberger in Studiorum Paulinorum Co«grM/«j-1456-9; van Uimik, NovTest 6 (1963) 165. NEB's translation is superb and exceUendy conveys Paul's meaning; so TEV. For a fuUer treatment see my article in JTS 21 (1970). But even if we took Kvpios = Qirist and v. 17 = we catmot know Christ except by means of the Spirit (Hermann), or together with the Spirit (Schlatter), the result is the same for the Pentecostal. 'According to II Cor. 3.17 the contact with the Lord is reception of the Spirit as such' (Büchsei 428). 'For purposes of commutdcating redemption the Lord and the Spirit are one' (N. Q. Hamüton, The Holy Spirit and Bscbatolog/ in Paul[i^j-[] 8). See pp. 95f. above.

I t is b y t u r t d n g t o t h e S p i r i t = r e c e i v i n g t h e Spirit,85 t h a t t h e b o n d a g e o f t h e l a w is left b e h i n d a n d t h e fullness o f the S p i r i t entered u p o n (cf. G a l . 4 - 5 ) . ' * I t is t h u s b y r e c e i v i n g t h e S p i r i t that a m a n b e c o m e s i n C h r i s t , f o r i n this a c t i o n h e passes f r o m t h e dispensation o f d e a t h a n d c o n d e m n a t i o n t o t h e dispensation o f the S p i r i t a n d o f righteousness s o that t h e o l d c o v e n a n t b e c o m e s a b r o g a t e d f o r h i m , s o m e t h i n g w h i c h takes place o i d y i n C h r i s t ( v . 14).«'

I n a U this chapter, t h e n , there is n o t h o u g h t o f a s e c o n d g i f t o f t h e Spirit. I n d e e d there c a n n o t b e . T h e S p i r i t is so m u c h the essence a n d a U o f t h e n e w c o v e n a n t i n its a p p U c a t i o n t o m a n t h a t i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o c o n c e i v e o f t h e n e w c o v e n a n t apart f r o m the S p i r i t , a n d i m p o s s i b l e t o experience t h e blessings o f the n e w c o v e n a n t apart f r o m t h e i n d w e U i n g ^ o f t h e Spirit. A s t h e J e w s ' experience o f t h e o l d c o v e n a n t w a s w h o U y i n terms o f a n d w h o U y d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e l a w , so t h e C h r i s t i a n s ' c ^ r i e n c e o f the n e w c o v e n a n t is w h o U y "Lietzmann-Kümmel 113. Cf. van Uiuiik 165f. •'Lietzmann-Künunel 1 1 3 ; Hermann 35f.; Schildenberger 456; W. Schmithals, Die Gnosis in Korintb* (1965) 299-308; NEB.

The Corinthian Letters

137

i n terms o f a n d w h o l l y d e t e r m i n e d b y the Spirit. A s o b e d i e n c e t o the external l a w w a s t h e m e a n s b y w h i c h the J e w m a i n t a m c d his relationship w i t h G o d , so o b e d i e n c e t o t h e i n d w e l l i n g S p i r i t is the m e a n s b y w h i c h t h e C h r i s t i a n maintains his relationship w i t h G o d . T o b e c o m e a J e w w a s t o take u p o n oneself t h e y o k e o f the l a w . T o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n is t o receive the g i f t o f the Spirit. «8 O n the o t h e r side, those w h o exalt the role o f b a p t i s m i n initia t i o n s h o u l d n o t e that it is the g i f t o f the S p i r i t w h i c h is p r e - e m i n e n t in conversion-initiation. (i)" O n c e a g a i n w e see that P a u l h e l d a v e r y d e a r d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n o u t w a r d f o r m a n d i n w a r d r e a h t y , f o r the t h e m e o f c h . 3 is the contrast b e t w e e n the c o v e n a n t o f external l a w a n d o u t w a r d c e r e m o n y a n d t h e c o v e n a n t o f the i n d w e l l i n g S p i r i t - n o t b e t w e e n t w o complementary prindples, b u t between t w o utterly opposed p r m d p l e s . T h e contrast w o u l d lose its f o r c e i f i n fact w a t e r b a p t i s m p l a y e d a d e t e r m i n a t i v e role i n this l i f e - g i v i n g m i n i s t r y . F o r P a u l the w h o l e basis o f r e U g i o n h a d b e e n r a d i c a U y c h a n g e d , f r o m that w h i c h operates o n the external, physical p l a n e t o t h a t w h i c h operates o n t h e internal, spiritual p l a n e . (ii) C h r i s t w r o t e t h e letter o n their hearts w i t h the S p i r i t ; as C h r i s t ' s p o s t m a n , P a i d d e h v e r e d t h e letter t h r o u g h his m i i d s t r y o f p r e a c l d n g ( w . 3, 6). (iü) F a i t h is i m p ü e d i n w . 16f.: t o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n is a m a t t e r o f t u r t d n g t o t h e L o r d w h o is the Spirit. ( i v ) W a t e r - b a p t i s m is a g a i n absent. I t s presence w o u l d a d d n o t h i n g t o t h e a r g u m e n t o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g . Its absence detracts n o t at a U f r o m the a r g u m e n t o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , t o g i v e i t a n y p r o m i n e n c e w o u l d d e s t r o y t h e central emphasis w h i c h P a u l wishes t o m a k e . O n the o t h e r b a n d , t h e concrete a n d v i v i d q u a ü t y o f these first C h r i s t i a n s ' experience o f the S p i r i t is v e r y s t r i k i n g . O t d y a n o v e r w b e l n d n g c o n v i c t i o n a n d certainty c o u l d h a v e enabled t h e m t o affirm t h e c l a i m o f this passage o v e r against t h o s e w h o t o o k their s t a n d o n t h i n g s as t h e y h a d a l w a y s b e e n . T h e y c o u l d n e v e r h a v e m a i n t a i n e d their p o s i t i o n a n d w o n a d h e r ents t o i t h a d t h e S p i r i t n o t b e e n i n t e n s d y real i n their experience.** T o s u m Up, t h e f o r c g o i n g e x p o s i t i o n o f t h e k e y passages i n I a n d I I C o r i n t h i a n s s h o w s t h a t n d t h e r Pentecostal n o r sacrament ahst can l o o k f o r s u p p o r t here. T h e a n o i n t i n g o f t h e S p i r i t is w h a t m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n ( I I . i . a i f . ) ; t h e g i f t o f t h e S p i r i t is w h a t • 8 See also Cerfaux, Cbrittian 261-89.

'* See Hermann 29, 31, 49f., 57-

I }8

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

g i v e s h i m p a r t i d p a t i o n i n O m s t a n d i n d i e n e w c o v e n a n t (I. 6 . 1 4 - 2 0 ; II. 3); t h e b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit is w h a t i n c o i p o r a t e s h i m i n t o t h e B o d y o f C h r i s t ( 1 . 1 2 . 1 3 ) . T h e verses w h i c h sacramentaUsts h a v e referred t o t h e rites o f b a p t i s m a n d / o r C o n f i r m a t i o n w e h a v e f o u n d t o refer t o b a p t i s m i n the Spirit (I. 6 . 1 1 ; 1 0 . 2 ; 1 2 . 1 3 ; II. i . 2 i f . ) . T h e r e are n o g r o u n d s i n these letters f o r i d e n t i f y i n g o r c o n f l a t i n g these t w o b a p t i s m s , rather t h e o r d y (relevant) reference t o t h e water-rite (I. 1 . 1 0 - 1 7 ) c o n f i r m s i f a n y t h i n g that P a u l s a w i t as the expression o f m a n ' s response t o G o d a n d i n his t h o u g h t set it o v e r against the I n s t r u m e n t s o f G o d ' s s a v i n g grace - the Spirit a n d t h e W o r d . F o r the m o s t p a r t , h o w e v e r , w h e n l o o k i n g b a c k t o his readers' c o n v e r s i o n - i t d t i a t i o n , P a u l ignores the rite a n d c o n centrates a l m o s t entirely o n the o f t e n d r a m a t i c l i f e - g i v i n g a n d lifet r a n s f o r m m g experience o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m .

XII T H E

L E T T E R

T O

R O M E

I F R o m a n s is i n d e e d 'the theological self-confession o f P a u l ' , ! w e m a y h o p e f o r stiU fuller i n s i g h t i n t o P a u l ' s t h o u g h t o n o u r subject. Rjom. /./

iKKexwai, w h e n c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e S p i r i t , v i v i d l y recalls P e n t e cost. A s t h e d i s d p l e s b e g a n their C h r i s t i a n h v e s at P e n t e c o s t w i t h t h e o u t p o u r i n g o f C h r i s t ' s S p i r i t a n d G o d ' s l o v e i n their hearts, so d i d each o n e b e g i n his C h r i s t i a n life i n these early days o f C h r i s tianity. T h e r e is n o q u e s t i o n o f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e initial e q ) e r i e n c e o f G o d ' s l o v e , o f w h i c h t h e perfect iKKexprat speaks, f r o m the i n i t i a t i n g g i f t o f t h e H o l y Spirit. F o r P a u l t h e y are o n e . C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n is n o t h i n g o t b e r t h a n a b e i n g seized a n d o v e r w h e l m e d b y t h e l o v e o f G o d i n t h e p e r s o n o f t h e H o l y Spirit. Rjom. 6.1-14

P a u l n o w t u m s t o check t h e a n t i n o m i a n reductio ad absurdum o f t h e argimients h e has \ised i n t h e fiaith-works c o n t r o v e r s y . W h e r e i n t h e latter f a i t h w a s naturally m u c h e m p h a s i z e d , n o w i n w h a t f o l l o w s t h e p r i n d p a l t h e m e is t h a t o f d e a t h a n d life. (i) I t is i m p o r t a n t t o g r a s p t h a t t h e subject o f R o m . 6 is n o t b a p t i s m b u t d e a t h t o sin a n d t h e life w h i c h f o l l o w s f r o m it. P a u l ' s t e x t f o r 6 ( i f n o t 6-8) is g i v e n i n t h e first words h e speaks i n r e p l y t o t h e o b j e c t i o n o f v . i: ' B y n o m e a n s I H o w c a n w e w h o h a v e d i e d t o sin still l i v e i n i t ? ' I t is this t h e m e , o f d e a t h t o sin a n d life t o G o d , w h i c h P a u l enlarges u p o n in t h e f o l l o w i n g t w d v e verses. B a p t i s m affords t h e first Strand o f t h e e x p o s i t i o n o f this t h e m e , b u t ^ Kümmel, Introduction 221.

I40

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

t h e n h e passes o n f r o m i t t o t a k e u p o t h e r ideas w h i c h ülustrate the central t h e m e f r o m different angles.2 Too many commentators speak as though v. 2 was not there (e.g., DeUing confines his discussion to 6.5ff. - Taufe 125). On the contrary, V. 2 is the key without which the meaning of the passage cannot be

unlocked and opened up (J. Denney, Expositor's Greek Testament [1900] II 632; Lambert 1 7 1 ; cf. W . Sanday and A . C. Headlam, The Epistle to the Romans^ [ICC 1902] 156; J . Knox, IB 9 [1954] 473; J . Murray, The

Epistle of Paul to the Romans I [i960] 2i3ff.). The words ßanrit,eiv and ßa-TTTicTfia appear only in w . 3f., and there is a break after v. 4 (RSV, NEB, J B , TEV). Verses 3-10 as a whole are an exposition of v. 2, and while V. 4 (oSv) ties in closely with v. 3, it also revives the antithesis of

V. 2 (M.-J. Lagrange, Bpitre aux Romains^ [1950] ^45)- The ydp of v. 5 picks Up the theme of death with Christ and death to sin, not of baptism, and w . 5 and 6 are further iUustrations and expositions of the theme of V. 2, not of baptism.

(ü) P a u l is dealing w i t h t h e spiritual r e a U t y o f d e a t h t o sin ( a n d Ufe t o G o d ) a n d i n w . 3-6 h e depicts this t h e m e i m d e r a series o f different images.3 T h e first m e t a p h o r w e are already f a m i h a r w i t h ßa-m-l^eaBai, eis Xpiarov 'IijaoCv.* I t is d r a w n f r o m b a p t i s m , b u t does n o t itself describe b a p t i s m , o r c o n t a i n w i t h i n itself the t h o u g h t o f the water-rite, a n y m o r e tiian d i d t h e s y n o n j m i o u s m e t a p h o r s o f p u t t i n g o n C h r i s t ( G a l . 3.27) a n d b e i n g d r e n c h e d w i t h t h e S p i r i t (I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 ) . T h e first a n d o n l y concrete reference t o w a t e r b a p t i s m i n R o m . 6 is t h e phrase 810 TOO ßam-tafiaros; this phrase m a r k s a n e x t e n s i o n o f P a u l ' s t h o u g h t t o e m b r a c e t h e water-rite, a n d indicates t h e relation b e t w e e n t h e m e t a p h o r s ( o f b a p t i s m a n d b u r i a l ) a n d t h e rite itself i n t h e actual e v e n t o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n , as w e shaU see. B u t w h e n ßain-i^ew is u s e d i n its m e t a p h o r i c a l sense * Cf. Mcntz 30; Marxsen 172; E . Güttgemanns, Der-leidende Apostel und sein Herr (1966) 213 n. 14; Tannchili 7-10; Barth, Dogmatik IV/4 laSf., 216; N. Gäumann, Tattfe und Ethik: Studien zu Rämer 6 (1967) 72, i26f. 8 Cf. Schnackenburg 26, 33, 49, 54f.; O. Kuss, Der Römerbrief 1 (1957) II (1959) 30J; scc also Barth, Taisfe 245; G. Wagner, Pauline Baptism and the Pagan Mysteries ( E T 1967) 282. ^ It is not to be equated with ßarrriieaSai tis ri ovofta 'IijaoO XpurroO (contra C. K . Barrett, Tbe Epistle to tbe Romans [1957] 122; Barth, Taufe 223-6; Larsson 5 5; Wagner 287 n. 121; Gäumann 74 n. 5 3). See p. 112 above. It is by incorporation into the Second Adam, a corporate or inclusive personality (5.12-21), that we share in the righteousness of Christ (cf. C. H. Dodd, Tbe Epistle to tbe Romans [Moffiatt 1952] 86; O. Michel, Der Brief an die Rümer^* [1963] 149; Beasley-Murray 133-8; Wagner 292f.; Grundmann, TWNT V I I 789; Best. Bo(^66f.).

The Letter to Rome

141

any element which is i n v o l v e d is the Spirit, and w h a t it describes is the spiritual mysdcal reaüty of union w i t h Christ effected b y G o d . Union with Christ means union with his death. O f the complcteness of this death the rite of baptism is an exceUent symbol: the disappearance, h o w e v e r brief, b e l o w the surface of the w a t e r represents a burial rather weU - and in this case, participation in the completeness and finaÜty of Christ's death. That burial cannot be separated from death is shown by E. Stommel, Römische Quartalschrift 49 (1954) 1-20 (cited by Schnackenburg 34): ' "The event of dying, of departure from this world, was first really concluded by burial": in the thought of the ancients, a dead man went fully into the realm ofthe dead only at this point.' This fact rules Barth's elaborate distinction out of court (e.g. Taufe 229; cf. Lambert 1 7 3 ; Delling, Taufe iz%{.; Bieder i9if.). The difficulty of taking ßan. eis = ßaw. eis ro ovojxa is clearly shown in V . 3b. It is quite inadequate to translate 'with reference to his death' (Beasley-Murray 130) or 'in the direction of his death' (Schnackenburg 34). Paul obviously means much more than that. See also TaimehiU 22. T h e second metaphor (v, j ) m a y be d r a w n f r o m agriculture o r horticulture: 'planted together in the hkeness o f his death' ( A V ) ; f o r in the populär speech o f the day OV/X^UTOS had the meaidng 'odtivated' o r 'planted'.* But it is m o r e probable that Paul has in mind the m o r e general biological imagery of the physical and natural g r o w t h which, f o r example, unites in unbroken wholeness the broken edges o f a w o i m d o r a b o n e . ' crvijufiwos is to be derived from mifuffvonat (to grow together) rather thanffviuftvreJai(to plant together) - Grundmann, TWNT VII 786. W c should therefore understand avi>4ivros in the sense 'grown together', 'utüted with'. Professor Moule suggests 'fuscd' as a good modern equivalent. O u r imion w i t h Christ, says Paul, w a s Uke the grafting o f a branch o n t o the main stem so that they become one, o r üke the healing of < Moulton and Milligan. Those who scc a botanical metaphor here include Sanday and Headlam 15 7; F . J . Leenhardt, Tbe Epistle to tbe Romans ( E T 1961) 160; Cullmann, Baptism i^t, 30; H. Schwarzmann, Zur Tai^tbtologf* des bl. P, See also Best, Body 51 n. 2.

142

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

a w o u n d s o that t h e b o d y is w h o l e ; m o r e precisely, i t w a s t h e c o n d n g t o g e t h e r o f us a n d t h e ofwuoiw. o f C h r i s t ' s d e a t h , ' s o t h a t henceforth w e were indivisibly uidted w i t h it i n continuing g r o w t h and development. T h e t h i r d m e t a p h o r is quite i n d e p e n d e n t o f the o t h e r t w o avveaTavpcüdrj. I t describes the n e g a t i v e side o f c o n d n g t o p a r t i d p a t e i n the n e w creation - t h e c o m p l e t e b r e a k i n g o f the ties o f the o l d creation ( G a l . 2 . 1 9 ; 5.24; ö . i ^ f . ; I I C o r . 5.i4f., 17). I t is o n l y this d i v i n e O p e r a t i o n o n the spiritual plane w h i c h can effect the destruc tion o f the b o d y o f sin, a n d thus e n d m a n ' s subjection t o sin as a m e m b e r o f A d a m and o f the o l d order. I n s h o r t , each m e t a p h o r p o i n t s directly t o t h e spiritual reaUty a n d n o t t o b a p t i s m , w h i c h is itself a m e t a p h o r . » (üi) 6(ioi
best iUustrate the p o i n t : Paul wants t o stress Christ's humanity as strongly as possible; he was p r e d s d y Uke men, c o m p l e t d y identified w i t h fallen humanity. H e n c e i t refers n d t h e r t o b a p t i s m i t s e l f i " n o r t o t h e d e a t h o f C h r i s t itself,ii b u t r a t h e r t o t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i d i ' To supply OÜT4» spoils the imagery. So Sanday and Headlam 157; H. Lietzmatm, An die BJömer^ (HNT 1928) 68; Barrett lajf.; A . Schlatter, Gottes Gerechtigkeit (1935) 202; H. W. Schmidt, Der Brief des Paulus an äe PJämer (1963) n o ; Kuss, PJämer 299^.; also Ausleg/mg 151-6; Best, Body 5 1 ; J . Schneider, TDNT V 192; Schnackenburg 36f. (who changed his mind between the first and second editions); Larsson 59f.; Beasley-Murray 134; Tannehill 30-32; Gäumaim 79; F. Mussncr, Praesentia Salutis: Gesammelte Studien zu Fragen und Themen des Neuen Testamentes (1967) 192. Cf. Rom. 8.29; Phil. 3.10. See also p. 150 below. * See Kennedy 226f.; Güttgemaims 213 n. 214. » Cf. Kuss, Auslegung 157-9; Mentz 99 n. 34; Delling, Taufe 130 n. 465. 1« Contra Denney 633; Scott, Paul 118; K . E . K i t t , Tht Epistle to tbt Romans (1937) 200; K . Barth, Tbe Teaching of tbe Cburcb Regarding Baptism ( E T 1948) 1 3 ; Bultmann, TDNT JE. 19 n. 80; Schwarzmann 33f.; Barrett 123; Schinidt n o ; Neunheuser 26, 28; see also those referred to in Wagner 276 n. 79. "Contra G. Bomkanun, Early Cbristian Experience ( E T 1969) 76f.; cf. Beasley-Murray 134; CaüxDaaa,Baptism xi)f.; DeUing, Taufe izjt.; TannehiU 35-39 and passim. Otherwise Paul would simply ücvc s ü d tl yiip criin^orm Y€y6v<ma> np Oavirtp aCroC (cf. Schwaizmann 38ff.).

The Letter to Korne

145

takes place at c o n v e r s i o n w h e n w e b e c o m e u n i t e d w i t h a d e a t h t o sin p r e d s e l y h k e C h r i s t ' s . T h a t is t o say, G o d operates o n us t o d e s t r o y u s , i n so f a r as w e are i n A d a m a n d d e t e r m i n e d b y sin. T h i s is n o t s o m e t h i n g w h i c h w e m e r d y b e h e v e h a p p e n s , o r w h i c h h a p p e n s s a c r a m e n t a U y ( w h a t e v e r t h a t m e a n s ) ; s o f a r as P a u l is c o n c e r n e d there reaUy takes place i n the c o n v e r t s o m e t h i n g w h i c h can b e caUed a d e a t h , so that h e n c e f o r t h that w h i c h determines a n d m o t i v a t e s o u r c o n d u c t is n o l o n g e r sin.12 I t is as real a n e v e n t i n o u r spiritual h i s t o r y a n d experience as o u r share i n the f u m r e c o n s u m m a t i o n w ü l b e . B o t h these events are ofiouLixara o f C h r i s t ' s d e a t h a n d resurrection. B o t h are p a t t e r n e d p r e d s d y o n C h r i s t ' s h e n c e t h e parallel b e t w e e n w . 5-7 a n d w . 8 - 1 0 , t h e f o r m e r a f f i r m i n g o f the C h r i s t i a n w h a t the latter affirm o f Cbrist.i^ So dosely does our experience p a r a U d Christ's that w h e n w e think in terms o f u n i o n w i t h Christ w e can speak o f both the past initiating death and the future consummating resurrection as avv Xpiarip ( w . 5, 8). T h e tenses o f v . 5 also rule out the equation o f o/towo/xa w i t h baptism: the individual continues i n the o/toi'ai/xo (yeydva/tev), and he certainly does not continue i n the baptismal w a t c r l ; and eaofieBa looks f o r w a r d t o the future somatical resurrection o f Christians patterned p r e d s d y o n Christ's (almost aU commentators agree that grammar and sense require the repetition o f oiutUofia i n v . j b ) . T h e aiv Xpiaria of the beUever's experience o f Christ n o w is in essence n o different f r o m the avv Xpiar^ o f his experience in the future (v. 8); as w i t h 6fu>UapM n d t h e r usage can be referred direcdy t o baptism (contra G ä u m a i m 57f.). ( i v ) I t is a s t r i k i n g fact t h a t P a u l does n o t ü n k b a p t i s m w i t h t h e idea o f resurrection. O n e w o u l d t h i n k t h a t i t w o u l d b e a n a t u r a l e x t e n s i o n o f t h e s y m b o ü s m o f b a p t i s m t o scc e m e r g e n c e f r o m t h e b a p t i s m a l w a t e r s as a picture o f resurrection. B u t v . 4b is surpris i n g p r e d s e l y because t h e balance o f t h e sentence is d i s r u p t e d b y P a u l ' s rcfusal t o use this i m a g e r y . " F o r P a u l at this p o i n t resurrec tion is StiU f u t u r e , f o r t h e O/XOMÜ/XO o f C h r i s t ' s resurrection is t h e resurrection o f t h e b o d y ( R o m . 8 . 1 1 ) . " T h e n e w ü f e i n C h r i s t i n 1* Cf. Gäumann 78. ^' Bomkamm 74f.; Leenhardt, Rematu 159f. " P . Althaus, Der Brief an die Rämer^" (NTD 1966) 62; Mussnet 191;

Gäumann 48 n. 114, 7jf. 1» Verses 5, 8 cannot adequately be understood as logical future« (Michel 154; H. Conzehnann, Grmdrus

der Tbeolo^

des Netm

Tettameta [1967] 299;

Tannehill 10-12; Mussnet i92f.; Gäumann 48 n. 114, 74 n> 59)'

144

Baptism in tlie Holy Spirit

its present experience ( v v . 4b, 1 1 , 1 3 ) is bere a corollary t o a n d c o n sequence o f the i n i t i a t i n g experience o f d e a t h , as i t w a s w i t h C h r i s t ( w . 9 - 1 1 ) , n o t o f baptism.16 N e i t h e r t o this present experience o f hfe n o r t o the f u t u r e resurrection does P a u l relate b a p t i s m , either s y m b o h c a l l y o r sacramentaUy. W h e n h e c o m e s t o t h i n k m o r e fiiUy o f U f e i n t b e present h e does so entirely i n terms o f the S p i r i t (ch. 8). T h i s is the first t i m e t h a t b a p t i s m has b e e n related t o d e a t h i n t h e m a n n e r o f w . 3f. I t is p r o b a b l e , t h e r e f o r e , that this passage r e p r e sents a d e v e l o p m e n t i n P a u l ' s t h e o l o g y o f b a p t i s m a n d a step f o r w a r d b e y o n d the o l d e r ideas g e n e r a l l y . ! ' ß u t h e goes n o f u r t h e r ; h e does n o t relate b a p t i s m t o Christ's resurrection. T h e reason f o r this m a y b e that f o r P a u l at least b o t h the sacraments w e r e i n t e n d e d t o speak p r i m a r ü y o f d e a t h - o f C h r i s t ' s d e a t h f o r t h e m a n d their d e a t h w i t h C h r i s t (see I C o r . 1 1 . 2 4 - 2 6 ) . T h e r e w a s n o n e e d f o r r e m i n d e r s o f Christ's resurrection a n d their U f e i n C h r i s t : t h e life o f the Spirit w a s so real a n d a p p a r e n t b o t h i n their o w n experience a n d i n that o f o t h e r Christians, that such r e m i n d e r s w o u l d h a v e b e e n superfluous. B u t sin w a s stiU s o p o w e r f u l a n d the flesh stül so w e a k t h a t there w a s constant n e e d o f r e n ü n d i n g that t h e y h a d d i e d - d i e d t o sin, crucified w i t h C h r i s t . T h i s is certaiiüy t h e sigiüficance a n d lesson w h i c h P a u l d r a w s o u t firom the s y m b o U s m i n 6; w h e r e a s i n w . 4b, i i a n d c h . 8 b a p t i s m has n o p k c e w h a t soever. ( v ) A c c o r d i n g t o this passage w a t e r - b a p t i s m has t w o F u n c t i o n s . F i r s t , the rite o f b a p t i s m v i v i d l y depicts a b u r i a l . T h i s is w h y P a u l seizes u p o n the m e t a p h o r o f b a p t i s m ü n m e d i a t e l y i n his e x p o s i t i o n o f t h e C h r i s t i a n as d e a d t o sin - s i m p l y because i t is t h e m o s t o b v i o u s , m o s t expressive, a n d m o s t m e a n i n g f i i l m e t a p h o r foir t h o s e w h o s e b a p t i s m m a r k e d the b e g i r m i n g o f their C h r i s t i a n life. I t is o n l y o n e o f t h e possible m e t a p h o r s , a n d , as w e h a v e seen, P a u l uses others t o b r i n g life a n d w e i g h t t o his e x h o r t a t i o n , b u t i t is t h e best. I« Schnackenbutg 58; Wagner 282f.; cf. Schlattet zoii. " Cf. Kuss, Auslegung iSjf. iymvn of v. 3 is probably just the polite teacher's manner of passing on new knowledge (Kuss, Körner 297, citing Lietzmaim on Rom. 7.1; Wagner 278). Certainly in Rom. i . i 3 ; i i . 2 j ; I Cor. lo.i; 12.1; II Cor. 1.8; I Thess. 4.13 it conveys the idea of passing on Infor mation and teacliing unknown before; and in Rom. 7 . 1 ; 10.3; II Cor. 2 . 1 1 ; 6.9; Gal. 1.22; I Tim. 1.13 äyro^o» has die sense 'to be Ignorant of' rathet than 'to ignore'. When he refers to past teaching or experience Paul elsewhere uses ywümKio

(v. 6) or oBo (I Cor. 6.19;

etc).

The hetter to Rome

145

S e c o n d , whereas ßwmileadai eis has o n l y a m e t a p h o r i c a l sig nificance ßänriona also a n d p r i m a r i l y refers t o t h e water-rite itself.^* V e r s e 4 indicates that the rite o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m n o t o n l y s j m i b o h z e s b u r i a l w i t h C h r i s t , b u t also that i t helps i n s o m e w a y t o effect i t (Sid TOV ßairrlaixaTos).^^ O n t h e t e s t i m o n y o f R o m ,

6 alone o n e

w o u l d b e justified i n a r g u i n g that i n Pavd's v i e w G o d operates ' t h r o u g h b a p t i s m ' a n d b y means o f b a p t i s m t o effect t h e s p i r i m a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i c h the c e r e m o n y symbolizes,^'' B u t w h e n w e v i e w R o m , 6 i n t h e c o n t e x t o f w h a t P a u l has said elsewhere, I a m p e r s u a d e d , t h o u g h n o t w i t h o u t s o m e hesitation, that w e s h o u l d take Stet TOV ßaTTTiofiaTos as describing the behever's S u b m i s s i o n o f f a i t h t o the action o f G o d , parallel t o his obedience i n C h r i s t i a n h v m g i n response t o Christ's resurrection ( v , 4b), T h i s is certaüdy L u k e ' s v i e w rather t h a n the o t h e r , a n d i t accords best w i t h the teaching o f I P e t e r 3,21, the nearest t h i n g t o a defiiütion o f b a p t i s m that t h e N T affords, T h e r e N o a b ' s d e ü v e r a n c e is described as St' uSttTOff, t h e t y p e o f C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m w h i c h also saves, b u t o n l y i n that i t is t h e p r a y e r o r p l e d g e o f m a n t o G o d , M o r e o v e r , i n the p r e a c h i n g / f a i t h n e x u s o f salvation, b a p t i s m is better seen as the expression o f response t o t h e g o s p e l t h a n as t h a t w h i c h m a k e s the p r e a c h i n g effective, P a v d c o u l d n e v e r h a v e w r i t t e n I C o r . 1,1721 o r set f a i t h so s h a r p l y against circumcision i f h e v i e w e d b a p t i s m i n terms o f t h e latter alternative, a n d t h e i n s t n i m e n t a l role o f b a p t i s m here (8id TOO ßanrlaiiaros) is paraUel t o t h a t o f f a i t h i n C o l , 2 . 1 2 b (Stä rijs iTMrT€tos).22 B a p t i s m is best seen here, t h e r e f o r e , as t h e m e a n s a n d step o f c o m m i t m e n t t o C h r i s t w h i c h results i n n e w life. W i t h o u t renundation o f the old üfe and commitment t o the n e w t h e r e is n o d e a t h a n d n o life. B a p t i s m does n o t effect these, b u t i t can b e t h e v i t a l v e h i d e o f t h d r e x p r e s s i o n : as t h e iidtiate surrcndcrs h i m s e l f t o the b a p t i z e r , g i v i n g h i m c o n t r o l o f his b o d y so t h a t t h e p l v m g i n g b e n e a t h t h e surface o f t h e w a t e r is w h o U y i n his h a n d s , so h e surrenders h i m s e l f t o G o d f o r G o d t o p u t t o d e a t h a n d b u r y his o l d seif. 23 W e m a y e v e n say t h a t i t is in a n d t h e act o f svir^' Contra Leenhardt, Bapttmt 49. ^* This plirase alone is sufSdoit to rule out the traditional anti-sacramentalist view: that baptism is a sign of a conversion which has alrtady taken place (see e.g. Scott, Paul 118). «0 So cxpUcidy L . Fasekrf, TZ 22 (1966) 5i4f. *i See pp. ii8f. above, and on Rom. 10 (pp. i jof.) below. 8* Cf, Scott, Spn-it I j 5. On the place of faith here see also Beasley-Murray i45ff. M Cf. E . Brunner, Tb* Letter to tbe Romans (ET 1959) 49f.

146

Baptism in the Hoiy Spirit

r e n d e r t o the b a p t i z e r that there comes t o its necessary climactic expression the c o m m i t m e n t t o G o d w h i c h results i n d e a t h a n d life. Rom. 2.2g/.; y.4-6

T h e s e t w o passages, closely related t h r o u g h the m'evua/ypdfj.fji.a antithesis, reqidre a b r i e f c o m m e n t . T h e teaching o f 2.28f. can b e p u t s i m p l y : external rites are n o t t o b e identified o r c o n f u s e d w i t h internal reahties; external rites are f u t Ü e a n d i n v a h d , e v e n t h o u g h g i v e n b y G o d , imless there is a c o r r e s p o n d i n g internal r e a h t y (cf. v . 25); external rites a n d internal reahties b e l o n g t o distinct a n d e v e n antithetical spheres, so t h a t o n e c a n n o t b e said t o b e p e r f o r m e d o r effected b y o r t h r o u g h t h e o t h e r . M o r e o v e r , w h e n w e realize that P a u l t h i n k s o f the c i r c u m cision o f the heart i n terms o f the Spirit,^* i t is o t d y a small step t o p a r a U e l circumcision o f the flesh a n d circumcision o f the h e a r t w i t h b a p t i s m i n w a t e r a n d b a p t i s m i n the Spirit. R o m . 7.4-6 f o r m s a b r i d g e b e t w e e n chs. 6 a n d 8. I t is t h e c o n clusion t o P a u l ' s a n s w e r t o t h e s e c o n d o b j e c t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e Christian's relation t o t h e l a w n o w that h e is u n d e r grace ( 6 . 1 5 7.6).25 T h e m>evfj,a/Ypdfj.fm contrast is therefore t h e c l i m a x a n d c o n clusion t o P a u l ' s r e p l y , as i t w a s i n 2.28f.,26 a n d w o u l d h a v e led a t o n c e i n t o c h . 8 h a d P a u l n o t feit t h e n e e d t o e x p l a i n t h e role o f l a w i n the life o f t h e C h r i s t i a n i n the U g h t o f w h a t h e has just said. I n 7.4 h e has t a k e n u p t h e m a r r i a g e Illustration a n d a p p U e d i t t o t h e C h r i s t i a n . T h e idea o f d y i n g w i t h C h r i s t is so i m p o r t a n t t o P a u l a n d t o t h e p r e c e d i n g c o n t e x t t h a t h e sacrifices t h e exactness o f t h e paraUel i n 7 . 1 - 4 . T h e t h o u g h t is therefore n o different firom t h a t o f 6.2-6, a n d w h a t I said there appUes here. N o t e that the t h o u g h t o f u n i o n w i t h Christ i n his resurrection is stiU absent. I t is almost as t h o u g h P a u l carefuUy steers r o u n d it; f o r he speaks o f u n i o n w i t h Christ in his death, and o f (marriage) u n i o n w i t h the risen Christ, but n o t o f u n i o n w i t h Christ i n his resurrection. T h i s confirms w h a t w e have already noted above. T h e o i d y o t h e r p o i n t t o b e m a d e is t h a t i n b o t h passages, as i n n C o r . 3, h i s contrast b e t w e e n J u d a i s m a n d C h r i s t i a n i t y centres As in II Cot. 3.6 the « v e C ^ of the y/xJ^ifw/m-eC/ao antithesis must be

undetstood as the Holy Spirit, despite Bartett's hesitation (60) and contra Lagtange jy. See fiitthet on Col. 2.1 if. «»Fot patallels see A. Nygtcn, CommeHtary on Romans (ET 1952) 268;

Michel 166. 8* Michel 93.

The lütter to Kome

i47

o n t h e S p k i t as t h e decisive n e w f a c t o r . I t is t h e S p k k alone w h o brings life. T h e r e is n o l a w that c a n g i v e life. N o t h i n g t h a t can b e s u b s u m e d u n d e r t h e h e a d o f ypa/i/ia - n o external o b e d i e n c e , n o o u t w a r d rites - c a n d o that, o n l y t h e S p i r i t . T h e S p i r i t is centre a n d heart o f the n e w c o v e n a n t , as h e is b y his c o i n i n g its Initiator. F o r t h e C h r i s t i a n , r e l i g i o n is n o l o n g e r b a s e d o n a set o f external regulations a n d rites w h i c h d e m a n d s u b s e r v i e n c e , b u t o n t h e s p o n t a n e o u s d r i v i n g f o r c e o f sheer v i t a h t y o u t w o r k i n g i n o b e d i ence a n d l o v e . Rom.

8.I-ZJ

R o m . 8 is the c h m a x o f P a u l ' s e x p o s i t i o n o f his text f r o m H a b . 2.4. H a v i n g e x p o u n d e d the w o r d s 6 Sc Slßcaios ix marews i n the first five chapters ( a n d t h e n m e t the o b j e c ü o n s w h i c h arose t h e r e f r o m ) , h e n o w t u r n s t o t h e w o r d l-^oerai. T h e t h e m e w h i c h w a s f o r e s h a d o w e d m2.28f.; 5.5 a n d 7.6 n o w appears i n all its s p l e n d o u r - t h e g l o r i o u s u n f o l d i n g o f spiritual experience i n C h r i s t a n d o f life Karä mevixa. P o p u l ä r ( H o l i n e s s ) preachers h a v e s o m e t i m e s e x p o u n d e d R o m . 7-8 as t h o u g h P a u l f o r a l o n g t i m e i n h i s C h r i s t i a n life e x p e r i e n c e d the defeat a n d d e s p a k o f c h . 7 ; b u t t h e n h e d i s c o v e r e d t h e secret o f v i c t o r y a n d i n experience passed f r o m t h e d a r k a n d depression o f c h . 7 i n t o t h e h g h t a n d assurance o f c h . 8, thereafter t o e n j o y i t f o r t h e rest o f his life. B u t r a t h e r w e m u s t say t h a t c o n v e r s i o n w a s the entry hito m a n o f a n e w p r i n d p l e a n d p o w e r , the l a w o f the S p k i t o f h f e , w h i c h rose a b o v e a n d d e t h r o n e d t h e o l d p r i n d p l e a n d p o w e r , the l a w o f sin a n d d e a t h ; c o n v e r s i o n w a s t h e transfer f r o m the o l d covenant t o the n e w , f r o m t h e realm o f death t o that o f life ( w . 6 , 1 3 ) , f r o m d o m i n a t i o n b y t h e flesh t o d o n d n a t i o n b y t h e S p k k (cf. 2.28f.; 7.6). O n l y it is n e v e r s o final as these d e a r - c u t antitheses suggest, f o r t h e Christian is c o n t i n u a l l y t e m p t e d t o l i v e Karo. aapKa - t h a t is, t o l i v e t o w a r d s G o d xiflder t h e t e r m s o f t h e o l d c o v e n a n t , severed firom C h r i s t , f a l l e n firom g r a c e , a n d o n t h e w a y t o d e a d i o n c e m o r e ( 8 . J - 8 , iz£.; c f . G a l . 3 . 3 ; J . 2 - 4 . x 6 - i 8 ) a n d all t o o o f t e n h c s u c c u m b s t o t h a t t e m p t a t i o n , w i t h all t h e firustration a n d d e s p a k w h i c h i t i n v o l v e s . H e m u s t d i s c o v e r t h e Spirit's liberating n d g h t e v e r a n c w i n e v e r y n e w s i m a t i o n . H c m u s t l e a m n o t t o l i v e Karä oöpKa, b u t r a t h e r t o p u t t o d e a t h b y t h e Spirit's s t r e n g t h d i e dceds o f d i e b o d y ( v . 1 3 ) . T h a t is t o say, t h e C h r i s t i a n life f r o m start t o finish is a m a t t e r o f d a i l y d q i c a d c n c e o n t h e S p i r i t w h o a l o n e b r i n g s life.

148

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

T h i s passage is also o n e o f the N T ' s m o s t e m s h i n g denials o f Pentecostal ( a n d ' C o n f i r m a t i o n i s t ' ) teaching. (i) N o t i c e h o w v . 2. defines a n d explains (yap) the ' n o c o n d e m n a t i o n ' f o r those i n C h r i s t , i n terms o f the Spirit o f life a n d t h e h b e r a t i o n h e b r i n g s . M o r e o v e r , w . 3f. explain (yap) v . 2, plginly i m p l y i n g that the Spirit effects i n experience w h a t C h r i s t effected b y his d e a t h . I n d e e d , so closely cormected are t h e Spirit a n d t h e n e w life w h i c h m a k e s o n e a C h r i s t i a n ( w . 2, [5], 6) that it is n o surprise w h e n P a u l equates t h e m i n v . 10 - the Spirit is life. L i k e w i s e , justification o r r i g h t relationship a n d the Spirit are so closely c o n n e c t e d f o r P a u l - so close that each can b e described as t h e result a n d o u t w o r k i n g o f the o t h e r ( w . 4, 10) - that w e can d r a w Up a similar e q u a t i o n : g i f t o f Spirit = g i f t o f righteousness.27 ( ü ) V e r s e 9 is t h e m o s t embarrassing verse i n t h e N T t o t h e c m d e Pentecostal v i e w (that c o n v e r s i o n is a m a t t e r o f r e c e i v i n g C h r i s t a n d S p i r i t - b a p t i s m o f r e c e i v i n g t h e Spirit - see p. 93 n . 5, a b o v e ) , f o r i t states i n the blimtest t e r m s : I f a n y o n e does n o t h a v e the Spirit o f C h r i s t h e does n o t b e l o n g t o C h r i s t , o r , as N E B p u t s i t , ' h e is n o C h r i s t i a n ' . elirep has the sense o f ' i f indeed', ' i f after all', o r 'provided that', as g i v i n g a necessary condition, b u t n o t a necessary and sufficient con dition (et). T h i s distinction between et and etwep is clearly visible i n v . 17. See Blass-Debrunner-Funk 454 (2). P a u l is n o t doubting that his readers have the Spirit, b u t neither is h e equating possession o f the Spirit w i t h obedience t o the Spirit. A m a n m a y have the Spirit indwell i n g h i m (i.e., be a Christian), and yet n o t be h v i n g Kard irvevua. W e could Paraphrase the second clause o f v . 9 t h u s : ' I a m assuming, o f course, that the Spirit o f G o d really is dwelling w i t h i n y o u . ' T b c c o n c l u s i o n w h i c h R o m . 8 . 9 - 1 1 ; I C o r . 6.17; 12.4-6; 15.45 t h m s t u p o n us is u n a v o i d a b l e : t h a t i n P a u l ' s expeäeace C h r i s t a n d the Spirit were one, and that Christ was experienced t h r o u g h the Spirit.28 I t is especially clear b e t e w h e r e v . l o takes u p a n d repeats V. 9b, w i t h the Substitution o f ' C h r i s t ' f o r ' t h e Spirit o f C h r i s t ' , a n d w h e r e v . 1 1 takes u p a n d repeats t h e t h o u g h t o f the t w o p r e c e d i n g verses, o i d y i n t e r m s o f ' t h e S p i r i t o f G o d ' . T h e s e three phrases describe precisely the same fact a n d experience. i" Michel 191 n. 2; see also Stalder 427-30; Wendland, TLZ 77 (1952) 459; Büchsei 427f. 8* Hermann; see pp. 95f. above; cf. Dodd 124; Hamilton lof.; Pfister 91; J. Bonsirven, Tbeology of tbe NT (ET 1963) 294; contrast Murray, Romant 288.

The Letter to Rome

149

A few Pentecostals have argued that m/tviia Xpiarov here does not mean the Holy Spirit but 'the ChristUke life' (Brooke 27; I have had a similar Suggestion put to m e by a feirly well-known Pentecostal evangeUst); cf. the distinction between the Spirit of God a n d Holy Spirit which Nels Ferre makes (cited by Hendry 47). But such a distinction is completely without foundation in the N T , and ignores the chief dis pensational significance ofthe event of Christ: viz. that the Holy Spirit of God becomes so related to Jesus and the redemption he effects as to be called 'the Spirit of Christ' (see C. F. D. Moule, The Holy Spiritin the Church, cited by E. M. B. Green, The Meaning of Salvation [1965] i75f-)Fortunately such desperate shifts are rarely resorted to; see e.g., Riggs' entirely orthodox interpretation of 8.9 (13).

