Sectarian Baptism: A Comparison of Luke and Paul |
||||
LUKE'S
PAUL AND THE EPHESIANS
Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. And he said to them, "Did you receive the Qodesh Spirit when you believed?" And they said, "No, we have never even heard that there is a Qodesh Spirit." And he said, "Into what then were you dunked?" They said, "Into John's dunking." Paul said, "John dunked with the dunking of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Yahshua."
On
hearing this, they were dunked in the name of the Sovereign Yahshua. And when
Paul had laid hands upon them, the Qodesh Spirit came on them; and they
spoke with tongues and prophesied. (Acts 19:1-6)
The
feature of this passage that most interests me is that Luke assigns Paul
the role of protagonist. In doing so, Luke is to some extent describing
Paul's theology and methodology in baptism(s). I am interested in
comparing Luke's account of Paul's baptizing the Ephesians in Acts 19 (and
other Lukan passages) with those in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline letters
for the purpose of investigating whether Paul
differentiates between water baptism and Spirit baptism and whether
baptism was deemed necessary for entrance into the community of believers.
Investigation of
Acts 19:1-6
helps lay the groundwork for the
remainder of the essay.
Luke
may have been one of Paul's traveling companions. Evidence pointing to the
possibility is found in Acts 16, 20, 21, and 27, specifically in passages
such as Acts 27:1 that reads, "when it was decided that we should
sail for Italy...". Luke interposes himself into the narrative.
Luke is mentioned in some Pauline Epistles including II Corinthians
(subscript), Philemon 24 (where he is described as a "fellow
laborer"), and Romans 16:21. The Deutero-Paulines that include Luke are
Colossians 4:14 and II Timothy 4:11.
Deutero-Paulines letters: those which may have been written under Paul's name by his disciples.
Perrin
and Duling pointed out several possible inconsistencies between
Luke's account of Paul's life in their reconstruction of Paul's letters.
(I am afraid this type of thinking has led some to view Acts too
critically, perhaps to the extent of discounting from it even a vestige of
historicity.) If Luke and Paul were indeed fellow laborers as Biblical
evidence suggests, I submit that Luke must have been familiar with Paul's
baptism philosophy, perhaps even a witness to his method of baptizing. Therefore, we would expect Luke's accounts of the
baptismal practices of his Hellenistic affiliates to demonstrate a
theology and practice similar to Paul's understanding of
"correct" baptism as set forth in his letters. Likewise, we
might expect Paul's letters to accurately reflect the historic Lukan
accounts of baptism.
Several
of the Pauline passages regarding baptism are cryptic, although they imply
that baptism was not only practiced, but was the means by which one would
enter the community of believers. But since "Messiah did not send
[Paul] to baptize but to preach the evangel" (I Corinthians 1:17),
baptism passages are always subordinate to Paul's preaching of the evangel
message. This creates a problem in reconciling the two authors, as we do
not have
a physical description of baptism in Paul's letters (to my knowledge).
Neither do we have cut-and-dried theology connected with Luke's accounts.
My
task then is to try to discover similarities between the two accounts
based on Luke's account of Paul baptizing in Acts 19 (and other Acts
passages) and Pauline and Deutero-Pauline baptism passages. In order to
begin, a preliminary analysis must be made of this text in order to set up
a test by which we might compare.
There are several
important points in the passage above. Three baptisms are described:
John's (the Baptist) water baptism, water baptism in the name of the
Sovereign Yahshua, and baptism in (receiving) the Qodesh Spirit (Acts 1:5).
Two spiritual manifestations are noted by Luke: tongues and prophecy. (In
other Acts passages, "evidences" include extolling the Almighty
-
boldness, praise, etc.)
