On another board, a question was asked about Rom 6, whether the ones who are buried together, planted together, and crucified together with Christ refer to all mankind or only to believers, based on his understanding that the phrase "baptized into Christ" limits it to only believers. Here is the moderator's question:
Quote from: RichardHello my thoughtful friend,
Why do you think those words apply to all humanity? Why did Paul seem to restrict those "together words" to those who have been "baptized into Christ"?
As I looked into this, I noticed a connection I had never made before and this is what I came up with. What do you all think? Here is my response to him:
Rom 6:3 Or don't you know that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him through baptism to death, that just like Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:8 But if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him;
Rom 5:10 For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we will be saved by his life.
2Co 5:18 But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ, and gave to us the ministry of conciliation;
2Co 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their trespasses, and having committed to us the word of reconciliation.
2Co 5:14 For the love of Christ constrains us; because we judge thus, that one died for all, therefore all died.
2Co 5:15 He died for all, that those who live should no longer live to themselves, but to him who for their sakes died and rose again.Great question Richard.
Notice that the we who died with Christ written of in Rom 6:8 are the same all that died, whom Christ died for, in 2Co 5:14. By killing off the first Adam, and all of us in him, God conciliated us to himself, as is written in 2Co 5:18. Who are the "us" conciliated? The world is, according to verse 15, not reckoning to them their trespasses. This speaks of the entirety of the human race. The entire world is being spoken of here. This is speaking of those who do not yet believe, because Paul goes on to say that we who do believe are given the privilege to bring that message of conciliation to them, that they may believe and receive it's benefits to themselves.
Likewise the entire world was baptized in Christ's death, so it does apply to everyone. This is not speaking of course, about water baptism, but rather, this immersion is synonymous with the phrase "in Christ", by which is meant God conciliating the world-in Christ, all dying-in Christ, all being buried-in Christ, all baptized-in Christ, and now, Christ, having been raised, is in the process of raising each individual in God's time and order, all in Christ, to walk in that newness of life brought about.
When you read these "together with" passages concerning the death and burial of Jesus, one careful distinction Paul makes is that while he speaks of being raised together with Christ, he speaks of the living with Christ as a future thing. He never does this with regard to the death and burial though, never speaks of it as a future thing. This is because the entire human race in Adam was killed off. That is a past event, totally fulfilled in time. However, while in God's view all are alive to him in Christ, all justified, all righteous, the being made alive is something that occurs over time, for each individual, "each in his own order" as Paul put it. This is what we experience as salvation when our minds are awakened to apprehend and believe the good news of Jesus.
One more small point to consider Richard. Remember when the Israelites came out of of Egypt? Notice what Paul wrote:
1Co 10:1-2 Now I would not have you ignorant, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea;How many of the Israelites were baptized into Moses? All, without exception. This is plain from the fact that just a couple verses later he speaks about these same ones being overthrown in the wilderness because of unbelief. If the only ones who were baptized into Moses were those who actually believed and made it to the promised land then we would have to say that only 2 people were thus baptized, Joshua and Caleb.
This physical type also carries over in the spiritual fulfillment. All of the first Adam, the many-meaning, every single person, was baptized into Christ. Like the physical example, the vast majority go through life in unbelief. Now, I know where you might be headed in your thoughts here, that the majority of Israel died in that wilderness, never entering the promised land. You would then possibly conclude that most today will never believe and die in that state of unbelief, just like fleshly Israel.
I agree with that, with one exception. I do not see the death of fleshly Israel, nor the death of anyone not believing, as the final state. But that is for another topic. I believe Paul speaks of us as being baptized into Christ simply because that is who he is writing to. I find that when he needs to include everyone to make a point clear, he does in fact do that. For example, it is written:
1Ti 4:10 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we have set our trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.He indeed is the Savior of all men, not just believers. This is clear from his distinction given-"all men", then "those who believe." The reason he is especially the savior of those who believe is because they are aware of it and believe it and experience in knowingly in their lives. It is only in that sense that he is especially our savior, although in fact he is everyone's savior just as well. Well, that is enough for one post. Tell me what you think Richard. I love speaking on these things. Thank you for sharing your heart here.
Ron
wow Ron , that is good I never saw that before, well done ! :thumbsup:
maybe this will help us also to understand baptism?