For the N T g e n e r a U y a n d P a u l i n particular the c r u x o f c o n v e r s i o n is the g i f t a n d r e c e p t i o n o f the H o l y Spirit, w h o thereafter d w e U s w i t h i n t h e C h r i s t i a n as t h e S p i r i t of C h r i s t , g i v m g t h e experience o f ' C h r i s t i n m e ' (cf. G a l . 2.20 w i t h 3 . 2 - 3 ; also R o m , 8.10 ['the S p i r i t is life'] w i t h C o l , 3,4 [ ' C h r i s t w h o is o u r life']). T h i s is especiaUy clear h e r e : since the n o n - C h r i s t i a n c a i m o t ' h a v e the S p i r i t ' a n d o n l y those w h o ' h a v e t h e S p i r i t ' are C h r i s t i a n s , i t is b y Coming i n t o 'possession' o f t h e S p i r i t t h a t o n e b e c o m e s a C h r i s t i a n (8.9, i j ) . T h i s has a n i m p o r t a n t c o n s e q u e n c e , f o r i t m e a n s that t h e t h i n g w b i c h determines w h e t h e r a m a n is a C h r i s t i a n is n o t his p r o f e s s i o n o f f a i t h i n C h r i s t b u t t h e presence o f t h e S p i r i t . ' I f a n y o n e does n o t h a v e t h e S p i r i t ' , says P a u l , ' h e is n o C h r i s r i a n ' ; 'Only those w h o are led b y the S p k i t o f G o d are sons o f G o d ' ( v . 14). H e does n o t say, I f y o u are C h r i s t ' s y o u h a v e t h e S p i r i t , o r , I f y o u are sons y o u h a v e d i e S p k i t , f a r less, I f y o u h a v e b e U e v e d a U d i e r i g h t t h i n g s a n d / o r h a v e b e e n b a p t i z e d ( a n d s o are a C b r i s tian) y o u h a v e the Spirit. I n the carUcst d a y s o f C h r i s t i a i ü t y p o s session o f the S p i r i t w a s a fact o f immetüate p e r c e p t i o n , n o t a logical c o n c l u s i o n t o b c d r a w n f r o m t h e P e r f o r m a n c e o f a n e c d e s i astical rite. T h i s , as w e s a w , is s t r o n g l y e m p h a s i z e d i n A c t s . (iü) I t is e v i d e n t f r o m w . 1 4 - 1 7 t h a t i t is t h e S p i r i t w b o effects s o n s h i p , n o t m e r d y strengthens the c o n s d o u s n e s s o f s o n s h i p . N E B q u i t e p r o p e r i y translates rrvtSim vtoetaias as ' a S p i r i t t h a t m a k e s u s s o n s ' , f o r unless t h e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t is t h e r e c e p t i o n o f s o n ship P a v d c o i d d n o t h a v e w r i t t e n v . 1 4 . ' P a u l s p e d f i c a U y identifies t h e S p i r i t as the S p i r i t o f a d o p t i o n , t h u s e q u a t m g p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e S p i r i t w i t h possession o f s o n s h i p ' . 8» T o experience t h e S p k i t is t o *» Hester 64; see also Kuss, Römer 601; Pfister 79.

I JO

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

experience s o n s h i p , a n d this is s i m p l y because t h e S p i r i t is t h e Spirit o f t h e S o n ( G a l . 4.6). ( i v ) F i n a U y , w e s h o u l d n o t e v . 23: t h e S p i r i t is the aTrapxfi o f the f u t u r e c o n s u m m a t i o n — 17 orroAvrpöiats TOO awiiaros •qpÄuv.'^he re d e m p t i o n is i n t w o stages: the r e d e m p t i o n o f the i n n e r m a n a n d the r e d e m p t i o n o f t h e b o d y . B o t h are effected b y G o d t h r o u g h his Spirit, a n d b o t h i n v o l v e a n experience o f d e a t h . T h e f o r m e r is a once-for-all sharing h i C h r i s t ' s d e a t h resulting i n a sharing i n his resurrection life, that is, his Spirit ( R o m . 8.2, 9, 10). T h e latter is a l i f e - l o n g experience o f C h r i s t ' s death - a w a s t i n g a w a y o f the b o d y o f d e a t h u n t ü , w i t h its final destruction at d e a t h o r the p a r o u s i a , i t is t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o the resurrection b o d y ( I I C o r . 4 . 7 - 5 . 1 0 ; R o m . 8 . 1 1 , 1 3 , 1 7 , 23). S o t h e n , his c o m i n g at c o n v e r s i o n m a k e s us sons (8.15), a n d his h f e - l o n g w o r k brings o u r sonship t o m a t u r i t y a n d m a k e s us perfect sons (8.23), n o t j u s t w i t h a h i d d e n Hkeness t o C h r i s t a n d a life h i d d e n w i t h C h r i s t i n G o d , b u t w i t h t h e v e r y I m a g e o f G o d h i m s e l f a n d manifested m g l o r y (8.29; I I C o r . 3 . 1 8 ; G a l . 4 . 1 9 ; P h i l . 3 . 2 1 ; c f . I J o h n 3.2) - t h e c u l m i n a t i n g a n d final w o r k o f the Spirit. T h u s the Spirit is h i m s e l f t h e airapxi - n o t just the f o r e s h a d o w h i g o f it b u t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f it - t h e b e g i n n i n g s o f a h a r v e s t w h o s e r e a p i n g p r o c e e d s s l o w l y b u t surely v m t ü t h e final i n g a t h e r i n g a n d rejoicing.

Rom.

10.9-17

T h i s passage is i m p o r t a n t f o r the U g h t i t sheds o n P a i d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the relation b e t w e e n b e U e f a n d b a p t i s m . 8 0 (i) T h e reversal o f t h e o r d e r o f t h e v e r b s i n w . 9f. s h o w s t h a t t h e t w o v e r b s are n o t t o b e t h o u g h t o f as distinct i n t k n e , b u t r a t h e r as s i m u l t a n e o u s : t h e act o f f a i t h ( = the act o f c o m m i t m e n t ) is t h e act o f c o n f e s s i o n . F a i t h does n o t reach its climactic p o i n t o f c o m m i t t a l w i t h o u t a n d u n t ü t h e act a n d m o m e n t o f confession. I n V. 1 0 t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n belief a n d c o n f e s s i o n is as rhetorical as t h a t b e t w e e n justification a n d s a l v a t i o n . ( ü ) T h a t the act o f b e ü e f (aorists i n v . 9) = t h e act o f confession, is also i m p ü e d b y t h e q u o t a t i o n f r o m J o e l i n i o. 13. emKaXfonp-at c a n b e identified o i d y w i t h SnoXoyi^
The LeUer to Rome

151

u p o n t h e n a m e o f t h e L o r d ia t h e p u b U c confession o f f a i t h ( a t b a p t i s m ) w h i c h results i n salvation. (in) T h i s is n o t c o n t r a d i c t e d b y v . 14 w h e r e there is a logical, n o t a f>&rö«ological sequence. F o r P a u l c o u l d n o t say t h a t t h e act o f b e h e f results i n s a l v a t i o n prior t o t h e act o f c a l h n g u p o n t h e L o r d ( v . 14), w h e n h e has just said that i t is t h e latter act w h i c h results i n salvation ( v . 13). W h a t w e m u s t r a t h e r say is that f o r P a u l t h e act o f faith is inseparable f r o m the p u b h c confession o f f a i t h = t h e p u b h c act o f c o n m i i t t a l = the p u b h c act o f calling u p o n the L o r d . U n t i l that act there is n o s a v i n g faith. T h e clear i m p ü c a t i o n o f this is that b a p t i s m is p r o p e r l y t o b e re g a r d e d as the expression o f response t o the g o s p e l a n d the vehicle o f c o m m i t m e n t t o the L o r d . Y e t w e m u s t n o t i g n o r e the fact that it is the faith confessed a n d the confession o f f a i t h w h i c h results i n justification a n d s a l v a t i o n , n o t t h e circumstances o r m a i m e r i n w h i c h i t w a s made.si T h a t 'Jesus is L o r d ' is a baptismal confession does n o t mean that Paul is thinking o f the baptismal confession in I C o r . 12.3. F o r I C o r . 12 clearly shows that P a i d is thinking o f such utterances ('Jesus is accursed'; 'Jesus is L o r d ' ) being made i n the context o f Christian worship. H e is obviously n o t thinking o f the mere Statement o f a proposition ( f o r anyone could say the w o r d s ) , b u t o f an inspired o r ecstatic utterance w h i c h did n o t originate i n the individual's o w n rational consciousness. T h e baptismal confession, o n the other b a n d , is the Statement o f a propositional beUef w h i c h then becomes a confession o f c o m m i t m e n t i n and b y the act o f baptism. T . M . T a y l o r ' s argument that dßßd, 6 wanjp was a baptismal formula has a f a r f r o m adequate foundation (SJT 11 [1958] 62-71).

T o s u m Up, i n R o m a n s w e see a d e v e l o p m e n t i n P a i d ' s e x p h c i t t h o u g h t a b o u t b a p t i s m , i n that h e relates i t t o the Christian's b u r i a l w i t h C h r i s t (6.4). R o m a n s h a s also c o n f i r m e d t h a t P a u l distin g u i s h e d clearly b e t w e e n ritual a n d r e a h t y (2,28f.; 7.6), b e t w e e n m e t a p h o r (ßanriUaOaji) a n d rite (ßäirruitui) (6.2-4), a n d t h a t i n P a u l ' s eyes b a p t i s m w a s essentiaUy t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e risen L o r d ( 1 0 . 9 - 1 7 ; 6.4). A s b a p t i s m speaks o f f a i t h a n d d e a t h , so t h e Spirit m e a n s grace a n d life. T h e Pentecostal o u t p o u r i n g o f t h e S p i r i t is w h a t m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n (5.j) a n d w h a t sets his feet o n the w a y o f life - t h e b e g i n n i n g o f the w a y t o life ( 8 . 1 - 2 7 ) . » Cf. Schnackenburg 82.

XIII T H E

L A T E R

P A U L I N E S

I N t u r n i n g t o Colossians, E p h e s i a n s a n d the Pastorais w e enter the m o s t d i s p u t e d p a r t o f the P a u l i n e c o r p u s . T h e y include a n u m b e r o f passages w h i c h b o t h P e n t e c o s t a l a n d sacramentahst h a v e s o u g h t t o Interpret t o their o w n a d v a n t a g e . Col. i.iß

P a u l t h r o u g h o u t Colossians refrains f r o m ascribing a n y salvific w o r k t o t h e S p i r i t - n o d o u b t because i n t h e circumstances h e w a n t s t o g i v e a U possible p r o m i n e n c e t o C h r i s t . B u t that the S p i r i t is t h e a g e n t o f G o d ' s r e d e m p t i v e act i n t h e spiritual transfer f r o m t h e d i m e n s i o n o f darkness t o t h e k i n g d o m o f t h e S o n is i m p U e d : (i) b y t h e s i m ü a r i t y o f t h e p r a y e r i n w . 9 - 1 4 w i t h t h a t o f E p h . i . i y f f . , ! a n d the m e n t i o n o f awems irvevimTucq ( C o l . 1.9); ( ü ) b y t h e ideas o f b e a r i n g f r u i t (cf. G a l . j . z z f . ) , Svvafus, 8d|o (cf. I I C o r . 3.8, 18) a n d xapa (cf. I T h e s s . 1.6; R o m . 1 4 . 1 7 ; 1 5 . 1 5 ) ; a n d (iü) b y t h e descriptions o f the spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n t e r m s o f inheritance (cf. R o m . 8 . 1 5 - 1 7 ; G a l . 4.6f.) a n d ü g h t (cf. I I C o r . 5.16-4.6), a n d o f t h e spiritual d e U v e r a n c e i n terms o f ßaaCXsla. a n d dwoAwrpwats. T h e t h o u g h t is v e r y close t o t h a t o f E p h . i .13f., w h e r e a g a m o c c u r t h e ideas o f itiheritance a n d aTmkirptoai.s i n close c o r m e c t i o n w i t h t h e Spirit. T h i s w o r k o f G o d ( t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t ) takes place w h o U y o n t h e spiritual p l a n e - a n y relation i t has t o b a p t i s m is p u r e l y subsidiary t o t h e t h o u g h t hcre. /xcTccmjaev is a conversion aorist, n o t spedücaUy a baptismal aorist. T h a t 'baptism represents a g u l f between the t w o spheres o f p o w e r such that o n l y a / x e T o o r ^ v o * can bring m a n o u t o f the one into the other' 1 irvef^ta in Eph. 1.17 is the Holy Spirit referred to in the same way as in Rom. 8.15.

152

The Later Paulines

15 5

(Käsemann 160; cf. E . L o h s e , Die Briefe an die Kolosser und an Philemon [1968] 74; Confirmation Todaj [1944] 10; M o l l a t in BNT 63) is a fine picture, but I question whether it was present t o the m i n d of the author. Col.

2.11-1}

W i t h h i s usual v a r i e t y of m e t a p h o r s P a u l o n c e again describes Christian conversion-iidtiation. (i) V e r s e 1 1 . T h e first m e t a p h o r is circumcision. P a u l is n o t s p e a k i n g here o f b a p t i s m u n d e r t h e figure of c i r c u m c i s i o n ; he is s p e a k i n g directly of the circumcision of the heart ( J e r . 4.4; D e u t . 10.16; 30.6).2 H e is e x p o u n d i n g t h e radical n a t u r e o f the spirimal t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i c h takes place at c o n v e r s i o n ; as t h e rite of circumcision w a s a Stripping a w a y of p a r t of the physical b o d y , so the spirimal circumcision of t h e heart ( = c o n v e r s i o n = i n c o r p o r a tion i n t o C h r i s t ) is a t o t a l Stripping a w a y o f t h e b o d y of flesh ( = t h e b o d y o f sin [ R o m . 6.6] = t h e b o d y of d e a t h [ R o m . 7. 2 4 ] ) . T h i s spiritual c i r c u m c i s i o n experienced b y the initiate w h e n he b e c o m e s a C h r i s t i a n is a p a r t i d p a t i o n in t h e c i r c u m d s i o n o f C h r i s t - t h a t is, m o s t h k e l y , i n t h e d e a t h of Christ.8 Delling argues that the three ev-phrases in w . i i-i aa are paralld and really identical. B u t there is no real paralleHsm. T h e first t w o «^-phrases, h> rfj orreKSvcrei and ev rfj i r e p t T O j u g , stand v e r y d o s e together as one phrase dependent on irepierfi'^Brjre; whereas ev ßanriaftan Stands in a separate, t h o u g h d o s d y related clause, g o v e m e d b y awra^ivres. Secondly, the first of the three instances of ^ has an instrumental sense, whereas the other t w o have a m o r e local sense. A n d , fhirdly, the direKSvais and the nepiroiii^ cannot be identified w i t h the ßim-wim. T h a t P a u l is t h i n k i n g o f spiritual reahties, a n d is m a k i n g a v e r y d e a r d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n inward a n d o u t w a r d , spiritual r e a h t y a n d physical rite, is s h o w n b y his use of o x e t p o w o V o r . T h i s Operation w h i c h takes place i n t h e i n n e r m o s t b d n g of m a n a n d affects h i s t o t a l p e r s o n a U t y is * p u r d y spiritual' a n d 'invisible'.* I t is t h e w o r k * Lightfoot, Colossians and Philemon (1875) 181; Lampe, Seal 56; Beasley-

Murray i;8. As Beasley-Murray points out, the baptismal language does not really begin until v. raa ( i j j ) . 8 See C. F. D. Moule, Tbe Epistles to tbe Colossians and to Philemon (1962)

94-96. * E. F. Scott, Tbe Epistles of Paut to tbe Colossians, to PbilemoH and to tbe Ephesians QAoßatt 1930) 44; E . Lohmeyer, Die Briefe an die Pbilipper, Kolosser

undan Philemon^ (1964) 108; F. W. Beate, IB 11 (19)5) 196; so Lambert 180; Beasley-Murray 153 n.i; Bieder 59; H. Martin, BQ 14 (1951-52) 220.

15 4

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

o f G o d , n o t o f m a n . I t is deliberately c o n t r a s t e d w i d i t b e pbysical, external, visible rite o f circumcision. I t is n o t b a p t i s m w M c h is s o contrasted w i t b c i r c u m d s i o n : P a u l n e v e r says t o bis J e w i s b o p p o n ents, O u r b a p t i s m is a m o r e effective c e r e m o n y t h a n y o u r d r c u m c i s i o n ; rather he contrasts a n o u t w a r d rite w i d i its c o r r e s p o n d i n g i n w a r d reahty. S o here it is the spirimal, internal, i n v i s i b l e w o r k o f G o d i n the beart o f m a n o n w h i c h P a u l focuses.* ( ü ) V e r s e 12a. T h e second m e t a p h o r is t h a t o f b u r i a l i n b a p t i s m . awTa 4> w h i c h begins v . 1 2 b s h o t d d n o t b e referred t o b a p t i s m b u t to C h r i s t - ' i n whom', n o t ' i n which'.' « See also Atgyle 198. • See pp. 141, 144 above. ' This is the noniial view among the chidF Continental expositors: M . Dibelius and H. Greeven, An di* Kolosser, Bpbeser an PbilemoH (HNT i9j j ) 3 1 ; Lohmeyer n i ; Schlatter, Brläutenu^en 7 Teil 278; C. Masson, UBpItre dt Saint Patd aux Colossiens (1950) 126 n. 4; Kuss, Auslegfmg 15 3 n. 14; Schnacken burg 68; Delling, Taitfe 124; Barth, Taufe 259; W. Marxsen, Introduction to tbe New Testament ( E T 1968) 182; Lohse, Kolosser 156 n. 4; English-speaking exegetes however usually refer A» ^ to baptism (T. K . Abbott, Epbesians and Colossians [ICC 1897] 25if.; Scott 45; Flemington 62; Beasley-Murray i53f.; F. F . Bruce, Tbe Epistle to tbe Colossians [1957] 234 [more doubtfully]; R S V ; NEB; TEV).

r55

The Later Paulines

T o e x p l a i n m o r e f u l l y : w . 9 - 1 2 is a single u n i t i n t h e l o n g sentence w . 8 - i 5, C h r i s t is t h e p r i n c i p a l t h e m e o f this u n i t . P a u l is m e e t i n g h e a d o n a n y a t t e m p t t o disparage C h r i s t o r t o d i m i n i s h his role i n r e d e m p t i o n . T h e w h o l e emphasis is therefore o n C h r i s t , a n d o n the fact that r e d e m p t i o n a n d f u l f i l m e n t is a c c o m p h s h e d in Christ. dwells die fullness o f deity b o d i l y ; y o u have come to fullness o f U f e ; iv
iv avrw iv avTÜ

W e m i g h t say t h a t w . i if. are a n e x p a n s i o n o f v . l o ' s iari iv ainat w . 1 I-I2a describes t h e n e g a t i v e side a n d v . 1 2 b t h e p o s i t i v e side o f t h a t c o m i n g t o fuUness o f life i n C h r i s t . E a c h t i m e h e stresses t h a t i t w a s in him t h a t these t h i n g s t o o k place. ireTrArjpoifteVoi;

I t is the ev ^ «ai w h i c h is repeated, n o t the auriji. T h e inclusion o f T^9 T T u r r e w s also teUs against a reference t o baptism, since Paul nowhere eise exphcidy links faith and baptism so closely. T o refer h> 4» to Christ does m a k e f o r an awkwardness o f thought since the v e r b f o U o w i n g is a o w - c o m p o u n d , and so carries the sense o f raised rvitb h i m . B u t it is n o m o r e a w k w a r d than the precisely paraUel passage i n E p h . Sia

2.4-6

— KOX gvv-ijyeipev Kol gweKoßiaev iv Tois eirovpaviots

iv

XfnaT
T h e closeness o f the paraUel i n fact teUs in fevour o f taking «> 4* o f Christ (whether i t is the same author f o U o w i n g the same U n e o f t h o u g h t o r a disciple c o p y i n g his teacher's idiosyncrasies). N o r can w e say that this awkwardness o f t h o u g h t is one Pavd w o u l d a v o i d - rather it is thrust u p o n h i m b y his liking f o r the t w i n ideas o f being iv Xpiarip and o f expcriencing the saving events oOv Xpurrip. C f . M a s s o n 126 n . ; . 'Ivaov.

B o t h structure, t h e m e a n d emphasis t h e r e f o r e d e m a n d that«»4» b e referred t o C h r i s t . I t is best, t h e r e f o r e , t o f o U o w R o m . 6 a n d t o separate t h e idea o f resurrection ficom t h a t o f b a p t i s m ( t h o u g h n o t , o f c o u r s e , f r o m d e a t h w i t h C h r i s t ) . F o r P a v d b a p t i s m s y m b o l i z e s t h e finaUty o f d e a t h i n b u r i a l , a n d n o m o r e . H e has a d v a n c e d , a t least i n h i s e x p U c i t t h e o l o g y , f r o m R o m . 6 i n t h a t h c considcrs resurrection w i t h C h r i s t t o b e a t h i n g o f t h e past - t o b e p a r t o f t h e e v e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n ( C o l . 3.1).* B u t h e has n o t y e t c o m e t o the * Contra Tannehill, who asserts, without sufficient proof, that Col. 2. i i-i 3 is a more primitive form ofthe bapdsmal motif than Rom. 6 (10).

15 6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

p o i n t w h e r e h e sees b a p t i s m as s y m b o h c a l o f resurrection. T h e m o s t h e says here is that b a p t i s m s y m b o h z e s ( a n d helps the b a p t i s a n d t o c o m e t o ) the p o i n t o f d e a t h w i t h C h r i s t . T h i s participation i n C h r i s t ' s d e a t h has as its c o n v e r s e participation i n tds resurrection, so t h a t t h e n e w C h r i s t i a n shares i n Christ's resurrected life. ( i v ) V e r s e 1 3 . T b e f o u r t h m e t a p h o r is a g a i n different. W h e r e p r e v i o u s l y P a u l h a d l o o k e d a t c o n v e r s i o n u n d e r t h e different aspects a n d figures o f circumcision, b u r i a l a n d resurrection, n o w he s u m s u p the e v e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n w i t h o n e p r e g n a n t phrase — awe^woTroiTjaev vfias aiiv avTui. I t n e e d hardly be said that baptism as a rite a n d s y m b o l is n o t i n his m i n d i n tlds m e t a p h o r . H i s t h o u g h t centres entirely o n that first t h r i l ü n g , n e v e r - t o - b e f o r g o t t e n experience w h e n t b e risen life o f C h r i s t flooded his b e i n g a n d raised h i m f r o m his darkness a n d d e a t h t o newness o f life i n Christ, A l t h o u g h the Spirit is n o t m e n t i o n e d , the s p i r i m a l Operation here s p o k e n o f c a r m o t b e u n d e r s t o o d apart f r o m h i m o r his w o r k . H e is G o d ' s a g e n t i n resurrection ( R o m . 8 . u ) a n d i n ^woirotrjais ( R o m . 8 . n ; I I C o r . 3.6; cf. I C o r . 1 5 . 4 3 ; G a l . 3.21), f o r h e is h i m self t b e n e w life o f the C h r i s t i a n ( R o m . 7,6; 8,2, l o ; I T h e s s . 4.8), a n d t h e risen life o f C h r i s t c a i m o t b e e x p e r i e n c e d o r h v e d o u t except b y o r t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t ( R o m . 8.5-6, 1 3 ; G a l . 5.25). S p i r i m a l circumcision also is t h e w o r k o f t h e S p i r i t a n d the g i f t o f t h e Spirit. T h e circumcision w h i c h matters is t h e circumcision o f t h e h e a r t effected b y t h e S p i r i t ( R o m . 2.28f,). W e are the c i r c u m cision, because w e h a v e b e e n circumcised b y t h e S p i r i t , a n d h a v i n g t h u s received the S p k i t , w e w o r s h i p b y t h e S p i r i t o f G o d ( P h i l . 3.3). T h e r e is also the l i n k t h r o u g h t h e 'seal' m e t a p h o r . C k c i u n cision w a s t h e seal {a<j>payLs) o f the righteousness o f A b r a h a m ' s f a i t h ( R o m . 4 . 1 1 ) . T h e S p i r i t is G o d ' s seal o n t h e C h r i s t i a n ( H C o r . 1.21 — apaytos; E p h .

I . 1 3 ; 4.30 - ia^paylaBryre).

T h e gift o f

the S p k i t is therefore t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h t h e ckcumcision o f t h e h e a r t (cf. D e u t . 30.6 w i t h J e r . 31.33 a n d E z e k . 36.26f.). F o r the occasion w h e n J u d a i s m called ckcumcision a seal see F i t z e r , T J F N T V I I 947. Barrett thinks the evidence t o o late t o p r o v e that the J e w s spoke o f circumcision as a seal in N T times, t h o u g h it is a reasonable conjecture that they did so speak {Komans 92). T h e h n k between the circumcision o f the heart and the Spirit i n the O d e s o f S o l o m o n is striking; ' M y heart was circumcised . . . F o r the M o s t H i g h circumcised me b y his H o l y S p k i t . . . A n d his ckcumcision was

The Later Faulines

ij7

m y salvation' (11.1-3 - Bauer's translation i n Hennecke-Schneemelcher, NT Apohypben I I [1964]). See also The Gospel of Thomas, L o g i o n 53. I t is i m p o r t a n t t o grasp this p o i n t : t h a t the f u l f i l m e n t o f c i r c u m cision is not b a p t i s m b u t the g i f t o f t h e Spirit. N e i t h e r does b a p t i s m fulfil t h e p r o p h e t i c h o p e o f spiritual c i r c u m c i s i o n ; o n l y t h e S p i r i t does that. Q t c u m c i s i o n w a s n o t a b r o g a t e d a n d set aside b y P a u l because a n e w rite o f i n i t i a t i o n h a d t a k e n its p l a c e ; h e n e v e r a n d n o w h e r e contrasts o r c o m p a r e s the t w o . C i r c u m c i s i o n has b e e n set aside because that w h i c h i t l o o k e d f o r w a r d t o a n d p i c t u r e d has t a k e n its place - the circumcision o f C h r i s t - n o t o n l y o n the cross b u t also i n t h e hearts o f behevers. T h a t is t o say, b a p t i s m a n d circumcision are related n o t because b a p t i s m fulfils the h o p e o f spiritual circumcision, b u t because b o t h v i v i d l y depict Christ's d e a t h a n d the r e a h t y o f t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n effected b y the S p i r i t i n t h e heart o f the c o n v e r t . I t w o u l d b e q u i t e w r o n g t o c o n c l u d e t h a t for P a u l b a p t i s m w a s only s y m b o h c a l . T h e axnna^hnes tjvrip h> ßarrriafiari indicates that b a p t i s m w a s also t h e occasion o f t h e spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n depicted b y b u r i a l (and circumcision), a n d t o s o m e e x t e n t t h e m e a n s o f b u r i a l w i t h C h r i s t . T h e b u r i a l took place i n the rite o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m , a n d b a p t i s m w a s the occasion o n w h i c h the i n d i v i d ual was d r c i u n c i s e d w i t h the invisible circumcision o f the Spirit. T h i s does n o t m e a n that b a p t i s m effected that c i r c u m d s i o n a n d tbat burial. I t m e a n s s i m p l y that t h e b a p t i s a n d s u r r e n d e r e d h i m s e l f t o the c u t t i n g e d g e o f the Spirit's k n i f e b y s u b m i t t i n g h i m s e l f t o b a p t i s m . S o w e see that o n c e a g a i n , as i n R o m . 6, P a u l uses ßäirriafsa. i n t w o w a y s : first, f o r its s y m b o h c a l significance - as c i r c u m d s i o n ' s Stripping away o f t h e flesh Images the Stripping away o f the b o d y o f flesh, SO the s i n k i n g bdow the w a t e r ' s surface Images the b u r i a l o f the old natmrc; s e c o n d , because i t was the occasion and m e a n s t o w a r d s t h e spiritual Operation - the Stripping a w a y and b u r i a l took place ' i n b a p t i s m ' , i n the self-surrender o f the i n d i v i d u a l a t one and the s a m e t i m e , i n one and t h e same a c t i o n , b o t h t o the b a p t i z e r and t o G o d , t h e w a t e r - b a p t i a e r and the S p i r i t - b a p t i z e r respectively. W e h a v e n o justification f o r g i v i n g iv r& ßamlonan a deeper significance t h a n tiiis.» * Even if the 1^ is referred to baptism in 12b, the ev can be given only local significance, since the instrumental function is attributed to &ith.

Ij8 Col.

Baptism in the Holy Spirit 2.20-y.i4

A s w i t h I.I3 s o m e c o m m e n t a t o r s h k e t o b e h e v e that the aorists o f 2.20; 3 . 1 , 3, j f . refer t o b a p t i s m . ^ " T h i s a g a m m a k e s the m i s t a k e o f e x t e r n a h z i n g w h a t is p r i m a r i l y a spiritual transaction. B a p t i s m m a y p l a y a p a r t i n it, b u t b a p t i s m is n o t at a h the focus o f a t t e n t i o n . F o r o n e t h i n g , t h e idea o f b u r i a l does n o t a p p e a r - a n d , as w e h a v e seen, i t is t o the idea o f b u r i a l that P a u l usually links b a p t i s m as a rite.ii A n d f o r a n o t h e r , t h e fact that h e c a n u r g e t h e m t o repeat w h a t t h e y d i d o n c e a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f their C h r i s t i a n h v e s (eVSuCTao-öe - V. 1 2 ; hihvaäfi^voi. - V. l o ) i m p h e s that t h e p u t t i n g o f f a n d p u t t i n g o n at c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n w a s essentiaUy a spiritual act o f self-renunciation a n d c o m m i t m e n t (cf. 3.5 w i t h R o m . 8.13). H o w i t w a s expressed is n o t r e l e v a n t here - f o r h e is certainly n o t a s k i n g t h e m t o repeat their b a p t i s m . P a u l ' s m i n d is w h o l l y o n t h e s p k i t u a l c h a n g e w h i c h c a n b e represented u n d e r t h e different figures o f d e a t h a n d resurrection, d i s r o b i n g a n d e n c l o t h i n g , n o t o n baptism.i2 If 3.5-17 is an example o f a primitive Christian catechism, the recognized form o f teaching given to inquirers seeking baptism (see e.g. Moule, Colossians H 3 f . ; Kamiah 36), we should note that the important thmg in what is required of the initiate is not baptism itself (which is not mentioned) but the conunitment expressed in it. The import ofthe instruction to die initiate was that he should not go forward to baptism, unless m and by that act he put off the old man and put on the new. However, die metaphors are so common and natural that I am not convmced of the necessity to refer them to a common source or occasion. Bpb.

i.i}f.;

4.}o

E p h . 1 . 1 3 is o n e o f the few P a i d i n e ( ? ) verses m u c h u s e d b y Pentecostals i n d e f e n d i n g their t h e o l o g y o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m : '. . . after t h a t y e b e U e v e d , y e w e r e sealed w i t h that H o l y S p i r i t o f p r o m i s e ' (AV - w i t h t h e 'after' e m p h a s i z e d ) . ^ » B u t this sort o f Lightfoot 200, 2o6f.; Abbott 272, 278; Masson 135, 143; Beare 2o8ff.; Lohse, Ksihsser 180, 205f.; Mollat 74; Beasley-Murray, Baptism Today and Tomorro» 6f.; Schwei2«r, NTS 14 (1967-68) 3; cf. Bruce 258, 272. 11 See also Schnackenburg 72. 1* Cf. Dibelius-Greeven 40; Scott, Colossians 62. See also pp. io9f. above. " Riggs 54, 61; Horton 1 j ; Brooke aif.; Prince, Jordan yoi.; B. Allen 9; but cf. Harper, Power 44, For the equivalent interpretation in Holiness teaching see e.g. Cumming 145.

The Later Pauünes

159

exegesis, as w e h a v e already n o t e d , is based o n a f u n d a m e n t a l m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f G r e e k g r a m m a r . i * T h e aorist participle does i n fact u s u a U y express antecedent action, b u t i t is the c o n t e x t , n o t the g r a m m a t i c a l f o r m , w h i c h determines this.i* A n d t h e c o n t e x t here indicates that w e s h o u l d take the t w o v e r bs as the t w o sides o f the o n e e v e n t : i t w a s w h e n t h e y b e h e v e d that G o d sealed t h e m w i t h t h e Spirit. A s i n G a l . 5 . 2 , the step o f faith is m e t b y t h e g i f t o f the Spirit. (i) T h e w h o l e section w . 3 - 1 4 is a i m i t y . I t is based o n v . 3, a n d t h e rest o f t h e verses describe w h a t are the blessings o f the h e a v e n l y realm.i6 T h e w h o l e sentence r e v o l v e s r o u n d a n d reverberates w i t h eV Xpiorut ( w . 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 1 0 , 1 0 , I I , 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 3 ) . T h e s e are the blessings w i t h w h i c h the i n d i v i d u a l is blessed w h e n h e b e c o m e s a C h r i s t i a n , that is, w h e n h e comes t o b e ev Xpiarw. A n d t h e chief o f these is t h e gift o f the H o l y Spirit, f o r t h e w h o l e sentence m o v e s f o r w a r d majesticaUy t o the climax o f w . 13f., so that a U the bless ings can b e r i g h t l y described as b e l o n g m g t o a n d c o m i n g f r o m the Holy Spkit." (Ü) W o r d s h k e inayyeXia, KXrjpovoiua, ireptTroirjai? s h o w b o w m u c h P a u l is t h i n k i n g o f the C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h as the n e w Israel.^^ T h e Spirit is t h e essence o f the n e w c o v e n a n t o f p r o m i s e (as i n G a l . 3.14). H e is the eschatological seal w h o m a r k s o u t Christians as t h e p e o p l e o f t h e E n d - t i m e . I t is o n l y b y receivuig t h e Spirit that o n e b e c o m e s a m e m b e r o f t h e n e w Israel, t h e n e w c o v e n a n t , t h e n e w age. (iü) T h e Spirit is o n l y the äppaßdv o f the Christian's inheritance. T h a t is t o say, t h e g i f t o f t h e S p k i t is t h e first instahnent o f that fidlness o f eternal life t o w h i c h t h e C h r i s t i a n l o o k s f o r w a r d - t h e anoXörpoiais r^s irepiirovqaems- A s t h e p a r t - o r d o w n - p a y m e n t , t h e appaßwv is p a r t o f a n d t h e same as t h e w h o l e . I n o t h e r w o r d s , the Spirit is the initial g i f t o f salvation. H e n o t o n l y guarantees the c o m p l e t i o n o f salvation ( w h i c h appaßwv also signifies); h e is h i m self the b e g m n i n g o f that salvation. I t is o n l y w h e n h e is received that the i n d i v i d u a l b e g m s t o b e saved. 14 See pp. 86f. above. " Button, Moods and Tenses 61. 1 « H. Schlief, Der Brief an die Epbeser (1957) 39.

" SchUet 66. »«B. F. Westcott, St Paid's Epistle to tbe Epbesians (1906) 14-16; J . A. Robinson, St Paul's Epistle to tbe Epbesians* (1904) 36, 146; Scott, Epbesians

i49f.; Schliet, Ef^ser

66f.

i6o

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

( i v ) Since tlie S p i r i t is G o d ' s seal, the 'transaction' o f c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n is c o m p l e t e d o n l y w h e n G o d gives a m a n t h e S p i r i t a n d t h u s m a r k s h i m as h e n c e f o r t h his p r o p e r t y a l o n e , m a r k s h i m o u t f o r the d a y o f final h b e r a t i o n (4.30 N E B ) . I n s h o r t , t o receive t h e S p i r i t b y f a i t h is t o b e c o m e a C h r i s t i a n . O n t h e o t h e r f r o n t , a n y Identification o f the seal o f the S p i r i t w i t h b a p t i s m i * o r confirmation^o is t o b e rejected. T h e t h o u g h t centres w h o U y a n d solely o n the Spirit g i v e n b y G o d as his o w n distinctive seal. B u t notice o n c e a g a i n t h e o l d P a u l i n e l i n k - u p b e t w e e n h e a r i n g t h e G o s p e l , b e H e v i n g , a n d receiving t h e Spirit. S o far as P a u l is c o n c e r n e d , these are t h e indispensable elements i n the n e x u s o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . I n particular, the emphasis o n f a i t h is rather striking. I n s t e a d o f w r i t i n g s i m p l y ev 4" « a l eapaylaörjTe, P a u l o b v i o u s l y t h i n k s it i m p o r t a n t t o insert m a r e v o a v T e s , e v e n t h o u g h the n e t result is a v e r y a w k w a r d clause. T h i s is n o d o u b t because f a i t h f o r P a u l is the o n l y , b u t also t h e v i t a l prerequisite f o r r e c e i v i n g the Spirit (cf. 1 . 1 5 , 1 9 ; 2.8; 3.12 w i t h 2.18). Eph. 2.4-6

S o m e m a i n t a i n t h a t P a u l is s p e a k i n g o f b a p t i s m here,2i princip a U y o n the g r o v m d s o f t h e u n d o u b t e d l y close paraUel b e t w e e n 2.5 a n d C o l . 2 . 1 3 . B u t this thesis c a i m o t b e sustained. (i) C o l . 2 . 1 3 , as w e s a w , c o m p l e t e l y c h a n g e d the m e t a p h o r f r o m that t o w h i c h b a p t i s m w a s attached. T h e r e is n o t h i n g o f bvuial here, a n d the d e a t h s p o k e n o f is a p r e - C h r i s t i a n State, n o t p a r t o f the c o n v e r s i o n e v e n t . awrf^aptv recaUs C o l . 2 . 1 2 b , but that too was detached f r o m ßämiana; a n d h e r e it is y o k e d w i t h awKaOi^ev w h i c h is h a r d l y a suitable figure f o r b a p t i s m . i»Most recentiy by G. Johnston: 'Those who accept it are "sealed", baptized, in water; in and through this water the Spirit of God floods their life' {Ephesians, Phiiippians, Colossians and Philemon [1967] i i ) ; and Kirby i53f. Scott makes the astounding claim that 'frequendy in the N T baptism is called a seal' {Ephesians 148). But see p. 133 above. 2» Westcott 16; Schlier, Epheser 70; cf . T/6» Theology of Christian Initiation 2 3; Thomton, Confirmation Today 9; and see p. 134 n. 5 8 above. Schlier's discussion at this point is typical of his sacramentalism. 81 Schlier, Epheser 109-11; Schnackenburg 73-78. See also Larsson 106; Bieder 225-7; *"id those cited by Kümmel who contend that Ephesians is 'a "post-baptismal mystery discourse" addressed to rccendy baptized Christians to remind them of their baptism' {Introdsiction 251); cf. Bultmatm, Theology I i42f.; Bouttier, Paul 39; Kirby I54ff. Schlier even thinks that Paul under stands baptism as a heavenly joumey (111), presumably with Reitzenstein's exposition of the meaning of Mandacan baptism in mind (see Wagner zif.).

The Later Paulines

i6i

(ii) T h e t h o u g h t is all u p o n t h e spiritual transition (
4.1-6

T h i s passage appears t o indicate t h e respective roles o f t h e S p i r i t a n d b a p t i s m i n C h r i s t i a n conversion-irütiation. 22 T h e p r i n cipal t h o u g h t is that o f i m i t y , as i t is o f the w h o l e epistle. B u t b e f o r e e l a b o r a t i n g o n t h e t h e m e b e designates i t as u i ü t y o f the S p i r i t u n i t y w h i c h is t h e w o r k a n d g i f t o f t h e Spirit. U i ü t y is d e t e r m i n e d b y the Spirit a n d m a i n t a i n e d b y the S p i r i t ( I C o r . i2.i2f.; P h ü , 2 . 1 ; E p h . 2.18).

T h e u n i t y o f t h e S p k i t is t h e n elaborated k i terms o f s e v e n great unities. T h e s e are t o b e g r o u p e d i n a 313 .•! scheme, as the balance o f t h e sentence a n d t h e «fs, pia, h> f o r m u l a o f t h e s e c o n d t r i a d indicates.28 T h i s m e a n s that TtveOpa. is i n the m i d d l e o f the first triad. A n d this is n o t accidental, f o r o t h e r w i s e w e w o u l d h a v e expected nvevpM t o c o m e first, so t h a t the f k s t m e m b e r o f each o f the three ünes w o u l d g i v e t h e c l i m a x h irveOfia, efs Kvptos, ets ßeos. M o r e o v e r , i t is e v i d e n t that i t is the S p i r i t w h i c h b i n d s the o t h e r t w o m e m b e r s o f the t r i a d t o g e t h e r . T h e u n i t y o f the b o d y is effected a n d m a i n t a i n e d b y t h e S p i r i t ( v . 3); a n d the S p i r i t is t h e substance a n d g r o i m d o f the Christian's h o p e , f o r i. 18 identifies t h e h o p e w i t h t h e KAijpovo^t'a o f w h i d i t h e S p i r i t is t h e g u a r a n t e e ( 1 . 1 4 ) ' T h i s p r o b a b l y i m p ü e s that the s a m e h o l d s true o f t h e s e c o n d t r i a d ; that is, i t is f a i t h w h i d i b i n d s t o g e t h e r mpios a n d ßäwnaixa. F a i t h is o n e because i t is d k e c t e d t o the o n e L o r d , a n d has t h e o n e L o r d as its g r o u n d a n d content.2* A n d b a p t i s m is o n e because i t 8« The absence of any mention of the Lxjtd's Suppet implies that Paul is thinking about the initial conditions of the Chtistian life (Westcott j8f.; Schlier, Epbeser 158 n. 2). ** Abbott 107; Robinson, Epbesians 93; Dibelius-Grceven 79; Schlier, Epbeser 185.

«* Scblatter, Erläutenmgen 7 Teil 202.

102

Baptism in tlie Holy Spirit

expresses the one faith. T h e t h o u g h t is essentiaUy o f the o n e L o r d confessed in b a p t i s m (cf. R o m . io.9f.). T h u s w e m i g h t w e U say that as the S p i r i t b r i n g s i n t o u n i o n w i t h the o n e B o d y and m a k e s v a h d the o n e h o p e , so faith b r i n g s i n t o u n i o n w i t h the o n e L o r d , a n d m a k e s v a h d the o n e b a p t i s m . Paul is not talking here about subjective experiences or spiritual transformations - not even when he speaks of faith and hope: they are both seen objectively and concretely (C. Masson, Uß,pttre de Saint Paul auxEphesiens [1953] 186; Beasley-Murray 200). This confirms that in the Pauline use ßdimafm is the external act of water-baptism as such and nothing more.

T h e fact that b a p t i s m is l i n k e d here w i t h f a i t h c o n f i r m s tbat the water-rite Stands o n the side o f m a n ' s faith r a t h e r t h a n o n the side of G o d ' s grace. 25 T h e fact that b a p t i s m is i n c l u d e d i n the hst i m p U e s that b a p t i s m w a s r e g a r d e d as the o t d y legitimate w a y f o r f a i t h t o c o m e t o (iidtial) visible expression. B u t t h e p o s i t i o n b a p t i s m is g i v e n s h o w s t h a t i t w a s o t d y i m p o r t a n t because o f the faith i t expressed, and because i t w a s the act o f c o m m i t m e n t t o the o n e L o r d . T h e o n e G o d ' s response is t o g i v e t h e o n e S p i r i t who i n corporates i n t o t h e o n e B o d y a n d gives the o n e h o p e . A n d t h u s is estabUshed the i m i t y o f t h e Spirit. Epi.

y.iy-iy

T h e p r i m a r y reference here is o n c e a g a i n to t h e spiritual cleans i n g a n d sanctification w h i c h is t h e w o r k o f t h e Spirit, a n d as s u c h the essence of c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . M o s t t h i n k t h a t the e x p U c i t m e n t i o n o f w a t e r c a n o t d y b e e x p l a i n e d b y a reference t o w a t e r b a p t i s m , t h o u g h a f e w refer t h e phrase t o C h r i s t ' s d e a t h o n t h e cross. 28 B u t the \ovrpav roS vSaros refcrs rather, i n t h e first instance, t o the c u s t o m a r y p r e - n u p t i a l bridal b a t h , as t h e c o n t e x t clearly shows. T h e t h o u g h t of w . 25-27 is entirely centred o n the bridal analogy. Verse 25 regards the r d a t i o n of Christ t o the Christian in terms of husband and wife, and v . 27'thinks of the parousia as a w c d d i n g : 'in order that he m i g h t present (yrapaar^) die C h u r c h (as a bride) t o 8* The first triad consists of elements given by God; the second triad of elements in man's response. Kittel, who emended pi^n to at/tan; Robinson, Studiet 169; Barth, Taufe 472; Church of Scodand, Bibtica/ Doctrine }8.

