Baptism in the Holy Spirit

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 4380 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 Uteratunêitung 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


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


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' (Tê 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.

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'êaöai (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


•would probably understand this implication since ßavrit,eaQai (some times even jSawTt'êiv) 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 ) .


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 irvevâ 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


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 .


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? äêoiv 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 aêmv 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


( 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 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


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.î 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


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 . ô),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 xpôrös 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 Zlû»> 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 irapaXaußaiûi 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


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).


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 eî.; 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


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 rrvevâTos. 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.


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) ßanTiêadoLi 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) tKêeiv 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 - xpêiv 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


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 KOfîaf 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


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. ßaTTTiêadai 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. ô. 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 . dSeAô'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 oBeXôi— '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 dSeAô'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


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 lô 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.î 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


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


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 ôrqv.'^ 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 êrdvoia 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


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


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.


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.


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^êtas 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, imurpeêiv and mcreveiv. Each describes the act from a different angle: neravoelv always has the sense of turrdng away from (OTTO) sin; emarpeêiv 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 . pxTavTi 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 Korintberô (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


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^ 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 ireâynafievovs 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 î.; 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


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


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-lêaBai, 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-iêw 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/XÛTOS 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


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 59)'

144


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 äyroô» 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/xJîfw/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-ôerai. 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


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


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^ 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 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


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


( 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 confirmationô 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 . awrfâptv 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 awKaOiêv 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 ( 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


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 immeâtelj 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^î) 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. Kurê 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


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 dyidêiv c a n o t d y hc referred t o a spiritual Opera tion. I n P a u l dyidêiv 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


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.î '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


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 ßaTniêaßai 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 8of9rjv(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 iîwfvoev 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


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


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 eVeûaijo-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 iî 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 ätxâlmvTa 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


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€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


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 xPâfia 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; ^ öAôo: 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'' 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 yeyevvrâdai 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, 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& atârt (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 (exî) 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


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


call in v v . 4f. and to argue that while jxjiTuxBivras refef s to baptism,^ the jLteTo'xoii? yeinjÖevras TTVevîaros 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


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 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.


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


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.


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«/ 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. zîf. 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 . , /

Baptism in the Holy Spirit

Baptism In The Holy Spirit

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)

The Holy Spirit In You

The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit

Holy Spirit: Unlocking the Power of the Holy Spirit

The Baptism and Gifts of the Spirit

Lead Me Holy Spirit

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Your Power In The Holy Spirit

Lead Me Holy Spirit

Holy Spirit In You (Good Copy)

The Mystery of the Holy Spirit

The New You And The Holy Spirit

UNDERSTANDING YOUR BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT & FIRE LESSON 4

God's Will Is The Holy Spirit

Embraced by the Holy Spirit: An Experience in the Supernatural