John's
baptism is replaced by rebaptism in Yahshua's name. This tells us Luke
feels baptism in Yahshua's name is superior to John's baptism. That
Luke holds the essentiality of water baptism in Yahshua's name for
becoming a part of the sectarian community (Acts 28:22) is found in Acts 10:44-48 when
the Qodesh Spirit is "poured out" on the Gentiles (to the
amazement of the Jews), and Peter asks rhetorically, "Can anyone forbid
water for baptizing these people...?"
The
baptism of the Qodesh Spirit in Acts is consistently a separate occurrence
from water baptism. In this case particular, Paul administers Spirit baptism by
laying his hands on the disciples. In other, similar instances, the Qodesh
Spirit is "poured out" or "falls." So Luke has Paul
officiating a double baptism: he baptizes in water and Heaven baptizes in
spirit.
In
analyzing the following texts of Paul and Deutero-Paul, I will look
specifically for instances where baptism is proclaimed to be essential to
entrance into the community of believers, where baptism is separated into
two or three baptisms as described above, and where the effects or
manifestations of baptism(s) are enumerated.
PAUL TO THE GALATIANS
So that the
law was our custodian until Messiah came, that we might be justified by
faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian;
for in Messiah Yahshua you are all sons of the Almighty, through faith. For as many of
you as were baptized into Messiah have put on Messiah. There is neither
Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male
nor female; for you are all one in Messiah Yahshua. (Galatians 3:24-28)
The
Galatians were sectarians in the cities Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium,
Lystra, Derbe, and perhaps others. Paul had visited Galatia at least twice
previously (Acts 13, 14, 16). His letter was written from Corinth in
around 50 or 51 C.E. (Eller, pp. 325-6) for the purpose of addressing the
error of the Judaizers: that sectarians ought to obey the law of Moses in
addition to accepting Yahshua as Messiah. In it Paul repudiates authorities,
institutions, customs, and laws that would interfere with one's direct
access to the Almighty. Essential to justification by faith alone is the necessity
that all humankind "baptized into Messiah" be equal in Messiah and
in the sectarian community. There is not to be distinction on the basis of
race, social status, or sex within the framework of the community of those
who have "put on Messiah" through baptism.
That water
baptism in the name of Yahshua is Luke's initiation into the sectarian
community is found throughout Acts, one such passage is Acts 2:38 where
Peter answers the Jews' question of "Brethren, what shall we
do?" with
Repent and
be baptized every one of you in the name of Yahshua Messiah for the
forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Qodesh
Spirit.
The essentiality of baptism and equality and of the
baptized was affirmed in Luke two ways. First, by the Jerusalem Council in
Acts 15 where the "apostles and elders with the whole church"
(vs. 22) decided on the matter at the instigation of Paul and Barnabas,
then sent a letter to the Gentiles at Antioch via Judas and Silas
affirming Paul's doctrine of justification by faith, and the extension of
that justification to the Gentiles (see also Acts 10:9-16,47). Secondly,
Luke extends the ritual of baptism from the Jews (Acts 2:39-41) to women
and Samaritans (8:5-17) to the maimed Ethiopian (8:34-38), finally to the
Gentiles (10:44-48, 19:1-6) so systematically that it must have been
planned as a device for convincing Jewish sectarians and converting
Gentiles.
Luke and
Paul have demonstrated in the passages outlined that baptism is the ritual
for initiation into the body of Messiah, that it, through faith, is a means
of putting on Messiah, that there are no racial, sexual, or social
restrictions or prerequisites for entrance into the community of
believers, and that no deference is to be shown a believer on these bases.