The Later Paulines

163

himself in glory' (Reicke, TWNT V 839; Schlier, Epheser 258; and cf. II Cor. 11.2). Verse 27 indicates the purpose of the action described in V . 26: the washing has the purpose of making the bride dean for her wedding (the second im-clause is imme^atelj dependent on v. 26, but ultimately, of course, on v. 25). It is surely most natural and most in keeping with the analogy, therefore, to see the \otnp6v TOV vSaTos as part of the analogy, that is, as the bridal bath which precedes and prepares for the wedding. The other alternative is to say that he takes up the marriage metaphor in v. 2 5, drops it in v. 26, and takes it up again in V . 27. But this is a far less plausible interpretation. Moreover, the brideanalogy is common in Scripture: Matt. 2 5 . 1 ; Mark 2.20; John 3.29; Rom. 7 . 2 - 4 ; ! Cor. 6.17; II Cor. 1 1 . 2 ; Rev. 19.9; 21.2; 22.17; in the see Isa. 54.4^; 62.5; Hos. 2.14-17, i9f.; also Jer. 3.8; Ezek. 16.8-13. If indeed Ezek. 16.8-14 is the background of this passage Q. A . T. Robinson, The Body [1952] 82 n. i) it is not at all surprising that the author extended the analogy to include the bridal bath, since Ezek. 16.8 explicidy speaks of washing hi t / S a « . Those who accept the reference to the bridal badi indude Kennedy 251; Cerfaux, Christ ^lo; see also those dted in Schnackenburg 5; Delling, Taufe n. 375.

T h e q u e s t i o n t h e n b e c o m e s : I f the w e d d i n g equals t h e p a r o u s i a i n t h e a n a l o g y , t o w h a t does t h e b r i d a l b a t h refer? S o m e w o u l d r e p l y , ' T o b a p t i s m ' ; b u t w e s h o u l d r a t h e r refer t h e I m a g e directiy t o t h e i i m e r d e a n s i n g a n d sanctifying Operation o f t h e S p i r i t . ^ ' (i) T h e Spots a n d w r i n k l e s etc. ( v . 27) depict t h e blemishes a n d ravages o f sin. A s t h e b r i d a l b a t h washes a w a y all d i r t a n d Spots, s o G o d ' s d e a n s i n g washes a w a y all sin. (ii) I t is C h r i s t w h o effects t h e w a s h i n g , a n d his i n s t r u m e n t o f d e a n s i n g is n o t w a t c r b u t that w h i c h w a t e r s o o f t e n sigtdfies i n S c r i p t u r e - t h e Spirit. (iii) T h e b r i d e is t h e Chvurch. T o say t h a t the Church is h t e r a l l y w a s h e d i n w a t e r is r a t h e r artificial;^» i t is m u c h easier t o t h i n k o f t h e C h u r c h , as C h u r c h , d e a n s e d a n d sanctified b y t h e S p i r i t ( c f . 4.4). T h a t is t o say, w e m u s t g o i m m e d i a t d y f r o m t h e figure o f t h e b r i d a l b a t h t o t h e spiritual r « d i t y o f d e a n s i n g , a n d n o t v i a w a t e r b a p t i s m . I t is i n a n d b y t h e Spirit's i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t h e B o d y , " Cf. E. K. Sünpson, Tbe Epistk to tbe Epbesians {i^^i) 121-32. Those who think baptism is probably referred to under the image of the bridal bath indude Westcott 84; Abbott 168; Lambert 178; Prat II 216 n. 2; Masson 212; F. W. Beare. ZB 10 (1953) 7*2-5; N. A. Dahl. Kur^e AusUffmg des Epbeserbriefes (1965) 70; Bieder 166; cf. F. Foulkcs, Tbe Epistle ofPaul to tbe Epbesians (1963) ijSf. Beasley-Murray is uncertain (201). »« H. Conzclmann, Der Brief an die Epbeser^» (NTD 1965) 87.

164

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

the C h u t c h , that o n e p a r t i d p a t e s m the Spirit's d e a n s i n g a n d sancti f y i n g o f the C h u r c h (cf. I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 ) . ( i v ) T h e v e r b w h i c h describes the cleansing (/caöopt'Cctv) has l o n g since left t h e cultic sphere o f ritual p u r i t y , a n d i n N T r e l i g i o n it Stands f o r a spiritual a n d m o r a l cleansing a n d p u r i f y i n g . ^ » I t is t h e w o r d w h i c h breaks d o w n t h e o l d barriers b e t w e e n clean a n d tmclean ( M a r k 7 . 1 9 ; M a t t . 2 3 . 2 5 ^ ; L u k e 1 1 . 3 9 ; A c t s 1 0 . 1 5 ; 1 1 . 9 ) , s o that Peter's defence o f his c o n d u c t w i t h r e g a r d t o C o r n e h u s is t h a t G o d cleansed (Kaddpiaas) their hearts b y f a i t h ( A c t s 15.9). I t appears only three times i n the P a u h n e Hterature. T i t u s 2 . 1 4 s h o w s t h e sense clearly, and again i n I I C o r . 7.1 a m o r a l cleansing is in v i e w . ( v ) L i k e w i s e dyid^eiv c a n o t d y hc referred t o a spiritual Opera tion. I n P a u l dyid^eiv is o n e o f the Holj Spirit's great w o r k s ( R o m . 1 5 . 1 6 ; I C o r . 6 . 1 1 ; I T h e s s . 4 . 7 ^ ; I I T h e s s . 2 . 1 3 ; ! C o r . 3.i6f.) - t h e o n e w h e r e b y h e sets aside t h e c o n v e r t f o r G o d ; a n d tbat takes place n o t o n t h e cross n o r at C o n f i r m a t i o n , b u t i n c o n v e r s i o n - i t d t i a t i o n , f o r it is t h a t w h i c h m a k e s o n e a Christian.80 ( v i ) C o n t r a r y t o t h e o p i r d o n o f m o s t exegetes, ß^p-a m e a n s ' p r e a c h i n g ( o f the gospd)',3i n o t a b a p t i s m a l confession, f a r less a b a p t i s m a l f o r m u l a . T h e d e t e r m i n a t i v e P a u h n e passages are R o m . 1 0 . 8 , 1 7 : there T6 p^/to o f t h e D e u t . 30.14 d t a t i o n is defined as ' t h a t w h i c h w e p r e a c h ' ; a n d w e are t o l d that f a i t h c o m e s f r o m t h e m e s sage, a n d t h e message t h r o u g h t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n o f C h r i s t (8ia prJimTos Xpiarov). T h i s is t h e m e a i d n g o f t h e t w o occurrences o f pijua i n E p h , 5.26; 6.17. I t is p r e a c h i n g o f G o d w h i c h the S p i r i t uses as his s w o r d . A n d it is p r e a c h i n g w h i c h t h e S p i r i t uses t o d e a n s e t h e h e a r t o f the b e h e v e r (cf. J a m e s 1 . 1 8 , 2 1 ; I P e t e r i.23).32 p^fija = 'preaching' is usually anarthrous i n Paul. T h e artide appears w i t h p^/*a i n R o m . 10.8 only because 'TÖ p^/ia' u k e s u p the d t a t i o n o f D e u t . 30.14 (the Standard pesher technique). T h e absence o r presence o f Xpiarov o r 0eov is immaterial t o the sense. I question whether ro pfjiM. should be regarded as the confession spoken o f in R o m . 10.9. T h e m o s t probable original text o f 10.9 does n o t contam prjpja. P a u l has already interpreted rd pfj/jux o f D e u t . 30.14 as 'that w h i d i we preach' (10.8). I n «»Hauck, TDNT TU 417, 423-6. 3<> See also Beasley-Munray's criticisni of the Robinson-Barth interpreta tion (20lf.). *i Lambert i76f.; Meuzelaar 89 n. 2; Foulkes 158; cf. E. K. Simpson 131 n. 35. 82 This accords well with the Pauline emphasis that preaching is a dedsive factor in conversion (scc p. 119 n. 7 above).

Tie Later Paulines

16 5

10.9 he proceeds to take up and Interpret the latter phrases of Deut. 30.14, in tjfpical pesher fashion, using them to definc tbe response to tbe pfjfia rather than the p^/m itself. Further, the absence of the artide in Eph. 5.26 teils against referring pfjua to the baptismal confession. For the confession seems to have had Standard forms from very early on, and a reference to it would more hkely be to 'the confession' (as in Heb. 4.14; 10.23; cf. I Tim. 6.13); whereas preaching the gospel could take a great variety of forms, and could be referred to simply as '(a) proclama tion (of the gospel)', as it is in Rom. 10.17 and Eph. 6.17. Only when Eph. 5.26 is referred directly to baptism as such does ev pfjixari cause difficulty and have to be forced into speculative and less natural mean ings - a fact Worth noting in the context of this whole investigation.

(vü) F i n a U y , w e h a v e seen t h a t P a u l uses b a p t i s m p r i m a r ü y as a m e t a p h o r a n d a s y m b o l . H i s b r i d a l a n a l o g y w o u l d b e o f üttle v a l u e i f i t o t ü y s y m b o U z e d a s y m b o l . B u t w e h a v e clearly seen so o f t e n h o w P a u l goes straight f r o m t h e m e t a p h o r t o the r e a l i t y ; c i r c u m d s i o n , f o r e x a m p l e , is n o t a picture o f b a p t i s m , b u t o f i i m e r circvund s i o n , the seal o f t h e Spirit. S o h e r e , t h e b r i d a l b a t h represents the i i m e r d e a n s i n g a n d sanctifying o f the Spirit. Its paraUel i n t h e real d r a m a o f m i t i a t i o n is w a t e r - b a p t i s m . B u t b o t h p o i n t d i r e c d y t o the b e a r t o f the m a t t e r , n o t t o each o t h e r . Titus ß.j-y T h e s e verses c o v d d b e d t e d i n f a v o u r o f t h e P e n t e c o s t a l thesis, the dvoicaii'üjorts irvevfmTos äyiov b e i n g d e t a c h e d f r o m t h e XovrpoO •naXiyyevea'ias^^ a n d a l o n e U n k e d w i t h t h e subsequent clause t o describe t h e Pentecostal effusion o f t h e S p i r i t ; » * f u r t h e r , t h e hiKoiosBhnes c o v d d b e r e g a r d e d as c h r o n o l o g i c a U y p r i o r t o t h e yeiTjöcu/iev.ss T h e n e t result w o v d d b e : "»An old interpretation, going back to Theodoret, whereby AowrpoO •naKiyytwalas is referred to baptism and äveucaivciKrcei); mifiiMTos äytov to con firmation (see e.g. Chase 98-102; J . Coppens cited by Schnackenbutg 86; also NEB and JB). ** Pastot L. F. Woodfotd ofthe Pentecostal assembly in Cambridge in 1965 dtew my attention to the following pataUels with the tuotativc of Pentecost and the othet 'Pentecostäl' passages in Acts: (i) ^f^ccv . . . iiXavaUas - Acts 2.17, 18, 33; 10.45; (") ü' - the emphatic Ar(-Acts a.iyf.; 8.16; 10.44; i r . 1 5 ; 19.6; Luke 24.49; ("Ö 'IrfoO XpurroO - Acta 2.53. Pastot Woodford dted ABbrd in Support and tefetred also to the follow ing translations: AV, RV, NEB, Weymouth, Datby, Rothetham, Conybeaie. B. S. Easton speaks of 'a long exegetical ttadition' which argues that' "being justified" describes an event occurring before baptism' (Jbe Vastaral Epistles 1948] 103). Cf. J . N. D. Kelly's translation in Ibe Pastoral Epistles (1963) 248.

i66

Baptism in the Holy Spirit Conversion

he saved us t h r o u g h the washing o f regeneration that h a v i n g been justified

Baptism in the Spirit

and renewal o f t h e Spirit w h i c h he poured out u p o n us richly t h r o u g h Jesus Christ our Saviour in order w e might become heirs in hope o f eternal life.

B u t this w i l l h a r d l y d o . (i) V e r s e 5 . iraXiyyeveala a n d dvaKaivaiais are v i r t u a l l y s y n o n y m ous. T h e y can h a r d l y be t a k e n t o signify t w o q u i t e distinct a n d separate events a n d experiences. T o b e r e b o r n is to be m a d e a n e w . A t m o s t w e can say that the t w o phrases describe the same trans f o r m a t i o n f r o m s h g h t l y different angles.»* M o r e o v e r , b o t h phrases, AouT. TToA. a n d d m « . m>. d y . , are g o v e m e d b y t h e o n e 8id. I f the ideas h a d b e e n distinct a n d the events i n v o l v e d separate, i t w o u l d h a v e b e e n natural t o repeat the Sid. T h e N E B m a r g i n is therefore t o b e p r e f e r r e d : ' t h e w a t e r o f r e b i r t h a n d o f r e n e w a l b y . . .', w i t h b o t h TToA. a n d dm/c. b e i n g t a k e n as d e p e n d e n t o n Xovrpov.^'' A g a i n , just as i t is difficult t o distinguish waA. f r o m dvaK., so i t is difficult t o separate rraX. f r o m meviia äyiov as the S p i r i t o f r e g e n e r a t i o n . ' R e b i r t h is effected b y t h e H o l y Spirit.'»8 eauxxev therefore describes t h e s a v i n g act o f G o d i n w h i c h h e effects r e g e n e r a t i o n b y t h e r e n e w i n g p o w e r o f the H o l y Spirit - o n e act w i t h different aspects, n o t a series o f acts. ( ü ) V e r s e 6. T h e m a i m e r i n w h i c h t h e H o l y S p i r i t c o m e s f o r this r e g e n e r a t i n g a n d r e n e w i n g Operation is f i i r t h e r described in the n e x t clause, f o r here t h e o u t p o u r i n g of t h e S p i r i t is o b v i o u s l y w h a t effects t h e ( r e b i r t h a n d ) r e n e w a l o f t h e S p i r i t , so t h a t t h e e f e x « « ' m u s t describe t h e same e v e n t as t h e eaioaev. T h e clear allusion t o t h e t r a d i t i o n o f P e n t e c o s t (tKxew is used w i t h t h e S p i r i t i n t h e N T only here a n d i n A c t s 2 . 1 7 , 1 8 , 3 3 ) i s a d e d s i v e c h e c k t o P e n t e c o s t a l ideas b o t h o f c o n v e r s i o n a n d S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . F o r here it is t h e P e n t e c o s t a l o u t p o u r i n g of t h e S p i r i t - t h e b a p t i s m i n t h e S p i r i t w h i c h effects the r e g e n e r a t i o n a n d r e n e w a l o f salvation. P e n t e c o s t is r e g e n e r a t i o n a n d r e n e w a l . *« So most commentators. See especially Lampe, Seal j^f.; Schnackenburg lof.; E. F. Scott, Tbe PastoralEpittlet (Mo&tt 1936) 175. »' So most; see especially Lampe, Seal jgf.; C. K. Barrett, Tbe Pastoral Epistles (1963) 142. Barrett 142; see also Lampe, Seal 60.

The Later Ptmlines

167

(iii) W i t h biKOMoß&res WC h a v e o n c e a g a i n a coincident aorist participle, f o r n o P a u h n i s t w o u l d t h i n k t o distinguish t h e e v e n t o f b e i n g justified»» f r o m t h a t o f b e c o m i n g a n h e k ' i n h o p e o f eternal life', o r either f r o m the e v e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n ; s u c h pass ages as R o m . 3.24; 8.17; I C o r . 6 . 9 - 1 1 ; G a l . 4.5-7; E p h . 1 . 1 1 m a k e t h a t p i a i n e n o u g h . N o r m a y w e separate this hiKouadevres from w h a t precedes i t : t h e tva-clause describes t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e P e n t e costal o u t p o u r m g as w e l l as o f the tamafvA^ T h e s a v i n g p u r p o s e o f G o d , w h i c h is that w e m i g h t b e justified a n d b e c o m e h e k s , is effected b y the b a p t i s m i n the Spirit. I I T i m . 1.6 has sometimes been referred to Confirmation (e.g. Chase 35-41; L o w t h e r Clarke 10), o r t o Spirit-baptism ( O . R o b e r t s , The Baptism mth the Holy Spirit [1964] 46f.); but the m u c h sounder interpreta

tion refers this verse, together w i t h I T i m . 4.14 (cf. also 1.18; 5.22), t o a setting aside f o r particular w o r k (equivalent t o out 'Ordination'), as xdpiafia (not Scopeo) in b o t h passages, and the parallel in A c t s 13.1-3 also suggest. I need d o n o m o r e than refer t o Barrett's excellent treatment and the articles by D a u b e and Jeremias w h i c h he also mentions (7if., 93, also 47, 81). I I T i m . 1.7 has a wider reference t o all Christians and t o the gift o f the Spirit at conversion - cf. R o m . 8.15. I t is e v i d e n t , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t P a u l is describing t h e o n e e v e n t o f b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n i n as rieh a n d f ü l l a w a y as possible. T h e o u t p o u r i n g o f t h e S p i r i t is n o t s o m e t h i n g distinct f r o m t h e r e n e w a l n o r t h e r e n e w a l f r o m t h e r e g e n e r a t i o n ; n e i t h e r is t h e b e c o m i n g h e k s distmct f r o m t h e b e i n g justified, n o r a n y o f t h o s e f r o m t h e b e i n g saved. G o d ' s p u r p o s e i n t h e act o f s a l v a t i o n is o u r justifica tion a n d a d o p t i o n ; t h e m e a n s b y w h i c h h e achieves t h a t p u r p o s e is ' t h e w a s h i n g o f r e g e n e r a t i o n a n d r e n e w a l i n the H o l y S p i r i t w h i c h h e p o u r e d u p o n u s richly t h r o u g h o u r L o r d Jesus C h r i s t ' . F o r the S p k i t as the agent o f spiritual 'begetting' in P a u l see G a l . 4.29 a n d I C o r . 4.15 w i t h 2.4; cf. I I C o r . 3.6; o n the S p k i t and justification see p p . 108, i35f., 148 a b o v e ; and o n the l i n k between the Spirit and K\i)povoijUa see R o m . 8.15-17; I C o r . 6.9-11; G a l . 3 . 1 4 , 1 8 ; 4.6f.; E p h .

i.i3f. »» Any distinction between StKouU here and justification in the certain Paulines rather presupposes the distinction of authors than proves it. See Beasley-Murray 215f.; Kelly 25 3f.; J . Jeremias, Dk Briefe OH Timotheus imd Titus* (NTD 1963) 67; Barrett 143; cf. M. DibeUus and H. Conaelmann, Di* Pastoralbriefe* (HNT 1966) 1 1 5 . « Cf. C. Spicq, Les ßpitres Pastorales* (1947) *8o.

i68

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

B u t w h a t is this Xompov"? M o s t c o t n m e n t a t o r s unhesitatingly accept t h a t the p r i m a r y reference is t o b a p t i s m . B u t o n c e a g a i n I b e U e v e that w e m u s t see here a spiritual w a s h i n g w h i c h is effected b y t h e Spirit. Xoxnpöv is b e t t e r i m d e r s t o o d as t h e act o f w a s h i n g ( o r t h e w a t e r u s e d t h e r e m ) , t h a n the receptacle u s e d f o r washing.^i 'Washing' is the sense we find in the four other occurrences in bibhcal Greek (S. of S. 4.2; 6.6; Ecclus. 34.25; Eph. 5.26). Aquila uses XovTpöv in Ps. 61.8; 107.9 'washpot', but Aquila's version is dated AD 130. The earlier we date the 'faithful saying' the more likely it is that the biblical usage is determinative. On the other band, the closer we link the Xovrpov iraXiYyeveaias with contemporary pagan tcrminology the more Ukely it is that Xovrpöv has the sense of 'bath'. Yet this latter link is more open to question, for while iraXiyyeveaia is probably borrowed from contemporary reUgious tcrminology, in the Mystery cults generaUy the idea of rebirth had not been Unked to the introductory bath, which was simply a bath of cleansing (Schnackenburg 14; Wagner 259f., 270).

M o r e o v e r , since iraXiyYevemas and dvaKaivu>aecos are b o t h d e p e n d e n t o n Xovrpov, a n d neither can b e i n d e p e n d e n t o f o r separated f r o m the S p i r i t , i t is best t o t a k e ' r e g e n e r a t i o n a n d r e n e w a l ' as a single c o n c e p t describing the w a s h i n g o f the H o l y S p i r i t - the w a s h i n g , o f regeneration a n d r e n e w a l , w h i c h the H o l y S p i r i t effects. 42 T h i s , t h o u g h cvmibersome, is, I suggest, c o n f i r m e d b y t h e iiexeev o f v . 6 : t h e w r i t e r speaks o f t h e S p i r i t as ' p o u r e d o u t ' because h e is t h i n k i n g o f the Spirit's regenerative a n d r e n e w i n g a c t i v i t y i n terms o f w a t e r a n d w a s h i n g : i t is the cleansing a n d p u r i f y i n g w e experience w h e n the S p i r i t is p o u r e d o u t u p o n u s w h i c h b r i n g s a b o u t o u r r e g e n e r a t i o n a n d r e n e w a l , * * T h e m o r e definite is t h e c o n s d o u s a U u s i o n t o P e n t e c o s t , t h e s t r o n g e r this Suggestion b e c o m e s , f o r the o u t p o v u i n g o f the S p i r i t a t P e n t e c o s t w a s s y m b o l i z e d b y (the w a s h i n g o f J o h n ' s ) b a p t i s m , b u t w a s w h o U y i n d e p e n d e n t o f the water-rite, O f water-lM.ptism as such there is h e r e n o m e n t i o n , t h o u g h i t naay b e i m p U d t i n t h e t h o u g h t t h a t w a t e r - b a p t i s m , w h i c h depicts this w a s h i n g , w a s also the occasion w h e n i t t o o k place. T h i s w o u l d certainly more a c c o r d w i t h t h e p i c t u r e o f c o n v e r s i o n which w e have drawn out f r o m Paul and L u k e , than one where 41 See Robinson, Epbeswu zo^t; Simpson, Pastorats ii4f. « a. TEV; R. F. Horton, Tbe Pastorat Epistles (1911). « Cf, Kittel 43f,; Barth, Dogmatik IV/4 126; and scc Schnackenburg 13, For the idea of spiritual deansing cf, II Tim, 2,21; Titus 2.14.

The Later Paulines

169

baptism as sucb w a s described in terms o f regeneration and r e newal. A n d if w e coidd be sure tbat tbis 'faithful saying' was written or dictated b y Paul himself the matter w o u l d be setded. A l t e m a tively, if Luke either w a s Paul's amanuensis a n d co-author, o r framed Paul's thought in his o w n w o r d s after the latter's death,** the allusion t o Pentecost w o u l d be aU the more defiidte and the 'washing o f the Spirit' interpretation all the more sure. W e must, h o w e v e r , aUow f o r the possibiUty that here w e have a different theologian at w o r k , one whose ideas are m o r e akin to the theology (perhaps) of J o h n 3 . 5 . In that case there w o u l d be more t o be said for the translation: 'the bath of the regeneration and renewal which the Holy Spirit effects'. Baptism w o u l d be n o t ordy the occasion of regeneration, b u t the rite itself w o u l d be characterized b y the regeneration and renewal which took place in it. N o t otdy so, but water-baptism w o u l d also be given a functional role in the event of salvation:'he saved US . . . /j6ro»^>& (Sid) the bath . . .'. I t d o e s not foUow, h o w e v e r , that w e can speak of baptism here as effecting regeneration or conveying the Holy Spirit - the getdtive •nveu/xaTos ayiov indicates n o t dependence o n Xovrpov but the agency which effects the •traXiyyeveala Kai dvaKalvwais, and the Spirit is poured o u t n o t Std Xovrpov but S(d 'Irjoov Xpiarov. The w a y w o u l d then be open t o Interpret the functional role of baptism in terms o f faith, as w e have so far been doing, and w e w o i d d have t o opt f o r one o r other of the t w o translations offered b y Beasley-Murray: 'the washing characterized by the regeneration and renewal w r o u g h t b y the Holy Spirit', o r 'the washing wherein the Holy Spirit w r o u g h t regenera tion and renewal'.** O n the evidence o f the undisputed Paidine letters this cannot be regarded as typical o f his theology o f conversion-hdtiation. O n the other band, it is n o t altogether unPauline in its context. If I Tim. 6.1 af. refers to the baptismal confession, as is most probable (see Beasley-Murray 204-6), we should only note that it is to this that Timothy is recaUed, and not to some sacramental efficacy of baptism such as some find reflected in the exhortations of Col. 3. II Tim. 2 . 1 1 - 1 2 is not to bc referred to baptism (contra Schneider, Baptism 34f.; Beasley-Murray 207-9), but it includes a rcferöicc t o the *» Cf. C. F. D. Moule, ^lletin oftbe Jobn Kylands Ubrary

47 (1963) No. 2.

430-52; A. Strobel, NTS 15 (1968-69) 191-210, «Beasley-Murray 211, 2i4f, (my italics); cf. Bultmann, Tbeologf I l o i ; Schweizer, TWNT VI 444.

lyo

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

death with Christ experienced at conversion-initiation. The echo of Rom. 6.8 confirms this smce, as we saw, the thought there had passed on from the sacrament mentioned in v. 4. (Notice that once again death ües in the past while Hfe Hes in the future; it is a poetical antithesis, of course, but it is certainly in line with Paul's thought in Rom. 6.1-11.) To expound the rest of the hymn in terms of 'hving out the baptismal hfe' (Beasley-Murray 208; a frequent phrase in Moss) introduces an idea foreign to the NT. For Paul at any rate the thought is rather of hving out Hfe Kard trvevfJLa. Once again, then, w e have seen how Paul in an effort to describe the richness and variety o f the experience o f conversion-initiation has pressed into service metaphors and analogies drawn, f o r ex ample, from the business w o r l d (Eph. i.isf.), o r from the signifi cant events of human Hfe, Hke birth (Titus 5.5), marriage (Eph. 5.25-27) and death (Col. 2.1 if,, 20; 3.3). In every case the thought has centred whoUy on the spiritual reahties and inward w o r k of the Spirit rather than, and even as distinct f r o m some outward rite. There has never been any real question of a second stage such as that argued for b y Pentecostals and 'Confirmationists'; and baptism has been clearly presented as the occasion of the Spirit's life-giving Coming (Col. 2 . 1 2 ; Titus 3.5 f. [ ?]) and the expression of faith (Eph. 4.5), but as nothing more.

CONCLUSION

T h r o u g h o u t P a r t T h r e e w e h a v e c o n t i n u e d o u r debate w i t h P e n t e costals o n t h e o n e b a n d a n d sacramentaUsts o n the o t h e r . S o f a r as Pentecostal t h e o l o g y is c o n c e r n e d , ovur task has b e e n t o l o o k f o r a r e c e p t i o n o f the S p i r i t w h i c h P a u l distinguishes f r o m c o n v e r s i o n initiation. M o s t Pentecostals r e c o g n i z e t h e f o r c e o f R o m . 8.9 a n d agree t h a t t o b e a C h r i s t i a n o n e m u s t h a v e received t h e S p i r i t i n s o m e sense. B u t f o r t h e m t h e focus o f a t t e n t i o n faUs o n a second r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t w h i c h t h e y a t t e m p t t o find as o f t e n as p o s sible i n P a u l , i d e n t i f y i n g i t w i t h s u c h t e r m s as a n o i n t i n g , sealing, a n d p r o m i s e . O u r s t u d y has s h o w n : t h a t P a u l k n o w s o f o n l y o n e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S p i r i t , n o t t w o ; t h a t t h e concepts o f a n o i n t i n g , sealing, o u t p o u r i n g , p r o m i s e , g i f t , etc., a U refer t o that o n e c o m i n g o f t h e Spurit; t h a t this c o m i n g o f t h e S p i r i t is t h e v e r y h e a r t a n d essence o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a d o n ; a n d t h a t e v e n their o w n tide o f ' b a p t i s m i n t h e S p i r i t ' is u s e d b y P a u l t o describe n o t h i n g

The Later Paulines

171

o t h e r t h a n G o d ' s m e a n s o f m c o r p o r a t m g the c o n v e r t u i t o C h r i s t . There are a few passages which c o u l d be taken t o imply frequent Comings o f t h e Spirit ( I Thess. 4.8; G a l . 5.5; Phil. 1.19; Eph. 5.18). However, the first two are best taken as describing the continuing activity of God as more and more become Christians (cf. John 1.3 3), rather than a continual giving of the Spirit to individuals (see p. 105 n. 2 above). Phil. 1.19 is best taken as 'the supply afforded by the Spirit' (M. R. Vincent, Phiiippians and Philemon [ICC 1897] 24; F. W . Beare, The Epistle to the Phiiippians [1959] 62). The more probable interpretation of Eph. 5.18 does allow for repeated filUngs with the Spirit (contra Ervin 7 4 - 7 8 - since the prohibition is against a repeated action and not a continuous State {ixeOvaKca not iiedvco] it suggests that the exhortation should be understood similarly). Yet this caimot provide any support for the Pentecostal. For this is the same distinction as appears in Acts: repeated experiences of being filled (i.e. taken over or controlled) by the Spirit on the part of an individual or individuals who had already been once-and-for-all baptized in the Spirit. Of a special once-and-forall second giving of or fiUing with the Spirit Paul knows nothing.

S o far as sacramentahst t h e o l o g y is c o n c e r n e d , i t is clear that the Classification o f m a n y passages i n P a u l as ' b a p t i s m a l ' rests o n a f u n d a m e n t a l m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f P a i d ' s t h o u g h t . T h e failure t o appreciate t h e concreteness a n d v i t a h t y o f spiritual experience i n N T times has t o o o f t e n led t o t h e exaltation o f t h e peripheral a n d secondary t o a p o s i t i o n o f central a n d p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e . E x p o s i t i o n has p r o c e e d e d b e y o n d the limits o f P a u l ' s t h e o l o g y w i t h o u t sufficient care f o r the c o n t e x t a n d c a u t i o n o f P a u l ' s t h o u g h t , a n d ' o b v i o u s ' corollaries h a v e b e e n d r a w n o u t w i t h o u t c h e c k i n g whether they were obvious t o Paid. I n particular, it is necessary t o reaffirm t h a t ßawrileiv does n o t i n a n d o f itself m e a n ' t o b a p t i z e i n w a t e r ' o r necessarily i n c l u d e a reference t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m ; t h a t ßairrCleaBai eis is n o t t h e same as ßaTni^eaßai eis rd Svofia, t h e latter describing t h e O p e r a t i o n a n d sig nificance o f t h e water-rite, t h e f o r m e r b e i n g o n e o f t h e m a n y m e t a p h o r s u s e d b y P a u l t o describe the Spirit's c o m i n g t o t h e incüvidual as G o d ' s g i f t o f n e w life i n response t o f a i t h ; t h a t ß&nrusiuj. is the water-rite as such a n d s y m b o l i z e s b u r i a l ( n o t resurrection), e v e r a r e n d n d e r o f t h e finaüty o f t h e initiate's b r e a k w i t h t h e o l d selfcentred w a y o f l i f e ; a n d that i n w a r d , spiritual experience i n general c a n n o t b e related t o o u t w a r d , material ceremonies, either b y w a y o f e q u a t i o n o r o f direct d e p e n d e n c e .

Baptism

172

in

the Holj

spirit

The hiitial refiisal t o use 'baptism' as a blanket term o r con certina w o r d has been amply justified, even though Paul does not sharpen his distinction between water-baptism and Spirit-baptism in the w a y Luke does. The v i v i d experience o f receiving the Spirit (not baptism) and the effect of his coming (not baptism) is ever to the foreftont of Paul's thought both hi his remmiscmg and bis theologizing. Water-baptism is the means whereby the individual expresses his faith and commits himself to Jesus as Lord. But it may not be described as the means whereby G o d accepts him or conveys to bim the Spirit.** F o r Paul it is the Spirit w h o is the mark of God's acceptance, and God's Instruments of saving grace are the Spirit and the gospel; the dedsive act of grace is the gift of the Spirit to the faith expressed in baptism. It is sometimes argued that the reason why baptism is so seldom mentioned in Paul is because it was common ground to all Christians and its role could be assumed without exphcit reference (e.g. Lake, Earlier Epistles 384). But predsdy the same could be said of preaching, beheving and receiving the Spirit. Yet Paul mentions them frequendy. This suggests that for Paul it was just these three elements which were dedsive in conversion. Baptism, while important, was neverthdess sub sidiary to these three. It would seem, therefore, to be a misinterpretation of Paul's thought to give the water-rite the determinative and dominant role in the event or theology of conversion-initiation; and it is certainly quite without foundation to speak of Paul making baptism 'the comer stone of his Chtist-rdated doctrine of salvation' (contra Schnackenburg 21), or to descdbe the whole of his theology as an exposition of baptism (contra A . R. C. Leaney, SJT 15 [1962] 394-9; Lohse,Kerygma md Dogma ii[i^6^] 3i8;E.Fuchs, J/aÄw/» tbe Historical

Jesus [ET 1964] 173). I n s h o r t , w h e r e t h e sacramentahst m i g h t say, G o d i n c o r p o r a t e s US i n t o C h r i s t a n d b e s t o w s o n u s the S p i r i t in and by baptism, P a u l w o u l d say, W e g i v e o u r s d v e s in and by baptism t o C h r i s t , w h o g i v e s h i m s e l f t o u s i n a n d t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t , a n d o n l y t h u s utdtes u s w i t h h i m s e l f a n d w i t h his p e o p l e . *• Cf. Büchsei 426f.; Schneider, Tasife 70; Stalder 79.

P A R T

F O U R

XIV T H E

J O H A N N I N E

P E N T E C O S T ?

F O R t h e Pentecostal t h e F o u r t h G o s p e l is especially i m p o r t a n t since i t s h o w s h i m clearly that the disciples w e r e regenerate b e f o r e Pentecost a n d h a d received the Spirit b e f o r e P e n t e c o s t . I n partic ular, the i m p a r t a t i o n o f the Spirit o n the e v e n i n g o f resurrection S i m d a y ( 2 0 . 2 2 ) seems t o indicate b e y o n d reasonable d o u b t t h a t t h e b a p t i s m i n t h e Spirit fifty days later w a s a t least a s e c o n d a n d distinct w o r k o f t h e Spirit i n the h v e s o f the disciples.^ T h e basic w e a k n e s s i n this a r g u m e n t is o n e I h a v e already t o u c h e d o n briefly i n chapter I V . I t is t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t J o h n a n d L u k e - A c t s are m o r e o r less n a r r a t i v e histories o f t h e same sort, so u n i f o r m i n their m a i m e r o f p r e s e n t i n g facts a n d e v e n t s t h a t t h e y can i m m e d i a t e l y b e d o v e t a i l e d i n t o each o t h e r i n a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d c h r o n o l o g i c a l f a s h i o n ( A c t s 2 , f o r ejcample, b e i n g the f u l f i l m e n t o f J o h n 7 . 3 8 f . ) . B u t s u c h a n a s s u m p t i o n i g n o r e s t h e basic q u e s t i o n s : W h a t is t h e t r u t h J o h n a n d L u k e w i s h t o c o n v e y ? a n d , H o w d o t h e y a t t e m p t t o c o n v e y i t ? T h e fact is t h a t t h e first five b o o k s o f t h e N T are n o t a flat p i a i n o f h o m o g e n e o u s historicity. T h e o l o g i c a l m o u n t a i n s ( a n d molehills) b r e a k t h a t flatness, a n d i t is a m i s t a k e t o t h i n k t h a t w h e n w e d i m b o n e o f these m o i m t a i n s w e are m o v i n g f o r w a r d historically at t h e same pace as w h e n w e traverse t h e level piain. J o h n ' s t r e a t m e n t o f Jesus* d e a t h is o n e o f these m o u n t a i n s . T o p u t i t s i m p l y , J o h n wishes t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e u n i t y o f t h e decisive events i n t h e c l i m a x o f J e s u s ' m i n i s t r y - d e a t h , resurrection, ascen sion, g i f t o f t h e Spirit - a fact m o s t clearly seen b y his use o f t h e w o r d s 8of<£{;«v a n d itfmSv. E v e r y s o o f t e n t h e reader is p o i n t e d f o r w a r d t o the event o f Jesus'glorification ( 7 . 3 9 ; 1 2 . 1 6 , 2 3 ; l i - i i i 1 7 . 1 ) , t h e decisive h o u r (wpa) o f d i v i n e a c t i o n ( 2 . 4 ; 7 . 3 0 ; 8 . 2 0 ; 1 e.g. Harper, Poutr 1 9 ; Tfasux, Jordan 6 6 . See pp. 38f. above.

m

174

Baptism in the Holj Spirit

12.23, 27; 1 5 . 1 ; i7.i),2 w h i c h embraces n o t o n l y J e s u s ' resurrec t i o n a n d ascension, a n d n o t m e r e l y his d e a t h , b u t all these together. J o h n does n o t w a n t t o t h i n k o f t h e m as separate events, b u t rather as a Single act o f glorification. Thus in i2.23f.; 13.31 it is primarily death which is in mind (cf. 21.19); in 12.32 and 17.5 it is the thought of ascension which is most prominent; and in 7.39 and 12.16 it is the event which results in the giving of the Spirit and quickening of memory (also the work of the Spirit - 14.26) which is foremost. In every case (except one) Sofd^eiv refers not to one or other, but to all as a single hour of glorification. And even where two separate acts of glorification are envisaged (13.31 f.) John is careful to add evBvs. S i n ü l a r l y w i t h wpoio ( 3 . 1 4 ; 8.28; 1 2 . 5 2 , 54). A s most recent c o m

m e n t a t o r s r e c o g t d z e , J o h n uses this w o r d n o t otdy f o r J e s u s ' l i f t i n g Up o n the cross, b u t also f o r his l i f d n g u p t o h e a v e n , that is, his ascension: the o n e w o r d includes w h a t are c h r o n o l o g i c a U y distkict events i n the one action.» I n short, J o h n presents as a t m i t a r y c o n c e p m a l w h o l e t h e S o n o f M a n ' s r e d e m p t i v e acts i n d y i n g rising, ascending a n d g i v i n g the Spirit. T h e decisive act o f salvation is not c o m p l e t e i m t U t h e S o n o f M a n has ascended and b e s t o w e d t h e Spirit. H o w does this fact - that J o h n treats t h e redemption-effecting events t h e o l o g i c a U y as w e U as c h r o n o l o g i c a U y - bear u p o n t h e crucial passage, J o h n 20.22? T h e r e is s o m e reason f o r b e h e v i n g that at this p o i n t J o h n is c o n c e r n e d m o r e w i t h t h e theological u i d t y o f these events t h a n their c h r o n o l o g i c a l separateness. F o r o n e t h i n g , 20.17 seems t o i m p l y t h a t the ascension w a s the i m m e d i a t e consequence o f the resurrection a n d had i n s o m e sense t a k e n place b e t w e e n 20.17 ao.d 20.19.* T h i s w o v d d s i m p l y m e a n that J o h n shares w i t h L u k e a n d P a u l the b e U e f that i t is o t d y t h e E x a l t e d O n e w h o b e s t o w s the Spirit, t h e d i v i n e g i f t b e i n g t h e i m m e d i a t e c o n sequence o f his ascension. * See also Kaip6s (7.6, 8) a n d ^ (12-51; ij-5i; cf. 4.23; j.25). * See especially Brown i45f. * Seee.g. Bauer 18if.; Macgregor 559f.; R. H. Strachau, TbeFourtb Gospel* (1941) 328; W. Michaelis, Die Erstbeimmg/m des Auferstandenen (1944); Dodd 442f-; Lightfoot 351; W. Wilkens, Die Etitstebungsgesebiebte d*s vierten Epongeliums{i9^%) 88-90; F.-M. Braun,/*<»)/«rA/«/(!gM«in (1966) 225-8; J. Marsh, St Jobn (1968) 639f.; and especially Archiimndrite Gissien, La Penteedte Jobannique (1939) 9-91.

Tbe Jobannine Pentecost?

175

J o h n ' s p n e u m a t o l o g y seems t o b e a r o u t this interpretation. I n t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h N i c o d e m u s the n e w life p r o m i s e d is described as ävtuBev (3.3, 7 ) , C'K irveijfiaTos (3.5, 6, 8), a n d as the consequence o f b e h e v i n g m the S o n o f M a n lifted u p (vil>a>9rjv(u - 3.14), w h i c h is o b v i o u s l y closely l i n k e d t o the i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d i n g t h o u g h t o f the S o n o f M a n ' s a s c e n d i n g t o h e a v e n ( 3 . 1 3 ) ; this i m p h e s that b i r t h e/f weiSfiaros is the consequence o f the S o n o f M a n ' s ascension a n d o f f a i t h m h i m as thus exalted. It is probable that John means us to read 3. j in the hght of 7.39 as weU. In other words, the new birth by the Spirit was not possible tili after the resurrection. John woxüd not hesitate to write in the present tense since he is writing for his contemporaries, and since 7.39 is too exphcit to aUow any reference to the Spirit (apart from those relating to Jesus) to be understood of the time before his death.

T h e great discourse o f J o h n 6 concludes w i t h a similar d o v e t a d i n g o f t h e ascension i n t o t h e h f e - g i v i n g m ü d s t r y o f t h e S p k i t ( ö . ö a f . ) ; a n d t h e J o h a i m i n e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e T a b e r n a c l e s t e x t clearly indicates that f o r J o h n the g i f t o f t h e S p k i t w a s t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f J e s u s ' g l o r i f i c a t i o n i n death-resurrection-ascension (7.39). T h e Paraclete sayings are m o r e c o m p l e x , b u t t h e p r i m a r y mess age is t h e same. T h e d o m i n a n t t h e m e is t h e c o n t m i d t y b e t w e e n t h e ministries o f Jesus a n d t h e Paraclete.* T h e S p i r i t takes o v e r as t h e oÄAoff TropoArAijTos w h e r e t h e first P a r a c l e t e leaves o f f . I n d e e d w e m i g h t say t h a t J e s u s continues t o b e p r e s e n t w i t h a n d i n h i s dis ciples t h r o u g h t h e Paraclete. I n o t h e r w o r d s , a p u r e l y spiritual relationship is t o supersede w h a t w a s also a p h y s i c a l o n e ( 1 4 . 1 8 23). T h i s is w h y Jesus m u s t g o a w a y i n a h t d e w h i l e = g o t o t h e F a t h e r = b e lifted u p i n sufifering a n d e x a l t a t i o n (14.28; 1 6 . 5 , 1 6 - 2 4 , i 8 ) , f o r o n l y t h e n can t h e P a r a c l e t e c o m e (16.7).« A s w i t h 7.39, t h e Coming of t h e S p i r i t a w a i t s t h e ascension a n d is t h e i m m e d i a t e residt o f J e s u s ' d e p a r t u r e i n g l o r y . J o h n has thus r e c o r d e d a number o f p r o m i s e s a n d p r o p h e d c s o f t h e Spirit's c o m i n g , but on/j one coming. M o r e o v e r , h e has tied that Coming to t h e u n i t a r y e v e n t o f g l o r i f i c a t i o n a n d u p l i f t i n g , b o t h i n the earÜer f o r w a r d - l o o k i n g passages a n d i n t h e actiüd e v e n t « Barrett points out how the mission ofthe Spirit is dosdy paralld to tibat ofthcSon;cf. 13.26 with 8.42; 1«.»: 16.27 (Go/*#/402). See also R. E . Brown, NTS 13 (1966-67) 126-8. • Cf. D. B. Holwerda, Tie Holy Spirit and Etcbatohgf in tie Gospel of Jobn (1959) 18-21; C. F. D. Moule, NovTest 5 (1962) 178-80.