Strong's G907 - baptizō βαπτίζω
bäp-tē'-zō (Key)
Part of Speech
verb
Root Word (Etymology)
from a derivative of G9111) to dip, dip in, immerse
2) to dip into dye, to dye, colour
G907
Outline of Biblical Usage 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe
3) to overwhelm
"Note on Baptism in Ac. Baptism in water (such as John's) is distinguished from baptism with the Holy Spirit (i. 5, etc.). Those who receive the latter, however, may also be baptized in water (cf. xi. 16 with x. 47); and there is one example of people who had previously received John's baptism receiving Christian baptism as a preliminary to receiving the Spirit (xix. 3 ff.). John's was a baptism of repentance (xiii. 24; xix. 4), as was also Christian baptism (ii. 38), but as John's pointed forward to Jesus (xix. 4), it became obsolete when He came. Christian baptism followed faith in the Lord Jesus (xvi. 31 ff.); it was associated with His name (ii. 38; viii. 16, etc.), which was invoked by the person baptized (xxii. 16); it signified the remission (ii. 38) or washing away of sins (xxii. 16); sometimes it preceded (ii. 38; viii. 15 ff.; xix. 5), sometimes followed (x. 47 f.) the receiving of the Spirit." (F. F. Bruce. The Acts of the Apostles [Greek Text Commentary], London: Tyndale, 1952, p. 98, n. 1.)
This word should not be confused with baptô (911). The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped' (baptô) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizô) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change.
Quote from: rosered on January 06, 2009, 07:03:29 AM
wow Ron , that is good I never saw that before, well done ! :thumbsup:
maybe this will help us also to understand baptism?
Strong's G907 - baptizō βαπτίζω
bäp-tē'-zō (Key)
Part of Speech
verb
Root Word (Etymology)
from a derivative of G9111) to dip, dip in, immerse
2) to dip into dye, to dye, colour
G907
Outline of Biblical Usage 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe
3) to overwhelm
"Note on Baptism in Ac. Baptism in water (such as John's) is distinguished from baptism with the Holy Spirit (i. 5, etc.). Those who receive the latter, however, may also be baptized in water (cf. xi. 16 with x. 47); and there is one example of people who had previously received John's baptism receiving Christian baptism as a preliminary to receiving the Spirit (xix. 3 ff.). John's was a baptism of repentance (xiii. 24; xix. 4), as was also Christian baptism (ii. 38), but as John's pointed forward to Jesus (xix. 4), it became obsolete when He came. Christian baptism followed faith in the Lord Jesus (xvi. 31 ff.); it was associated with His name (ii. 38; viii. 16, etc.), which was invoked by the person baptized (xxii. 16); it signified the remission (ii. 38) or washing away of sins (xxii. 16); sometimes it preceded (ii. 38; viii. 15 ff.; xix. 5), sometimes followed (x. 47 f.) the receiving of the Spirit." (F. F. Bruce. The Acts of the Apostles [Greek Text Commentary], London: Tyndale, 1952, p. 98, n. 1.)
This word should not be confused with baptô (911). The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped' (baptô) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizô) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change.
I love this definition Rose . . . I came across this a while back as well and really felt a transforming revelation on it same as you. Another connection to the "pickled" use of the Greek word was also used when dying fabric. It had the same definition as well because the fabric was of a different color coming out than it was when it went in. Same as us when we're baptized in Christ . . .we're of a different color . . .(white) coming out than we were when we went in.
I use the pickled one a lot . . .it's my excuse of getting drunk. :LH: (kidding of course)
:cloud9: Amen. To go a little further with it, John's baptism was as being baptized into the likeness of His death. Being baptized into Christ's Spirit is being baptized into the likeness of His life, ie. the POWER of an endless life. And so, "How are the dead raised and what is the sign of Your coming?" :bigGrin: Blessings...
I sense a bit of a change of leverage in my own understanding of the coming of the Lord. The church has engrained this picture of the body of Jesus bursting through the clouds, floating on air, with trumpets blazing and clouds rolling and all the earth comes to a standstill.
It's been several years since I chose to walk away from the rapture theory. But I've really not settled on any true conclusions as to how Christ really "will" return. But things are begining to evolve in me that lean toward the revelation of Jesus Christ . . TO ME . .is the so called second coming. It's not the experience at an altar where I cried my eyes out and saw myself as a sinful waste of flesh. It was years and years after that when I finally matured enough to enter INTO something that my religious head could never see.