PAUL TO THE ROMANS
How can we who died to
sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been
baptized into Messiah Yahshua were baptized into
his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so
that as Messiah was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we
too might walk in newness of life.... [Y]ou also must consider
yourselves dead to sin and alive to the Almighty in Messiah Yahshua. (Romans 6:2b-4,11)
The Epistle
to the Romans has been called "the first great work of sectarian
theology" (Dodd). It was written around 56 or 59 C.E. as an
introductory letter to sectarians of Rome, from whence Paul thought he
might set up his base of operations for further missionary adventures in
the West (Miller, p. 622). Miller reports Tacitus as describing the church
at Rome as an "immense multitude" (c. 64 C.E.), which may have been
established through the evangelism of Jewish converts who had taken part
in the sectarian revival at Jerusalem described in Acts 2. Paul proclaims
to the Roman believers that they have died to sin; the process, which
facilitated this death, was baptism. He uses the word "burial"
to describe the immersion process as more than a symbol, for he says that
"we were buried with [Yahshua]." The word "baptism" is
actually used twice, for Paul also refers to baptism in Messiah, which I
might compare to Luke's baptism in Yahshua's name. Paul need not explain it
in detail to an established Roman church, as baptism was a regular
practice. Paul may be describing in passing a dual baptism here: baptism
of burial and baptism in Spirit as "newness of life."
"If we have been united in a death like his, we
shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection." (vs. 5). What
we can surmise for sure from the passage is that Paul considered baptism
in the name of Yahshua to be burial with Messiah,
for
the purpose of rising up with a fresh life perspective: "dead to
sin" but "alive to the Almighty."
If you
confess with your lips that Yahshua is Lord and believe in your heart that
the Almighty raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (Romans 10:9)
In Acts 22,
Luke has Paul describing his conversion experience. Paul is struck blind,
and is led to Ananias' house for recovery. He is miraculously healed, and
Ananias advises him thus: "Why now do you wait? Rise and be baptized,
and wash away your sins, calling on his name" (Acts 22:16).
Paul gives
the Romans a formula for salvation that includes "calling on his
name" in the passage from Romans above. Furthermore, Romans 10:13
says that "every one who calls upon the name of the Lord will be
saved." In verse 12 he calls the Romans to equality through this
confession: "For there is no distinction between Jew and
Greek...."
This Romans
passage must be compared with the passage of Galatians 3:28 since the
wording is very similar, especially in equating Jews and Greeks. If Paul
is consistent, since the Galatians passage clearly refers to baptism, then
this formula in Romans is doing the same thing. Therefore, Luke and Paul
similarly include the possibility of a confession of faith sometime in the
course of baptism.
Another
interesting feature of the passage is the direct manner in which Paul has
set two conditions for salvation: confession first, then belief in the
resurrection of Yahshua. I have speculated the confession being part of the
ritual of baptism, but it is not actually mentioned at all although this
confession is also connected to another "distinction between Jew and
Greek" passage in verse 12 (as in Galatians 3:28).
PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS
And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were
sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Yahshua Messiah and in
the Spirit of our the Almighty. (I Corinthians 6:11)
Corinth was
a notoriously dissolute city. In our Corinthian letters, Paul attempts to
illuminate moral failures and excesses (party quarrels, incestuous
relations, disputes before the secular courts of law, etc.), then
prescribe rules for their correction. The text gives us a very clear
picture of the routine of one established first century church.
In this
passage from I Corinthians 6, Paul has described the former condition of
some of the local sectarians: they have been immoral, idolaters,
adulterers, perverts, thieves, greedy, and drunken. Yet, these have become
"new creatures" (II Corinthians 5:17) through
"washing." Though "baptisma" has not been used here
(in favor of "apolouo"), the word refers to baptism. I believe
Paul used "washed" in this passage to refer to baptism as a
device to "draw a line between the unwashed world and the washed
sectarian" (Meeks, p. 154), that line being a supernatural occurrence
evidenced by proper moral behavior.
The
sectarian is washed, sanctified, and justified how? By two means: in the
name of Yahshua and in the Spirit of the Almighty. Paul is certainly referring to the
application of the name in immersion in water and the infilling of the
Qodesh Spirit, two distinct yet related works. Paul was not simply using
descriptive rhetoric here, but detailing what the Corinthians already
knew: that water baptism was accomplished in the name of Yahshua with Spirit
baptism following. If this is the case, it offers some evidence for
correlating Luke's baptism narratives and Paul's baptism theology.