176

Baptism itt tl)e Holy Spirit

(20.22). It is quite natural, therefore, t o say that J o h n intended his readers to find the fulfilment of these earUer promises in the insufilation of 20.22, rather than in a later event which he does n o t r e c o r d . ' F r o m this hst of promises fulfilled in 20.22 w e can hardly exclude the prophecy of J o h n 1 . 3 5 : Jesus' ministry as Baptizer in the Holy Spirit foUows inunediately f r o m his ministry as Lamb of G o d (1.29). W e could tberefore say that in 20.22 J o h n reeords the disciples' baptism in the Spirit. If tbe conclusion Stands the Pentecostal case at 20.22 faUs. Y e t I am not finaUy convinced that it is the conclusion J o h n himself would draw out. A l t h o u g h w e cannot deny John's concern to impress a theological scheme on a chronological sequence of events, it would not be true to say that the former completely ignores and suppresses the latter. The chronological separateness of the various events recorded in 20 (including the time-lapse between the death and resurrection of Jesus) is retained (20.1, 19, 26). Again, the argument that 20.17 indicates the theological unity of the ascension with the resurrection, and that the ascension foUowed immediately after Jesus' meeting w i t h M a r y is not entirely satisfactory. O n any reckoning the ovnoi (20.17) preserves a clear enough time-lapse between resurrection and ascension. Moule, NovTest 5 (1962) i75f., also explains the contrast between 20.17 and 20.27 as due to the different needs and circumstances of the two disciples concerned. The physical contact in each case was very different (jx-q (lov anrov - 'Do not cüng to me' NEB), and there is no hint in the Tliomas scene that the ascension was already past. AU that is clearly impUed is that Jesus can be seen and touched; and the blessing of 20.29 is for those who without being able to see and touch for them selves accept the testimony of those who have (cf. I John 1 . 1 - 3 ) . The difference in the responses to the risen Jesus in w . 16 and 28 probably has no significance at this point (contra Wilkens 88) in view of the identity o f t h e responses in w . 18 and 25. In a private communication Professor Moule also points out that the avaßauxa comes in the message Mary has to teU the disciples, not as part of the reason why Mary should refrain from touching him. The ovtro» avaßdßtjKa hardly imphes that Jesus was at that moment in the process of ascending; and dvaßaivw can be translated, 'I am about to ascend' (Barrett, Gospel 470; Lagrange ' Those who think that the sending of the Paraclete refers to 20.22 include Bultmaim, Jobannes 5 56f.; Barrett, Gospel 474f.; H. Schlier in Neiaestamentliebe Aufsätze (J. Schmid Festschrift 1963) 234-6; O. Betz, Der Paraktet (1965) 169, as well as those cited in n. 4 above.

T/be Johannine Pentecost?

xil

512), o r 'I a m going to ascend' ( N E B m a r g i n ) . See also Sanders and Mastin 429.

Since J o h n retains this distinct c h r o n o l o g i c a l separateness, n o t h i n g w o i d d be g a i n e d by p l a c i n g t h e ascension b e f o r e t h e v i t a l resur r e c t i o n appearances.8 T h e t h e o l o g i c a l p o i n t can stiU be m a d e widio u t d i s r u p t i n g or c o m p r e s s i n g the a c c e p t e d sequence o f e v e n t s (as 20.1 shows). Had the theology totally swamped the chronology we would have expected the dvaßaivoi to come on Jesus' Ups while he was stiU hanging on the cross. Some indeed think that 19.50 is deHberately phrased (TrapeScüKEv TO irvevixa) to indicate that the gift of the Spirit is the immediate result of the Son of Man's being Hfted up (Hoskyns 552; Lightfoot 3r9f.; Brown V I ; Braun III 168); and 19.34, depicting bodi the death of Jesus and the outpouring o f t h e Spirit (see pp. i87f.), cer tainly symbohzes perfectiy the unity ofthe great redemptive acts (the hfegiving Spirit comes only from the Crucified and as the immediate result of his glorification). But in that case 20.19-22 simply buttresses the fact that the theological point can be made without dispensing with the chronology. However, so far as 19.30 g o e s , Bultmann thinks that the phrase means nothing more than t h e i^Ktv TO irvevfia of M a t t . 27.50 and tiie i^iwfvoev of Mark i j . 3 7 (Jobannes 523 n . 1), and for Barrett 20.22 allows n o room for an earlier g i v i n g o f the Spirit (Gospel 460; c f . Lagrange 497).

I t m a y w e l l b e best, t h e r e f o r e , t o I n t e r p r e t t h e P a r a c l e t e p r o m i s e s o f 1 4 . 1 6 , 26; 15.26 a n d 1 6 . 7 n o t o f 20.22 ( w h i c h is n o t n a t u r a l l y described as a ' s e n d m g ' o f t h e S p i r i t , especially b y o r f r o m t h e F a t i i e r ) , b u t o f a later b e s t o w a l o f t h e S p i r i t , f o l l o w i n g J e s u s ' f i n a l r e t u m t o t h e F a t h e r after his v a r i o u s a p p e a r a n c e s t o t h e disciples. J o h n ' s account could then dovetail chronologicaUy into the A c t s narrative: J o h n w o u l d k n o w o f t w o bestowals o f t h e Spirit, t h o u g h recording o i d y one, a n d the p r o n d s e d baptism i n the Spirit (1.33) c o u l d easüy b e r e f e r r e d t o tSac u n r e c o r d e d P e n t e c o s t . I t m a y h o w e v e r be that J o h n wishes u s t o understand the t w o minis tries o f Jesus w h i c h the Baptist f o r e t o l d as intimately related. T h a t is t o say, in the baptism i n the Spirit Jesus c o n v e y s the d e a n s i n g a n d f o r g i v e ness o f sin made possible b y his sacrifidal d e a t h as L a m b o f G o d . 20.22 « John presumably shared the beUef tfaat the 'tesuttection ^>i>catMices' were something special (different ftom the later visions and revelations) and came to an end wfaea Jesus retumed once-for-all to the Father (so ao.29 implies).

178

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

would then be the disciples' baptism in the Spirit whereby they received the blessings newly won by Christ's lifting up and glorification. To avoid the historical contrast between Ä e 'Lukan Pentecost' and the 'Johanrdne Pentecost' it has been periodically argued that 20.22 does not depict an actual giving of the Spirit, but oidy points forward to Pentecost proleptically, as though Jesus was saying, 'When you hear the sound of the wind ( = rrveviia = breath) then you will receive the Spirit.' This is an unsupported speculation which does too htde justice to the text. Bultmann points out that the use of Xajxßdveiv corresponds to the Christian community's tcrminology in Rom. 8.15; I Cor. 2 . 1 2 ; Acts 8.15ff., etc. (Johannes 4 7 6 n. 5). I must confess that I am t o r n between these t w o interpretations. O n tbe one band, J o h n ' s theological message is clear: the t w o great moments of redemption (crucifixion-resurrection and ascensiongift o f the Spirit) are n o t independent o f each other; the Spirit is the Spirit (breatb) o f Jesus, o f Jesus exalted in death, resurrection and ascension, and the gift of the Spirit is the climax and conclusion of these decisive salvation-effecting events. O n the other band, i t is equally piain that the theological motif can be adequately h i g b hghted without obscuring the chronological outline, so that a h f t ing Up t o heaven can be thought o f as a theological unity w i t h t h e lifting Up o n the cross which t o o k place at least three days, a n d probably as much as forty-three days earher.* O u r conclusion thus far is simply that the Pentecostal thesis a t this point cannot entirely be rejected: J o h n m a y well h a v e c o n sidered that the baptism in the Spirit w a s a second and distinct w o r k o f the Spirit in the spiritual experience o f the first disciples. But the Pentecostal must argue f o r m o r e than this: namely, t h a t the experience o f the aposdes is, o r can be a pattem which m a y be repeated in the Hves o f later Christians. It is with this fiirther Step that he definitely misses the w a y . F o r the chronological sequence o f events in the Hves o f the aposdes is unique and m i repeatable. The coming o f the Son from the Father t o dweU a m o n g men in human flesh w a s something which had never h a p p e n e d before and which has never happened since. Similarly the r e l a t i o n of Jesus' disciples t o him in the period before Pentecost was o n e which simply cannot b e k n o w n again. This point deserves fiirther amplification: ' Luke in fact is the only NT writer to distinguish carefuUy between Easter and Pentecost (S. M. Gilmour, JEL 81 [1962] 63).

The Jobannine Pentecost?

179

(a) F o r the first Christians Jesus' ministry was the watershed between the dispensations: *tbe law was given tbrougb Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ' ( 1 . 1 7 ) . Jesus fulfilled many of the messiatdc predictions and eschatological hopes of Moses and the prophets (1.45; 4.25f.; 5.39, 46; 6 . 3 1 - 3 5 ; 8.56).io He brought a radiancy of hght that was not present before and set in motion the divine judgment (3.19 etc.). In so doing he altered the 'terms' of salvation: from then on eternal hfe was essentiaUy a matter of beUeving in him ( 5 . 1 6 - 1 8 , 56; 5.24 etc.) - w h a t it could never have been before. {b) It is important to realize that it was the total mission which effected this alteration - not just his life, but especiaUy his death, resurrection and ascension. Saving behef f o r J o h n is behef in Jesus as lifted Up ( 3 . 1 4 - 1 6 ; 12.32). In particular, the Spirit covdd not be received from Jesus vmtil Jesus had been glorified (in death and resurrection - 7.39); otdy then could those w h o believed in him receive the Spirit, w h o is the living water which becomes a spring o f water welUng up t o eternal life (4.14). In other w o r d s , it is n o t untU after Jesus' death and resurrection that it is possible even for the Pentecostal to speak of the disdples as 'genuine converted Christians' (Prince). H o w e v e r w e understand the deansing spoken of in i3.iof. and 1 5 . 3 , it cannot be taken t o mean Christian con version. The punctuation of 7.37^ is a weU-known crux, and the issue is important since it almost certainly determines whether Jesus is the source of the rivers of hving water or the behever (though see J . Blenkinsopp, NTS 6 [1939-60] 93-98). In my opinion the best interpre tation is that which reads Jesus' words thus: edv Tts Si^t^ ipxeaOa» irpos fjx, KOX mvera) 6 niar&Stav eis efie. KoJdois

elnev

yp"^

• • •

(so Lagrange, and the authors and western Fathers dted by him [2i4f.] C. F. Bumey, The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel [1922] i09ff. Macgregor 207; C. C. Torrey, Our Translated Gospels [1936] 108-11 Hoskyns 32if.; W . F. Howard,IB 8 [1932] 388f.; Dodd 349; Bultmann, Johannes 228; G. D. Küpaürick, JTS 11 [i960] 340-2; M. Black, The New Testament Dßctrine of the Spirit [Hoyt Lectiires, unpubhshed, 1963] Lerture 5; Mussner 139-42; HiU 199^, 291; Sanders and Mastin 2 1 3 ^ ; NEB; J B ; R S V margin; see especiaUy W . Thüsmg, Die Erhöhung und Bultmann, Tbeo/ogi II 37.

18o

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Verherrlichung Jesu im Johannesevangelium [i960] 160-5, and Brown, Gospel 320-7). In otiier words, die believer is invited to drink of the living water which flows from the body of Jesus when he is glorified (cf . 19.34); see pp. i87f. (c) A l l that I have said is most clearly confirmed by 20.22 and Jobn's use of eVe^uaijo-cv there. It is the w o r d used in G e n . 2.7, Ezek. 3 7.9 and Wisd. 1 5 . i i^i t o describe the creation of man - the divine breath {nveOfia - in G e n . 2.7 TTVOTJ) which brmgs hfe t o w h a t was otherwise a corpse. In other w o r d s , J o h n presents the act of Jesus as a new creation: Jesus is the author o f t h e new creation as he was of the old ( i . 3).i2 If Pentecostals l o o k for tbe moment w h e n the apostles^» became regenerate they can find it only here and not before - only then was the spirimal life (breatb) o f t h e new creation communicated t o them. Since the Spirit-passages - 3.5-8; 4 . 1 0 - 1 4 ; 6.63; 7.37-39 - speak of the hfe-giving work of the Spirit, they are to be referred to 20.22 rather than to a later coming of the Spirit. The point must be stressed for 7.37-39, in view ofthe Pentecostal exposition which sees in these verses an mvitation to the Christian to receive the Spirit (e.g. Roberts 25; Harper, Walk 16). This hiterpretation is excluded by the punctuation and interpretation adopted above. B u t even if the other punctuation is retained, the beheving which results i n the indwelling and overflowing ofthe Spirit is die same action as that described in 3 . 1 5 , 1 6 , 1 8 , 36; 5.24; 6.47; 12.46; 20.31 - namely, the initial commitment of faith. The aorist of V . 39 shows ihat we cannot Interpret the present of v. 38 in any other way. The puzzling oviro} irvevfia. in 7.39 is not to be interpreted ontologically but functionally (as with 4.24). So far as the disciples' ex perience of the Spirit was concerned, until 20.22, the Sphh was not yet. They had not yet begun to experience that relation with Jesus through the Spirit which was only possible afi:er his exaltation and ascension 11 Gen. 2.7, Ezek. J7.9 are the only two occasions in the L X X when ifv^miia is used to translate näpab (A has also Ezek. 22.20); these two passages plus Wisd. 15.11 are the only ones to link e/i^wnuo with the divine crcative breath. 1« Macgregor 365; Hoskyns 544; Barrett, Gospel 474; Betz 165; Sanders and Mastin 433; Marsh 640, 643f.; Ervin 3 i f . 1* We should probably understand the group of 'disciples' either as broader than the aposdes (were Mary and the other womcn there? cf. Acts 1.14), or as representative of the broader circle o f disciples (when did Thomas receive the Spirit?), or of believers in general CW. F . Howard, Cbristianity according to J'//o*B[i94}] 141;Schweizer,TIFOT VI44oandn. 75 3; Käsemann,RGG»II 1278; Hill 287).

Tbe Johmnine Pentecost?

181

( D o d d 184; Barrett, Gospel 272; B r o w n , Gospel 324; H . F . W o d e h o u s e , Theolo^ 67 [1964] 310-12). {d) W h i l e this substantiates t h e Pentecostals' p r i n d p a l d a i m that t h e apostles w e r e regenerate b e f o r e P e n t e c o s t - i t still does n o t justify t h e m i n t a k i n g t h e apostles' experience as the o r e v e n a possible p a t t e r n f o r experience t o d a y . F o r 20.22 has m a d e i t e v i d e n t that t h e disciples' experience w a s d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e process o f salvation-history. G o d ' s i m f o l d i n g p l a n o f r e d e m p t i o n w a s at a critical transition phase as a result o f the i n c a r n a t i o n ; t h e o l d dis p e n s a t i o n o f l a w w a s g i v i n g w ä y t o t h e dispensation o f (fuller) grace a n d t r u t h ; o n e stage o f salvation-history w a s c h a n g i n g o v e r t o a n o t h e r . T h e d i s d p l e s h v e d t h r o u g h this transition p e r i o d , a n d d u r i n g i t their s p i r i m a l experience w a s l i m i t e d t o that w h i c h w a s a p p r o p r i a t e a n d possible at each stage. N o w , i f w e u n d e r s t a n d t h e significant events o f J o h n i n a c h r o n o l o g i c a l scheme w h i c h links Up w i t h A c t s , w e h a v e t o say that t h e transition p e r i o d b e t w e e n t h e dispensations lasted at least f r o m J e s u s ' d e a t h t o P e n t e c o s t , i f n o t f r o m t h e b e g i n i d n g o f his m i n i s t r y t o P e n t e c o s t , i f n o t firom his b i r t h t o P e n t e c o s t . W h a t w e n o w caU f ü l l C h r i s t i a n experience w a s possible o n l y after t h e ascension a n d P e n t e c o s t , w h e n t h e ' a d v o c a t e f r o m h e a v e n ' c a m e t o represent a n d act f o r the ' a d v o c a t e i n h e a v e n ' . L i k e w i s e , t h e experience o f t h e n e w b i r t h a n d n e w creation w a s possible o n l y after the sin-bearing d e a t h o f t h e L a m b o f G o d a n d bis resurrection. L i k e w i s e , t h e experience o f d e a n s i n g w a s possible o n l y ' t h r o u g h t h e W o r d ' w h i c h t h e i n c a m a t e L o g o s b r o u g h t f r o m t h e F a t h e r ( 1 5 . 3 ; 12.48-50; 14.24; 1 7 . 1 4 ) . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i n this c h r o n o l o g i c a l scheme w e h a v e t o distinguish three d e d s i v e milestones i n t h e transition p e r i o d b e t w e e n t h e dispensa tions - t h e Coming o f the W o r d w i t h t h e w o r d , his l i f t i n g u p o n t h e cross, a n d his s e n d i n g o f t h e öAAo? irapdKXrjros after his d e p a r m r e ( 1 4 . 2 5 ^ ; 15.26; 16.7). A s t h e y passed each m i l e s t o n e t h e d i s d p l e s entered i n t o t h e fidler experience w h i c h h a d o n l y t h e n b e c o m e p o s s i b l e ; until J e s u s ' resurrection it w a s n o t possible f o r t h e m t o experieace t h e recrcative b r e a t h o f G o d ; i m t i l P e n t e c o s t i t w a s n o t possible f o r t h e m t o experience t h e Spirit o f P e n t e c o s t ; t h d r experience t h r o u g h o u t this transition p h a s e w a s l i m i t e d t o w h a t w a s possible a t t h a t p o i n t . I n 14.17 eoTiv is probably the original text, as b d n g the m o r e difficult reading ( N E B , J B , T E V ) . T h e three verbs d t h e r reflect the time at

i82

Baptism in the Holy

spirit

w h i c h J o h n w r o t e (Barrett, Gospel 587), o r eise the present tenses haye a future reference, a s i n ij.6, 27, 35; 14.3; 15.27; 20.17; 21.23 (Bernard 546; L a g r a n g e 384; Sanders and Mastin 328; see M o u l e , IdiomBook 7). I n v i e w o f 7.39, 14.16, 20, 23, Jesus' w o r d s (all three verbs) could n o t be true o f the disciples until after the sending o f the Spirit; n o r does there seem t o be any significant theological distinction at this point between the Spirit's remaining w i t h them and his being in them. T h i s a U s i m p l y means that i t is impossible t o r e g a r d the e x p e r i ence o f the apostles t h r o u g h o u t this p e r i o d as a possible p a t t e r n , far less the n o r m , f o r experience t o d a y . W i t h P e n t e c o s t the transi tion phase came t o a n e n d ; the o l d stage o f s a l v a t i o n - h i s t o r y w a s w h o U y past a n d the n e w stage w h o l l y i n O p e r a t i o n . H e n c e f o r t h e n t r y i n t o the blessings o f the n e w dispensation is i m m e d i a t e , wheifeas f o r the aposdes i t w a s ' s t a g g e r e d ' . A set o f experiences w h o s e o r d e r a n d d e p t h w a s d e t e r n d n e d b y a n utterly u t d q u e a n d unrepeatable set o f events ( t h o s e f r o m B e t h l e h e m t o P e n t e c o s t ) c a i m o t b e the p a t t e r n f o r the r e g i d a r experience o f c o n v e r s i o n a n d O i r i s t i a n g r o w t h after P e n t e c o s t . O n l y i f J e s u s w e r e t o h v e , die, rise a n d ascend a g a i n a n d a g a i n , c o i d d t h e experience o f t h e aposdes b e described as n o r m a t i v e f o r later C h r i s t i a n i t y , since their experience w a s d e t e r m i n e d b y their relation t o the historical m i n i s t r y o f Jesus. I f a n o r m is desired f o r t h e g i f t o f the S p i r i t w e h a v e i t n o t i n J o h n 20.22 o r A c t s 2.4, b u t i n A c t s 2.38." I n s h o r t , J o h n certainly s h o w s t l u t i t m a y n o t b e possible t o e q u a t e S p i r i t - b a p t i s m w i t h r e g e n e r a t i o n , but only in the case of the apostles. H i s theological message at this p o i n t indicates ( a n d L u k e a n d P a u l certainly s h o w ) t h a t f r o m P e n t e c o s t o n w a r d s h e w h o b e h e v e s receives t h e S p i r i t i n his cleansing, r e g e n e r a t i n g , b a p t i s m a l p o w e r , b r i n g i n g t h e f o r g i v e n e s s a n d life o f t h e n e w dispensa tion. W i t h the transition p e r i o d e n d e d , the theological emphasis o f J o h n is n o l o n g e r c o m p h c a t e d b y a necessary c h r o n o l o g i c a l disjointedness, a n d t h e t h e o l o g i c a l u n i t y o f t h e Spirit's l i f e - g i v i n g a n d e m p o w e r i n g m ü d s t r y b e c o m e s a c h r o n o l o g i c a l u n i t y as w e l l . " See ch. IX. Cf. J . R. W. Stott, The Baptism and Fullness qf the Holy Spirit

(1964) 1 1 ; R. Fache, The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit (ET 1956)

58-40,72.

Among Pentecostals, Stiles recognizes the 'dispensatioiial' chsuacter of the Spirit's Coming, and makes this point very forcefiilly (6jf.).

XV T H E

SPIRIT A N D BAPTISM I N JOHN'S

G O S P E L

J o h n give us t o u n d e r s t a n d that t h e Spirit is mediated through the sacrament o f b a p t i s m ? O n e a u t o m a t i c a U y t h i n k s of 3 . 5 , and t h e affirmative a n s w e r reaUy Stands o r falls with this passage. T h e chief a r g u m e n t s f o r seeing a baptismal reference i n 3.5 are as f o l l o w s : DOES

(a) the sacramentaüsm o f J o h n : t o g e t h e r w i t h 6 . 5 1 C - 5 8 , 3.5 is r e g a r d e d as t h e m o s t e x p Ü d t o f t h e sacramental references.^ (b) I n v i e w o f the a l m o s t thematic repetition o f ' w a t e r ' i n t h e early chapters o f J o h n , i t is o f t e n said t h a t 3 . 5 is the E v a n g e h s t ' s description o f C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m i n contrast t o J o h n ' s ( a n d p e r h a p s also J e w i s h p u r i f i c a t i o n rites).^ {c) T h e reason m o s t f r e q u e n d y g i v e n is t h a t t h e C h r i s t i a n reader o f 3.5 c o u l d n o t f a ü t o t h i n k o f the rite o f initiation i n t o t h e Church.3 B e f o r e w e deal w i t h these a r g u m e n t s , t w o p r e l i m i n a r y p o i n t s m u s t b e considered. (i) A s t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r t h e sacramentahst u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f J o h n g e n e r a U y ( a n d 3 . 5 i n particidar), c h . 6 m u s t b e g i v e n s o m e attention.* B y u s i n g tids discourse J o h n wishes t o m a k e t w o 1 Schnackenbutg, Jobannestvangelium 383; Brown, New Testament Essays (1965) 77; Beasley-Murray 229f. For the ränge of opinions on the question of John's sacramentaüsm, see Brown, Essays 52-56. * Dodd, Interpretation 312; see also 309-11; Brown, Essays 94; Gospel 155; Barrett, Gospel 174; Oatk 27; D. R. GüSlUlts&m Cbristian Baptism (ed. Gilmotc)

156. 3 See e.g. W. L . Knox, Some Hellenistie Elements in Primitive Cbristianity (1943) 91; Btown, Essays 93f. * 'AU question matks which may be put at my explanation of othet pas sages should be concentratcd on the daim that the author saw in this study as such a connection with the Euchatist . . .' (Cullmann, Worsbip 94f.). 185

i84

Baptism in the Holy Sptrit

p o i n t s . F i r s t , belief m u s t b e centred o n a Jesus w b o really b e c a m e flesb a n d really d i e d ; » i t is t h e r e a h t y o f the i n c a r n a t i o n a n d t h e necessity o f the I n c a r n a t e O n e ' s d e a t h i f m e n are t o receive eternal h f e , w h i c h is e m p h a s i z e d t h r o u g h o u t , a n d especially i n 6 . 5 i c - 5 8 ; 6 6.3 5 m a k e s i t clear that the eating a n d d r i n k i n g is a n o t h e r w a y o f Coming t o a n d b e h e v i n g els'IrjaoOv. S e c o n d , eternal life comes t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t g i v e n b y the S o n o f M a n i n his exaltation. T h i s comes o u t m o s t p l a i n l y i n t h e k e y verses 2 7 a n d 6 3 . ' I n v . 2 7 , ' t h e f o o d w h i c h endures t o eternal h f e ' is o b v i o u s l y at least v e r y similar t o t h e 'Springs o f w a t e r w e l h n g Up t o eternal life' ( 4 . 1 4 ) , that is, the Spirit.» T h e f u t u r e (Swaei) refers t o the g i f t o f the breath o f life i n zo.zz. And the ia^päyiaev must refer t o G o d ' s attestation o f t h e S o n b y t h e a n o i n t i n g w i t h t h e S p i r i t a t J o r d a n . * T h e parallel w i t h 1 . 3 3 is especially noticeable, f o r i n b o t h the qualification f o r b a p t i z i n g i n t h e S p i r i t / g i v i n g t h e h e a v e t ü y f o o d is the a n o i n t i n g w i t h the Spirit. V e r s e s 6 2 - 3 e x p l a i n t o the scandalized hearers that Jesus is n o t t a l k i n g a b o u t a physical e a t i n g o f the S o n o f M a n i n his h u m a n State, b u t a b o u t the great l i f e - g i v i n g events w h i c h are the c l i m a x of his m i t ü s t r y . Jesus i n his h u m a r ü t y as flesh a n d b l o o d is n o h e l p t o t h e m , f o r h e l p c o m e s t h r o u g h the S p i r i t g i v e n b y the i n c a m a t e C h r i s t i n his ascension.!» 6.3 2, 3 5 and 45 may also be significant here, since 'the use of the term äX-qOivos sufficiendy indicates that the food of eternal life belongs to the order of aAi}ö«a and therefore of trvivp.a' (Dodd 341), since the only real paraUel to v . 35's note of epxeaOai-iriareveiv is 7.37-39, ^ d since the citation of Isa. 54.13 is very close i n thought to the great new covenant promises of Jer. 31.34 and Ezek. 36.27, which Paul for one saw * Strachau 192; cf. Bemard a i s f . "The theme of the discourse is . . .v imbelief and faitii' (Hoskyns 288) - a view confirmed by the repetition of the theme in v. 29, 35, 36, 40, 47, 64, 69. Cf Strathmarm 121. * A. Si±ia.tt£t, Das Evangelium nach Jobannes (ig ji) 1 1 5 ; Barrett, Gojr/)«/236, 246; Dodd 339; Lightfoot 162; B. Gärtoer, Jobn 6 and tbe Jewisb Passover (1959) 23f.; R, V. G. Tasker, Tbe Gospel According to St Job» (1960) 93. For the sacrifidal connotations of the phrase 'flesh and blood' see Jeremias, Eucbaristic Words 22if., im. 1 0 , 1 1 . ' Verse 27: as in the earlier discourses (3.3: 4.10; 5.19), Jesus' opening; words sound out the theme .which characterizes the succeeding verses; anc 'v. 63 is the clue that the reader must hold fast in attempting to luiderstand the discourse' (Dodd 341). * For the parallels between chs. 4 and 6 see Hoskyns 292. » Barrett,' Gospel 238; cf. Marsh 295. "> Cf. Barrett, Gospel 249, 251; Dodd 34rf. That ätx^almvTa is used in the same way as here is generally recognized (e.g. Bultmatm, Jobannes 341; Lightfoot 163, 167).

The Spirit and Baptism in ]obn's Gospel

183

fulfilled in the gift of the Spirit (II Cor. 3.3, 6; I Thess. 4.8 - note how 4.9 also echoes Isa. 34.13). Moreover, with the thought of Jesus' death we are at once into that complex event of death-resurrection-ascensiongift of the Spirit which John holds as an indivisible unity. The thoughtful reader will thus recognize that the assimilation of the life-giving food, which residts from Jesus' sacrifidal death and whose eating results in eternal life, must refer to the spiritual union of the believer with his Lord which follows Jesus' departure (14.20, 23; 15.1-8 - note the theme of reciprocal indwelling in 6.5 6; 14.20; 15.4f.), and which is effected by the sending of the other Paraclete.

A n y interest i n t h e L o r d ' s S u p p e r is incidental. J o h n ' s c h i e f p u r p o s e is t o c o m b a t d o c e t i s m , a n d h e does so b y h e a v i l y u n d e r scoring the offensiveness o f the i n c a m a t i o n (päp^, Tpcuyeiv). I t is just possible that h e is u s i n g the l a n g u a g e o f a n alternative v e r s i o n o f the w o r d s o f i n s t i m t i o n at t h e L a s t S u p p e r . B u t i f s o , t h e n w e s h o u l d n o t e that J o h n ' s chief use f o r i t is t o describe n o t the effect o f t h e sacrament as s u c h , b u t the u n i o n o f the ascended Jesus w i t h his b e l i e v i n g f o l l o w e r s t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t . i i A n y reference t o the sacrament itself reveals n o t a n exaltation o f the sacrament as a means o f receiving t h e Spirit a n d life o f C h r i s t , b u t rather a fairly b l u n t w a m i n g against a n y such false H t e r a h s m . T h e eucbaristic flesb avails n o t h i n g ; life comes t h r o u g h t h e S p i r i t a n d w o r d s o f Jesus.12 T h i s confirms w h a t w e m i g h t have inferred a n y w a y f r o m J o h n ' s silence a b o u t the L a s t S u p p e r a n d a b o u t J e s u s ' b a p t i s m - n a m e l y , that J o h n is c o n c e r n e d lest t o o m u c h a t t e n t i o n b e g i v e n t o t h e o u t w a r d rite, a n d lest t h e Spirit b e t h o u g h t o f as j o i n e d i n s o m e w a y t o the physical elements, s o t h a t t h e S p i r i t , a n d t h e H f e h e b r i n g s , c o u l d otily b e g i v e n t h r o u g h o r i n c o i m e c t i o n w i t h these elements. I n t h e discourse o f c h . 6 J o h n wishes a b o v e a l l t o e m p h a s i z e that Jesus h i m s e l f is t h e source a n d sustenance o f eternal l i f e ; h e a l o n e , t m l y i n c a m a t e , i n his w h o l e p e r s o n , gives life.!3 O n l y , i t is t h e ' i n c a m a t e Jesus as given up to death, w h o is t h e 11 So Strathmann 123; and see Howard, IB 8 373. Note how Ignatius uses the same eucharistie language in similar metaphorical ways: Trall. 8.1; Philad. 5.1; Korn. 7.2f. (on which see J . B. Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers II Vol. II

[1855]; also on Eph. 5.2). 12 Howard, JB 8 575; cf. Schweizer in Neotestamentiea (1963) 389-91, and espedally 395^; also TWNT VI 439f.; VII i4of. For a fuller treatment of this passage see my forthcoming article in NTS. l ä o o p f KOI oifio = the whole man (Brown, Gospel 282), the whole incamate life (Barrett, Gospel 247), man as distinct from God (P. Borgen, Bread from Heapen [1965] 181, 189) = 'me' (v. 57); cf. 11.25; 14.6.

186

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

bread of life; b o w e v e r essential was tbe incarnation to the w o r k of redemption, for J o h n it is n o t merely Jesus descended w h o gives life, merely as aäp^, but rather as also ascended, w h e n he gives himself through and in the Spirit.i* It is in the beheving reception o f the Spirit of Christ t h a t w e eat the flesh and drink the blood of t h e incamate and cmcified Christ. In ch. 6 the E v a n g e l i s t seems to b e e n v i s a g i n g an initial and u n repeatable contact and act o f u n i o n w i t h C h r i s t b y faith, t h r o u g h w h i c h life is c o n v e y e d to man, rather than a repeated c o m i n g , believing a n d eating (Barrett,

Gospel

2 4 3 ; S a n d e r s a n d M a s t i n 1 9 0 ) . 6 . 5 1 c , özf. m a k e

it clear that this entry into life-giving union w i t h C h r i s t can only result f r o m his death, a n d is effected once-for-all b y the Spirit g i v e n b y J e s u s on his ascending ' w h e r e he w a s before'. I n the last analysis the emphasis in ch. 6 Hes o n the imitary act of redemption in Christ's death, resurrec tion, ascension a n d gift o f the Spirit (cf. S t r a t h m a n n 1 2 1 ) .

(ü) 'Water' is frequently mentioned in the Fourth Gospel, and 3 . 5 must be set in the context of John's overaU use of the concept a necessary task t o o often overlooked b y exegetes. F r o m a survey of the relevant references - 1 . 2 6 , 3 1 , 3 3 ; 2 . 1 - 1 1 ( 4 . 4 6 ) ; 3 . 5 ; 3 . 2 2 26; 4 - 7 - 1 5 J 5 - 2 - 9 J 7 - 3 7 - 3 9 > 9-7.

1 3 - 1 - 1 6 ; 1 9 . 3 4 - t h e foUowmg

important facts emerge. First, J o h n uses 'water' in t w o distinct ways - by w a y o f contrast and by w a y of equation. In chs. 1 , 2 , 3 , and 5 , water is that which represents the old dispensation (in its preparatoriness, its p o v e r t y , its mere externahty, and its inabihty to help), in contrast t o that which Jesus gives in tbe n e w dispensation (represented b y the gift of the Spirit, by wine and by healing). On ch. I, see p. 1 9 above. On ch. 3 , see pp. i<)S. above. Most commentators recognize that the water in ch. 2 represents the poverty of the old dispensation in contrast to the richness ofthe new. Or are we to take it that John intends to contrast Christian baptism unfavourably with the Lord's Supper?! If symboüsm is intended in ch. 5, it is the contrast between the Torah which promised üfe to men, but which in fact did nothing for them, and the Hfe-giving word of Jesus (Dodd 3 1 9 ; Lightfoot 1 4 9 ; Brown, Gospel 2 1 1 ; Marsh 2 4 9 ^ ; also Sanders and Mastin 1 6 1 ) . It is incredible that Cullmann should find a baptismal reference here (JiVorslnp 8 5 - 8 7 ) , since the whole point of the story is that the water of the pool did not heal 1* Cf. Schlattcr, Johannes 114-19.

The Spirit and Baptism in John's Gospel

187

the man and did not even contribute to his healing. The healing -was accomplished solely by the word of Jesus (cf. 15.3). Is ch. 5 perhaps something of a warning against a sacramentalist attitude to baptism, which fastens its hope in a looked-for automatic efficacy of the waterrite, rather than in Jesus and his word (cf. Bieder 27if.)? In chs. 4, 7, and 19, water is a metaphor iot the Spirit given by the glorified Jesus in bis ascension (in contrast to the merely physical water of the old dispensation in Jacob's weh and at the Feast of Tabernacles[?]). That the water of which Jesus speaks in ch. 4 is the Spirit in his lifegiving Operation is indicated by several considerations, of which the following are the most important: (i) he describes it as ij Swped TOV ÖeoC. Since for Luke and quite probably Heb. 6.4 Swped = the Holy Spirit, and since Paul is very famihar with this sense (see p. 123 above), the implication is that 77 Swped tou ßeov was a more or less Standard expres sion for the Holy Spirit in early Christianity. (ii) Both 'the gift of the Spirit' and tJSwp ^wv were used in Judaism to describe the Torah (Strack-Billerbeck II 433f.; Barrett, Gospel 195); we are back in the contrast between the old order (characterized by law) and the new (characterized by the Spirit), as 4.12-14, 23f. confirm (cf. Rom. 7.6; II Cor. 3.6). John seems to have taken over the Standard equation of Wisdom with the waters of the OT and identified Wisdom not with the Torah but with the Holy Spirit (Knox, Hellenistie Elements 64; cf. Brown, Gospel i78f.; Schnackenburg 467). (iü) The closeness of thought between 4.14b and 6.63a; 7.38f. (iv) In using dAAo/ioi (4.14), which is nowhere eise used of water, John may have been tldnking of the Spirit's action in Judg. 14.6,19; 1 5 . 1 4 ; ! Sam. 10.10 - the oiüy occasions when dAAo/xat translates säleah. (v) Water which is drunk and which becomes in him who drinks it 'a spring of water Welling up to eternal hfe' can hardly be referred to baptism (contra Schweitzer 35 5f.; Cullmann, Worship 80-84; A. G. H. CoreU, ConsummatumEst\ET 1958] 60; Brown, Gospel i79f.). Cf. 7.37-39In 19.34, the primary reference is anti-docetic (see Beasley-Murray's exceUent treatment - 224-6). There is probably a further imagery in mind: whüe the blood affirms the reaUty of his death, the water symbol izes the outpouring ofthe Spirit (Beasley-Murray 225f.; Dodd 349 n. 2; Barrett, Gospel^Gzf.; Sanders and Mastin 4 1 2 ; Clark 28; Thüsing 172; Betz i67f.; Braun ÜI 168; Barth, Taufe i6j{.). This may seem grotesque to us, but it is the picture of 7.3 8 which John has in mind (note that the emphasis on beUef in 7.3 8f. is matched by Iva KOI vi^ets morevrjTe -19.35; according to Brown, Gospel 323, most authors agree on the connection between 7.38 and 19.34). John's point is not that the sacraments derive

188

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

from the death of Christ (contra Schweitzer 358; Cullmann, Worship ii4f.; CoreU 75) - the blood is mentioned before the water (Schweizer in Neotestamentiea 381; Strathmann 242; Barth, Taufe 416) - but that the Spirit and the life of the Spirit comes directly from the Crucified as a result of his glorification (so Barth, Dogmatik IV/4 i37f.)- We must not give the sacraments the importance or function of the Spirit. In chs. 9 and 1 3 , the water has no independent significance; the symbohsm focuses on the source of heaUng and the act of cleansing. With most recent commentators I beHeve that John means us to understand Jesus himself as d a.TTearaK\x.&os (9.7). The pool of Siloam represents Jesus, not baptism. He is the source of the water which heals, as he is the source of the water which revitalizes (4.14; 7-37f-)- John probably intends no symboüsm to be read into the water, since he does not mention it. Similarly in ch. 15, the water is only part of the stageequipment for the central action, hke the basin and the towel. The footwashing itself is a arjiieiov representing Christ's death and the spiritual cleansing which it brings. Peter asks for the impossible, a more com plete cleansing, and is rebuked in v, 10, where the shorter reading is original and which is best seen as a polemic against Gnostic claims to a fuUer salvadon. See my forthcoming article in ZNW. I n s h o r t , J o h n uses w a t e r e i t h e r as a n example o f w h a t b e l o n g s t o r d Kärta, o r t o symbolize w h a t b e l o n g s t o r d avw. Second, water f o r J o h n usuaUy symbolizes something other t h a n i t s e l f ( e v e n i n chs. 9 a n d 1 3 w h e r e t h e actions i n w h i c h i t is i n v o l v e d ' s y m b o l i z e s p i r i t u a l i U u m i n a t i o n a n d spiritual cleansing). T h e t w o e x c e p t i o n s a r e c h s . i a n d 3, w h e r e t h e w a t e r refers t o ' w a t e r - b a p t i s m . B u t i n t h e s e cases t h e w a t e r signifies w a t e r - b a p t i s m as a m e r e l y e x t e r n a l r i t e b e l o n g i n g t o t h e o r d e r o f J e w i s h p u r i f i cations a n d o t d y p r e p a r a t o r y f o r t h e b a p t i s m o f t h e M e s s i a h - t h e baptism i n the Spirit. T h i r d , t h e e v a n g e h s t r e e o r d s o r d y t w o o t b e r water-references o n t h e h p s o f J e s u s ( i n c h s . 4 a n d 7). O n b o t h o f these occasions w a t e r is u s e d as a m e t a p h o r o f t h e S p i r i t i n h i s l i f e - g i v i n g Opera tion. I n t h e U g h t o f these facts w e m u s t re-assess t h e t h r e e a r g u m e n t s u s e d t o s u p p o r t t h e v i e w t h a t 3.5 is a b a p t i s m a l reference. (a) ' T h e s a c r a m e n t a U s m o f J o h n ' is a n d s n o m e r . J o h n is n o t really i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e s a c r a m e n t s i n h i s G o s p e l . T h i s d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t h c is a n a n t i - s a c r a m e n t a ü s t ; b u t i t c e r t a ü d y e x c l u d c s t h e

The Spirit and Baptism in John's Gospel

189

view that m u c h o f his s y m b o h s m w a s directed t o w a r d s t h e sacra ments. W e m a y say t h a t his s y m b o H s m points t o a n d p o r t r a y s t h e same basic facts o f t h e eternal h f e w o n a n d bestowed b y Jesus which the sacraments p o i n t t o a n d portray. B u t t h a t is quite different from saying t h a t h i s symbols portray t b e sacraments themselves and indicate t h a t t h e eternal h f e is received through the sacraments. T h i s we caimot say. W h a t our survey has shown is that J o h n ' s symbohsm always centres on Jesus, and on Jesus as the mediator of eschatological salvation - that is to say, on Jesus in his salvation-effecting action at the chmax of his ministry in his glorification and exaltation, above all in his g i v i n g of the S p i r i t ; for it is through the S p i r i t that the eternal life is bestowed on his foho wer s. T h e only really plausible reference to a sacrament (in ch. 6), far from presenting the L o r d ' s S u p p e r as a Channel through which eternal life is received, o n t h e contrary, specifically dismisses this Suggestion, and rather indicates that sacramental language c a n fittingly be used t o describe t h e l i f e - g i v i n g Operation o f the S p i r i t i n t h e behever, only so long as it is not interpreted literally ( t h a t is, of a hteral eating a n d drinking). T h i s greatiy lessens t h e probabihty o f a sacramental reference i n 3.5, a n d a n y Suggestion that w a t e r b a p t i s m is t h e Channel through w h i c h t h e h f e - g i v i n g S p k i t is m e d i a t e d is ahnost t o t a l l y excluded.

