Chapter seven.
The Paschal Community and Baptism.
We have seen that Paul’s understanding of
servanthood is derived from his OT roots where Israel was called into a
covenant relationship with Yahweh and appointed to be His servant. Unless
Yahweh had redeemed Israel she could never have become the covenant community
and so could never have become His representative to the nations. Israel became
the covenant people of God as a result of Yahweh’s saving activity in the
Exodus. I am now going to examine how the Lord God brought into existence the
new covenant community, a people who, as we saw in chapter two, have been
appointed to be His servant to the world.
contextual determinants.
The background of all that Paul says in
Romans 6 is found in chapter 5. In that passage Paul discussed two communities,
one in Christ, the other in Adam. The apostle described how the members of
these communities shared in either the transgression or the obedience of their
representative head. Between this statement of two communities and the
statement regarding ‘the body of Sin’,[1]
Paul speaks of the baptism which the
Romans have experienced.[2]
I shall argue that the expression ‘the body of Sin’ is corporate, being an
alternative image for the kingdom of darkness. If this proves to be convincing,
then it would appear that the opening verses of Rom 6 interrupt the flow of the
solidarity concept essential for the argument in chapter 5 and so prevents it
having the link with 6:6 that would identify ‘the body of Sin’ with the
unredeemed community that has Adam as its head. If, however, the baptism spoken
of in chapter 6.1ff is found to have a corporate dimension it would form a
bridge between chapter 5 and 6:6 that continues the corporate theme and so
supports the proposed interpretation of ‘the body of Sin’.
Baptism has divided the church for many
centuries. To this day opinions differ as to the significance of the ordinance
and what text speaks of what reality. While support for the view that baptism
was derived from the mystery religions has declined,[3]
nevertheless there is still no clear consensus as to the origin and
significance of the rite.
What is generally agreed is that baptism is closely associated with the death of Christ.[4] Also, there is wide agreement that Paul used the exodus of the Jews from Egypt as a type in his exposition of the significance of baptism. In addition there is some agreement that texts exist in which the emphasis is not so much on the believer’s individual baptism in water, but on the believer’s inclusion into Christ’s baptism into suffering, i.e. His crucifixion.[5]
[1] Rom 6:6. I shall use the higher case for Sin as it has been argued that Sin is udonym for Satan. See chapter 5 note 46.
[2] Rom 6:1-4.
[3] Bultmann, Theology, 1:311; Pusket, Römer, 125. Petersen “Burial” 217f seeks to argue that Paul’s doctrine of redemption is modelled on the practice of double burial which was common in a number of ancient cultures. He acknowledges Paul never refers to the practice, but says it explains the transitional process between dying with Christ and being raised in the resurrection. This argument depends on denying Pauline authorship of Eph. and Col. O’Neill, Romans, 109 says that Paul’s original argument in ch 6 has been overlaid with commentary that boldly adopts the language of the Mysteries. Contra Ziesler, Romans, 155.
[4] Robinson, “Baptism”, 257; Cullmann, Baptism, 23; Ridderbos , Outline, 400-405; Best, One Body, 16.
[5] Dunn, Romans, 1:312 says that the subject is not baptism but death to sin. However, he also says (p.313) that the baptismal ritual is in view in 6:4. Dunn also links the passage with 1 Cor 12:13 and Gal 3:27. This association is close to that suggested by Black, “Adam”, 175 who links 6:1-3 with 1 Cor 10:1-2 and 12:13. Black also identifies the imagery in Rom 6:3 as being based on Adamic Christology. If this latter identification is correct, then it