In truth, it wasn't until AFTER I walked away from religious thinking that I found Christ appearing to me. Everyone assumes his return is going to be in the same form as it was when he left. Even though we know the second coming is not as a savior, but as a king. Even though we know that judgment is no longer in the cards for us due to are engagement in relationship with him and the work of the cross . .even though we know he came in one form to fulfill one purpose and then changed forms when that purpose was complete . .we still hang on to the idea that he's returning in that same form AGAIN???
It has always intrigued me to see places in Scripture where men's names were changed by God. Why? Why was Abram changed to Abraham? And his wife changed from Sarai to Sarah? Saul to Paul? Simon to Peter??? Then it occurs to me, my name is my nature. When I sign my name, it's called a signature . .it's my signed . .nature. And when these people had their natures changed, God changed their name to reflect the change in their nature.
Okay . . .when Jesus came as the Messiah, his form was flesh, because his purpose was to redeem my carnal mind back to God . .thus the crown of thorns . .thorns represtent curse, and a crown is what is wrapped around one's mind . .Jesus took my cursed mind to the cross and there he transformed it into another crown . . .one of gold. And if what he said is true "It is finished" then the fleshly form is no longer necessary. Thus, the reason why they couldn't recognize him after his resurrection. Not even Mary, one of those closest to him from before. Because as long as I live in the flesh, I will always and forever see carnality. They were still looking for a dying man . .they couldn't recognize a resurrected one.
Well . . .why are we any different? We've been looking for the return of a man of flesh for 2000 years . . .when the truth is . . . he's already returned . .we're just looking for the wrong form. He's appeared to my heart . . .my head just didn't know it at the time.
What was the question??? :laughing7: :laughing7:
:cloud9: Well, you know, much like the word rapture, the phrase "second coming" is not in there. I've found there's always a good reason for things not being in there. :winkgrin:
I don't know how much plainer they could have made it by saying, "Hereafter we'll not know Him after the flesh", than they did, but still our carnality looks for a man of flesh to hang onto.
Years ago, He gave me understanding on the "foolish Galatians" looking skyward. The principle is this; the Jesus you perceive (this SAME Jesus), is the one that will return to (appears) to you.
In churches where healing is taught, He appears in our "heavens" as our healer, and healing is manifested. The Spirit comes to perform the Word. The more we perceive by the Spirit of Him about Him, the more He "appears". He didn't walk in the flesh body and heal anyone, but they were healed by His appearing none the less. I can't see Him appearing in anything but a many membered body providing Him a place to lay His head. Blessings...
The one thing that I never realized nor had I heard anyone ask was . . .did the angels lie to those gaping up into the clouds then? Because according to the church . .he still hasn't come yet. Even though they told "them" directly that they would definitely see him come back to them . . . was God just toying with the sheep again by saying that? Because unless it happened "to them" it really didn't need to be said unless there was a specific purpose for it to be said.
It's much like what the angels asked when they rushed into the empty tomb "Why seek ye the living among the dead?"
Which is the Old Testament version of eating asses heads and dove's dung . . . stubborn minds forcably remain where the Holy Spirit "was" rather than where he "is". People still cling to the death rather than pursue the resurrection of life. His flesh was deposited into the tomb as a seed into a womb and the tree looks nothing like the seed. Spirit is nothing like flesh. And our natural thinking will never be able to conjure up any appropriate image of what Spirit is really like until we enter into it ourselves . . .by dying "to" ourselves.
Circle of life . . .how awesome.
:cloud9: AMEN. He DID come to them, of course, on the day of Pentecost. He appeared to them then by manifestation in and thru the 120, and thru Peter's anointed "outburst". Think of it; they were told they'd not know Him after the flesh anymore, and voila, they were no doubt as astonished as their onlookers when the Holy Ghost appeared on the scene, and true enough they didn't know Him after the flesh anymore but after (or in the manner of), the Spirit.
He said He would not leave them alone but send another Comforter, but this One didn't come in one "tent" He came in several. We all have to walk the road to Emmaus (sp), ie. seeing Him in another form that His words might burn within our heart. Blessings...
PS. Interesting side note. The HAH sound He added to AbraHAm and SarAH, was as His breath. He "revived" them.