{b) T h e argument d r a w n f r o m t h e context o f t h e N i c o d e m u s episode is greatiy w e a k e n e d . I n t h e immediate context, w a t e r Stands o n t h e f a r side o f t h e contrast b e t w e e n t h e o l d a n d n e w dispensations - as a n example o f w h a t belongs t o r d Kärui - as that

w i t i i w h i c h t h e g i f t o f t h e S p k i t is contrasted. B u t t h e w a t e r reference h i 3.5 is o f a different o r d e r : k i 3.5 w a t e r is co-ordinate, n o t contrasted, w i t h the S p k i t . I t is m o r e h k e l y therefore t o belong t o that o t h e r set o f w a t e r references w h i c h s y m b o l i z e s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n w a t e r , w h i c h s y m b o l i z e that w h i c b b e l o n g s t o rd ä v t » . M o r e o v e r , i n t h e jsaraUel episode i n c h . 4 w e h a v e a n example o f t h a t o t h e r J o b a n n i n e use o f w a t e r - as a s y m b o l o f the l i f e - g i v i n g Operation o f t h e S p i r i t (4.14). I f there is a n y significance i n t h e fact t h a t these w a t e r references, t o g e t h e r w i t h 7.38, are t h e o n l y ones w h i c h appear o n t h e h p s o f J e s u s , a n d that o n each occasion there is a triple l i n k b e t w e e n Spirit, w a t e r a n d life, i t w o u l d suggest that the w a t e r o f 5.5 h k c w i s e s y m b o l i z e s the l i f e - g i v i n g Operation o f the Spirit. (c) T h e a r g u m e n t that n o C h r i s t i a n reader c o u l d fall t o see

i^o

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m , t h o u g h p o w e r f u l , m u s t g i v e precedence t o the a r g u m e n t d r a w n f r o m J o h n ' s t h e o l o g y . Besides a s s u m i n g that w e k n o w w h e n the G o s p e l w a s w r i t t e n , a n d the sacramental i m d e r s t a n d i n g o f the readers t o w h o m i t was addressed, i t assumes also that it w a s J o h n ' s I n t e n t i o n t o fit his w r i t i n g i n t o the c o n t e x t o f that u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d n o t t o chaUenge o r alter it i n a n y radical w a y . B u t the G o s p e l itself h a r d l y gives these assumptions credibility.15 O n the c o n t r a r y , J o h n seems t o b e challenging a n y sacram e n t a h s m w h i c h h e assumes o n the p a r t o f his readers. O n the o t h e r b a n d , w e m a y n o t s i m p l y list 3 . 5 a l o n g w i t h the o t h e r w a t e r - S p i r i t references, f o r i n 3 . 5 w a t e r a n d Spirit are neither contrasted n o r e q u a t e d , b u t rather c o - o r d i n a t e d ; b o t h t o g e t h e r are means o f effecting the b i r t h dvwdw. M o r e i m p o r t a n t , i n the o t h e r w a t e r passages the w a t e r w i t h w h i c h the S p i r i t is contrasted a n d / o r e q u a t e d has a p o i n t o f reference i n the passage w h i c h hes outside the contrast a n d e q u a t i o n (the w a t e r o f J o h n ' s b a p t i s m , the w a t e r o f J a c o b ' s w e l l , t h e w a t e r o f T a b e r n a c l e s , the w a t e r f r o m J e s u s ' side). W h y t h e n does Jesus speak o f w a t e r i n 3 . 5 , 1 8 w h e n the idea o f b i r t h avwöev itself does n o t require i t (as t h e o t h e r verses s h o w ) ? W h a t is the irdtial p o i n t o f reference o f t h e w a t e r i n 3 . 5 ? T h e m o s t h k e l y a n s w e r is that the a u t h o r i n t e n d e d his readers t o u n d e r s t a n d the w a t e r iidtiaUy i n terms o f J o h n ' s b a p t i s m , since i n the o t h e r relevant" passages o f the first three chapters the w a t e r s p o k e directly o f the o l d dispensation's rites o f purification, particularly J o h n ' s b a p t i s m ev vSan.^'' , I f this is s o , the reader w o u l d t h e n u n d e r s t a n d 3 . 5 t o m e a n t h a t C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n is m o r e t h a n J o h a i m i n e b a p t i s m ev vBan: it consists either o f (Christian) b a p t i s m i n w a t e r a n d t h e gift o f t h e Spirit i n close connection,^» o r o f a cleansing b y t h e Spirit, a cleansing s y m b o l i z e d b y J o h n ' s b a p t i s m ev vban.^^ 15 Apart from anything eise, w . g£. may imply that the themes of w . 1-8 are to be understood in terms which Nicodemus could have understood. 1* Bultmann's excision of tüSaros Kai (Jobannes 98 n. 2; followed by Lohse, NTS 7 (1960-61); Dinkler, RGG» V I (1962) 635; Marxsen, Introduction 256; Braun III 86; N. Micklem, Bebold tbe Man: A Study oftbe Fourtb Gospel [1969] 8j) is wholly unwarranted. " See White 25 5^; cf. Marsh 178. 1' Cf. Zahn, referred to by Bauer 3 5; Rawlinson lof.; I. de la Potterie, cited in Schnackenburg 383 n. 3. 1» The alternatives are by no means mutually exclusive. But that the mention of water implies reading 'baptism in' for 'birth from' has yet to be demonstrated for any passage in the N T . See on Titus 3.5; I Peter 1.23.

The Spirit and Baptism in John's Gospel

191

T h i s seems t o b e c o n f i r m e d b y the l a n g u a g e i n t h e episode itself. (i) B k t h c'l üSoTo? Kai TTvevuaros is e q u i v a l e n t t o b i r t h dvtoQev ( v v . 3 , 7), i n contrast t o b i r t h eV T-^J y^?. A s J o h n is 6 utv e« T^S yfjs i n contrast t o 6 dvcodev epxöfievos (3-3 i ) j J o h n ' s b a p t i s m ev vSan is t o b e contrasted w i t h b i r t h f r o m w a t e r a n d Spirit. I n v i e w o f i. 3 3 a n d 3 . 8 , it is e v i d e n t t h a t t h e S p i r i t is t h e decisive e l e m e n t i n t h e contrast. T h i s w o u l d p e r m i t either o f t h e t w o m t e r p r e t a t i o n s suggested a b o v e , b u t t h e same verses rule o u t t h e p o s s i b i h t y o f i n t e r p r e t i n g 3.5 i n terms o f t h e so-called b a p t i s m - i n - w a t e r - a n d Spirit.2o T h e N T k n o w s o f n o such b a p t i s m . I t is m o r e h k e l y that w a t e r means w a t e r - b a p t i s m a n d S p i r i t means S p i r i t - b a p t i s m , a n d that b i r t h f r o m a b o v e i n v o l v e s both b a p t i s m s i n v e r y close c o n n e c tion. Clark suggests that in 3.5 'the Evangeüst looks back to the baptism of Jesus himself, when water and Spirit were conjoined' (27 - probably foUowing CuUmarm, Worship 76). But this üne of reasoning is left suspended in mid-air since it has no point of attachment at its far end: had John intended such an association he could hardly have failed to describe Jesus' baptism and the way in which it conjoined water and Spirit. See p. 3 3 above.

(Ü) B i r t h vharos KOX Tsvevfiaros is b i r t h eK TOV irvevfmros i n contrast t o b k t h eK rfjs oapKos ( v . 6). I t Stands w h o U y w i t h i n t h e r e a l m o f r d ävus, a n d w h o U y o u t s i d e t h e r e a h n o f r d K Ö T W . ^ ^ I t is something impossible t o m a n (v. 4) - somethüig that m a n caimot engineer, o r c o n t r i v e , o r achieve. I t is w h o l l y S p i r i t - g i v e n . A n d it is g i v e n m y s t e r i o u s l y , so that the c o m i n g o f the S p i r i t c a n n o t b e p i n n e d d o w n t o a precise t i m e a n d precise m o d e , a n d the effect o f his C o m i n g c a n n o t b e m e a s u r e d ; rather, o n e just b e c o m e s a w a r e o f his presence m t h e b e U e v e r ( v . 8).82 T h i s h a r d l y Squares w i t h the v i e w that J o h n t h o u g h t o f the S p i r i t as g i v e n t h r o u g h C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m , let alone t h r o u g h t h e w a t e r o f C h r i s t i a n baptism.^s (üi) vSft)/) K a i irvevpua c a n n o t b c r e g a r d e d as i n d e p e n d e n t a n d unrelated elements i n t h e b i r t h dvwdev; f a r less can w e speak o f t w o 2« Contra Bauer 35; Barrett, Gospel 174; Flemington 87; Wilkens 138. 21 Cf. Hoskyns 213, 215; Barrett, Gospel 175', Lightfoot 116. «2 Schweizer points out tliat it is not the Sphit but the bearer of the Spirit who is described in v. 8 (TWNT VI 459). More precisely, v. 8 describes the one bom of the Spirit in respect to Us birtb {K rntJ/MTos. 23 Cf. some valuablc comments by Strathmann 68. Contra especially E. F. Scott, Tbe Fourtb Gospel* (1908); Macgregor 72; Brown. Gospel CXIV; Schweitzer 359; Cullmann, Worship 76; Clark 28.

192

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

births. 24 T h e phrase is a h e n d i a d y s , a n d t h e single p r e p o s i t i o n g o v e r n i n g b o t h w o r d s indicates that vStop KOX nvevtia f o r m s a Single concept25 - w a t e r - a n d - S p i r i t . T h i s i m p h e s either t h a t C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n is a (theological) u n i t y o f w h i c h b o t h water-baptism a n d S p i r i t - b a p t i s m are integral parts ( i n w h i c h case t h e verse does n o t say h o w t h e y are related), o r that t h e w a t e r is a symbol o f t h e h f e - g i v i n g p o w e r o f the Spirit as i n 4.14 a n d 7.38. T h e latter is perhaps m o r e likely i n v i e w o f t h e fact that t h e O T finds wäter a A t t i n g symbol o f G o d ' s activity i n q u i c k e n i n g m e n t o life (e.g. Isa. 5 5 . 1 - 3 ; J e r . 2 . 1 3 ; 1 7 . 1 3 ; Z e c h . 14.8; E z e k . 47.9), a n d one n o t i n f r e q u e n t l y h n k e d i n J e w i s h t h o u g h t with t h e eschatolo gical re-creation and r e n e w a l effected b y t h e gift o f t h e Spirit (Isa. 3 2 . 1 5 - 1 7 ; 44.3-5; E z e k . 36.25-27; 39.29; J o e l 2.28; see also J u b . 1.23; T e s t . J u d . 24.3; i Q S 4.2of.).26 I t s h o u l d n o t g o u n n o t i c e d that t b e d o s e s t parallels t o t h e w a t e r a n d S p i r i t correlation o f J o h n 3.5 are t o b e f o u n d i n E z e k . 36.25-27 a n d i Q S 4.20-22.2' T h e f u r t h e r w e set J o h n ' s G o s p e l i n t o t h e c o n t e x t o f Palestinian J u d a i s m , as expressed particularly i n t h e Q u m r a n sect, t h e m o r e w e i g h t w i l l w e h a v e t o g i v e t o this use o f ' w a t e r ' with ' S p i r i t ' t o s y m b o l i z e r e n e w a l b y Spirit. N o r s h o i d d w e f o r g e t that J o h n ' s b a p t i s m seems t o h a v e b e e n f o r the B a p t i s t h i m s e l f a s y m b o l o f the eschatological p u r g i n g effected t h r o u g h t h e Spirit. A s i t is t h e S p i r i t - o f - t r u t h {mevua Kai aX-qOeia) w h o m a k e s spiritual w o r s h i p possible (4.2 3 f.), s o it is t h e w a t e r - o f - t h e - S p i r i t (üStop KOX irveSixa) w h i c h effects b i r t h ävotdev. T h e other w a y o f taking the hendiadys, water-which-is-(also)-Spirit ( D o d d 312), as t h o u g h the Spirit operates t h r o u g h the water o f baptism (see the authors cited i n n. 23 above), o r the watet is made potent b y the Spirit ( E . K . L e e , The Religious Thought of St ]ohn [1950] 189), is hardly acceptable i n v i e w o f the considerations marshalled i n these paragraphs. ( i v ) T h e f u r t h e r c o n v e r s a t i o n indicates t h a t t b e b i r t h avtoöev, e*c is t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h t h e eternal h f e w h i c h results f r o m

m>€vpMTos

24 As does, e.g., Hoskyns 215. 26 A fairly typical feature of the Johannine style. See also 4.23f; 6.63; Dodd 314 n. 2, 34if.; Brown, Gospel 130, 297. Schnackenburg 471 n. 3 refers also to 1.14, 17; 14.6; I John 3.18; II Jolin 3. 2« Cf. Barth, Taufe 445, 449; S. H. Hooke. NTS 9 (1962-65) 375. 2 ' Cf. F. M. Cross, Tbe Ancient Ubrary of Qumran and Modem Biblical Studies

(1958) 155.

The Spirit and Baptism in John's Gospei

193

the S o n o f M a n b e m g h f t e d u p a n d w h i c h comes t o m a n t h r o u g h f a i t h ( w . 1 3 - 1 5 ) . W e are thus led f o r w a r d t o 20.22 w h e r e the p l a y o n TTvedfia is v e r y similar t o that i n 3.8. B i r t h f r o m a b o v e is t h e g i f t o f the Spirit b y the ascended L o r d t o those w h o b e h e v e i n h i m ; a n d i n 20.22 that b i r t h is effected i n c o m p l e t e i n d e p e n d e n c e o f w a t e r , 28 It may be that J o h n is also d o i n g here w h a t he did i n 6 . 5 1 - 5 6 -

t a k i n g Up sacramental l a n g u a g e for its s y m b o h c a l v a l u e w i t h the aim of correcting a false sacramentahsm^ä - C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m b e i n g the initial p o i n t of reference for the ' w a t e r ' . By i n c l u d i n g the w o r d s J S a r o s Kai he a c k n o w l e d g e s the i m p o r t a n c e o f w a t e r b a p t i s m and its close c o n n e c t i o n w i t h tbe gift of the S p i r i t i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . But for him its i m p o r t a n c e hes in its relation t o and s y m b o h s m of the Spirit's r e n e w i n g w o r k . It is, of course, a feature of John's style that Jesus uses words which cause misunderstanding, so that he can go on to correct that misunder standing and to draw out their true meaning (see e.g. Lightfoot 131). It is quite hkely that in 3.5 and 6.51-56 he is doing the same sort of thing. Bultmann, conunenting on ävcadev, notes that the twofold meaning of John's language consists 'in that he uses concepts and Statements which in their regulär sense refer to earthly matters, but in their actual sense to divine' (Johannes 95 n. 2).

I t is i m p o r t a n t t o r e m e m b e r that i n 3.3-8 J o h n is t a l k i n g o f regeneration eK m>evttaTos, t o w h i c h ' w a t e r ' is s o m e h o w i n t i m a t e l y related, n o t o f b a p t i s m , t o w h i c h w e m u s t relate t h e Spirit. H a d J o h n r e g a r d e d t h e w a t e r ( m e a i d n g w a t e r - b a p t i s m ) as i m p o r t a n t i n itself a n d essential t o t h e t b o u g b t o f r e - b i r t h , h e w o u l d surely h a v e m e n t i o n e d i t a g a i n a n d g i v e n i t m o r e p r o m i n e n c e . T h e fact that h e does n o t , the fact t h a t h e o t d y m e n t i o n s w a t e r as p a r t o f a single c o n c e p t w i t h Spirit, a n d the fact t h a t h e goes o n t o stress t h a t the birth uSaros KOX irvevixaros is a b i r t h effected b y t h e Spirit a n d b e l o n g s w h o l l y w i t h i n t h e sphere o f w « ? / i a , a n d w h o U y outside the sphere o f adpi, i m p h e s that h e is saying s o m e t h i n g h k e this t o his readers, w h e t h e r d i s d p l e s o f the B a p t i s t w h o still o v e r - v a l u e d J o h n ' s b a p t i s m , o r Christians w h o o v e r - v a l u e d t h e C h r i s t i a n sacrament: T h e w a t e r w h i c h y o u v a l u e is o t d y a s y m b o l o f the See also p. 175. On the place of faith see Strathmaiui 68; Beasley-Murray 2}of There may well be a link intended between 1.12,1.33f and 3.5. Cf. also de la Potteric (see n. 18 above). *» Cf. Bartii, Dogmafik IV/4 133.

194

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

quickening p o w e r of the Spirit; water-baptism is of no avail, it is the Spirit w h o gives hfe. John's writings reflect a later stage when the magical-sacramental views of the mystery cuks w o u l d be exerting a dangerous influence on many Christians.»" Tids danger he seeks to counter b y his silence on the t w o great sacramental rites in Jesus' ministry, by his correction of hteralistic sacramentahsm and emphasis that the sacramental elements are essentiaUy symbols, and by his insistence on focusing attention on the hfe-giving activity of the Spirit which is the chmax and result of Christ's exaltation in death, resurrection and ascension. If Brown is correct in his conjecture that one of the purposes of the Fourth Gospel was to bridge the gap between the Church of John's day and 'the already distant Jesus' (NTS 13 [1966-67] 128), then we should note that far from localizing Jesus' presence in the sacraments, John seems to be warning against the attitude which finds solace for the delay of the parousia in the sacraments. John therefore ignores the sacraments and points direcdy to the Spirit. Jesus is present with his disciples in the Spirit and through the Word. The Fourth Gospel, w e might say, was the last plea of firstgeneration Christiardty f o r a true balance in its devotional and sacramental life, before the development of institutional, hierarchical and sacral Christiatdty began to tip that balance more and more out of the true, untd, within a relatively few generations, f o r the great majority of Christians, worship in Spirit and truth was submerged beneath a growing mass of ritual and ceremony.^ 3" Howard, Christianity 149; Macgregor, NTS 9 (1962-63) 118.

XVI T H E

SPIRIT A N D T H EW O R D I N T H E L E T T E R S O F J O H N

T H E a u t h o r o f the F o u r t h G o s p e l m a y h a v e b e h e v e d that the apostles' S p i r i t - b a p t i s m w a s distinct f r o m a n d subsequent t o their regeneration, a n d also that w a t e r - b a p t i s m p l a y e d a k e y p a r t i n t h e b i r t h ävcüöev. D o Pentecostals a n d sacramentahsts find a n y f u r t h e r s u p p o r t f o r their v i e w s i n his o t h e r w r i t i n g s (assuming that w e o w e the J o h a i m i n e epistles t o his p e n ) ? i T h e passages w h i c h d e m a n d attention are I J o h n 2.20, 2 7 ; 3 . 9 ; a n d 5 . 6 - 1 2 . I John 2.20, 2y; ß.^

W e take these passages t o g e t h e r since xP^afia a n d a-nipfia are o b v i o u s l y closely related; m o s t w o u l d agree that t h e y refer t o t h e same t h i n g - either t h e W o r d o r the Spirit, o r t h e Spirit w i t h t h e W o r d . T h e suggested m e a n i n g s f o r xp^fffia are b r o a d e r ; t h e y can be s u m m e d u p imder t w o heads: (a) w h e r e the reference is t o s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e S p i r i t : (i) a sacramental rite either o f b a p t i s m o r a n o m t i n g ; ^ ( ü ) t h e W o r d , the G o s p e l ; » (b) w h e r e the reference is t o t h e S p i r i t : (i) the S p k i t alone,* a n d 1 See Kümmel 310-12, 315. 2 J . Chaine, Les Spttres Catboliques* (1939) 170; Wilckens 107; Dix, Laying on of Hands lof.; Marsh 201; J . Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminologji (1962) 186, 263; cf. Thomton, Mystery 22, 45; Lowther Clarke 12. H. Windisch and H. Preisker give three alternatives which include these two views {Die katboliscben Briefe [HNT 1951] 117); they think both xp^f«« and oiripfui derive from a sacramental-magical view (119). s C. H. Dodd, Tbe Johannim Epistles (Mofläitt 1946) 62-64; Beasley-Murray 234-6; Dinkler, RGG» V I 635; Braun III 172. * R. Law, Tbe Tests ofLife (1909) 352; A . Schlatter, Erläuterungen 9 Teil 45f.; Delling, Tfl«/ff io7f.; J . R. W. Stott, Tbe Epistles of Jobn (1964) 106, io9f., 114; T E V . Windisch's third possibiUty is Spirit-baptism.

196

Baptism in the Holy spirit

even as distinct f r o m conversion-itdtiation ;5 (ii) the Spirit as given in baptism,» o r in some m o r e complex r i t e . ' The ränge of meatdngs suggested f o r unepfia is more hmited: either the W o r d , « o r the Spirit alone,* o r the Spirit as specifically given in o r through baptism.^" The first alternative w e may dismiss at once. XP'«^/^« certairdy used metaphorically, and neither hterally n o r o f a magical rite. Besides a ritual anointing w i t h oil being impossible to p r o v e and 'altogether unlikely' f o r N T times, the decisive fact is that the Xplcrp-a abides in them, and has the personal function o f teaching them (v. 2 7 ) . " T h e second alternative - xplop,a — teaching, the W o r d of G o d is much m o r e weigbty.12 J o h n often speaks o f receiving {Xap.ßäveiv) the testimony (jxapTvpLa. - J o h n 3 . 1 1 , 3 2 , 3 3 ; 5.34; I J o h n 5.9), the commandment (eVroAi? - J o h n 1 0 . 1 8 ; II J o h n 4), o r the w o r d s ( p ^ j u a r o - J o h n 1 2 . 4 8 ; 17.8). E v e n m o r e sigrüficant is the w a y he can speak o f this divine teaching abiding (jjJveiv), o r being {ehai) in them.13 O n tbe other band, J o h n speaks in a sindlar w a y of receiving tbe Spirit ( J o h n 7.39; 1 4 . 1 7 ; 20.22), and o f the Spirit and the divine presence in the disciples ( 1 4 . 1 7 , 2 0 ; 1 5 . 4 ; I J o h n 3.9, 24; 4 . 1 2 , 1 3 , 1 5 , 16). Dodd cites Ign. Eph. 1 7 . 1 , where Ignatius eqxiates the ointment (jxvpov) poured on the Lord's head (Matt. 26; Mark 14) with 'God's knowledge, which is Jesus Christ'. But compare Qement of Alexandria, w h o in commenting on the paraUel incident in Luke and John ukes the 5 Most Pentecostals. ' A . E . Brooke, Jobannine Epistles (ICC 1912) jjf.; Lampe, Seal 61, 81; Davies 161; G. Johnston in Peake 907b; R. Bultmann, Die drei Jobannesbriefe {1967) 42f. J . Schneider, DieBriefedes Jakobus, Petrus, JudasmdJohannes* ( N T D 1961) is not so certain (157). ' B. F. Westcott, Tbe Epistles of St Jobn (1883) 73; Chase 59; W. Nauck, Die Tradition und der Charakter des ersten Jobannesbrief (1957) 94-98. * Dodd 77f.; Braun III 117f. » Büchsel. TDNT I 671, 672 n. 37. 1" Windisch-Preisker i22f.; R. Schnackenburg, Die Jobanneshriefe^ (1963) 176, 191; Davies 99. 11 Dodd 59; Beasley-Murray 233f.; Schnackenburg 161; J . Michl in Festschrift für Max Meinertz (1951) 143 n. 15. See also p. 134 above. 1' However, it is dismissed by Windisch-Preisker 117; Michl I43f.; Nauck 94; Schnackenburg 134. läp^jÄOTo: John 15.7; o Myos: John 5.38; I John i.io; 2.14; ^ öA^oo: I John 1.8; 2.4; II John 2; hroX^: I John 2.8; (laprvpia: j . i o ; most noticeable is the close parallelism between 2.27 and 2.24 - see Beasley-Murray 234.

spirit and Word in

the hetters of John

197

ointment to be a symbol rjj? evwSias rov xpiaiiaTos ayiov TTvevfiaros (Paedagogus II.8.61.3). The atiswer may well be that J o h n in speaking o f XP'O'/^« is n o t thinking clearly o f one o r other, b u t of both.i* Y e t , while it is probably a mistake to distinguish sharply between the t w o , w e must give the Spirit first place: the xP''<^l^a is the Spirit - albeit the Spirit w o r k i n g in conjunction w i t h , o r even through the W o r d . First, the xpl^y^o- teaches y o u about everything. N o w , f o r J o h n , the function of teacher is always a personal one.^^ 'Xhis contrasts with the v e r y impersonal language of 2.24 - vinls o riKovoare äw' äpx'Tjs, ev vfxlv peveroi-, whereas it compares v e r y favourably w i t h the role o f the Spirit in 3.24 and 4 . 1 3 . T h e role o f the teaching is passive, the role o f teacher (xplap-a) and the Spirit is active. M o r e over, the BiBdcTKei vn&s irepl wdvTeav (z.zj) may Well be a dehberate echo o f J o h n 14.16 - 6p,ds SiSdf« navTa. Second, it is v e r y difficult t o avoid the conclusion that by a-nippM J o h n means the Spirit, especiaUy w h e n he uses it in talking about divine begetting. This rules o u t Dodd's paraUel w i t h the parable o f the sower (where the metaphor is agricultural n o t personal) and makes certain the paraUel w i t h J o h n 3 . 3 - 8 . It is the Spirit w h o effects the divine b i r t h , the Spirit w h o is the divine seed. The paraUels with James 1.18 (direKvrjcrev ijpÄs Xöyip dXqBelas) and I Peter 1.23 (dvayeyewqpÄvoi eK anopäs . • . dj^Oaprov hid Xoyov ^CDVTO? deov KoX ixevovTos) are hardly as close. Moreover, the cnropd is distinct from the Aoyos, and it could weU be that we should identify the anopd with the Spirit (yeyewTjfievov CK TOV n v e v p M r o s — John 3.6). This would confirm my Suggestion that the Spirit works through the Word (810 rov Adyot;). Certainly it does not provide support for the view that anepp-a = Aoyos. Third, as t o the connection between the S p h i t and the teaching, w e should note the foUowing points: (i) it is the Spirit o f G o d w h o is behind and p r o m p t s the correct confession (4.2); (ü) the Spirit is the truth (5.6) - hence the comment that the XP'V« is t^ue (2.27); " So Bultmann, Tbeology I I 88; de la Potteric in Schiuckenburg 152; cf. A. N. Wilder, IB 12 (1957) 245^; T. W. Manson,/TJ" 48 (1947) 29. On cm4ptui Schulz speaks of 'die Spirit teveaUng himself in God's Word' {TWNT VII 545); cf. Westcott 108. Nauck thinks a decision between the two (Spirit or Word) is not possible (64). 1» Apart from the taunt to the blind man (John 9.34), only the Father (8.28) and the Spirit (14.26) are called teachers other than Jesus (6.59; 7.14, 28, 35; 8.[2], 20; 18.20).

I ^8

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

(üi) t h e S p i r i t w a s p r o m i s e d as o n e w h o w o u l d bear w i m e s s concerning Jesus ( J o h n 1 5 . 2 6 ) , a n d is described as T6 fiapTvpoCv (I J o h n 5 . 6 ) - hence Christians b a v e i n themselves ij p.apTopia (3.11); (iv) c o m p a r e also 4 . 4 a n d 5 . 4 w h e r e v i c t o r y is ascribed b o t h t o o iv vp.lv a n d t o ^ mWis -qp^v;

link between the

prip.ara

( v ) n o r s h o u l d w e f o r g e t t h e close

a n d t h e Spirit i n J o h n

6.63,

and the

r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e irapdKXrjTos a n d t h e TrapaKXrjais o f t h e C h r i s t i a n Community. While Barrett's attempt to give TrapaKXrjTos the sense of 'the Spirit of Christian paraclesis' is hardly to be accepted — the legal tcrminology of John 1 5 . 2 6 ; i 6 . 8 - i i , a n d t h e sense o f l John 2 . 1 make NEB's'Advocate' preferable - the idea of the Spirit working through the Word to make it effective would be whoUy Johannine (cf. Barrett, JTS i [ 1 9 5 0 ] 1 2 - 1 5 ; Gospel 3 8 5 f . ; Schweizer, TWNT V I 4 4 0 - 4 2 ; Bultmann, Johannes 4 3 2 , 4 4 2 , 4 4 4 , also 1 4 0 ; Richardson 1 1 2 - 1 5 ; Käsemann, RGG^ II i z y y f . ; Schlier 2 3 6 - 8 ) . The Johaniüne emphasis on the Word (Aoyoy - 5 . 2 4 , 3 8 ; 8 . 3 i f . > 3 7 . 4 3 . 5 i f . ; 1 2 - 4 8 ; 1 7 - 1 4 . 1 7 ; I John i . i o ; 2 . 5 , 7 ,

14;prip.aTa-

3 . 3 4 ; 6 . 6 8 ; i 2 . 4 7 f . ) reminds us o f the important role Paul gives t o preaching.

W e m a y say w i t h s o m e confidence, t h e r e f o r e , that the X P ' V " the cmepp.a refer t o the Spirit, b u t the Spirit u s i n g the p r o c l a m a t i o n a n d teaching o f t h e G o s p e l , so that t o r e s p o n d t o t h e o n e is t o receive t h e o t h e r . B u t s h o u l d w e define this activity o f the S p i r i t m o r e closely a n d tie it d o w n t o s o m e particular c e r e m o n y ? O r rather, does John i n t e n d that w e s h o u l d d o s o , o r p r e s u p p o s e such a c o n t e x t ? O r , o n the o t h e r b a n d , s h o i d d w e d i v o r c e this talk o f the S p i r i t c o m p l e t e l y f r o m c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n , as Pentecostals w o u l d w i s h ? T b e a n s w e r t o aU these questions is t h e same - N o l l n a letter i n w h i c h b a p t i s m is c o n s p i c u o u s b y its absence, w e h a v e n o g r o u n d s w h a t s o e v e r f o r saying t h a t J o h n is t h i n k i n g o f a n a c t i v i t y o f t h e S p i r i t a t baptism.^^ A s S c h n a c k e n b u r g p o i n t s o u t o n 2.20, J o h n does n o t reflect o n the w a y i n w h i c h t h e y first received the S p i r i t ; his c o n c e r n is w i t h t h e c o n t i n u i n g , a b i d i n g p o w e r o f t h e Spürit (cf. 3 . 9 - /16V«). M o r e o v e r , t h e p r o b a b i h t y that t h e t h o u g h t here is o f the Spirit operating i n conjimction w i t h the W o r d makes a reference t o a b a p t i s m a l confession less h k e l y . i ' J o h n has i n m i n d 1« Contra Windisch-Preisker 1 2 3 ; Nauck 96. 1 ' Contra Beasley-Murray 2 3 5 .

Spirtt and Word in the'Lettersof John

199

the Gospel which is responded to rather than the response itself. W e seem to b e back with Paul here, with the focus on that time w h e n the G o s p e l w a s proclaimed and the Spirit used it in his w o r k of renewal, so that to believe (in) the W o r d w a s to receive the Spirit (cf. J o h n 7 . 3 9 ; I J o h n 5 . 1 , 10). T h e decisive Clements in conversion-initiation on the divine side (the phrase is always yeyevvr^adai e« rov deov) appear once again to be the Spirit and the W o r d . O f baptism there is no thought.i^ O n the other hand, it is impossible to g o along with a Pentecostal view of these passages - namely that the anointing is a baptism in the Spirit subsequent to conversion. First, if w e take oTTepixa = the H o l y Spirit, then since the divine <m€pßa is the agent of regeneration, we can hardly say other than that regeneration is the cmipua (Spirit) Coming to abide in the initiate. Second, it is quite likely that both x^tV« oTripiia are Gnostic w o r d s , and almost certain that 2.20, 27 are aimed at G n o s t i c teachers.19 A n d , as D o d d remarks, 'It is a safe assumption that these early heretics, like their successors, the "Gnostics" o f the second Century, laid claim to a superior gnosis, o r knowledge o f divine things, o f w h i c h they deemed the ordinary Christians incapable' (5 3 ) . W i t h this claim w e may compare the Pentecostal teaching on the baptism in the Spirit; for though they are hardly Gnostics, in that they believe all Christians could and should have this greater and deeper experience o f G o d , yet, infact, since in their ejes only a minority o f Christians have had this experience, the practical outworking of the doctrine is the same: only they have had this 'second blessing', and all other Christians are less well equipped for Service and much poorer in Spiritual experience. I t is precisely against such esoteric and factious teaching that J o h n directs his polemic. All Christians have knowledge, 20 because all have been anointed with the H o l y Spirit. T h e r e are not a nvimber o f Christians w h o are still awaiting this anointing. E v e n thepossibility that there could b e unanointed Christians w o u l d have been out 1* See also p. i}3 abovc. Faith, though quite prominent, is always thought of as a present continuing belicf in Jesus (3.23; 4.16; 5.1, 5,10,13). Similarly önok6ytai in 2.23 and 4.2 (contra Nauck 86). 1' Dodd 6of., 77; cf. Schnackenbutg 154. 2» •tti.vTfs is more difficult and better attested than väna, and the change from vivTfs to irovra is more easily accounted fot than its reverse. As Schnackenburg Points out, the emphasis falls on the oSBore not its objcct. The ir<£vTtr is best Seen as a countcr to the Gnostic claim to have special knowledge over against the less enlightened Christians.

200

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

of the question f o r J o h n , since it w o u l d have meant conceding a crucial point to the heretics. The anointing with the xp^<rp°Christ is not to be distinguished from the regeneration through the m r i p p a of G o d ; all w h o are born of the Spirit are ipso facto anointed with the Spirit. Third, w e have seen h o w closely the Spirit is related to the teaching. But the teaching which abides in them is what they have heard 'from the beginning' (2.24; cf. 2.7; 3 . 1 1 ; II J o h n 6). T h e reception of the Spirit w h o abides in them (2.27) is hardly t o be distinguished from the reception of this teaching. In other w o r d s , the Spirit was received, hke the teaching, at and as the beginning of their Christian lives. I John

J.6-12

Does J o h n have the Christian sacraments in mind h e r e ? T h e majority of exegetes w o u l d probably answer w i t h a strong affirma tive so far as v . 8 is concerned. Verse 6, it is generally agreed, refers to the once-for-aU historical events in Jesus' life - the eXBrnv reqtdres this - his baptism and his death, the former being the Inauguration of his mitüstry and the latter its climax. A s most agree it is probably correct t o infer f r o m v . 6b that J o h n is attacking those w h o affirmed Jesus Christ's baptism b u t deiüed his passion: hence, J o h n firmly asserts that Jesus Christ, the S o n o f G o d , came not b y the water otdy, b u t b y the water and b y the blood. This certainly gives a better understanding o f these w o r d s than the explanation which sees in v . 6b a reference t o the Christian sacraments. Windisch and Wilder sharply distingvdsh the two prepositions Std and h>, giving the latter the sense of 'with': that is, he has brought water and blood, namely the two sacraments (so Goguel 3 1 7 ; cf. Schweitzer 358f.). But the switch from Std to ev is probably no more than a styhstic Variation (Brooke 1 3 5 ; Schweizer in Neotestamentiea }jy, Beasley-Murray 237 n. 2; Schnackenburg 259; Barth, Taufe 399, who refers to Rom. 6.4 (Std) and Col. 2.12 (iv); cf. Blass-Debrunner-Funk 233(3) with 219(4)), and the iXdc!>v imdoubtedly governs v. 6b as weU (cf. Windisch-Preisker 1 3 2 ; Schnackenburg 258f.). That two different events are involved, and not simply Christ's baptism (cf. Flemington 89f.) or 19.34 (e.g. Thüsing 165-74; JB), is indicated by the Separation of St' vSaros Kol aluaros into two separate phrases - oiK iv rip vSari /xovov, dXX' iv T& vSan KCU. iv T& at^art (Brookc 13 5).

spirit and Word in the Letters of John

201

M a n y believe, h o w e v e r , that w i t h v . 7 the focus changes f t o m past h i s t o r y t o present experience: v i z t o the C h r i s t i a n sacraments. T h e p r i n c i p a l a r g u m e n t is that whereas i n v . 6 the w a t e r a n d the b l o o d w e r e historical factors, t o t h e reality o f w h i c h t h e S p i r i t testified, n o w i n w . 7f. the w a t e r a n d the b l o o d h a v e b e c o m e J o i n t witnesses w i t h the Spirit i n the present experience o f the C h u r c h . F r o m b e i n g past events, the objects o f the Spirit's witness, t h e y b e c o m e themselves present witnesses w i t h the Spirit.21 C o n f i r m a t i o n is f o u n d i n t h e parallel w i t h I g n a t i u s : particularly Smyrn. 7 . 1 : ' T h e y h o l d a l o o f f r o m the E u c h a r i s t . . . because t h e y refuse t o a d m i t that the E u c h a r i s t is the flesh o f o u r S a v i o u r Jesus C h r i s t , w h i c h suffered f o r o u r sins . . .' T h e L o r d ' s S u p p e r carried such a clear message a b o u t the reality o f Christ's death that those w h o d e n i e d the latter c o u l d n o t bring themselves t o partake o f the former (at least i n Company w i t h their orthodox fellows).22 T h u s , it is maintained t h a t for both I g n a t i u s and J o h n , ' t h e eucharist w a s considered a t e s t i n g - p o i n t o f o n e ' s attitude t o w a r d s t h e h u m a n i t y o f Jesus'.23 O n c e a g a i n I f i n d m y s e l f u n c o n v i n c e d . (i) I t is a fact t h a t a f / x a b y itself is n e v e r used i n t h e N T as a d e s i g n a t i o n o f t h e L o r d ' s S u p p e r . 24 A n d , f o r all the m u c h v a u n t e d parallels, t h e same is t r u e o f I g n a t i u s . H e refers t o the eucharist b y t h e Single t e r m ' b r e a d ' {ßph. y . 2 ; 20.2), a n d b y t h e d u a l t e r m s 'flesh a n d b l o o d ' (Philad. 4); b u t w h e n h e uses aap^ a l o n e h e is a l m o s t a l w a y s s p e a k i n g o f t h e incarnate J e s u s {Eph. 7.2; 20.2; Magn. 1 . 2 ; 1 3 . 2 ; Philad. 5 . 1 ; Smyrn. 1 . 2 ; 3 . 1 ; Volyc. •j.z-Smym. 7.1 is the o n l y e x c e p t i o n ) . A n d h e n e v e r uses alfm a l o n e e x c e p t i n referencc t o C h r i s t ' s passion (Eph. i . i ; Philad. i n s c r p ; Smyrn. i . i ; 6.1). I n Smyrn., 'flesh a n d b l o o d ' refers n o t t o t h e eucharist b u t t o the incarnate J e s u s (3.2 ( A r m e t i i a n v e r s i o n ) ; 12.2).25 M o r e o v e r , t h e o n l y t w o o t h e r references t o alfm i n I J o h n ( 1 . 7 ; j . 6 ) u n d o u b t e d l y *i Schnackenbutg 261; Schweizer in Neotestamentica 377; Bultmann, Jobarmesbriefe cf. Dodd i3of.; Nauck i47f. 22 Schnackenburg 262; Schweizer in Neotestamentica iTji. 23 O. S. Brooks, JBL 82 (1965) 296; cf. Nauck lyof. ^ Brooke 132; Beasley-Murray 240. Nauck thinks that this is a point in favour of the view that the rcference is to baptism alone - the Spirit being the gift of baptism, the water the element of baptism, and the blood die gtound of baptism (149). ** That 12.2 refers to the eucharist is possiblc (Schnackenburg 263), but it is more likely to be a final cmphatic rebuttal of the false doctrine of the docetists, especially in view of the context and of the strong antidocetic polemic which has run through the first seven chapters of the lettct.

202

Baptism in the Holj Spirit

refer to Christ's death, and whereas in 5.6 it is seen as a past event, in 1.7 its cleansing p o w e r is part o f the present continidng experience of the Christian commutdty. Any connection between John 19.34 and I John 5.8 Supports the view that in the latter John is thinking of the death of the incarnate Jesus, rather than of the sacraments (see Dodd 1 2 9 ^ ; Beasley-Murray 241). (ü) M o r e important is the question whether in fact the water and blood references have changed. ^6 In the first place, to say that tbe water and the blood are the objects of the Spirit's witness in v . 6 is not quite correct. The Spirit bears witness to the Son of G o d , t o Jesus Christ, to him w h o came b y water and blood - not merely t o t w o events of his earthly hfe. The Spirit thus testifies that the earthly Jesus was the Christ, the Son o f G o d . This is the v e r y point which J o h n has been emphasizing in the preceding paragraph ( 5 . 1 , 5 ) , and it is this thought which he takes u p and continues into w . 6f.: This Son of G o d is he w h o came by water and blood, Jesus C h r i s t . . . T h e water and the blood are emphasized, n o t because they as such are the objects of the Spirit's witness, but because the events which they designate were the focus o f the dispute w i t h the docetists - the key points o f the w h o l e incarnate life of the O n e t o w h o m the Spirit bears witoess (his promised role - J o h n 1 5 . 2 6 ; 16.9, i4).2'' Then, having thus identified Jesus Christ, the S o n o f G o d with the one w h o came b y water and blood, J o h n takes up these t w o events and, because they Span the w h o l e o f Jesus' ndtdstry, caUs them as witoesses to the reahty o f the incarnation, beside the key witoess, the Spirit. In the second place, it does n o t foUow that the change in tense {iXOtav V. 6; etffiv 01 iiapTvpodvres V. 7) rules out a reference t o the historical events. Having faüed t o take into account the preceding context o f w . 6-8, the sacramentahsts have also failed t o take into account the verses which foUow. Schnackenburg makes v. 9 begin a new train of thought (263), but the avrq iarlv 19 naprvpiä roß Oeov can only refer back to w . 7f. Schnackenburg's attempt to show that the formula always points forward (264) breaks down, since all the paraUels he cites have the 2" Brooke 137, Barth, Taufe40^, Beasley-Murray 241, Schneider,Bw/« 183, say No. 27 Note how close the thought is between John 16.9 and I John 5.1, 5, 10.

spirit and Word in the Letters of John

203

explanation following immediately (usually o f the f o r m aunj Se eorriv X oTi o r i m ) , and they all stand at the head o f a n e w sentence and never in a subordinate clause. Whereas i n v . 9 the o n aw-q eariv . . . w i t h n o explanation given inevitably poüits back t o w h a t went before. T h a t J o h n has simply departed f r o m his usual custom is further implied by the fact that he has done the same i n v . 6, following fiaprvpiiü w i t h ort = because, rather than 6ri = that - so un-Johannine a conjunction that M a n s o n t h o u g h t it sufficient g r o u n d t o prefer the V u l g a t e reading (he suspects the original was o n iarlv rj aXrjdeia) that Christ is the truth (^7).

V e r s e 9 clearly indicates that this t h r e e f o l d witness is t h e witness o f G o d , a n d it is t h e t e s t i m o n y w h i c h h e b o r e (jx€p,apTvp-qKev) (cf. J o h n 5.31-39).^^ T h e tense here a n d i n v . 1 0 is rather s t r i k i n g , since it indicates t h a t there is both apast andpresent element i n this witness. V e r s e 1 0 c o n f i r m s t h i s : h e w h o believes i n t h e S o n o f G o d has (ex^i) t h e t e s t i m o n y in himself. . . t h e t e s t i m o n y that G o d has borne (neixapTvprjKev) t o his S o n . W e See f u r t h e r h o w past a n d present are h e l d i n t e n s i o n i n w . i i f . , w h e n this t e s t i m o n y is d e f i n e d : ^ » ' t h a t G o d g a v e (eStuKev) us e t e m a l life, a n d this life is i n his S o n . H e w h o has t h e S o n has life: h e w h o has n o t t h e S o n o f G o d has n o t life.' T h e eSw/cev refers t o t h e historical m i n i s t r y o f C h r i s t ;3o v . 1 2 t o t h e possession o f t h e S p i r i t o f t h e Son.3i have, therefore, o n the o n e h a n d , the historical events w h i c h testify t o the S o n o f G o d a n d t o t h e e t e m a l life w h i c h is i n h i m . T h i s is G o d ' s t e s t i m o n y , a n d i t is v a l i d n o w as w h e n h e first g a v e i t (/*e/tiapTif/»jKev). A n d , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a n d h a r d t o distinguish finally f r o m t h e f o r m e r , is t h e i n n e r t e s t i m o n y , the i n d w e l l i n g Spirit w h o testifies t o Jesus C h r i s t , G o d ' s S o n b o t h i n his incarnate life (4.2; a n d i n his a b i d i n g i n Christians (3.24; 4 . 1 3 ; j . i i f . ) . T h i s b r i n g s us b a c k t o the xpUrna a n d t h e anipim, a n d t o the h a p p y balancc J o h n maintains b e t w e e n t h e o b j e c t i v e g i v e n n e s s o f ü i e C h r i s t i a n message a n d t h e subjectivc experience o f the i n d w e l l i n g S p i r i t o f C h r i s t . A s i n 2.27, s o here, J o h n is tfainking b o t h o f t h e C h r i s t i a n message a n d o f t h e Spirit w h o w o r k e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n Dodd i3if.; Beaslcy-Mutray 241; cf. Law 124. «» Contra Schnacltenburg 266. It is incorrect to say that the formula of John 3.19; 17.3 (I John 4.10 is different) does not introduce a definition. 8» Brooke 140. »1 Cf. 4.4; 'he who is in you' is the Spirit of Christ, as against 'he who is in the World', viz. the spirit of antichrist (4.3); see also 3.24; 4.13, and cf. 5.12 with John 6.63; 20.22.