For just as
the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body,
though many, are one body, so it is with Messiah. For by one Spirit we were
all baptized into one body - Jews or Greeks, slaves or free - and all were
made to drink of one Spirit. (I Corinthians 12:12,13)
Spirit
accomplishes “Spirit baptism”, with the result being the synthesis of
all sectarians into one body with a single intention. This baptism gave
sectarians the ability to be in "one accord" throughout Acts:
for prayer (1:14, 4:24), purpose (1:6), and decision making (15:25) among
other things. It also gave them power (Acts 1:8) to be distinct
"members," each having a personal responsibility and ministry to
edify the body.
Paul once
again reminds the party-spirited Corinthians of the result of Spirit
baptism, that class, sexual, and racial distinctions among members have
been abolished. He does this in a most interesting way, by personifying
the body of believers as Messiah himself.
Paul uses
language that links Spirit baptism with water and pouring: "all were
made to drink" (see also Joel 2:23, 28; John 3:5 may be translated
born of water, even Spirit). He also seems to speak here of Spirit baptism
only, as distinct from water baptism.
Another
Corinthians passage illustrated the egalitarianism of Pauline doctrine:
From now on,
therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view, even though we
once regarded Messiah from a human point of view, we
regard
him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Messiah, he is a new
creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. (II
Corinthians 5:16,17)
Paul has
finished a discourse on dying and rising. He designates a point in time:
"from now on." This must designate the time of the "new
creation" which may as well be baptism, especially if taken with the
other scriptures included in this essay.
He also
makes it plain that regarding Yahshua from the human point of view is not
consistent with the new creation. Specifically, Paul may be referring to
verse 12 ("man's position") in a social sense, but perhaps also
a theological sense, chiding those pundits in the congregation of the
Corinthians who would divest themselves of supernaturalism and charisma in
favor of the "quest for the historical Yahshua."
[H]e
has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a
guarantee. (II Corinthians 1:22)
"Kai"
is a little Greek conjunction that can be translated in several different
ways, depending on the context of the passage or the mood of the
translator. Here it is translate "and." It can just as well mean
"even." The small difference in these two English words can make
a big difference in meaning. "And" denotes two different things,
such as "this and that." "Even" equates two things as
the same: "this, even that." Yahshua is quoted in John 3 as saying
"unless one is born of water and the Spirit" denoting two
different births. How different this passage would be if it were
translated "unless one is born of water, even Spirit,"
signifying water as the symbol for the Spirit (Yahshua to Nicodemus:
"Are you a teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand
this?").
In the
passage from II Corinthians 1:22 the seal and the Spirit are seemingly two
different results of two different occurrences. I might say that Paul is
teaching the Corinthians that the "seal" is water baptism and
the gift of the Spirit is something else. But I would imagine that the
"seal" and "the Spirit in our hearts" are the same
thing, replacing "and" by "even." In doing so, I might
interpret this passage as referring to Spirit baptism as distinct from
water baptism, being not merely a symbolic act, but one that has made a
supernatural or psychological difference in the mind and sensation of the
believer. Of course, my knowledge of Greek syntax is quite limited, so
this is only speculation on my part at this time.
The context
of this passage is that in using "us" Paul is referring to
Silas, Timothy, and himself as missionaries of the evangel and may be
construed with Paul's "conversion" and his own experience (in
particular) with baptism in the Qodesh Spirit. Paul certainly believed that
he manifested Lukan evidences of Spirit baptism (I Corinthians 14:18,
etc.), thus he singles out Spirit baptism as an event distinct from water
baptism.