204

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

w i t h it. O r , t o p u t i t m t e r m s o f the present a r g u m e n t , h e w a s t h i n k i n g o f t h e f a i t h o f those b o m o f G o d ' s Spirit (5.4) - the f a i t h that Jesus is the S o n o f G o d (5.5). T h i s f a i t h w a s a b e h e f a b o u t Jesus C h r i s t w h o b e c a m e flesh a n d w a s b o t h b a p t i z e d a n d d i e d (5.6). W i t h m a n y the h e a r i n g o f that message w a s m a t c h e d b y the w i m e s s o f the Spirit t o their consciences as t o its t m t h (5.7). T h o s e w h o b e h e v e d entered i n t o a spiritual relationship o f life w i t h Jesus t h r o u g h the Spirit (5 . l o f . ) . I n this relationship t h e y w e r e k e p t f r o m e r r o r b y r e m a i n i n g f a i t h f u l t o the continuing witness o f the message first d e h v e r e d (2.24, 2 7 ; 5.8), a n d b y r e s p o n d i n g t o the continuing teaching a n d witness o f the Spirit (2.27; 5.8). I t w a s t h r o u g h the i n d w e l h n g Spirit a n d the i n d w e l H n g g o s p e l that t h e y w e r e able t o o v e r c o m e the w o r l d (4.4; 5.4f.). T h e iv ainw o f 5.10 w o u l d rule out the sacramental reference i f n o t h i n g eise did - whereas it accords t o o well w i t h 2.14, 24; I I J o h n 2 f o r i j (lafyrvpia to be anything other than the Christian message. I n s h o r t , the w a t e r a n d the b l o o d refer n o m o r e t o the sacra m e n t s i n 5.8 t h a n t h e y d i d i n 5.6. R a t h e r t h e y designate the k e y events i n the incarnate m i i d s t r y o f Jesus. A s such t h e y j o i n w i t h t h e S p i r i t i n b e a r i n g w i m e s s t o the r e a h t y o f that i n c a m a t e m i n i s t r y b u t t h a t w i m e s s , w h e t h e r w e take i t as a w h o l e ( t h e Sphrit w o r k i n g i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the message) o r i n its parts (Spirit a n d mess a g e ) , is n o t a o n c e - f o r - a U w i m e s s , b u t a c o n t i n u i n g w i m e s s , o n e t h a t abides i n a U w h o b e H e v e that Jesus is the C h r i s t , t h e S o n o f God. T o s u m Up briefly. E v e n i f Pentecostals w e r e justified i n a r g u i n g f r o m J o h n that the apostles' S p i r i t - b a p t i s m w a s a p o s t - r e g e n e r a t i o n experience, I J o h n e m p h a t i c a U y rejects a n y Suggestion that the a n o i n t i n g o f the S p i r i t is a n experience w h i c h s o m e Christians m a y n o t possess. A n d e v e n i f J o h n 3.5 can justiy b e i m d e r s t o o d to indicate the i m p o r t a n t role o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m i n r e g e n e r a t i o n , m o s t p r o b a b l y as b e i n g the occasion a n d c o n t e x t o f the Spirit's l i f e - g i v i n g descent a n d entrance i n t o a life, I J o h n certainly gives the sacra m e n t a h s t no f u r t h e r scope, since i t does n o t e v e n m e n t i o n the C h r i s t i a n rite. O u r s m d y of J o h n ' s w r i t i n g s generally has rather c o n f i r m e d that f o r J o h n as w e U as for L u k e a n d P a u l the S p i r i t a n d the W o r d are c o - o r d i n a t e factors and t h e decisive i n s t m m e n t s o f G o d ' s saving purpose.

P A R T

F I V E

XVII T H E

SPIRIT A N D BAPTISM I N H E B R E W S

W E h a v e n o w e x a m m e d the three principal N T theologians - L u k e , P a u l a n d J o h n - a n d w e h a v e seen that they are i n r e m a r k a b l e a g r e e m e n t as t o the centrahty o f t h e g i f t o f the Spirit i n c o n v e r s i o n irütiation. T h e i m p o r t a n c e t h e y h a v e ascribed t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m has v a r i e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e v a r i e t y o f situations addressed: J o h n ' s t h e o l o g y at this p o i n t has been least easy t o clarify, b u t L u k e a n d P a u l h a v e clearly seen i t as the v i t a l , p e r b a p s necessary, expression o f t h e f a i t h t o w h i c h G o d gives t h e Spirit. W e t u r n n o w t o t h e f e w passages w h i c h r e m a i n t o b e s m d i e d - i n H e b r e w s a n d I Peter. Heb.

6.1-6

A p a r t f r o m A c t s 8 a n d 1 9 n o o t h e r passage has p r o v i d e d such s t r o n g s u p p o r t f o r those w h o h o l d a h i g h d o c t r i n e o f C o n f i r m a tion. O n t h e face o f it, i t w o t d d seem natural t o see i n 6.2a a reference t o t w o rites p e r f o r m e d a t iiütiation - C h r i s t i a n w a t e r baptism, a n d laying o n o f hands. N o r can o n e complain w h e n A c t s 8 a n d 19 are caUed i n t o i U u m i n a t e t h e relation b e t w e e n these t w o rites. T h e d e d u c t i o n t h e n Hes t o b a n d that t h e second rite has t o d o w i t h t h e g i f t o f the S p k i t . I t s place i n a üst o f first prmciples a n d elementary i n s t r u c t i o n t o e n q u k e r s o r c o n v e r t s i m p ü e s that i t w a s a rite o f n o httle significance a n d i m p o r t a n c e . W a s i t t h e n m e r e l y a n act w h i c h corresponds t o a w e l c o m i n g h a n d s h a k e t o d a y , as L a m p e suggests ?i W a s t h e StSaxij n o t m u c h m o r e h k e l y t o b e a n e x p l a n a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g the g i f t o f t h e Spirit ? A s L e e m i n g asks, ' W h a t other instruction could have been given about the laying o n o f h a n d s i n c o i m e c t i o n w i t h b a p t i s m ?'2 I t is t h e n possible t o 1 Seal Iii.;

cf. p. 87 n. 9 above.

« 218; see also Thomton, Mystery 170; Neunheuser 43f.; cf. Chase 45.

205

2o6

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

call in v v . 4f. and to argue that while jxjiTuxBivras refef s to baptism,^ the jLteTo'xoii? yeinjÖevras TTVev^iaros äylov refers t o the gift of the Spirit in Confirmation.'* Pentecostals have n o t made much of the passage, but presumably they w o u l d be happy either to adapt this exposition to their o w n tastes, o r to say of the t w o rites in 6.2a, w i t h T. H. Robinson, 'Both concern a second stage in the Spiritual history of the Christian, the reception of the Holy Spirit.'5 (i) Taking first the list of foundation Clements (6.1 f.), w e are immediately faced with the difficult ßanTiofiOL. Many explanations of this puzzling plural have been offered.^ But if w e accept that this letter was written t o Christians,' v v . if. must contain basic teaching given to new Christians or to those enquiring about the Christian faith. The difficult phrase T6V rfjs apx^s rov Xpicrrov Xöyov most probably means somethinglike 'the rudiments of Christianity' (NEB), 'elementary teaching about Christ', or perhaps even 'the original teaching given by Christ' (so J . C. Adams, NTS13 [1966-67] 378-85). Kosmala's 'teaching about the begitining of the messianic life' wiU hardly do in view of the meaning of Xpiarös elsewhere in the episde. M o s t probably those addressed are converts f r o m Judaism, the initial preaching t o them having taken u p w h a t was valid in their old belief. This is the best explanation o f the non-(specifically)Christian list o f six points: they describe an area o f overlap between Judaism and Christianity i n terms common t o b o t h ; they are the ä So A . Nsdtne, Ihe Epistle to the Hebrews (1917) Ixxxiv; CuUmann, Baptism 15; Chutch of Scotland,BiblicalDoctrine 43; Richardson 348; MoUat 83; M. E . Boismard inBNT 222; H. Sttathmann, Der Brief an die Hebräer» ( N T D 1963) 104; H. W. Montcfiotc, The Epistle to the Hebrews (1964) 108; E . Käsetnann, Das wandernde Gottesvolk (1938) 119. * Chase 46; Lowther Clarke 10; Thomton, who also refers yevaaiiimvi rijs Swpcfis rfjs cVowpoviou to baptism {Mystety 169^). 8 T. H. Robinson, Tbe Epistle to the Hebrews (Moffatt 1933) 72. 6 See e.g. C. Spicq, U6pttre aux Wbreux II (1953) 148. 7 H. Kosmala, Hebräer - Essener - Christen (i 9 5 9) has argued that the writer is not addressing Christians but Jews - Jews whose beliefs were very similar to those of the Essenes and who could not yet be calied Christians (but see also Bruce, NTS 9 [1962-63] 217-32). In patticular, Kostnala argucs that the six points of ö.if. are identical with the basic views of the Essenes (31-38). It has often been noted that none of the six Clements of Instruction are particularly Christian, as distinct from Jewish (there is no mention of Christ or of the Holy Spirit - see e.g. E . C. Wickham, The Epistle to the Hebrews [1910] 3 9; Naime 66; O. Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer^^ [i966]238n.4;F. F. Bruce. The Epistle to the Hebrews [1964] 112).

The Spirit and Baptism in Hebrews

207

points at w h i c h the Christian evangel t o J e w s w o u l d b e g i n , t h e p o i n t s w h i c h t h e e v a n g e h s t w o u l d t h e n e l a b o r a t e i n specificaUy C h r i s t i a n t e r m s , ßaimatnoi m u s t t h e n a t least i n c l u d e a reference t o C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m , a c o n c l u s i o n c o n f i r m e d b y t h e close h n k h e r e b e t w e e n ßaTmafiol a n d l a y i n g on o f h a n d s (cf. A c t s 8.19). This would rule out the interpretation of ßaiTTiafioL in terms of waterbaptism and Spirit-baptism (Baker 6; Harper, Fire 15 f.; also allowed asa possibiUty by Marsh 189). The latter was not an element of Jewish teaching and it is most improbable that the letter was written to dis ciples o f the Baptist. Bruce's Suggestion that ßanriattxoi may refer to a pre-baptismal bath, 'a legacy from Roman Judaism' (116) is hardly convincing. That ßanTia/ws is used instead of the usual ßä-nriayLa is hardly decisive against the reference to Christian baptism in view of the strongly supported reading oi ßaiTTiafiM in Col. 2.12. On Adams' view (see p. 206), ßawnajxoi would probably refer to Christ's instruction on the relation of John's baptism to that of his own disciples (383). But if such hihax-T] ßanrujii&v was preserved (a questionable assumption - in Acts 1.5; 11.16 the two baptisms are John's water-baptism and Christ's Spirit-baptism), it would be regarded as part of the justification for continuing the practice of water-baptism and so part of the basic teaching about Christian baptism. However, if we relate StSa^^ ßatTTiaiJuüv to the oidy teaching o n baptism which is attributed to Jesus (apart from Acts 1.5; 11.16) we must look t o Matt. 28.19 (Mark 16.16) where the reference is t o Christian baptism as such. A s t o the relation b e t w e e n b a p t i s m a n d the laying o n o f hands, t h e v e r y u n u s u a l u s e o f T« ( m s t e a d o f KCU) suggests t h a t w h a t is e n v i s a g e d is a single c e r e m o n y , » H k e t h a t i n A c t s 1 9 , t h e single rite of i n i t i a t i o n . A Separation i n t o t w o d i s t i n c t rites c a n t h e r e f o r e h a r d l y b e a d v o c a t e d o n t h e basis o f this passage. T h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n 6.1 a n d 6.2 is also f a i r l y clear. I t is best t o r e a d SiSaxqv w i t h t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f c o m m e n t a t o r s , a n d t o t a k e t h e ' I n s t r u c t i o n a b o u t c l e a n s i n g rites a n d t h e l a y i n g o n o f hands, a b o u t the resurrection o f t h e dead a n d eternal j u d g m e n t ' , i n a p p o s i t i o n t o ' t h e f o u n d a t i o n of r e p e n t a n c e a n d f a i t h ' . T h a t is t o s a y , t h e l a y i n g o f t h e f o i m d a t i o n consists i n t h e g i v i n g o f instruction; t h e f o i m d a t i o n i s l a i d b y i n s t r u c t i n g a b o u t . . . » T h i s has an i m p o r t a n t c o r o l l a r y , f o r i t m e a n s t h a t r e p e n t a n c e a n d f a i t h » T€ indicates a closer relationship than Kat (Spicq 148). » So Bruce 112; J . Mofiatt, Epist/e to the Hebrews (ICC 1924) 74; Michel 238, even though he prrfers to read 8Ä«x^f; NEB.

2o8

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

w e r e here b r o u g h t a b o u t , p a r t l y at least, t h r o u g h instruction a b o u t the Christian's b e g m n i n g a n d the w o r l d ' s e n d . S o f a r as b a p t i s m is c o n c e r n e d i t seems t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n a b o u t i t h a d t o b e g i v e n b e f o r e repentance a n d faith c o u l d b e t r u l y estabhshed. R e p e n t a n c e a n d faith d i d n o t (usually) c o m e t o a decisive c h m a x apart f r o m baptism. The neatly balanced phrases in 6.1 show that repentance and faith were the negative and positive sides of conversion: the turning from and the turning to (Spicq 147; Michel 239; Strathmann 103; cf. Bult mann, TWNT VI 21 if.). This spiritual frontier with both its renunciation of the old ways and commitment to Christ is well expressed in baptism.

R e p e n t a n c e a n d f a i t h , w e m a y say, w e r e stirred u p b y the p r o m i s e a n d w a r n i n g of resurrection a n d j u d g m e n t , a n d w e r e b r o u g h t t o s a v i n g expression i n the rite o f itütiation. I f this is a fair c o n c l u s i o n , it c o n f i r m s o u r earher conclusions, that i n t h e p r i m i t i v e C h u r c h b a p t i s m w a s p r i m a r i l y a n expression o f repentance a n d f u n c t i o n o f faith. N o t e also t b a t ' b a p t i s m ' is distinct f r o m ' l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s ' a n d c a t m o t b e u s e d as a title f o r t h e c o m p l e t e rite o f initia tion, let alone f o r t h e t o t a l e v e n t o f c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n . T h e close c o n n e c t i o n o f b a p t i s m w i t h repentance a n d f a i t h o n the one band, and w i t h laying o n o f hands o n the other, means that this passage also teils against rather t h a n f o r t h e Pentecostal. W e h a v e n o t y e t discussed t h e role o f t h e S p i r i t , b u t i f A c t s is a n y g i d d e , t h e l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s n o t o n l y expressed m o r e f i i U y t h e c o m m v m i t y ' s acceptance o f t h e initiate, b u t also h e l p e d t h e initiate t o receive t h e Spirit. H i s repentance a n d f a i t h c a m e t o its v i t a l c l i m a x i n this single rite o f b a p t i s m - l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s , a n d t o this repentance a n d faith t h e S p i r i t w a s g i v e n . ( ü ) T h e relation o f t h e clauses i n 6.4f. t o o n e a n o t h e r is n o t certain, b u t the fact t h a t the m i d d l e t w o are d o s e l y b o u n d t o g e t h e r b y r e . . . Ko/,*^" a n d the repetition o f ywora/iievows, suggests a strucmre o n the foUowing pattern: dtra^ ^lOTiodhnas yevaafievoiis T« rfjs Scopeäs rijs iirovpaviov Kol /jteroxovs ytvii6hnas irvfVfuiTos ayiov Kai KoXov yevaa/ievovs Oeov pnjita Swdfieis re fieXXovros aUivos. 1« Blass-Debrunner-Funk 444.

The Spirit and Baptism in Hebrews

209

T h a t is t o say, the subsequent clauses seem t o b e t h e t o r i c a l elaborations a n d explanations o f the initial experience described i n amai ^(jiTiaBhnas?^ T h e once-for-all I l l u m i n a t i o n consisted i n , o n the o n e h a n d , a tasting o f the h e a v e n l y g i f t a n d Coming t o share i n the H o l y Spirit, a n d o n the o t h e r , a tasting o f the Word o f G o d a n d p o w e r s o f the age t o c o m e . C a n w e define these clauses m o r e closely ? T h e juerdxow ycvrjöeWa? TTvevfiaros aylov clearly speaks o f t h e g i f t o f the Spirit, w h i c h w e h a v e Seen elsewhere t o b e the central e l e m e n t i n a n d decisive m a r k o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . T h e p r e c e d i n g clause is p r o b a b l y a v e r y near s y n o n y m . N o t o n l y are t h e y b o u n d t o g e t h e r b y t c . . . Kai, b u t Sioped we h a v e seen elsewhere t o b e closely associated w i t h the Spirit. W e may p a r a p h r a s e : ' n o t o n l y d i d t h e y c o m e t o experience the g i f t o f salvation-justification w h i c h the Spirit b r i n g s , b u t t h e y also received the gift w h i c h is the Spirit himself.'12 N o r can w e really separate t h e last clause f r o m t h e Spirit. T h e Swafieis c a n n o t b e u n d e r s t o o d as o t h e r t h a n m i g h t y w o r k s effected b y the S p i r i t (cf. 2.4), especially w h e n t h e y are defined as the ' p o w e r s o f the age t o c o m e ' . F o r t h r o u g h o u t the N T the S p i r i t is characteristically the eschatological S p i r i t - the p o w e r o f t h e age t o c o m e b r e a k i n g i n t o a n d o p e r a t i v e i n t h e present age - a n d the 8 w a / i « ? are the manifestations o f his Svvafus as t h e eschatological Spirit. M o r e o v e r , t h e t w o l i m b s o f this clause are b o u n d t o g e t h e r o n c e a g a i n b y the u n u s u a l re.i^ W e m a y therefore say that i n the t w o yewafievovs clauses w e h a v e described the c o n v e r s i o n experience o f the c o n v e r t s i n b o t h its i n w a r d a n d o u t w a r d aspects: t h e ßijua a n d the Swäfieis b e i n g w h a t t h e y h e a r d a n d s a w , t h e Smped a n d the wevua äyiov b e i n g w h a t t h e y experienced i n their hearts. T h e s e t w o yevaaiifvovs clauses describe m o r e fiilly the experience d e n o t e d b y äna^ ^xariaBivras. The c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n experience (the once-for-allness o f the e v e n t is s h o w n b y the aorists a n d the inai) w a s a n i l l u m i n a t i o n o f m i n d " So Moffatt 78; cf. Westcott, Tk Epistle to tbe Hebrews (i 889) 147; Michel 241 n. I ; Schweizer, TW^NT V I 444 n. 784, " H. Windisch, Der Hebräerbrief (BNT 1931) 50, and Schweizer, TWNT V I 444n. 784, take 8
2IO

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

a n d h e a r t b r o u g h t a b o u t b y experience o f the G o s p e l ' s p o w e r (cf. 4 . 1 2 ) a n d the p o w e r o f the Spirit, the Spirit's g i f t a n d the g i f t o f the S p i r i t . T h a t üynaOevras - 6.4; 10.32), i n w h i c h the S p i r i t is g i v e n w i t h his h e a v e n l y g i f t i n a U his p o w e r . I f i n d e e d w . i f . deal w i t h the area o f o v e r l a p b e t w e e n J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n t e a c h i n g , i t i m p h e s t h a t t h e decisive differentia o f C h r i s t i a n i t y m u s t b e l o o k e d for r a t h e r i n w . 4f. T h i s w o u l d c o n firm Our earher findings: that t h e essence o f N T C h r i s t i a n i t y is a n e x p e r i e n c e (yewadax) - a n experience o f t h e H o l y Spirit. W i t h o u t t h a t e x p e r i e n c e the C h r i s t i a n ' s r e l i g i o n is U t t l e different f r o m t h a t o f t h e J e w s ; i t is b y g o i n g b a c k on t h a t experience (10.29) t h a t t h e y c o m m i t a p o s t a s y ; i t is b y g o i n g o n f r o m t h a t experience t h a t t h e y reach m a m r i t y . 10.29: TO vvev/xa rrjs xapiros - 'the H o l y Spirit, w h o offers himself t o m a n in free grace' (Michel 3 5 3), or, 'the H o l y Spirit t h r o u g h w h o m G o d communicates his grjce and f a v o u r ' (Montefiore 179). I f Z e c h . 12.10 i s i n m i n d here (irvevua xdpiros L X X - so Windisch 97; Michel " See especially Delling, Taufe 103 and n. 375.

1* See Windisch 50; Käsemann 119 n. 7; Spicq 150; Beasley-Murray 245f., who refers to II Tim. i.io; II Cor. 4.4-6; Eph. 1.18; and II Esd. i4.22ff., where a petition for the Holy Spirit results in the gift of enlightenment. See also p. 135 above.

The Spirit and Baptism in Hebrews

211

353; Strathmann 135; Schweizer, TWNT V I 444f.), the writer is thinking of the Spirit as poured out in the end time. That this is the salvation effecting act (contra Schweizer 445) is implied not only by its association with 'the blood of the covenant' (see p. 213 below), but also by the parallel with 6.4-6: if the spurning the Son and profaning his blood = the crucifying the Son (6.6), then the outraging of the Spirit corresponds to the apostasy from the enlightenment etc. of 6.4f. It is true that the Spirit does not have the same prominence in Hebrews as in Paul (presumably because of the prominence given to Christ - Westcott 3 31); yet 2.4 is not so very different from Rom. 15.19 etc., nor 10.29 from Eph. 4.30; and the understanding of Christian conversion in 6.4?. is hardly difFerent from Paul's. It is perhaps significant that the OT passages specifically referred to the Spirit speak respecüvely of the inadequacy of the old dispensation (9.8), of the Coming of the new covenant with its forgiveness and the law written within (10.15-18), and of the need for perseverance once begun in the Qirfsfian way (3.7-15). T h e c o r o l l a r y t o this is t h a t b a p t i s m a l o n e m e a n s n o t h i n g f o r C h r i s t i a n i t y . I t is o n l y w h e n it is related t o t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f G o d ' s i l l u m i n a t i o n , G o d ' s s a l v a t i o n a n d G o d ' s S p i r i t t h a t it b e c o m e s t h e rite o f C h r i s t i a n I n i t i a t i o n . I n s h o r t , Submission t o t h e rite o f b a p t i s m a n d l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s b r i n g s t h e initiate's r e p e n t a n c e a n d f a i t h t o t h a t c l i m a x and d e c i s i o n i n w h i c h a n d t h r o u g h w h i c h h e is i l l u m i n a t e d a n d enters i n t o t h e s a v i n g e x p e r i e n c e o f G o d ' s S p i r i t ; so that t h e r e is n o r o o m h e r e e i t h e r f o r a rite o r a g i f t o f the Spirit distinct f r o m a n d subsequent t o conversion-initiation. Heb. 10.22 I t is g e n e r a l l y a g r e e d t h a t t h e AeAoucr/xeVot TO acujua WSOTI Kadapia refers t o C h r i s t i a n w a t e r - b a p t i s m ; t h e c h i e f d i s p u t e is o v e r its r e l a t i o n t o t h e p r e c e d i n g clause. O n t h e o n e h a n d are t h o s e w h o a r g u e t h a t t h e r e is m e r e l y r h e t o r i c a l p a r a l l e l i s m , s o t h a t ras KopSias a n d TO (rci(ia c o u l d b e i n t e r c h a n g e d w i t h o u t a l t e r i n g t h e sense i n a n y way;i8 o n t h e o t h e r h a n d are those w h o distinguish t h e t w o clauses as g i v i n g t h e c o n j u n c t i o n i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n o f t h e i n w a r d and Spiritual cleansing w i t h its o u t w a r d a n d v i s i b l e s y m b o l . ! ' 1« Bultmann, Tbiology I 137; Michel 346f.; Oepke, TDNTIV 304; Spicq 317; Beasley-Murray 249f.; cf. Mollat 68; Ttemel aoif. 1' Wickham 85; Windisch 93; Flemington 98; Strathmann 133^; Bruce, Hebrews 25of.; cf. Delling, Taufe 103; Bieder I49f.

212

Baptism ia the Holy Spirit

T o m y m i n d t h e latter is m u c h truer t o t h e t h o u g h t o f H e b r e w s than the former. F o r o n e t h i n g , the heart a n d the b o d y together {not each i n d i v i d u ally, as B e a s l e y - M u r r a y seems t o thhik)i8 represent t h e entire p e r s o n a h t y , t h e w h o l e m a n . i » M o r e o v e r , there are m o r e types o f H e b r e w parallehsm t h a n s y n o n y m o u s p a r a l l e h s m ; ^ ' ' i n particular, there is w h a t w e m i g h t call ' c o m p l e m e n t a r y p a r a U e h s m ' , a t y p e , I s u p p o s e , o f the m o r e w i d e l y r e c o g n i z e d 'synthetic p a r a l l e h s m ' : t o p i c k a n e x a m p l e a t r a n d o m , J o b 29.5 : When the Almighty was yet with me, when my children were about me.

T a k i n g these t w o facts t o g e t h e r it b e c o m e s a p p a r e n t that the heart is best seen a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l l y , as the i n w a r d , h i d d e n aspect o f m a n , w h i l e the b o d y is t h e o u t w a r d , visible aspect o f m a n . A s these t w o c o m p l e m e n t each o t h e r , so there are t w o c o m p l e m e n t a r y aspects o f Christian conversion-initiation: the o u t w a r d and the i n w a r d t h e s p r i n k l i n g o f t h e heart a n d t h e w a s h i n g o f the b o d y . F o r a n o t h e r t h i n g , this i n w a r d , spiritual a n d o u t w a r d , material antithesis is w h o l l y i n U n e w i t h t h e sharp contrast t h e a u t h o r has already m a d e i n 9.i3f.: there is a cleansing w h i c h m e r e l y operates o n t h e flesh, a n d a cleansing w h i c h reaches t h e conscience, a n d these t w o are n o t t h e same. A s w e h a v e seen, this sort o f distinc tion w a s b y n o m e a n s u n c o m m o n i n t h e ancient w o r l d . 21 I t w i U n o d o u b t b e p o i n t e d o u t i n o b j e c t i o n that this p u t s C h r i s tian b a p t i s m o n t h e same level as t h e J e w i s h rites a n d ceremonies a n d that this w o u l d b e a b h o r r e n t t o t h e m a n w h o w r o t e 8 . 1 3 10.10.22 B u t this o b j e c t i o n c a i m o t b e sustained, f o r the fact remains that Christiatiity is n o t a ritual-less r e h g i o n , a n d that i n t h e ritual o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m i t has a c e r e m o n y w h i c h closely resembles J e w i s h lustrations. I n d e e d , i f C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m is a t all i n v i e w i n 6.2, i t f o U o w s that f o r t h e w r i t e r C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m r a n k s w i t h a n d is n o 1 * Beasley-Murray 2 4 9 . "Moffatt 1 4 5 . 2* See e.g. O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament, An Introduction ( E T 1 9 6 5 ) syf. 21 See Josephus, Ant. 1 8 , 1 1 7 , where /5airr«ofioy is used for John's baptism; Philo, De Plantatione 1 6 2 , and the othet Philo passages cited by Oepke, TDNT I V 3 0 2 ; IQS 5 . 4 - 9 , which also speaks of the inability of the 'watet fot impurity' to cleanse ftom sin; in Paul see Rom. a.zSf., and öf. I Cot. 7 . 3 4 . See also Acsch. fr. 3 2 in Naime 1 0 1 ; and pp. 1 5 f. above. 22 Cf. Kuss, Auslegung I 1 4 3 ; Montefiore i 7 4 f .

The Spirit and Baptism in Hebrews

z 15

different f r o m J e w i s h ßannaiwl (9.10)23 i n that its cleansing reaches n o f u r t h e r t h a n the b o d y . Y e t , at t h e same t i m e , i t is s u p e r i o r t o those o l d e r rites i n that i t b e l o n g s t o t h e n e w c o v e n a n t ; i t is a c c o m p a n i e d b y t h e reality w h i c h i t s y m b o l i z e s , as t h e y w e r e n o t a n d c o u l d n o t b e ; m o r e o v e r , it helps t o b r i n g a b o u t t h a t i n n e r cleansing i n that i t is t h e vehicle o f t h e repentance a n d f a i t h w h i c h receives t h e i n n e r cleansing. I n o t h e r w o r d s , C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m is b o t h o n e w i t h t h e J e w i s h lustrations i n its m e r e l y external O p e r a t i o n , a n d different i n that it b e l o n g s t o t h e fialfilment a n d reality o f w h i c h these o t h e r lustrations w e r e o n l y s h a d o w s . I t w o u l d a p p e a r that i n the D a y o f A t o n e m e n t c e r e m o n y o f L e v . 16, especially w . 6, 16, a n d t h e r e d heifer ritual o f N u m . 19, especially v v . 9, l y f . , t h e a u t h o r o f H e b r e w s has seen t h e O T s h a d o w o f t h e t w o sides o f C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n ; h e has already p o i n t e d t o this s h a d o w i n 9.13; a n d n o w i n 10.22 h e p o i n t s t o the reality t h u s f o r e s h a d o w e d : the b l o o d o f C h r i s t w h i c h is so m u c h better t h a n t h e b l o o d o f g o a t s a n d bulls, a n d t h e p u r e w a t e r o f C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m w h i c h is s o m u c h better t h a n ' w a t e r f o r i m p u r i t y ' f o u l e d w i t h t h e heifer's ashes.24 T h i s t h e n is w h y t h e w r i t e r has retained a c e r e m o n y w h i c h w a s h a n d e d d o w n t o h i m b y t h e first C h r i s t i a n s , n o t because i t a c c o m p l i s h e d a n i t m e r cleansing w h e r e t h e O T a b l u t i o n s t o u c h e d o n l y the outside o f a m a n - o n l y the b l o o d o f Christ could d o that - b u t because i t w a s t h e v e h i c l e o f repentance a n d f a i t h a n d w a s a c c o m p a n i e d b y t h e i n w a r d cleansing, e v e n t h o u g h i t itself cleansed o n l y the b o d y . T h a t the b l o o d and o n l y the b l o o d o f Jesus is the decisive factor i n the purification o f the Christian w h i c h enables h i m to d r a w near (that w h i c h above all eise shows the superiority o f Christianity o v e r the religion o f the O T - see 7.19, 25; l o . i , 19-22; 11.6; 12.18, 22) is clearly the v i e w o f the w r i t e r ( s e e 9.12-14; 10.19, 29; 12.24; 13.12, 20). C f .

I J o h n 1,7; R e v . 1.5; 7.14. T h e close c o m p l e m e n t a r y n a t u r e o f t h e t w o cleansings ( o f heart a n d b o d y ) r e m i n d us t h a t w e c a n n o t separate C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m f r o m c o n v e r s i o n . I t is related t o t h e cleansing o f t h e h e a r t as t h e Apartfrom6.2 ßawnaiioi is used only for Jewish ceremonial washings in its two other NT occurrences (Mark 7.4; Heb. 9.10). The experience of 6.4f. corresponds to the inner purification of the heart in 10.22, while the ßam-taftol of 6.2 obviously corresponds to the outward washing of the body in 10.22. " Cf. Mofiatt 144; Strathmann 134.

214

Baptism in tiie Holy Spirit

b o d y is related t o the heart. I t is the o u t w a r d e m b o d i m e n t o f the spiritual t r a n s f o r m a t i o n w h i c h is t a k i n g place inside a m a n . I t w o u l d s i m p l y n o t o c c u r t o t b e w r i t e r , o r t o early Christians g e n e r ally, that t h e t w o c o u l d b e separate. T h e p o p u l ä r idea that c o n v e r sion precedes b a p t i s m , a n d that b a p t i s m is a confession o f a c o m m i t m e n t m a d e s o m e t i m e p r e v i o u s l y is n o t t o b e f o u n d i n t b e N T . ^ s B a p t i s m is the act o f f a i t h , p a r t o f the t o t a l cleansing w h i c h enables t h e c o n v e r t t o d r a w n e a r a n d t o enter t h e H o l y o f H o h e s b y t h e w a y o p e n e d u p f o r h i m b y Jesus ( w . 1 1 - 2 2 ) . 25 Contra Robinson, w h o seems to distinguish conversion from baptism ( 1 4 4 ) as he did earlier ( 7 2 ) ; Bieder, w h o seems to refer the cleansing of the heart to the effect of preaching 'in the time of preparation before baptism' (148).

XVIII CONVERSION-INITIATION IN PETER

I N recent years I P e t e r has been the subject o f m u c h scrutiny,i w i t h the debate centring o n the q u e s t i o n : T o w h a t extent has a baptismal s e r m o n o r l i t u r g y , o r echoes o f a baptismal c e r e m o n y , b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o I P e t e r ? T h e debate is p e r i p h e r a l t o o u r study,2 a n d f o r us t h e really i m p o r t a n t issue is, W h a t is the a u t h o r ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f b a p t i s m ? T o a n s w e r this q u e s t i o n w e naturally t u r n t o the o n e indisputable reference t o b a p t i s m i n I P e t e r - 3 . 2 1 . A l t h o u g h i t f o l l o w s o n e o f the m o s t n o t o r i o u s cruces o f Interpreta t i o n i n the w h o l e N T , the o b s c u r i t y o f 3.19 f o r t u n a t e l y does n o t affect US m u c h . I Peter ß.21

P a r t o f the difficulty i n this passage lies i n the fact that w . 1 9 - 2 1 appear t o b e inserted i n t o a m o r e established confessional f r a m e w o r k ( w . 1 8 , 22).3 T h e reason f o r this Insertion is t o p o i n t t h e parallel b e t w e e n t h e salvation o f N o a h t h r o u g h the waters o f t h e F l o o d , a n d t h e salvation o f Christians t h r o u g h t h e waters o f b a p t i s m ( o t h e r w i s e there w o u l d b e n o adequate reason f o r t h e Insertion). 3.19 is o n l y t h e first p a r t o f t h e transitional sequence o f s u b o r d i n a t e clauses b y means o f w h i c h P e t e r s w i n g s a t t e n t i o n a w a y f r o m Christ's d e a t h t o C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m . I t is this realization, that 1 See the literature cited by R. P, Mattin, Vox Evang/ilica (1962) 29-42; and Kümmel's Introduction. Other writings include Beasley-Miuray 231-8; Delling, Taufe 83-6; W. J . Dalton, Christ's Proclamation to tbe Spirits: A Study of I Peter ).iS-4.6 (1965) 62-71; and J . N . D . Kelly, Tbe Epistles of Peter and of Jude (1969). * I take I Peter to be a genuine letter which unifbrmly looks back to the Single event of conversion-initiation (see especially Moule, NTS 3 [1956-57]

i - i i ; T. C. G. Thomton,/Ti 12 [1961] 14-26; Kümmel 295^; Dalton 65-71; KeUy 15-25). ä Beasley-Murray 258; see further Dalton 87-102; Kelly i5if.

215

216

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

the thought is driving single-mindedly towards baptism, which gives US the clue to some of the problems which face us. Peter has seen that the parallel between Noah's salvation and the Chrisüan's salvation hes not simply in the fewness and number of those saved,* but in the fact that water features both times. It is true that the analogy is far from complete (properly speaking Noah w a s saved from the waters of destruction, but vahd typology does n o t require exact parallehsm in all its details);^ b u t this is precisely w h y Peter uses the preposition Sid - its ambiguity is what enables h i m t o draw the analogy between the water o f the Flood and that o f baptism. The local sense is the only really suitable sense for the story of Noah; but the instrumental sense is more appropriate for baptism - hieawO-qaav Si' uSaTos — o . . . ocü^ei ßanTiafia. His use of Sid means that Peter can fit the antitype neatiy on to the type and ignore the fact that Noah was really saved from the water. In this I agree with Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism (1946) 1 4 1 - 3 ; Peter 1 1 3 ; C. E . B. Cranfield, The First Epistle of Peter (1950) 86; F. W . Beare, The First Epistle of Peter (1947) i47f.; J . Moffatt, The General Epistles Peter, James and Judas (Moffatt 1928) 142; E . G . Selwyn, The First Epistle of St Peter^ (1946) 202; Dalton 209f.; Kelly 159. M o r e o v e r , it is the water 'which saves y o u n o w in its a n t i t j ^ e , namely baptism'. Despite the cumbersome nature of two nouns in apposition to 6,1 prefer this to the explanations of Selwyn 203, and Cranfield 87, who take ovrlrtmov in apposition to v/tä?, and of Reicke, Baptism i45f., and Buse i78f., who refer dyrirwrov to Noah's salvation through water and translate 'which "antitypical" baptism now saves you'. The former is possible, but less hkely since attention is focused on the mode of sal vation. The latter is to be rejected: Peter is not describing Noah's salvation through water as a baptism (dvriTiwos can mean both the prefiguring shadow and the fulfilling reality - Arndt and Gingrich); far less is he saying that Noah's salvation is what saves his readers now (see further Beasley-Murray a6o); and the sense is as cumbersome and as difficult grammatically as the more usual interpretation (as Reicke * See B. Reicke, Tbe Epistles of James, Peter and Jude (Anchor Bible 1964) iizf.; Dalton 207f. 5 Cf. Kuss 146. Prof. Moule reads rather too much allegorical sigtiificance out of the type when hc emphasizes the idea of drowning at this potnt {Phenomenon 74); cf. F. L. Cross, I Peter - A PascbalLiturgf (1954) 29.

Conversion-initiation in Peter

217

recognizes - 146). W e need not be surprised at the cumbersome nature o f the clause: the t h o u g h t has m o v e d so swiftly and the parallel is so difficult and so compressed that the easiest w a y out was to p u t the two nouns in apposition. See also K e l l y 160. B e a s l e y - M u r r a y objects t o m a k i n g uSaros the antecedent o f o, o n t h e g r o u n d s that ' i t i n v o l v e s r e g a r d i n g the w a t e r as the m e a n s o f s a l v a t i o n , w h i c h . . . is difficult t o h a r m o n i z e w i t h the i m m e d i ately f o l l o w i n g w o r d s "mt the r e m o v a l o f d i r t f r o m t h e flesh b u t . . . " ' (259). O n the c o n t r a r y , i t is s i m p l y because uSaroy is t h e antecedent o f o that P e t e r feels it necessary t o a d d the qualifyi n g a n d corrective clause. I f the w h o l e p r e c e d i n g clause (that is, salvation t h r o u g h w a t e r ) is the antecedent, w e are left w i t h a t a u t o l o g y - ' s a l v a t i o n t h r o u g h w a t e r n o w saves' - a n d t o save t h e sense w e h a v e t o resort t o that last e x p e d i e n t o f a w e a k h y p o t h e s i s , v i z . c m e n d a t i o n o f the text (here o f o t o w).^ It is m u c h s i m p l e r a n d better t o say that P e t e r regards w a t e r as characterizing C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m , so that i n a real sense t h e w a t e r o f C h r i s t i a n b a p t i s m , w h i c h corresponds t o the w a t e r o f the F l o o d , ' n o w saves y o u ' . I n w h a t precise sense P e t e r i m m e d i a t e l y goes o n t o e x p l a i n . T h e C h r i s t i a n water-rite saves, b u t , adds P e t e r , I a m n o t t a l k i n g a b o u t the action o f the w a t e r . B a p t i s m is *the w a s h i n g a w a y o f b o d i l y p o l i u t i o n ' , b u t that Operation o f t h e w a t e r has n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h the salvation effected. I a m t a l k i n g a b o u t the awei^aews dyadijs enepdyrtjixa m a d e t o G o d . B a p t i s m is t h e expression o f t h a t , a n d as such i t saves. T h e G r e e k phrase is p u z z l i n g , a n d w h e n so m u c h depends o n i t f o r o u r i m d e r s t a n d i n g o f b a p t i s m o u r i n a b i l i t y t o catch its precise m e a n i n g is f r u s t r a t i n g . O p i n i o n i n recent years has b e e n a l m o s t equally d i v i d e d b e t w e e n t w o m e a n i n g s : a p l e d g e p r o c e e d i n g f r o m o r t o m a i n t a i n a clear conscience o r r i g h t attitude ( J B , T E V ) , a n d a n appeal o r p r a y e r t o G o d f o r a clear conscience ( R S V , N E B ) . F o r t u n a t e l y i t is n o t essential t o c h o o s e b e t w e e n these alternatives, f o r t h e f o r m e r charactctizes b a p t i s m as a n e x pression o f c o m m i t m e n t , w h i l e the latter characterizes it as a n expression o f repentance. inepäirrtna may e v e n indicate a specific m o m e n t i n t h e r i t u a l o f itiitiation - t h e act o f c o n f e s s i o n ' o r m o m e n t o f (silent) p r a y e r i m m e d i a t e l y p r i o r t o t h e I m m e r s i o n ; b u t it is • So Beasley-Mutray 260, following Erasmus, Hott and Beare 148. Only a few minuscules (the earliest dted is from the cleventh Century) can be calied in to Support this theory of a primitive textual corruption. ^ Cf. Selwyn 205; Moule, W'orsbip 51; and Rom. 10.9-10.

218

Baptism in the Holy

spirit

m o r e likely that P e t e r is h e r e d e n o t i n g the actual water-rite itself as the p l e d g e or p r a y e r , the eVcptüTij/xa b e i n g in a p p o s i t i o n to t h e ßdiTTiana: w a t e r - b a p t i s m saves in that it is the iireparrqfia of a g o o d conscience. M o r e o v e r , i t saves 8i' dvacndoecjs 'I-qaov Xpiarod. T h a t is to say, the p r a y e r or p l e d g e of b a p t i s m is efficacious o f salvation s i m p l y because it is addressed t o t h e risen o n e , is based on h i s resurrection, a n d results in a sharing of that n e w life f r o m t h e d e a d (cf. 1.3). R. E. Nixon in Studia Evangelica IV (ed. F. L. Cross 1968) 437-41, tries to argue that ßd-miop,a here = the Christian's baptism of suffering. But it is difficult to describe suffering as a pledge from man to God. This clause also rules out the Suggestion of Unger, Bih.Sac. l o i (1944) 496f., and L. S. Ch^kt, Bib.Sac. 109 (1952) 215, that ßanriapa here refers to Spirit-baptism. On the contrary, this passage confirms that ßanTiafia always means the water-rite as such.

W e s h o u l d n o t e f o r the m e a r d n g of b a p t i s m that the contrast in the parenthesis is n o t w h a t m a n y w o u l d e x p e c t : P e t e r does n o t contrast an o u t w a r d cleansing w i t h an i n w a r d cleansing or speak of b a p t i s m as G o d ' s m e a n s of cleansing t h e heart. S o m e feel this lack so d e e p l y t h a t t h e y a t t e m p t to read it i n t o the sense or e v e n to t w i s t t h e t h o u g h t . 8 S o a c c u s t o m e d h a v e s o m e c o m m e n t a t o r s b e c o m e to the v i e w t h a t b a p t i s m is s o m e t h i n g w h i c h G o d effects, a chaimel of d i v i n e grace t o u c h i n g t h e w h o l e m a n w i t h o u t a n d w i t h i n , that t h e y refuse to b e h e v e that P e t e r c o u l d be saying anyt h k i g different here.» B u t w h a t P e t e r says is q u i t e i m a m b i g u o u s at this p o i n t : b a p t i s m saves, n o t in its w a s h i n g a w a y the filth o f the flesh, but by e x p r e s s i n g man's r e p e n t a n c e and/or f a i t h to G o d . B y

the n e g a t i v e he does not d e n y that b a p t i s m is a rite w h i c h touches the b o d y ;io but h e does d e n y that it is the o u t w a r d cleansing w h i c h saves (that is, OJ5 . . . qualifies not ß d i m o p M a l o n e but the phrase achtel ßd-nriana). T h i s is why he says oi, a n d not oi fwvov. B y t h e p o s i t i v e Statement h e affirms that b a p t i s m is essentiaUy the e x p r e s s i o n and v e h i d e o f m a n ' s f a i t h , not of G o d ' s i n n e r w o r k i n g grace. T h e Mitithesis is n o t at a U surprising t o t h o s e w h o h a v e f o U o w e d 8 Reicke, Baptism 187; Schneider, Briefe 8 j ; K. H. Schelkle, Die Petrusbriefe, der Judasbrief (1961) 109; Delling, Taicfe and those dted in nn. 9, 1 1 - 1 3 below. » Scc c.g. Kuss 144 n. 95,147; S. I. Buse in Cbristian Baptism (ed. Gilmore) 17710 Schlatter, Erläutenmgen 9 Teil 57f.

Conversion-initiation in Peter

219

the w h o l e exposition so far; it is surprising only t o those w h o h a v e failed to grasp that baptism is the means b y which men come to G o d rather than that b y which G o d comes t o men. Dalton (followed by Kelly i 6 i f . ) is unnecessarily sceptical about referring aapKos amdeais pvnov to the material effect of the baptismal water on the body, and proposes as an alternative the much more difficult and improbable hypothesis that the phrase refers to circumclsion (215-24). In a context where the train of thought has forced the author to use the word 'water' to characterize baptism it is natural for him to correct the resulüng theological imbalance by defining baptism (and the role of water therein) more closely. For Peter, then, baptism has t w o aspects: it is a water-rite which cleanses the body, and it is an expression of man's inepwTrjua to God. It can also be said t o save, so long as w e realize that it is only the second aspect which is relevant here. It is n o t the w a t e r or its cleansing Operation which effects salvation; the water-rite as water-rite effects nothing m o r e than the washing of the body. W h e n he says that baptism saves, Peter means baptism in so far and only in so far as it is the expression of commitment and r e pentance. There is nothing here o f baptism as 'an i n w a r d and Spiritual grace . . . cleansing the soul',11 nothing here of baptism creating a g o o d conscience,!^ nothing here of baptism creating 'the possibüity (by cleansing the believer o f his sins) of "calling u p o n G o d " '.13 Baptism's role in salvation is t o serve as the vehicle of man's eTre/JcuTTj^a «'s Öeov, n o t of G o d ' s xa/>»S « S ävQponTOV, This conclusion becomes of fundamental importance w h e n w e realize that I Peter 3 . 2 1 is t h e nearest approach t o a definition o f baptism that the N T afibrds. In short, it is n o t w h a t baptism does t o a man, n o r something which G o d is supposed t o do t o a man through baptism, but w h a t man does with baptism and h o w he uses it, which is decisive f o r his salvation, so far as baptism is concemed. W e must add this final qualification since, of course, the finally decisive thing in salvation is G o d ' s Operation o n man. W h a t w e caimot say f r o m I Peter 3 . 2 1 is that 'baptism' describes o r effects that divine Opera tion. This has important consequenccs f o r the other 'baptismal' passages in I Peter, t o which w e n o w t u m , " C. Bigg, St Peter and St Jude* (ICC 1902) 165.

1» Schnackenbutg, Baptism 9.

" Bultmann, Tbeolog) I 136.

220

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

I Peter 1.2

T h e s e w o r d s b r m g t o g e t h e r the t w o sides o f c o n v e r s i o n : m a n ' s obedience a n d t h e d i v i n e cleansing. T h e t h o u g h t is o f d i e n e w c o v e n a n t h i the Spirit, i n w h i c h the vnaKcrq o f t b e b e h e v e r a n d t h e o f Christ's b l o o d c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e obedience a n d s p r i n k l i n g w h i c h estabhshed t h e o l d c o v e n a n t ( E x . 24.yf.). T h e thought m o v e s solely i n t h e realm o f a spiritual cleansing; t h e act of viraKo-q IS p r o b a b l y t h o u g h t o f as expressed i n bapdsm (cf. 3 . 2 1 ) , but t b e s p r i n k h n g of C h r i s t ' s b l o o d is t h e s p r i n k l i n g o f the h e a r t , precisely e q u i v a l e n t to the i n w a r d a n d spiritual h e a h n g by C h r i s t ' s w o u n d s o f 2.24. T h e r e is n o reference t o a b a p t i s m a l rite o f s p r i n k ling,i4 f a r less a n y Suggestion that t h e b a p t i s m a l w a t e r c o n t a i n e d the blessing o f Christ's a t o i d n g b l o o d . W h a t Stands i n t h e f o r e f r o n t o f t h e a u t h o r ' s m i n d is t h e t h o u g h t o f consecration - t h e a c t i o n o f t h e consecrating Spirit w h o utdtes t h e consecration o f m a n w i t h t h e consecration o f Christ's s p r i n k l e d b l o o d t o set m a n apart v m t o G o d , a n d i n this w a y estabhshes t h e n e w c o v e n a n t relation b e t w e e n G o d a n d m a n . J Peter 1.22

H e r e w e h a v e t h e same c o m b i n a t i o n o f ideas: cleansing a n d obedience. O n c e a g a i n t h e c l e a n s m g is m o r a l a n d spiritual (ras tpvxds viuav riYviKÖres), as also i n J a m e s 4 . 8 a n d I J o h n 3 . 3 , ^ » a n d there is n o reference t o b a p t i s m . ^ ' N o t e f u r t h e r that this purifica t i o n is n o t s o m e t h i n g effected b y G o d , b u t , as i n the o t h e r C a t h o h c epistles, is s o m e t h i n g w h i c h m e n d o . I P e t e r teUs u s h o w : b y obedience t o t h e t r u t h . I n I P e t e r this p r o b a b l y refers t o t h e o n c e for-all act o f obedience at c o n v e r s i o n - i t d t i a t i o n (riyviKores - p e r f e c t ) ; i n fact i t m a y w e l l refer t o b a p t i s m - their response o f f a i t h t o t h e g o s p e l , their acceptance o f t h e challenge a n d i n v i t a t i o n m a d e t h e r e m , a n d their c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e O n e t h u s p r o c l a k n e d . ! » T h i s a g a i n c o m p a r e s w e l l w i t h 3 . 2 1 , so t h a t vwaico^ here is n o t v e r y different f r o m enepwrrjfia there. A t all events i t cotifirms that b a p t i s m , i f i n " Contra Beare 51. 16 Contra Reicke, Pe/er 77, 85. " H o r t 87; Bigg 122; Moffatt 109; Hauck, TDNT I 123; WindischPreisker 57; Selwyn 149; Schelkle 52. " Contra Beare 83; Buse 176; Cranfield 41; Reicke, Peter 86. This applics also to the KoBapioftos r<M> ipapruöv of II Peter 1.9; rf. Heb. 1.3; I John 1.7, 9 (contra Käsemaim, Essays 193; Schneider, Baptism 29; Moule, Pbenomenoit 73). 18 Cf. Beare 84; Reicke, Peter 86; KeUy 79.

Conversion-initiation in Peter

221

m i n d here, is f o r P e t e r essentially m a n ' s act o f obedience, n o t G o d ' s act o f purification, a n d t h a t it is t h e obedience w h i c h results i n p u r i f i c a t i o n , n o t the b a p t i s m a l rite, b u t t h e obedience e v e n w h e n e x pressed i n b a p t i s m . 1 Peter i.ß, 2ß

S o far w e h a v e seen h o w P e t e r p u t s great emphasis o n the act o f m a n i n c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n {xmaKo-q, inepm-niixa, see also 2.25); here h e focuses a t t e n t i o n exclusively o n t h e w o r k o f G o d . A s else w h e r e i n the N T , t h e s u p r e m e l y decisive factor i n c o n v e r s i o n is the action o f G o d i n creating o r r e m a k i n g a n e w (cf. e.g. J o h n 3 . 3 8; I I C o r . 5.17; T i t u s 3.5; J a m e s i.i8). T h e d i v i n e I n s t r u m e n t o f regeneration is t h e W o r d {Xoyos), w h i c h P e t e r goes o n t o equate w i t h the particular p r o c l a m a t i o n {prifi.a) o f the g o s p e l w h i c h c a m e t o his readers (cf. J a m e s 1.18, 21). H e r e a g a i n there is n o t h o u g h t o f b a p t i s m t h e t h o u g h t is o f c o n v e r s i o n rather t h a n o f i n i t i a t i o n i n so far as these are distinct. 20 W h e r e a s i n 3.21 b a p t i s m is m a n ' s I n s t r u m e n t o f response t o G o d , i n 1.25 the W o r d is G o d ' s I n s t r u m e n t i n effecting n e w b i r t h i n m a n . I t w o u l d b e f o l l y t o d r i v e a w e d g e b e t w e e n these as t h o u g h t h e y w e r e separate e v e n t s , f o r the f o r m e r is l i n k e d w i t h purification a n d salvation ( i . 2 2 ; 3 . 2 i ) , a n d t o the latter is attached r e g e n e r a t i o n . W e are here o n c e a g a i n w i t h i n t h a t c o m p l e x e v e n t c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n w h o s e utiity c a n n o t b e b r o k e n . T i t u s 3.5 is sometimes calied i n t o support the reference t o baptism here (e.g., D e l l i n g , Taufe 84), b u t that w h i c h most suggests the thought o f baptism i n T i t u s 3.3 is quite lacking i n I Peter 1.3, 23. A closer parallel is James 1.18, and baptism is n o t in v i e w there at all, as D e l l i n g admits (84 n. 288; cf. M . Dibelius and H . G r e c v e n , Der Brief des Jakobus^^ [1^64] 136). W e are therefore i n f ü l l a c c o r d w i t h P e t e r w h e n h e insists that b a p t i s m b e seen as the means b y w h i c h m a n c o m e s t o G o d rather t h a n the m e a n s b y w h i c h G o d c o m e s t o m a n . G o d c o m e s t o m a n t h r o u g h t h e W o r d of p r e a c h i n g , a n d the m e e t i n g takes place iv aytatTpu^

itveviiaros.

W h a t of the S p i r i t a n d t h e rclevance of I P e t e r t o Pentecostal d o c t r i n e ? I t is t r u e t h a t h e is n o t g i v e n t h e same p r o m i n e n c e as i n P a u l ; b u t w e s h o u l d n o t e h o w closely 1.2 c o m p a r e s w i t h I I T h e s s . 1» See Dalton 69.

«» Cf. Selwyn 123.

222

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

2.13 a n d I C o r . 6 . n , a n d 1.12 w i t h such P a u h n e passages as I C o r . 2.4. M o r e o v e r , 1.12 m a y b e a n allusion t o P e n t e c o s t {atroaroKevri am' oi3/)avoO),2i a ^ d m a y p e r h a p s also indicate that the p r e a c h i n g o f the g o s p e l referred t o here resulted i n r e h g i o u s r e v i v a l , i n w h i c h m a n y w e r e c o n v e r t e d a n d the Spirit w r o u g h t w o n d e r s t h r o u g h the preachers a n d his p o w e r a n d presence w e r e experienced a n d m a n i fested i n a v e r y palpable manner.22 I n the h g h t o f 1.12 w e s h o u l d p r o b a b l y t h i n k o f the regenerative p o w e r o f the W o r d i n 1.23 as b e i n g d u e t o the Spirit. 23 P e t e r m a y w e l l i n t e n d t o distinguish b e t w e e n the (777-opa (e/c) a n d the Aoyos (Std) a n d t o equate the f o r m e r w i t h the Spirit, as I J o h n does w i t h the s y n o n y m oTtipii.a.'^ A n d t h o u g h he quotes the L X X o f Isa. 40.6-8 he m a y h a v e i n m i n d that Isa. 40.7 speaks o f the rüah - the flesh a n d its b e a u t y w i t b e r a n d fade because the rüah o f the L o r d b l o w s u p o n it; b u t it is n o t so w i t h the W o r d o f t h e L o r d : w h e n G o d breathes his rüah u p o n i t , far f r o m w i t h e r i n g a n d f a d i n g i t abides f o r e v e r a n d b e c o m e s a creative force b r m g i n g h f e t o a U w h o hear (cf. 1 . 1 2 , 23). F i n a l l y , 4.14 indicates that the C h r i s r i a n k n o w s the constant presence o f t b e S p i r i t w i t h h i m - i t is this w h i c h enables h i m t o rejoice despite his suflerings. N o t i c e especiaUy that b o t h the sufierings ( v . 13) a n d t h e S p i r i t are Christ's ( v . 14 b e i n g a n allusion t o Isa. n . z ) , a n d t h a t t h e relation b e t w e e n C h r i s t ' s g l o r y y e t t o b e revealed ( v . 13) a n d t h e Sphrit o f g l o r y ( v . 14) suggests P a u l ' s talk o f the S p i r i t as the dppaßatv a n d wrrapxn g ^ o T » the g l o r y o f t h e E n d - t i m e . 25 T h i s h n p U e s t h a t the Spirit c o m e s t o rest u p o n a m a n , t o ' e n - C h r i s t ' h i m , at a n d as the b e g i i m i n g o f his C h r i s t i a n life, g i v i n g that initial share i n Christ's exalted g l o r y w h i c h enables the C h r i s t i a n t o e n d u r e t o the e n d . A t a U events w e can say firmly that t h e P e n t e costal d o c t r i n e o f the b a p t i s m i n the S p i r i t has n o f o o t h o l d i n I P e t e r , a n d that, o n the c o n t r a r y , I P e t e r is sufficiendy close t o P a u l o n this p o i n t t o c o n f i r m o u r c o m p l e t e rejection o f this d o c t r i n e . " H o r t 61; Bigg i n ; Moffatt 102; Windiscli-Preisker 55. 22 Preisker 152; Sclielkle 42; cf. Selwyn 138, 267. 28 Note the weakly attcsted variant for 1.22: . . . äXtiBtias Sia intvfuiTos. 2* Most, however, equate mtopd and A(5yoy, often with reference to Christ's parable of the sower. This would certainly accord with the following quota tion: the imperishable seed being contrasted with the grass that withers. 25 Beare has some grounds for distinguishing the thought here from the more developed and more distinctively Paulinc idea of the Spirit indwelling the heart (36). But wc should not press the point, since the idea of'resting on' may simply be due to the allusion to Isa. 11.2. On the parallel between 4.14 and II Cor. 3.i7f see Selwyn 224.

Conversion-initiation in Peter

223

James has nothing of relevance to our study. In 4.5 the meCfw. is best understood as the human spirit, as the context suggests (see further Dibelius 266-8; B. S. Easton, IB 12 [1957] 56). It is possible, though unHkely, that James thinks of the Spirit when he speaks of the regenera tive power of the Word making converts the airapxq of his KrUrfiara (1.18 - cf. Dibelius 136), and of receiving the ep^vros \6yos which has power (Swa/xts) to save their souls (1.21). C. L. Mitton, The Epistle of James (1966) compares Gal. 5.22, 'where the Holy Spirit is thought of as a seed, deeply planted, and bearing rieh fruit in Christ-like qualities' (65). In general, however, in James the thought of Wisdom has largely taken the place which other N T writers give to the Spirit (Büchsei 463). O u r study o f Hebrews and I Peter has therefore confirmed our earUer conclusions. T h e essence o f N T Christianity w a s an ex perience of receiving the Spirit - an experience closely connected with hearing the W o r d , a reception manifested in eschatological p o w e r (Heb. 6.4f.; cf. 2.4; I Peter 1 . 1 2 , 2 3 ; 4.14; James 1 . 1 8 , 2 1 ) . But Hebrews and I Peter are most remarkable f o r their striking cotifirmation that N T Christianity as a w h o l e understood waterbaptism as an expression o f faith and repentance (Heb. Ö.2), o f vnaKori and iiTepd>Ti)iJ.a Q. Peter 1 . 2 , 2 2 ; 3 . 2 1 ) , and confined its cleans ing effect t o the physical b o d y (Heb. 10.22; I Peter 3.21).

XIX C

O

N

C

L

U

S

I

O

N

I N this s t u d y w e h a v e n o d c e d that there are three o r four elements a n d three parties i n v o l v e d i n Christian conversion-itdtiation. E a c h o f these elements a n d parties c o u l d b e said t o b e the characteristic emphasis o f each o f the three m a i n streams o f Christiatdty. C a t h o H c s e m p h a s i z e the role o f the C h u r c h a n d o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m ( a n d l a y i n g o n o f h a n d s ) ; Protestants e m p h a s i z e the role o f the i n d i v i d u a l a n d o f p r e a c h i n g a n d f a i t h ; Pentecostals e m p h a s i z e the role o f Jesus C h r i s t as B a p t i z e r i n the Spirit a n d o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . T h e C a t h o h c doctrine w a s a l u t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t o v e r t h e centuries. W h e n t h e Spirit became less the subject o f experience a n d m o r e the object o f faith, a n d direct Inspiration b e c a m e suspect as a result o f tbe M o n t a i d s t excesses ( a n d t h e finalizing o f t h e C a n o n ) , i t w a s natural that the o n e v e r y tangible a n d p u b h c element o f conversion-initiation s h o u l d b e c o m e m o r e a n d m o r e the focus o f a t t e n t i o n . ! W a t e r - b a p t i s m c o u l d b e regulated, whereas f a i t h a n d the S p i r i t can n o t . H e r e controls c o u l d be set u p a n d o r d e r m a i n t a m e d . T h e Spirit became m o r e a n d m o r e c o n f i n e d t o ' t h e C h u r c h ' , u n t ü i n a U b u t n a m e ' t h e C h u r c h ' s t o o d a b o v e the Spirit. T o a U intents a n d purposes the Spirit became the p r o p e r t y o f the C h u r c h , w i t h the gift o f the Spirit tied t o a n d detertnined b y a ritual act, a n d a u t h o r i t y t o b e s t o w the Spirit c o n f i n e d t o t h e bishop.2 O v e r the centuries this sacramental doctrine b e c a m e m o r e a n d m o r e m a g i c a l , a n d conversion-itdtiation, f a r f r o m m e r e l y f o c u s i n g o n w a t e r - b a p t i s m became w i i o U y identified w i t h it, w i t h C o n f i r m a t i o n i n the W e s t a m u c h delayed 'second h a l f ' . A g a i n s t this e x t r e m e sacramentaUsm a n d sacerdotaUsm P r o t e s 1 Cf. Robinson, Spirit 48, 155, 172. 2 See Swete, cited by H. Watkin-Jones, Tbe Holy Spirit in tbe Mediaepal

Cburcb (1922) 343; Scott, Spirit 244f.; cf. E. E . Aubrey, ]TS 41 (1940) 7f. 224

Conclusion

225

tants reacted, a n d i n their reaction the emphasis w a s shifited from w a t e r - b a p t i s m t o p r e a c h i n g a n d p e r s o n a l faith, w i t h a u t h o r i t y centred i n t h e B i b l e rather t h a n i n t h e C h u r c h . W i t h m a n y this c a m e t o m e a n p u t t i n g all t h e w e i g h t o n faith, a n d o n faith as distinct f r o m a n d p r i o r t o w a t e r - b a p t i s m ; faith w a s exalted t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e role o f p r e a c h i n g , a n d t h e role o f w a t e r - b a p t i s m w a s p l a y e d d o w n . T h e Spirit, h o w e v e r , d i d n o t r e t u m t o p r o m i n e n c e , largely o w i n g t o P r o t e s t a n t suspicion a n d h a t r e d o f the A n a b a p t i s t s . H e w a s the begetter o f faith a n d o f all g o o d , a n d the reality o f his manifestations i n t h e apostolic age w a s accepted, b u t little w a s said a b o u t the g i f t o f the Spirit as s u c h , a n d the charismata w e r e t h o u g h t t o h a v e ceased w i t h the apostles.^ I n scholastic P r o t e s t a n t i s m t h e Spirit b e c a m e i n effect s u b o r d i n a t e t o the B i b l e , a n d t h e latter replaced the sacraments as the p r i n c i p a l means o f grace a n d Inspiration. W h e r e C a t h o H c s fastened o n t o the o b j e c t i v i t y o f the sacraments, Protestants fastened o n t o the o b j e c t i v i t y o f the B i b l e . * T h o u g h t h e Spirit w a s r e g a r d e d as t h e p r i n c i p a l participant i n t h e w o r k o f s a l v a t i o n , h e w a s still h a r d l y t o b e experienced apart f r o m t h e Bible.5 ' T h e B i b l e o n l y is t h e r e l i g i o n o f P r o t e s t a n t s ' , a n d c o n v e r s i o n is essentially justÖication b y f a i t h alone. L i k e earlier 'enthusiasts' Pentecostals h a v e reacted against b o t h these extremes. A g a i n s t the mechanical sacramentalism o f e x t r e m e C a t h o l i d s m a n d t h e d e a d biblicist o r t h o d o x y o f e x t r e m e P r o t e s t a n t i s m t h e y h a v e shifted t h e focus o f a t t e n t i o n t o t h e experience o f the Spirit. O u r e x a m i t i a t i o n o f the N T evidence has s h o w n that t h e y w e r e w h o l l y justified i n this. T h a t t h e Spirit, a n d particularly the gift o f t h e S p i r i t , w a s a fact of experience i n t h e H v e s o f the earliest Christians has b e e n t o o o b v i o u s t o require e l a b o r a t i o n ( e g . , A c t s 2.4; 4 . 3 1 ; 9 . 3 1 ; 10.44-46; 1 3 . 3 2 ; 19.6; R o m . 5.5; 8 . 1 - 1 6 ; I C o r . 1 2 . 7 , 1 3 ; I I C o r . 3.6; 5.5; G a l . 4.6; j . r 6 - i 8 , 2 5 ; ! T h e s s . i.5f.; T i t u s 3.6; J o h n 3.8; 4 . 1 4 ; 7.58^; 16.7 - the presence o f the Spirit w a s t o b e better t h a n t h e presence o f Jesus). I t is a sad c o m m e n t a r y s See e.g. J . Buchanan, The Office and Work of the Holy Spirit (1843) 87£F.,

zoiß., 24}f., 25off.; Smeaton 47ff., i4off., I98£f., 2o8ff.; Kuyper 182, 283-427; Palmer 77ff., I23ff., 145; alsoB. B. Warfield, Miracles YesterdayandToday (1918) 2lfiF. *• Cl Brunner, Truth as Encounter (ET 1964) 77f. » SecH.yff9.i\sin-'ioat&,Tb« Holy Spirit from Arminius to IF«/<)r (1929) lyof.; G. F. Nuttall, The Holy Spirit in Puritan Faith and Experience (1946) 23f., 31-33;

and cf. the recent Statements of B. Ramm, Tbe Witness of tbe Spirit (1959) 64, and J . I. Packer, 'Fmdamentalism' and tbe Word of God (1958) 119. See also

Hendry 72-95.

220

Baptism in tlje Holy Spirit

o n the p o v e r t y o f o u r o w n i m m e d i a t e experience o f the Spirit^ that w h e n w e c o m e across l a n g u a g e i n w h i c h the N T writers refer directly t o the gift o f the Spirit a n d t o their experience o f it, either w e a u t o m a t i c a U y refer i t t o the sacraments a n d can o t d y g i v e i t m e a n i n g w h e n w e d o so ( I C o r . 6 . 1 1 ; 1 2 . 1 3 ; I I C o r . i.2if.; E p h . i . i 3 f . ; T i t u s 3.5-7; J o h n 5.5; 6.51-58, 6 3 ; l J o h n 2.20, 27; 5.6-8; H e b . 6.4), o r eise w e d i s c o u n t t h e experience described as t o o subjective a n d mystical i n f a v o u r o f a f a i t h w h i c h is essentiaUy a n affirmation o f bibhcal p r o p o s i t i o n s , o r eise w e i n effect p s y c h o l o g i z e the Spirit o u t o f existence. T h e Pentecostal a t t e m p t t o restore t h e N T emphasis a t this p o i n t is m u c h t o b e praised, b u t it has h a d t w o u n f o r t u n a t e aspects. F i r s t , the Pentecostal has f o U o w e d the C a t h o h c i n his Separation o f S p i r i t - b a p t i s m , f r o m the e v e n t o f c o n v e r s i o n - i t d t i a t i o n (represented i n w a t e r - b a p t i s m ) , a n d has m a d e the gift o f the S p k i t a n experience w h i c h f o U o w s after c o n v e r s i o n . T h i s is qvdte c o n t r a r y t o the N T teaching. A c c o r d i n g t o L u k e a n d P a u l b a p t i s m i n the Spirit w a s n o t s o m e t h i n g subsequent t o a n d distinct f r o m b e c o m i n g a C h r i s t i a n ; n o r , i t m u s t b e a d d e d , w a s it s o m e t h i n g w h i c h o t d y a n apostle (or bishop) could hope t o bring about, o r something which hap p e n e d o t d y o n c e o r t w i c e i n a p o s t o U c days. T h e gift o f the S p k i t m a y n o t b e separated i n a n y w a y f r o m c o n v e r s i o n , w h e t h e r t o b e set b e f o r e c o n v e r s i o n as its p r e s u p p o s i t i o n , or after c o n v e r s i o n as a m e r e l y e m p o w e r i n g , c o n f i r m a t o r y o r charismatic gift. T h e g i f t o f t h e S p i r i t (that is, S p i r i t - b a p t i s m ) is a distkict e l e m e n t w i t h i n c o n v e r s i o n - i i d t i a t i o n , i n d e e d , i n the N T , t h e m o s t significant ele m e n t a n d focal p o i n t o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n . I t is the g i f t o f saving grace b y w h i c h o n e enters i n t o C h r i s t i a n experience a n d life, i n t o the n e w c o v e n a n t , i n t o t h e C h u r c h . I t is, in t h e last analysis, t h a t w h i c h m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n (e.g., M a r k 1.8; A c t s it.i6f.; R o m . 8.9f.; I C o r . 1 2 . 1 3 ; I I C o r . 3.6; G a l . 3.3; T i t u s 3.6f.; J o h n 3.5-8; 20.22; I J o h n 5.9; H e b . 6.4). I t is true that w h e n the S p i r i t thus

e n t e r e d a U f e i n d i e earUest days o f the C h u r c h h e r e g i d a r l y m a n i fested h i s Coming b y charismata a n d his presence b y p o w e r (to w i t n e s s ) , but these w e r e coroUaries to his m a i n p u r p o s e - t h e ' c h r i s t i n g ' o f the o n e w h o h a d t a k e n the step o f faith (niarevaas). T h e second m i s t a k e o f the Pentecostal is that h e has f o U o w e d the P r o t e s t a n t in h i s Separation o f faith f r o m w a t e r - b a p t i s m . C o n « See A. R. Vidier, Cbristian Mief {19^0) 56; and cf. Newbigin 91; L. M. Starlcey, Tbe Work oftbe Holy Spirit: A Study in Wesleyan Tbeolc& (1962) 143.

Conclusion

227

Version is f o r h i m S p i r i t - e n g e n d e r e d f a i t h reaching o u t t o 'receive o r accept J e s u s ' , s o that a m a n is a C h r i s t i a n b e f o r e his w a t e r b a p t i s m a n d t h e latter is little m o r e t h a n a confession o f a past c o m m i t m e n t . T h i s m a y w e l l accord w i t h present B a p t i s t practice, b u t i t is n o t the N T p a t t e r n . T h e N T writers w o u l d t o a m a n reject a n y Separation o f the decisive m o v e m e n t o f faith {marevaaC) f r o m b a p t i s m , either b y way of p u t t i n g the act o f faith p r i o r t o b a p t i s m , t h e r e b y r e d u c i n g b a p t i s m t o a m e r e s y m b o l , o r b y w a y of p u t t i n g it after b a p t i s m , t h e r e b y exalting b a p t i s m t o an I n s t r u m e n t o f divine power which operates on a person without his k n o w l e d g e or consent. B a p t i s m properly p e r f o r m e d is f o r the N T essentially the act o f f a i t h a n d repentance - the actualization of s a v i n g f a i t h w i t h o u t w h i c h , usually, c o m m i t m e n t to Jesus as L o r d does n o t c o m e t o its necessary expression. A s t h e Spirit is the vehicle o f s a v i n g grace, so b a p t i s m is the vehicle of s a v i n g f a i t h . ' B y thus asserting the p r o m i n e n c e a n d centraüty o f the g i f t o f the Spirit i n conversion-initiation w e h a v e b e e n able t o g i v e waterb a p t i s m its p r o p e r N T role, neither m o r e n o r less - v i z . as t h e expression o f the f a i t h t o w h i c h G o d g i v e s the Spirit. T h e initial refusal t o use ' b a p t i s m ' as a s h o r t h a n d description o f c o n v e r s i o n i n i t i a t i o n has b e e n a m p l y justified. ßarrnaiia o r ßatniayiAs i n the N T means t h e water-rite p u r e a n d simple, w h o s e cleansing efficacy reaches n o f u r t h e r t h a n t h e b o d y ( M a t t . 3.7; M a r k 7.4; L u k e 3 . 3 ; J o h n 3.25; E p h . 4.5; H e b . 6.2; 9.10; 10.22; I P e t e r 3 . 2 1 ; also R o m . 6.4; C o l . 2 . 1 2 ; i t is u s e d o n c e m e t a p h o r i c a l l y - M a r k io.38f. = L u k e 12.50). ßami^eiv, ßaTrriUoBai m e a n s either t o b a p t i z e literally (in w a t e r ) o r t o b a p t i z e m e t a p h o r i c a l l y ( i n Spirit i n t o C h r i s t , i n suifering i n t o d e a t h ) , b u t i t n e v e r embraces b o t h m e a n i n g s s i m u l taneously ( M a t t . 3 . 1 1 ; M a r k 1.8; io.38f.; L u k e 3 . 1 6 ; 12.50; J o h n 1 . 3 3 ; A c t s 1 . 5 ; 10.47; I I . 1 6 ; R o m . 6.3; I C o r . 1 0 . 2 ; 1 2 . 1 3 ; G a l .

3.27). T h e N T writers w o u l d n e v e r say, f o r e x a m p l e , that the 'sign ( o f b a p t i s m ) is o r effects w h a t i t sigtiifies'. S p i r i t - b a p t i s m a n d w a t e r b a p t i s m r e m a i n distinct a n d e v e n antithetical, t h e latter b e i n g a p r e p a r a t i o n f o r t h e f o r m e r a n d the m e a n s b y w h i c h the believer actually reaches o u t i n faith t o receive the f o r m e r . A g a i n , O e p k e ' s talk o f b a p t i s m as ' t h e action o f G o d o r C h r i s t ' » is correct o n l y i f ' Cf. Barth, Dogmatik IV/4, who abandons his earlier 'sacramental* under standing of baptism, and, like his son, defines Christian baptism in terms of the human decision which corresponds to the divine tuming to man, and as man's prayer to God, the human answer to the divine work. See also p. 94 above. 8 Oepke. TDNT I 540.

228

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

he m e a n s S p i r i t - b a p t i s m . I t is i n c o r r e c t i f h e m e a n s w a t e t - b a p t i s m . I n the N T there is n o t h i r d a k e r n a t i v e . I must confess to being completely unmoved by any appeal to 'the sacramental principle', or 'incarnational basis to sacramental teaching' (e.g. Wotherspoon, Sacraments 1-30). We have seen clearly enough that Hebraic thought and NT writers Uke Luke, Paul and the author of Hebrews knew well how to distinguish and contrast inward and out ward, spiritual and physical. It is true, of course, that God came to men in and through physical, material, human flesh in Jesus, but it is perilous to draw from this a general principle which can be applied forthwith to the sacraments. Rather our study of the relevant NT passages shows that for those authors the divine instrument in the divine-human encounter is the Spirit and, or through, the Word, whüe the corresponding human instrument is faith and, or through, baptism.

I f the N T is t o be o u r rule, t h e r e f o r e , the rite o f w a t e r - b a p r i s m m a y n o t b e g i v e n t h e central role i n c o n v e r s i o n - i r ü d a r i o n . I t s y m b o h z e s the spiritual cleansing w h i c h t h e S p k i t b r i n g s a n d the finahty o f the b r e a k w i t h t h e o l d h f e ; it is a stknulus t o f a i t h a n d enables c o m m i t m e n t t o c o m e t o necessary e x p r e s s i o n ; i t is t h e rite o f acceptance b y t h e local Christians o r c o n g r e g a t i o n as repre sentative o f t h e w o r l d - w i d e C h u r c h ; b u t o t h e r w i s e it is n o t a Chan nel o f grace, a n d n e i t h e r the g i f t o f the S p k i t n o r a n y o f the s p k i t u a l blessings w h i c h h e b r i n g s m a y b e i n f e r r e d f r o m o r ascribed t o it. A recall t o the b e g i i m i n g s o f the C h r i s t i a n life i n the N T is a l m o s t a l w a y s a recaU n o t t o b a p t i s m , b u t t o t h e g i f t o f the Spirit, o r t o t h e s p k i t u a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n his c o m i n g effected. I n short, üi the begiiming, n o Christian was unbaptized, b u t n o t all t h o s e b a p t i z e d w e r e ipso facto Christians. N o C h r i s t i a n w a s w i t h o u t the Spirit, f o r o n l y t h o s e w h o h a d (received) t h e S p i r i t w e r e ipso facto Christians. T h e N T teaching at this p o i n t m a y b e expressed e p i g r a m m a t i c a U y t h u s : F a i t h d e m a n d s b a p t i s m as its e x p r e s s i o n ; B a p t i s m d e m a n d s f a i t h f o r its v a h d i t y . T h e g i f t o f t h e S p i r i t presupposes f a i t h as its c o n d i t i o n ; F a i t h is s h o w n t o b e g e n u i n e o n l y b y t h e g i f t o f t h e Spirit. T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f this c o n c l u s i o n f o r C h r i s t i a n i t y as a w h o l e s h o u l d n o t b e i m d e r e s t i m a t e d i n a d a y o f radical q u e s t i o n i n g , w h e n m a n y Christians are searching w i t b i n t h e B i b l e , t h e k t r a d i t i o n s

Conclusion

zzi)

a n d themselves i n a n a t t e m p t t o grasp the r o o t a n d l i v i n g heart o f the C h r i s t i a n f a i t h stripped bare o f all its accretions a n d n o n essentials, i n a d a y w h e n the q u e s t i o n is b e i n g a s k e d w i t h increasi n g f r e q u e n c y a n d particularly b y Christians t h e m s e l v e s : W h a t is a C h r i s t i a n ? W h a t is the distinguishing h a l l m a r k o f the C h r i s t i a n ? O u r s t u d y has g i v e n us the N T a n s w e r t o this q u e s t i o n w i t h s o m e p r e c i s i o n ; w i t h r e m a r k a b l e consistency the a n s w e r c a m e : T h a t m a n is a C h r i s t i a n w h o has received t h e g i f t o f the H o l y S p i r i t b y c o m m i t t i n g h i m s e l f t o t h e risen Jesus as L o r d , a n d w h o lives accordingly. I f this is a n accurate assessment o f N T C h r i s t i a n i t y , a n d t h e apostolic t r a d i t i o n a n d teaching has a n y n o r m a t i v e significance f o r US t o d a y , t h e n it i n t u r n i n e v i t a b l y raises several o t h e r large a n d i m p o r t a n t questions f o r present-day C h r i s t i a n i t y at b o t h d e n o m i n a tional a n d ecumenical level. F o r e x a m p l e : A r e moäetn theologies o f c o n v e r s i o n - i n i t i a t i o n a d e q u a t e ? D o C h u r c h e s really u n d e r s t a n d the respective roles o f Spirit, f a i t h a n d b a p t i s m , o r g i v e t h e m satisf a c t o r y expression i n their v a r i o u s liturgies a n d practices o f initia t i o n ? C a n i n f a n t b a p t i s m a n y l o n g e r b e justified b y the p r e v e n i e n t grace a r g u m e n t so p o p u l ä r t o d a y ? H a s m o d e r n e v a n g e l i s m h e l d f o r t h the p r o m i s e o f the Spirit e x p Ü c i t l y e n o u g h ? S u c h questions can o n l y b e a s k e d , since t o a n s w e r t h e m goes b e y o n d t h e scope o f the present s t u d y . B u t there is a n e v e n m o r e basic q u e s t i o n w h i c h o u r conclusions raise, a n d o n e w h i c h m u s t be a n s w e r e d b e f o r e these o t h e r questions can b e frdly dealt w i t h : A c c e p t i n g t h a t the g i f t o f the S p i r i t is w h a t m a k e s a m a n a C h r i s t i a n , h o w d o h e a n d others k n o w i f a n d w h e n h e has received t h e S p i r i t ? I n w h a t w a y s does t h e S p i r i t manifest his Coming a n d his presence ? W h a t indications are there t h a t t h e Spirit is active i n a c o n g r e g a t i o n o r i n a Situation? C l e a r l y these are questions o f first i m p o r t a n c e at all p o i n t s o f C h r i s t i a n life a n d activity. A n d i n casc i t s h o u l d b e t h o u g h t that I h a v e b e e n less t h a n just t o the Pentecostals let m e s i m p l y a d d i n reference t o these questions t h a t Pentecostai t e a c h i n g o n Spiritual gifts, i n c l u d i n g glossolalia, w h i l e still u n b a l a n c e d , is m u c h more sovmdly b a s e d o n t h e N T t h a n is generally r e c o g n i z e d . B u t here a n d n o w I c a n o n l y p o i n t o u t the rclevance o f these issues, since t o discuss t h e m a n i festations o f the S p i r i t is a subject in itself. I f G o d wills I shall i n d u e course t a k e u p this subject since it is a necessary sequel t o t h e present s t u d y .

I N D E X

O FM O D E R N A U T H O R S A N D

W O R K S

(Italics indicate tiiat a new title appears for the first time) Abbott, T . K . , IJ4, 158, 161, 163 Abrahams, I., iz Adams, J . C , 206, 207 Adler, N . , }9, 40, 4S, 5of., j6'ä., 70 Alford, II., / / / , 165 Allen, B., 2), 59, 129, 158 Allen, R., / , 46, 102 von Allmen, J . J . , 14, 58, 98 AUo, E . B., 117, 125, J}4i. Althaus, P., 108, 115, 14} Altmann, k.,14 Argyle. A . W., 129, 154 Arndt. E. J . F.. 6 Arndt. W. F.. 10, 6j, 121, 123, 133, 216 Aubrey, E. E., 224 von Baer, H., 8, 23, 25, 27, 35, 44f.. 50. 97 Bailey. S.. 100 Baker. J . , ii}, i28f., 207 Barabas. S., i Barclay, W., 7 Barnard, L . W., zrf. Barrett. C. K.. 8, i j . 2oi., 27f., 32. 36. 44; 94, 117, 121, 123-6, 128, 140S., 146,156, i66i., i73ff., 180-7, 191, 198 Barth, K . . }6, 94, 1 1 1 , 140. 142, 168. 188, 193. 227 Barth. M., 2 1 , 24, 87, iiof., 1 1 3 , i28f.. i4of.. 154. 162. 164. i87f. 192. 200. 202 Bartsch. H. W . , / / * Basham. D.. f9, 73, 79 Bauer. W . , 19^; 32, if7> i74,-i9ofBeardslee, W . A . . 46 Beare, F . W . , 9. "JJ, 158, r O , U', 2l6i.,

220, 222

Beasley-Murray. G . R . . / / , i4ff., 27, 32, 36, 55fr.. 59,6iff.. 7 7 , 88f., 97f, 105.109-12.117.123.12jf.. 129f., 134, i4off.. 145, I53f-, 158, i62ff.. 2io

167, l ö g f , 183, 187, 193, i95f., igS, 200-3, 2og-i2, 2r5ff. Behm, J . , / / , i}j Benoit, A . , i)} Berkhof, H., }, 4if. Bernard, J . H., 19, 21, 182, 184 Best, E., 9, 18, 26, 30, 117, 124, 126, 129, i4off. Betz, O., 176, 180, 187 Beyer, H. W., 108, i i j Bieder. W., 9, 20, 26, 6if., 88f., 128, 141, 153, 160, 163, 187, 2ir, 214 Bietenhard, H., 1 1 2 , 117, 121 Bigg. C , 2i9i., 222 Billerbeck, See Strack Black, M., 10, 20, 25. 179 Blaiklock. E. M., 4j, 50. 66, 73 Blass, See Funk Blenkmsopp, J . , 179 Blessed Trinity Society, 9) Bligh, J . , IIO, III Bloch-HoeU, N.. 2 Boismard. M . 'S.., 206 Bonnard. P.. / / , 106, 108. 111 Bonsirven. J . . 148 Borgen. P.. 18j Bornkamm, G.. 14, 23, 26, 98. z^if. Bourke, M . M., 1 2 / Bouttier. M., ii}, 160 Brandon, O., 7 Branscomb, B. H., 28 Braumatm, G., 99, 106, 122, 125 Braun,F. M., 174,177,187,190, igsf. Braun, H.. 10 Briggs, C. A . , 8 Brooke, A . E . , 196, 200-3 Brooke, J . . 126, 149, 158 Brooks, O. S., 201 Brown, R . E.. 10,19S., 32.174. 77;. 177, i8of., i8s, 1855.. igif., 194 Brownlee, W . H., 10 Bruce. A . B., * Bruce, F. F . , 4;, 55. 62, 64, 67, 73,

Index of Modern Authors and Works 7J, 79. 8if., 92, 96, 98, lu, 158, 2o6i., 209, 211 Ötumback, C., 2 Brunet, F. D., ßS, 127 Brunnet, E . , 14;, 22j Buchanan, J . , 22; Büchsei, F., 10, 15, 27, 35, 94. 99, 108, 136, 148, 172, 223 Bullinger, E . W . , /<( Bultmann, R., S, 18, 21, 61, P4, ^ji., 100, 116, 123, 129, 142, 160, 169, 176-9, 184, 190, 193, ipiS., 201, 20S, 211, 219 Burney, C. F., i/p Burton, E . de W . , i/, 106, io8f., 113 Burton. W . F. F.. 128, 159 Buse, S. I . , }0, / 7 , 21S, 218, 220

Cadbury, H. J., 61, 7}, 75. 84, 88,97f. Caird, G. B., 2i, J9, 62 Calvin. J . , / / Camelot, P. T., / / Campbell, J . Y . . / / Carrington, P., 24 Carter, C. W., 7}, 82 Cassien, Archimandrite, 174 Cerfaux, L . , 91, iii, 124, 128, 137, 163 Chaine, J . , 19j Chafer, L . S., 218 Chase, F. H.. }7, 58, 83, 113, 122, 134, i6j, 167, 196. 205f. Chevallier, M. A . , S Christenson, L . , 2}, 39, 129 Church of Scotland, 6,23,44,162,206 Clark, N., / , 16, 100, 129. 183, 187, 191 Clarke, W. K. L . , }7, j8f., 126, 167. 195, 206 Cole. R. A . , io8 Confirmathtt Today, 98, 153 Conybcare, F. C , 16; Conzehnann. H., 9, 23. *5. 4of-. 43. 60L, 64, 88, 92, 98, 117, 119, I 2 2 f . .

2il

Cross, F. L . , 216, 218 Cross, F. M., 192 CuUmann, O.. / / . 18. 20. 23, ji, jo, 67, 98, ///f., 128, i4if., 183, i86ff., 191, 206 Cumming, J . E . , 83. 138 Dahl, N . A . , I2S., 16, 124, 16) Dalton, W . J . , 2//f., 219, 221 Darby, J . N . , 16; Darton, G. C , 88 Daube, D., }0, 34, 167 Davies, J . G., ji/f., 196 Davies, W . D., 126 Debrunner, See Funk Deissmann, A . , / / / Delling, G., 10, / / , 18, 42, 97, 105, 110, ii7£F.. i26ff.. 133, i4ofF., i53f., 163, 195, 2iof., 215, 218, 221 Delorme, 10 Danny, J . , 4, 140, 142 Dewar. L . , / / , ^jS., 97 Dibelius, M., 8, 28, 33, 60, 85, 88f., Iß f. U4. 158. 161, j(!7, 221, zii Dinkler, E . , 60,117, i3iff., 190, 195 Dix, G., ß, 37, 9ß. 126. 195 Doble. P., ßo von Dobschütz, D., iß2 Dodd, C. H.. 20{., 32. 44, 90. loj, 140,148,174,179,181, i83f., i86f., 192, I9;e., 199, 20i£F. Downing, J . D . H., xoi, 113 Duncan, G. S., 107, 113 Dunn, J . D . G., ß, 10, ißf, 18;, 188 Duprez, A . , /14 Barle, R., 7i. 82 Easton, B. S., 10,16;, 22) Edsman, C. M., 12 Eggenberger, O., ß8 Ehrhardt, A . , 60 Eisler, R., 8 Eissfeldt, O., 212 Ellis, E . E . , II, 33 Erasmus, 217 Elpis, F. H., 9} Ervin, H. M., ß9, 55, 57, 70, 73, 79, 83. 86, 93, i28f., 171, 180 Evans, P. ^.,ißß

12J, 127, I4J, i6ß, 167 Cooper, H.. 9) Coppens, J . , i6j CoreU, A . G . H., 187L Craig. C. T., 1 2 ; Cranfield, C. E . B., 10, 2 0 , 25, 28, f6, 42, 2jg, 2 2 0 Fasckaä, L., i4f Creed, J . M., S, 28, 33 Fenton, J . C , ßo Crehan, J . , 39,154

232

Index of Modern Authors and Works

Hamilton. N . Q . , 136, 148 Ferre, N . , 149 Harper, M . C , i i . 39, 56, 59. 73, Feuillet, A . , i » , 33 79, 8 J , 91, 9 4 . " 3 , »28f.. 158.173, Field, F . , 7 Filson, F . V . , 10, 24, 124 180, 207 Finlayson, R . A . , / / Harris. J . R . , 28 Fitzer, G . , t}}, 156 Hathaway, H . G . , 8} Flemington. W . F . , 8, 16, 5 8 . 88, Hauck, F . , 164, 220 loSff., 1 2 1 , 1 2 9 , 1 3 2 , 154, 1 9 1 , 200, Headlam, A . C , 140S. 211 HeitmüUer, W . , 117 Flender, H . , 2j, 3 3 , 44, 46, 88 Hendry. G . S . , 4, 149, 225 Flew, R . N . , ; / Hennecke, E . , IJ7 Flowers, H . J . ,
Kelly. J . N, D.. s6j, 167. i j / f f . , 2i9f. Haenchen. E . .