COLOSSIANS
May you be
strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all
endurance and patience with joy, giving thanks to the Father, who has
qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints of light. He has
delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the
kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of
sins. (Colossians 1:11-14)
Scholars are
have mixed feelings about the authenticity of Paul's writing the letter to
the Colossians. Perrin and Duling reject it (p. 209-16); Miller accepts it
(p. 109). So far as we know, Paul never actually visited Colossae (the
Qodesh Spirit forbid him to in Acts 16:6), though the church may have been
founded
by Epaphras or one of Paul's other "Asian" companions, with this
letter being delivered by Tychicus.
The
church at Colossae was suffering from an infusion of paganism called
"syncretism" by Smith, (p. 109) or synthesis of the freedom of
the community of Messiah with the ascetic values of Greek and Oriental
philosophy, including what I would call Manichaeanism (Walker, p. 121), or
primitive gnosticism where materialism in any form is evil, or of an evil
power. Though Messiah has redeemed the spirit, the believer must, through
abstinence and exorcism (or invocation), redeem his/her own flesh.
Ultimate salvation rests on success in both areas.
This
passage has prompted some interesting related comments in two of my
sources (those believing it to be a 2nd century work by a Pauline
"school"). Bultmann suggests that this passage refers to actual
deliverance from demons and demonic power through supernatural power
evidenced in baptism (p. 138). Meeks (p. 154-5, 238) cites a 2nd century
source stating that this transference from one kingdom to the other was
actually demonstrated in one contemporary church by subjecting the
novitiate to dramatic, public exorcism during the baptism ritual.
Since at
least two of my learned sources interpret this passage in conjunction with
baptism, I will take the liberty to do so as well (may I be so bold?),
equating the "qualifications" of "deliverance" and
"transference" mentioned in the passage to the deliverance of
water baptism in Yahshua's name as the community entry ritual, and
transference as the supernatural act of the baptism in the Qodesh Spirit.
TITUS
[H]e saved
us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his
own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Qodesh Spirit,
which he poured out upon us richly through Yahshua Messiah our Savior....
(Titus 3:5,6)
Paul's
authorship of Titus is seriously questioned on theological, literal, and
ecclesiastical grounds. Nevertheless, even if Paul did not write it, it
must be demonstrative of some first or second century ekklesia, the author
being a follower of Paul writing in his name.
S/he
differentiates two works involved in salvation, washing and renewal. Once
again we have the theme of regeneration, or rebirth into the community of
believers (or from the community of darkness to the community of light),
and renewal in the Qodesh Spirit. The washing refers to water baptism in
Yahshua name, the renewal to a different but related work. Pseudo-Paul uses
the traditional verb "poured out" to describe baptism(s).
CONCLUSION
Nothing is
absolutely conclusive about this comparison if the Pauline passages are
taken by themselves. But if taken as a body and analyzed, three points
emerge, that (1) Paul and the Paulines distinguish two facets to baptism:
regeneration and renewal (or alternate nominations), (2) one or both of
these initiate the novitiate into the community of believers, (3) and
those subjected to the ritual become new creations by supernatural
intervention, no longer observing social, racial, or sexual status in the
community or grace. These are the same three points that I thought were
outstanding in the Acts 19 passage and Acts baptism in general. In this
light, it is my conclusion that Luke and Paul are consistent in their
accounts and theology of baptism insofar as the texts herein analyzed have
been interpreted with due carefulness and consideration.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bultmann,
Rudolf Karl.
1970
Theology of the New Testament. New York: Charles
Scribner's
Sons.
Dodd,
C. H.
date
unknown The Moffatt New Testament Commentary.
"Introduction
to The Epistle to the Romans."
Harper.Eller,
Meredith.
1958:
The Beginnings of the sectarian Religion. New
Haven:
College and University Press.
Miller,
Madeline S. and J. Lane.
1973
Harper's Bible Dictionary. New York: Harper and
Row.
Perrin,
Norman, Dennis C. Duling.
1982
The New Testament: An Introduction. New
York:
Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Walker,
Williston, Richard Norris, David Lotz, Robert Handy.
1985
A History of the sectarian Church. Fourth Edition.
New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
|
||||