33, 35, 4^, 57, 60.

62,65, 67, 73, 80. 84, 88, 92, 94,98. 120

Kennedy. H . A . A . , tio,

128. 131, 142, 163 K i k , J . M . , 47

1 1 3 , 123,

Index of Modern Authors and Works Kilpatrick, G. D., 34, 179 Kirby, J . C , 49, 160 Kitk. K. E., 142 Kirkpatrick, J . M., 6 Kittel, G., 18, 61, 98, 129, 162, 168 Kiine, M . G., i)

Klostermann, E., / / , 25, 28, Knox, J . , 7i. 7 j , 140 Knox, W. L . , 49, 83, no, iSß, 187 Kosmala, H . , 206 Kosnetter, J . , ^7, 35 Kraeling, C. H . , 8, 13, j j f . , 2 j , 84 Kraft, H . , /($•, 40 Ktetschmat, G . , 48

Kümmel, W . G . , 104, 117, 119, 124-8. i35f., 139, 160, 195, 215 Kuss, O., 77, 94, ji7f., 129, 140, 142, 144, 149. 154. 212, 216, 218 Kuyper, A . , 94, 22J Lagrange, M . J . , 10, 20i., 34, io8i., iiii., i4o£., 146, i76f.. 182 Lake. K . , 41$, y8, 61, 73. 73. 8ßi., 88, 97f.. 109, 172 Lambert. J . C , / / , 94, 98, 113, 123, 131. i33> i4of-. 153. i63f. Lampe, G . W. H., 12,16, z^i., 27, 53. 46. S7&., 62, 65. 67. 73. 75, 77. 88, 91. 93, 98, 100. logf., 114, 119, 12}, iio£., !}}£., 153, 166, 196, 205 Lang. F . . 10, 42 Larsson, E . . roiT, 140, 142, r6o Law, R . , 19/, 203 Leaney, A . R . C . , 10, jo, 46, 48, 172 Lee, E . K . , 192 Leeming, B . . 10, j8, 83. 205 Leenhardt, F . J . , 10, 2j, 2 7 , 1 4 1 , 1 4 3 , 145 Lenski, R . C . H.. 79. 94 L^on-Dufour. X . . 39 LiddeU, H . G . , i2f, 141 Lietzmatm, H., 106, i i o . ii4f.. 117, 119. 124-8, i35f.. 142, 144 Lightfoot, J . B . , lOf, 109I.. Iii, IS), 158, / * / Lightfoot, R . H., 12, 20, 174, 177, 184, r86, 191, 193 Lindsay, G., Z), 39, 39, 79, 83, 127 von Loewenich, W., 76 Lohmeyer, E . . 10, i4i., zjS., 30, / / / f . Lohse. E . . 48, 117, 119. J33. J / i f . , 158, 172. J90

233

Macdonald. J . , 6)i. Mae^regor, G . H. C . , 19S.., j8, 73. 174, 179^-, 191.194 McNeil. J . . 79 McNeile, A . H.. 14 Mann, C . S., 48 Manson. T. W., 8, 197, 203 Marsh, H. G.,
234

Index of Modern Authors and Works

Rengstorf, K . H., 2 4 , 31, 4 U 8 4 Richards, G . C , ; / Richardson, A . , 62, 98, loo, 198, 206 Ridderbos, H . N . , /07-10 Rigaux, B . , 1 0 ; Riggs. R. M . , 2 } , 39, 55, 70, 73, 79, 83, 86, 94, 113, 127, 149, 158 Roberts, O . , 1 6 7 , 180 Robertson, A . , 1 2 } , 125, 128 Robertson, A . T . , 7 9 Robinson, H . W . , 4, 1 6 , 2 3 , 2 9 , 94, N y g r e n , A . , I4TF 224 Oepke, A . , 1 0 0 , 1 0 6 , 108, i i o , 115, Robinson, J , A . , 1 ) 9 , i6i, 168 117, i28f., 2 1 227 Robinson, J . A . T . , / / , } O , 4 4 , 47, Oliver, H . H . , } 2 84, 118, 162, I63I. O'NeiU, J . C , 4! Robinson, J . M . , / / , 14, 24f., 32, 35 Origen, LOI. Robinson, T . H . , 206, 214 Oulton, J . E . L . , / / , 57, 59. 62, 94 Robinson, W . C. Jnr., 23, 33 Rotherham, J . B . , I 6 J Fache, R., 1 8 2 Rowley, H. H . , 2 9 , } 6 Packer, J . I., 7, / / , 2 2 ; Sanday, W., 1 4 0 & . Palmer. E . H . , / / , 94, 225 Sanders, J . N . , 2 0 , 32,177, i79f., 182, Parratt, J . K . , / , *A 94, i»?, " 3 . i86f. 120, 133 Schelkle, K . H., 2 1 8 , 220, 222 Pearlman, M . , 3 9 , 79 Schildenberger, J . , 1 3 6 Percy, E . , 1 2 4 Schlatter, A . , 102,109,113,124,129, Pfister, W., lOf, 121, i48f. 136, 142, 144, 154, 161, 184, 186, Pierson, A . T . , 7 9 , 83 1 9 j , 418 Pinnock, C. B . . , 1 0 8 Schlier, H., 2 6 , 77, 61, 94, 97f., du Plessis, D . J . , 1 2 7 LOES.., I I I , 1 1 5 , 1 1 7 , 133. ^/^ff-. Plummer, A . , 1 2 } , 125, 128, i}} 163,176,198 Plooij, D . , 2 8 , 36 Pocknee, C. E . , fS Schmid, J . , 1 0 , 1 7 6 de la Potterie, I., 1 9 0 , 193, 197 Schmidt, H. W., 1 4 2 Prat, F . , II}, 1 1 7 , 1 2 3 , 1 6 3 Schmidt, K . L . , 1 0 6 Preisker, H . , 8 8 { . , 102, /p/f., 198, Schmithals, W., 1 3 6 Schnackenburg, R., 1 9 , 2 1 , 32, jS, 200, 220, 222 io5f., io9f., 1 1 2 , 117, 119, I2if., Preuschcn, E . , 60 126, laBf., I33f., i4off., 144, 1 5 1 , Prince, D . , 3 9 , J 9 . 7 ° . 79. «3. " 8 , 154, 158, 160,163, i65f., 168,172, ij8. 173. 179 183,187,190, 192, I96I., 199-203, Procksch, O., 4 0 219 Schneemelcher, W., / / 7 Quick, O., 98 Schneider, J . , / ; , 1 2 9 , 142,169, 172, 196, 202, 218, 220 Rackham, R. B., 4;, 47. 49. 5». 74. Schnicwind, J , , 4 1 77, 83. 93. 97. i ° o Ramm, B . , 2 2 / Schoeps, H. J . , 7 2 / 123,13; Rawlinson, A . E , J . , 2ßS., 28, Sdurenk, G., Schubert, P., 3 2 Reicke, B . , 47, 1 6 } , 2 1 6 , 218, 220 Schub, S., 7 ^ 7 Reiling. J . , 1 2 9 Schütz, R., 9, 2of., 84 Reitzenstein, R., lio Schwarzmann, H., 7^7f.

N a i m e , A . , 20^, 212 Nauck, W.. 1 9 6 ' % 201 Neil, y^ff.. 1 0 ; Neufeld, V . H . , /
Index of Modern Authors and Works Schweitzer, A . , }6, 124, 191, 200 Schweizer, E . , 4, S, pi., 15, 19, 25, 30, 41, 44, 49, 62, 86, gp, 94, 98, 102, 114, 131, /;
235

Thüsing, W., 7751, 187, 200 Torrance, T. F . , 6 Torrey, C. C , 7 7 p Torrey, R. A . , 39 Tteen, H. M., /f., 198, 200, 209&., 220, 222 Wink, W., 9, 20, 25, 32

2 36

Index of Modern Authors and Works

Wirgman, A . T . , ^ 7 , 57 Wodehouse, H . F . , igi W o o d , C . T . , 7} W o o d , H . G . , 28 Woodford, L . F . , i6j Wotherspoon, H . J . , 6, 2j, 228

Wright, R. S . , 6 Yates, J . E . , 2oi. Ysebaert, J . , 19J 44, 50.

Z a h n , T . , / 7 , i?» de Z w a a n , J . , 132

I N D E X

O FB I B L I C A L

R E F E R E N C E S

OLD T E S T A M E N T Genesis

Judges

1.2 2-7 2.24 8.8f. 12.3 13.10 17.7-10 17.12f.

14.6,19 15.14

27 180 12411. 27 47 131 47 47«47

22.18 Exodus

4.22f. 13.21 14.24 19 19.1 24.7f. 32.32f. 34-34 Levititus

16.6,16

30 i27n. 12711. 48 48 220 53 136

10,10 15.22

187 17

II Kings

5.14 I3.i8f.

12 16

I Cbronicles

12.18

iion.

II Cbronicles

15.10-12 48 24.20 iion. 29.5

212

213 Psalms

9.20 3on. 11.10-29 3on. 19.9, i7f. 213 Deuferonomy

8.J

/ Samuel

Job

Numbers

6-8 6.13,16 8.2-5 8-3

Isaiah

187 187

30 3on. 30 3on. 30 17.153 6511.

2 2-7 42.7 51 61.8 69.2,15 78.37 107.9

29 27.28 II

17 168 II

Jeremiah

65 168

2.13 3-8 4-4 7.3f. 17.13 31.9 31.12 31.31-33 31-33 31-34

Song of Solomon

4.2 6.6

29.10 29.i8f. 30.28 31.9 32.15-17 32.15 34.16 35-5f40.6-8 40.7 42 42.1 42.6f. 43-2 44. if. 44.3-5 44-3 49.6 54.4f34.13 6i.if. 61.1 61.10 62.5 63.8-14 63.111.

168 168

10.16 12.12 29.18-20 30,6 17,153.156 30.14 i64f.

Isaiab

Judges 6.34

II.2

27, 2 2 2

Ezekiel

II.15

12

9.4

iion.

i.io-iS 1.25 4-4

17 I2n. I*

12, 131 41 12 i2n. 12, 192 I3n.,46n.,i3i 46n. 41 222 222 29 27 77 11 290. 192 12, 1311., 131 2711. 163 i84f. 192 28 27,41 110 163 3on. 30 192 16} 17, I J 3 17 192 30 131 135 48, 156 184

133

238 Amos

Ezekiel II.ig

16.8-13 16.8-14 16.8 18.30-31 22.20 32.6 36.25-27 36.26f. 36.26 36.27 37 37-4-14 37.8-10 37-9 37-14 39-29 47-5

46n. 163 163 163

47-9

192

5.21-24 7-4

i2n. 1311.

Habakkuk

17 I2n.

Daniel

17 i8on. 131 1311., i g 2 46n., 1 5 6 135 47, 1 8 4 105 46n. 106 180 10511., 106 1311., 1 3 1 , i g 2 12

7.10 7.19-28 12.1

2.4

147

53 Zechariah

Hosea 2.14-17 2.19f. 6.6 II.I

3-3ff. 12.10 13.9 14.8

,63 163 17 30

HO 13x1., 46n i2n. 192

Malachi Joel 2.12-14 2.28f. 2.28 2.32

NEW

17 1311., 4611., 68 1 3 1 , 192 92

3-1 3.2f. 4-1 4.5f. 4-5

i2n. 10, 12 12 i2n. i2n., 1 3

T E S T A M E N T

(Italics indicate some discussion of the passage) Matthew

2.15, 20 3-2 3.7-10 3-7 3-8

3.10-12 3.10 3.11 3.12 ä:Jk

Matthew

3on. 9 nn. 10, 227 9 10 9, 10 10, i5n., 1 4 , I8-2Z, 128, 227 8, 10 36

4-iff-

26i., 3oi.

4-3,6 4-17 4-23 7.22f. 9-35 10.10 11.4-6 11.10 11.11 12.18 12.28 13.27 13.30

30 9 9 85 9 128 26 12 25 27n. 26 73n. 25

}4

13.40-43 16.16 16.18 17.11 18.17 i9.4ff19.27 21.29 23-25f25.1 25.11 25.20, 22, 24 25.41,46 26 26.28 27-4 27.50 28.19

Mark i8-2t,

21 39«5 in. I2n. 5 in.

1.9-11 1.9 I.IO

12411. 87 73«164 163 73«73«21 196 i8n. 87 177 207

1.12f. 1.12 I.I4

1.15

9 i2n. 35 9. 8, 21,

23, 28 2.20 3.22-30 3.27 J.29 6.51 7-4 7-'9 7-2 if. 9.12 9.38-40 io.38f. 10.38 10.39 13.24-26 14

26L,

29i.,}4L

i28n. 35«26. }o, 35 4in. 25 26

I.2I,

Mark

1.1 1.2 1.4-8 1.4 1.8

25,

35n., 46, 128, 226, 227

i-14.

34 163 26 26, 30 15 34 2i3n., 227 164 121 i2n. 85 18. 227 ii,42n., 129 24 25 196

Index of Biblical References 14.36 15-37 i6.i5f. 16.16

4211. 177 59 1511., 207

Luke I

1.15 i.i6f. 1.17 1-35 1.43 i.76f. 1.76 1-77 2 2.10 2 . I I , 26 2.J2 2.40 2.49 2.52 3-7-9 3-7 3.8 3-9 3.10-14 3.i5f. 3.15-17 3.16 3-17 3.18-20 3.18 3.2lf. 3.21 3.22 3.23ff. 4-1 4.14 4.i8f. 4.18 5-5 5.8 5.20 6.IJ

7.i8f. 7-27 8.4J-48

John

Luke

Mark

45 24 9

9.20 9-54f10.20 I0.23f. II.2 II.13

11.39 12.1 if. i2.49f. 12.50

239

52 41 39. 26 33n. 33n-./i. 56n. 164

3.3-8 5-5 5-4 3.5-8 5-5

Jk

95.193.197. 221, 226 175, i84n., 191 191 180 168,175,7*^, 186, ism.,

204, 226 175.191.197 I 2 n . , 26 227 175.191 24, z8, 41, 69 13.8 7311. 153.175.191. 14.22 28 193.225 73"16.16 9 i9on. 3.9f25 17.20f. i2n., 28 3.11 196 26 18.13 9 193 3-13-15 18.14 43 43 175 3-13 19.16,18, 79 32 179 3.14-16 20 28 73n. 174, 175 3.14 2i.34f. 32 180 22.42 3-15 24 179 3.16-18 180 24, 28 24-47 15. 97 24.49 3.16, i8f. 179. 20311. 24 2, 47. 54. im. 3.20 i i o n . , i65n. 20 3-22-24 186, 188 10 9 3.22-26 20,99 9, 10 3.22 20 180 9 3.24 21, 227 iin. 95 3.25 2on., 99 1.12 44 3.26 95.193«163 1.14 10, g - 1 4 , I i 3.29 i9i. 19211. 21, 100, 128, i.i6f. 3.31-36 19, 20, 191 1.17 2911. 227 5-5% 196 1.25 3-52f. 179,19211. 8, 10 20, 2911., }2, 1.26 5-34 25 19 53. 198 19,129,186, 3.36 179. 180 1.29 2i{., ßßt 18411. 4 1.31-34 188 32,35«» , 21, 99 24, 41, 42, 69 1.31 4.2 176 186, 188 4.7-15 16, 4in., 69, 71 i.33f. 19, 129, 186, 4.10-14 180, / * / 95, 1840. 69 1-53 188 4.10 26 187 19311. 4.12-14 179,184,187, 28,41,42,69, If-2I, 2911., 188.189.192, 133 32, 128, 171, 4.14 225 52 176, 177, 184, 4.19-26 63n. 43 »•45 186, 188, 191, 4.23f. 187.192 97 227 2.I-I1 4.23 17411, 450. 2-4 179 180 4.24 2.6 175 41 21 179 4-25*. 2.25-2J i2n., 2511. 186 65 4,46 3.1-8 lOI 19011, II,

Ik

18, 129,

3.6 3-7 3.8

Index oJ üiblical References

240 Jobn 5.2-9 5-19 5.24 5-*5 5-34 5.38 5-39 5-43 5.46 6 6.21 6.27 6.29 6.31-35 6.52. 35 6.36, 40 6.45 6.47 6.51-56 6.51-58 6.51 6.56 6.57 6.59 6.62f. 6.63

iSit

18411. 179. 180, 198 i74n. 196 i96n.. 198 179 95 179 I75,i*iff.,i89 95 29n.. 33. 7 * ^ 18411. 179 1S4

18411. 184.

180. 18411. 193 i8}S.,

226

186 185 18511. i97n. 175. 184S. 95, 180, 184. 187. 19211., 198. 20311., 226 1840. 198 i84n. 17411. i97n. 173 19711.

8.42 8.43. 5if. 8.56 9-7 9.11 9-34 9.39-41 10.18 11.25 12.16 12.23f. 12.23 12.27 12.31 12.32 12.34 12.46 i2.47f. 12.48-50 12.48 13.1-16 13.1 13.3 1J.6 i3.iof.

13.10 13.20 13.27 i3.3if. 6.64 13.31 6.68 13.33 6.69 14.3 7.6.8 14.6 7.14. 28 14.16 7.30 14.17 7-35 14.18-23 i79i; 188 7-37f. 14.18-24 7.37-39 180,184.186, 14.20 187. 188 14.23 7.38f. 95. 173. 187. 14.24-26 225 14.26 180.187.189. 7.38 192 14.28 20. 21,46.60. 15.1-8 7-39 96.173.174. 15-3 175.179.180. 182.196.199 i5.4f. i97n. 8.2 15.4 173. 19711. 8.20 15.7 8.28 174, i97n. 15.26 8.3if.. 37 198

Jobn 15.27 16.5 16.7

i75n. 198 179 188

186 I97n. 76 196 18511. 173. 174 174 173. 174 174 1740. 174. 179 174 180 198 181 196, 198 186, 188 174 17511. 182 39. 179 188

95 182 174 173. 174 182 182 18511.. i92n. 177. 182 i8ii.,

196

175 95 182, 185, 196 182. 185 181 122.174.177, 197 175 185 39. 179. 181. 187 185 196 19611. 175«., 177. 181, 198, 202

182 175 175.177.181, 225 i6.8-ii 94 16.9. 14 202 16.16-24 175 16.23 122 16.27 17511. 16.28 175 17.1 173. 174 2030. 17-3 174 17.5 196 17.8 181. 198 17.14 198 17.17 19711. 18.20 177 19.30 777.180.186. 19-34 i87(., 202 19.35 187 176.177 20.1 176 20.16 i74,77(J^f.,i82 20.17 20.18 176 20.19-22 177 20.19 174.176 20.22 39. 43. 95. 773£F., 176, 177,178,180, 181,182.184, 193,196. 203. 226 176 20.25f. 20.27 I7i 176 20.28 20.29 176.17711. 20.31 180 21.19 174 21.23 182 Acts

1 1.2 1-3 1.4 1-5

45 45. 4^ 64

47 2, i8n.. 43, 44. 45. 46, 68,69.70. 71. 90. 100. 128. 129, 207. 227

Index of Biblical References Acts

1.6 1.8 I.I4

i.ijff.

1.15-26 1.15 1.16 I.24f. 1.24-26 1.24 2 2.1-4 2.1 2.4

2-5 2.15 2.17f. 2.17-21 2.17 2.18 2.19f. 2.21 2.29-33 2.31 2.33

2.36 2.38f. 2.38

2.39 2.4T-47

2.41 2.42 2.44

Acts

5on., 64 2. 2711., 45. 49. 54.68,69, 70, 71, 72. 87 3311., 53, i8on. 5on. 4ji-

2.47 3-4.22 5-4 3.6 3.18 3.19 3.25 3.26 4-4, 7 4.8

71 , 45.69 46 9n. 52n. 4.10 }SS., 45, 49, 4.12 92, 175 4.23-31 530. 4.24-30 40,53 , , 4-25 2. 54. 56, 61, 4.26 68,69,70,71, 4.27 90, 101, 4.29-31 lozn., 182, 4.31 225 49 4-32-37 40 5.1-10 56, 70, 16511. 5-3,9 8in., 92 5.14 .,<jr., 71,16511. 5.19 16511., 166 5-29 47 5-}i 330-. 47, 50, 5-32 74.75,92, 96 6.1 6.2 44 64 6.3 40,45,46,47, 6.5 50, 56. 70. 6.7 l o i , 16511., 6.8 166 7-17 29, 50, 64 7.5 if. 47, 92 7-55 47,50.54,56, 8.1-5 58,59,6in., 8.1 63,65,68,69, 8.4-13 70, 72, 80, 8.4 90S.., 93, 96, 8.5-8 97,ioo,i28n., 8.5-13 182 8.5-25 3311., 47, 92 ;of-, 57 50.59.63,91. 8.6-8 96, lOI 8.6 50 8.8 52, 63, 91 8.9-11

241

Acts

9611. 60 71 96 64 15, i»". 91. 97 47 9611. 97 54, 6on., 69, 70, 71 97. 122 9611. 33n. 71 46, 69 64 42. 133 51, 54.6on., 69. 70. 225 51 13 51 6511. 71 6on. 15,9611., 97 6on., 70, 90 45 71 45, 71 71, 120 6on., 84 71 47 77 71 67 45 55 91 66 57 ;;ff., 92, 99, 100, l o i , 205, 207 57. 64 64, 65, 91 64 64, 66

8.iof.

8.10 8.11 8.12f. 8.12 8.13 8.14-17 8.14 8.15-17 8.15-20 8.15 8.i6f. 8.16 8.i7f. 8.17-19 8.17 8.18-24 8.18 8.19 8.20 8.21 8.22 8.25 8.24 8.25 8.26-39 8.26 8.37f. 8.38 8.39 9.1-8 9.1-19 9-3-9 9-5 9.9 9.10-19 9.i3f. 9.14 9.i7f. 9.17 9.18 9.19 9.21 9.22 9.25

64 6311., 64 91 55,63, i^/f.. 96 55. ^4,(>(>

60,66 55. 63, 66 61, 91 33n., 178 68 56, 69. 70 90 55.56.58. 70. 16511. 67 io2n. 56,60, 69, 70, 7811., lOI 66 56, 60, 70 56, 69, 70 65,69 65 66 65 66 61 /*.6i 61 96 59 34, 88n., 93 73n. 61, Ziff., 92 73". 51,73 75,770. j8i.

74 74 72, 78n., 90, 134 54,69, 70,71, 73, 74, 76, 7811. 7811. 84 74 64 84

*42

InOex oJ tuuitcal

Atts

9.26, 30 9.31 9-35 9.38 9.40 9.42 lO-II

10.2 10.4 10.15 10.28 10.3} io.34f. IO-34-43

10.34 10.35 10.36 10.37 10.38 io.43f.

10.43-48 10.43 10.44-46 10.44-48 10.44 io.45f.

10.45 io.46f.

10.47 10.48 ii.iff.

11.1 11.9 ii.i4f.

11.14-18 11.14 II.15

ii.i6f.

11.16 ii.i7f.

74 225 97 84 71 52. 93. 97 51,61, 90 79 73n.. 74, 79 79, 8on., 164 74 87 74 80 71 79 49 25 23, 24, 28, 32, 33,61.69,70, 133 58, 80 79S., 92 15. 82. 97. 122 i02n.. 225 590., 61. 90. 94 69. 70. 80. 101. 16511. 56 56. 69, 70. 16511. 94 52,69, 70.71, 8211.. 227 59, 101 61, 68 40, 91 79, 8on,, 164 58. 80 79S; 92, 100 79, 96n. 40. /2, 56, 69, 70. 71. 80, 82n.. 16511. 226 i8n..54n.,69. 70. 90.100. 128. 207, 227 8 in.

Acts 11.17

Kjejerences

72,56,58,60, 66,69,70,71, 80, 82, 96, 101 15.79.81, 11.18 960. 11.19-21 61 11.19-24 59. 61 11.21 91. 93. 97 61. 6711. 11.22 11.23 68 11.24 71, 96n., 120 11.28 46 I3.I-3 61, 167 13.2 46 54, 69. 70. 71 13-9 6511. 13.10 65n. 13.12 47 13.23 i3.24f. 25 13.32 47 13.33 29 15. 97 13.38 13-47 27n. 13.48 97 13.52 69. 70. 225 14.1 97 82 i5-7f. 79S. 15-7-9 90 15.7-11 79. 82 15-7 71, 8on., Sii. 15.8f. 52, 66n., 69. 15.8 70. 82n. 15.9 79. 80. 82. 96.121,122. 164 84 15.10 i5.i4fF. 90 15.14 79.82 15.36-40 45 60 i5-39f60 15.41 60 16.1, 3 26, 95 16.7 96 i6.i4f. 64, 91, 9611. 16.14 59 16.15 71 16.18 73«16.30 96 16.31-33

Acts 16.31 16.35 16.34 17-3 17.11 17.12 17.15 17-34 18.5 18.6 18.7 18.8 18.11 18.24fr. 18.24-28 18.25 19 i9.iff.

19.1-7 19.1 I9.2f. 19.2

J2. 59. 72.91, 92,97 59 6511.. 93 64 91 97 60 93. 97 60 71 60 59. 65«., 96 60 gSi.

61. 92, 101 90 58, 66 68 'iff-. 92, 99. 101, 205, 207 84 96,102

46.60,69. 70. 83, Ui., 96 87 19.3 911. 19.4 *7f-. 9°. 93 i9-5f19.6 56,70,7811., 87,101.165, 225 19.8 64 19.13-15 97 19.13-16 85 19.22 60 19.30 84 20.1 84 20.21 91 20.25 64 zo.^o 84 21.4 46 21.II 71 21.16 84 22.5 22.6-16 74 7iff. 22.8 73 22.9 75 22.10 73. 74 22.11 75 22.13 73.74 22.14f. 75.76

maex

oj oipiicat

22.l6

J3n-.74.78n-. 96, 97. 9^ 22.21 47n. 65 24.14 47 26.6 26.12-18 7iff26.15-18 45 n. 73 26.15 26.16-18 61 26.16 76 26.18 15, 6511., 76, 91, 97 26.20 91 26.23 64,77 26.27 65 27.3 87 28.21 74 28.23 64 28.27 77 28.31 64 Romans

6on., 116 14411. 119 142 146 i29f., 1461., 151, 156. 212n. 167

3.24 4-11 134. 156 4-13. 16, 20 47 5-5 10511., 130, 5.12-21 132, / i ? , 147. 151, 225 5.14 14011. 6-8 142 6.1-11 139 6.1-14 103, 170 6.1 ii9&., 155 6.2-6 139 6.2-4 146 6.2 i39f. 6.}f. 118, 128, I40i., 144 6.3-6 140 6.3-10 140 6-3 112,140,141,

6.4

i44n., 227 75, 77n-, 97,

6.5-7 6.5

13°. 139. HJ. 14^., 151. 157,170,200, 227 14J 131, 140,

104, I 2 8 n . ,

6.6 6.8-10 6.8 6.9-11 6.11 6.13-20 6.13 6.15-7.6 6.17 7-8 7 7.1-4 7.2-4 7.4-6 7-4 7.6 7.24 8 8.1-16 8.1-27 8.2 8.3f. 8-3 8.4 8.5-6 8.5-8 8.5 8.6 8.9f. 8.9-11 8.9

141S.

140, 142, 14411., 153 HJ 143, 170 144 144 123 144 146 123 147 U7 146 163 I4(!{. 146 97. 147. i j i . 156,187 153 123,144.146, 147 225 147«.,

151

107.132,/^*, 150, 156 14S

142 148 156 147 148 147, 148, 161 95.1^3. 226 148 47.55.86, 88n., 9;, 107, I I I , 11511.,

8.11 8.12f. 8.13 8.14-16 8.14-17 8.14 8.15f. 8.15-17 8.15

8.17 8.23 8.29 9.8 10.3 10.8 lo.gf.

10.9-17 10.9 10.10 10.13, 14 io.i6f. 10.16 10.17

150,

143.^^«?. 150. 156 147 ii5n., 132, 147.150,156. 158 113 i49£.

4in.,ii3,i49 24, " J 152, 167 72, 99, " 6 . 132,149,150, 15211., 167, 178 148,150,167 zjo I42n., 150

47 i44n. 1641. ifo,

162, 2i7n. 14511., ijoL 49f-, 150, i64i.

150 74,

ijoi.

109 6on. l i g n . , 164,

11.10 ii.i7ff. 11.25 12.II 13.14 14.17 15.13 15-15 15.16 I5.i8f.

15.18 15.19 16.26

165 77 131, i4in. 14411. 88 IIO, 13211. 123, 152 152 116 164 61 11911. 211

6on.

I Corintbians

1.4-9 170 107,14S, 149, 1.4 150, 156, 161 1.5-7

I4S{.,

8.10

243

Romans

Romans

Atts

1-5 1.13 1.16 1.23 2.25 2.28f.

ss^ejerences

132, 135 116, 117 116 i'^^;

Index

244

oj litblical

/ Corinfbiotts

/ Corinthitms

i.6f.

ii.i

1.6 1.8

1-9 1.10-17 I.IO

1.12 1.13-15 1.13-17 1.13 1.14-17 1.17 1.21 2.4f.

1170. 132 11711., 13211. 117,118 IJ7S., IIS

// Corintbians

24 11.24-26 144 12.1 1440. 12.3 50,73,120,

138

12.4-6 12.7 12.8-10 12.8 I2.I2f. 12.13

"7 "7 130 //7f. 103 jiSS.,

K.ejerenees

145

11911. 116,11911., 132 2.4 167, 222 2.10-3.4 120 2.12 120,132,178 3.2, 6-8 131 3.10 116 3.i6f. 164 3.23 11711. 119,167 4.15 I2lf. 5-4 132, 135, 167 6.9-11 I20ß., 123, 6.11 130,138,164, 222, 226 6.14-20 läßf., 138 6.15 123 6.17-19 132 6.17 I2ß{., 148, 163 6.i9f. 124 6.19 118, 123, 14411. 118 6.20 118 7.23 212n. 7.34 119 9.if. 126 9.8-10 9.19, 22 119 9.24-27 125 9.24 1270. 10.1-13 12711. 10.1-5 I24S. lO.I 125.127. 1440. 112,129,130, 138, 227 125 10.4,6

148 225 2 116 1 2 ; , 161 180., 540., 72,103,111, 112,122,123, 127&.,

12.17 13 14 I4.24f. IJ.lf.

I5.7f.

15.8 15.18 15.29 1545 16.1

129,

130,132,133, 138, 140, 1410., 164, 225, 226, 227 109 132 116 94. "9ß104,1190. 450. 92 87 103, 1040., 119 95. 148, 156 128

3.7-18 3.8f. 3.8

185,187,225, 226 126 7i/f.,

136,

152 3-9 3.14 3.16-4.6 3.i6f. J.16

3.i7f. 3-17 3.18 4.4-6 4.4 4.6 4.7-5.10 4.13 4.14 5.4f. 5.l4f. 5-17 6.6 6.9 7.1 11.2 13.14

125, 126, 136 152 "3^, 137 136 2220. 125, 132. 136 132,134.150, 152 76, II90., 2100. 134 134 150 120 1330. 107 1050., 223 142 142, 221 560. 1440. 164 . 163 50, 116

II Carinthians

1.8 1.20 I.2lf. I.2I

1.22 2.11 2.14-17 3 3-3 3.6f. 3.6-8 3.6

1440. 1330. 104, 137, 138, 226 99, I I I , 116, 156 1050., 1330. 1440. 1190.

Galatians

/i/ff., 138,

3.I-I4

106, 107 107, 1120. 106, 142 107,111,115, 149 122, 135

146 47. 48,107, 136.137. 185

3-1-5

joyä., 123,

1.13 1.22 2.16-21 2.l6 2.19f. 2.19 2.20

3.2f. 3.2-5 3.2

47. 48, 53 1 0 7 , 0 ; , 136,

137, 1460., 156,161,167,

3-3 J-4

77 1440. io6i.

132, 133 72, 80, 149 108, 109, 1 1 3 60, 96,107, 108, 1 1 3 , 1190., 159 1 1 3 , 147, 226 113

inaex oj nwucat Galatians

3-5

107. 109, ii9n., 132,

171 3.8f. 3.8 5.11-14 3-13 3.14-22 3.14 3.16 3.18 3.21 3.26f. 3-27 3.29 4-5 4.1-7 4.2 4.3f. 4-3 4.4 4-5-7 4-5 4.6f. 4.6

4-7 4-9 4.19 4-21-31 4-25 4.27-29 4.28f. 4-29 5.2-4 5-5 5-7 5.16-18 5.16-24 5.18 5.22f. 5.22

isjtjmnces

Galatians

109 108 126 107 118 108 47. 72,

5-24f5-24 5-25 6.8 6.i4f. 6.15

245

Pbilippians

1.6 107, 142 107,115,156, 225 107 142 H O , 112

Ephesians I O T S . ,

113.123,132. 1.3-14 159 1.3.4.6.7 159 159. 167 1-9 87, 159 108 I.IO 108,167 159. 167 108. 136, 156 I . I I 1.12 159 III, 1.13f1.152. ^;'ff., 112 167,170, 226 109,111,112, 103,133,156, 128,131,132, I . I 3 158.159 140, 227 1.14 161 108, H O , I I I 160 136 I.l7ff. 152 114,115 I.I7 13211. ii2n. 1.18 134.161, 114 2ion. ii2n. 1.19 160 "5 1.20 167 2.4-6 155, i6oi. ii2n., 118 2.5,8,18 160,161 111, Jjß., 116 3-2 152, 167 3-3-5 24. 95. 99. 3.8 1 1 1 , 1 1 3 , 1 1 4 , 3.12 160 115,132,150, 4.1-6 i6ii. 225 161 4-3 108, 114 163 4-4 ii2n. 170, 227 4-5 132, 150 116 4-7 126 110 4.24 125 133, 156, 4.30 ii2n. ijSS., 160, 211 108, I I I S.18 54, 112, 167 5.20 122 147 5.25-27 162S., 170 120, 123 162, 163 5.25 12711. ii9n., 163, 5.26 147. 225 164, 165, 168 107, 132 162, 163 5.27 4in. 11911., 164, 6.17 152 165 132, 223

\\l

I.I9

2.1 2.6-11 2.7 2.10f. 2.10 3.3 3.10 3-21

108 95. 50,116, 161 44«142 122 122 156 14211. IJO

Colossians i.5f.

1-9-14 1-9 1.12 1.13 2.6 2.8-1 j 2.9-12 2.10 2.1 i f . 2.11-13 2.11 2.12

2.13 2.20-3.14 2.20 3-1 3-3 3-4 3-5-17 3-5 3-9f3.10 3.12

11911. 152 152 6511., 77 ifii.,

158

65«-. 9f 155 155 155 14611., ///ff.. 170 15511. ///f.,

200

7% na., 130, 145, 1530., U4S.. 15711-. 160,170, 207, 227 1/6, 160 158, 170 155.158 158, 170 149 158. 169 158 158 I I O , 158 ij8

I Thessahnians i.5f.

1.5-9 1-5 1.6-9 1.6 I.IO

2.12 2.13

116, 225 10;, 133 11911., 132 132 24, 105, 152 10511. 10511. 10;, 109,1190.

Index oJ iüblical Kejerenees

Z46 4.7f.

loji.,

4.8

105.152,156, / / / , 185 185 14411. j6n.

4-9 4-iJ

5-19

164

3-7-15 4.14 5.8f. 6.if.

6.1-6 6.1 6.2

U Tbessalonians

1.8 2.8 2.13f. 2.13 2.17 3-1 3.6

6on. 13 122, 123 120,132.164, 22lf. 13211. 11911. 122 144«. 167 123 167

167

Iis

165

II Timothy

1.6 1-7 1.10 2.9 2.1 if. 2.21

167

10511., 167 2ion. iign.

1691 i68n.

Titus

2.14 3-5f.

164, i68n. 130, i68i., 170

3-5-7 3-5

72,16jS., 226

3.6f. 3.6 3-7 Hebrews

1-3 2.4 2.10

6.4f.

loS,

/ Timothy

1.13 1.18 3.16 4.14 5.22 6.12f. 6.13

I Peter

Hebrevs

/ Tbtssalotiiatts

166, 170, 19011., 221 123, 226 166, 225 167

6.4 6.6 7-19.25 7.27 8.1310.10 9-8 9.9-14 9.10 9.12-14 9-13f9.13 9.14 10.1-4 10.1 10.11-22 10.15-18 10.19-22 10.19 10,22 10,23 10,29 10,32 11,6 12,2 12,15-17 12,18 12,22, 24 13,9 13,12, 20

211 165 Ji 206S., 20fS.

2loi.

207, 208 205,207.212, 21311.. 223. 227 47. 206, 20SS., 211. 21311.. 223 76. 134. 187. 210. 226 211 213 87 212 211 1711. 213. 227 213 212 213 121 1711. 213 214 211 213 213 2iia., 223, 227 165 21 of., 213 76, 210 213 44n, 65 213 213 13211, 213

James

1.18 220n. 61, 209, 211, 1.21 223 4-5 4-8 24

1.2 1-3 1.12 1.22

222,

221. 223 221

223

220{., 222n..

223 164. 190. 197, 221, 222, 223 2.24 220 2.25 221 3.18-4.6 21 5n. 3.18 215 3.I9-2I 213 3.19 215 3.2of. 270. 145. ^//ff.. 3.21 220, 221, 223, 227 3.22 215 4.13 222 4.14 222, 223 II Peter

1-9 2.15

220n. 65n.

I John

1.1-3 1-7 1.8 i.9f. 2-4 2.5 2.6 2-7 2.8 2.12 2.14

2,23 2.24 2.27

22}

218.

1.23

164,197,221, 223 164, 221, 223 220

220,

3-2 3-3

176 201,202.213, 220 i96n. 22on. 19611, 198 24 198, 200 19611. 122 19611,, 198, 204 99. 134. 19/R., 198, 199, 226 19911, 19611,, 197, 200, 204 99. 154, 19 ;S., 19611., 197,199,200, 203, 204, 226 150 220

Index of Biblical References IJobn

IJobn 5-9 J.II J.18

).»} J.«4 4-*

4-3 4.4 4.10 4.« 4.13 f^J 4.16

M

/3»/ff.. 198. 226 200 19211. i99n. 196, 197, 203 197. 1990-. 20} 20311. 198. 20}n., 204 20311. 196 196, 197, 203 196 196, 19911. 199, 202 204 198, 204

OTHER

5-5 5.6f. 5.6-8 5.6-12 5.6 5.7f. 5-7 5.8 5-9 , 5.iof. 5.10 5.1 If. 5.11 5.12 5-13

19911., 202, 204 202 202, 226

n John 2 3 4 6

197.198,200, 201, 202, 203, 204 201, 202, 203 201, 202, 204 200, 202, 204 196, 20^. 204 1960., 199, 202n.,20/, 204 203 198 20J 199

IT Esdras I4.22ff. 2100.

Sibylline Oracles 1 1 1 5 3 - 5 4 120.

Wisdom 15.11 180

IIBaruch 24-29 I30.

Jubilees 1.2} 192 6.17-21 48 9.15 120. 15.1-24 48 }6.I0 120. / Enoch 10.6 i2n. 10.12f. 120. 54-6 120. 67.1} 120. 90.13-27 i}n. 90.24-27 120. 104.1 5} 108-3 53 Testament of Judah 24.3 192

4 Ezra 7.36-38 i3.iof.

19611 1920 196 200

195, 200S.

Jude

120. 120.

Psalms of Solomon I5.6f. 120. Qumran Documents iQS 2 48 iQS }.3-9 16, 17 iQS 3.4-9 2120. iQS 3.7-9 9 iQS 4-2 134 iQS 4.2of. 192 iQS 4-2022 192 iQS 4.21 9, 10 iQH 3.29 120. iQH 5.16 120. iQH6.i8f. 120. iQH 7.6 9

120

19 Reve/afion 1-5 3.20 7-3 7-14 19.9 21.2 22.17

JEWISH A N D EARLY CHRISTIAN

Ecclesiasticus 34.25 168

247

21} 95 1}} 21} 165 165 165 WRITINGS

Qumran Documents iQH 12.1lf. I}4 iQH 16.129 iQH 17.269 frag. 2.9 9 frag. 2.1} 9 Josephus - Antiquities 18.85-89 640. 18.117 i6n., 2120. Philo

De Plantatione 162 2120. Ignatius

Ephesians 1.1 201 5.2 1850., 201 7.2 201 17.1 196 20.2

201

Magnesians 1.2 201 13.2 201

248

Index of Biblical References

Trallians 8.1

18511.

Romans 7.2f.

i85n.

Smyrfieans

Pbiladelpbiims Inscrp. 201 4 201 5.1 185«., 201

2 3.1, 2 6.1 7.1 12.2 I.I,

201 201 201 201 201

HcrmM - Similitude 9.24.2 Iion. Odes of Solomon II.1-3 i56f. Clement of Alexandria

Polycarp 5.2 201

Paedagogus II.8 i96f

Baptism In The Holy Spirit

Read more

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Read more

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Read more

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Read more

The Holy Spirit In You

Read more

The Holy Spirit

Read more

The Holy Spirit

Read more

Holy Spirit: Unlocking the Power of the Holy Spirit

Read more

The Baptism and Gifts of the Spirit

Read more

Lead Me Holy Spirit

Read more

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Read more

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Read more

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Read more

Lead Me Holy Spirit

Read more

Holy Spirit In You (Good Copy)

Read more

The Mystery of the Holy Spirit

Read more

The New You And The Holy Spirit

Read more

UNDERSTANDING YOUR BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT & FIRE LESSON 4

Read more

God's Will Is The Holy Spirit

Read more

Embraced by the Holy Spirit: An Experience in the Supernatural

Read more

Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Re-Examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today: A ... Spirit in Relation to Pentecostalism Today

Read more

The Indwelling Spirit: The Work of the Holy Spirit in the Life of the Believer

Read more

The Beginner's Guide to Receiving the Holy Spirit

Read more

The Beginner's Guide to Receiving the Holy Spirit

Read more

The Kiss of God: 27 Lessons on the Holy Spirit

Read more

The Beginner's Guide to Receiving the Holy Spirit

Read more

Baptism by Fire

Read more

The Spirit of God Transforming Life: The Reformation and Theology of the Holy Spirit

Read more

Baptized in the Spirit

Read more

Baptized in the Spirit

Read more

Recommend Documents

Baptism In The Holy Spirit

BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT DEREK PRINCE Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quo...

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit (The Explaining Series)

Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit Explaining Baptism with the Holy Spirit Jack Hayford Sovereign World Sover...

The Holy Spirit In You

DEREK PRINCE Scripture quotations marked (NAS) are from the New American Standard Bible, © 1960, 1962, 1968, 1971, 19...

The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN INSIGHTS The series includes important new works as well as reissues of texts ...

The Holy Spirit

translated by REGINALD H. and ILSE FULLER FORTRESS PRESS Philadelphia This book is a translation of Heiliger Geist, ...

Holy Spirit: Unlocking the Power of the Holy Spirit

The Baptism and Gifts of the Spirit

The Baptism and Gifts of the Spirit This exposition of Scripture dares you to be restless for a deeper encounter with G...

Lead Me Holy Spirit

HARVEST HOUSE PUB LISHERS EUGENE, OREGON Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture verses are taken from the New King J...