What connection can there be between `Jesus and the resurrection' and

`foreign demons'?  We must understand that among the Gentiles, demons were

supposed to be the spirits of men who had died.  These demons acted as mediators

between men and the far-off celestial gods.  They were the `gods terrestrial'

and the `lords many' of 1 Corinthians 8.  In the Old Testament these terrestrial

gods, demons, or mediators are called `Baalim', which Paul literally translates

`lords'.  When Paul spoke of Jesus Who had died and yet Who lived again, when he

spoke of Him as the Lord, and as the Mediator, he was using expressions that

implied, to the heathen mind, a foreign demon.  `To us', said the apostle,

`there is but one Lord, one Mediator'.  The words are used with precision:

`One God, the Father, Out Of Whom (as the originating cause) are all

things (ta panta, not "all things" in general, but that particular

universe directly brought into being for the purpose of the ages), and we

for Him; and one Lord (the Mediator), Through Whom (the mediating cause)

are the all things, and we through Him' (1 Cor. 8:6 author's translation).

There is no question raised here of the Deity of Christ, the whole

question is one of mediation.  This is the great feature in the unity of the

Spirit.  At either extreme is the One Body and the one God and Father.  Access

is through the one Lord.  As the Lord, too, He rules and has supreme dominion,

and all profession of the unity of the Spirit that does not recognize the

necessity to obey the one Lord will be an empty profession.

One Faith.  As this item is lifted out for separate treatment in the next

section of chapter 4, we pass on to:

One Baptism.  The structure of the unity places the one baptism over

against the one Spirit.  The entire absence of types and shadows from the

epistles of the Mystery lends weight to the thought that this is not the baptism

in water, but that of Spirit.  The fact that there is `one baptism' is both

conclusive and exclusive.  John the Baptist baptized in water.  This could be

called one baptism.  During the Acts baptism in water was accompanied by baptism

of the Spirit.  This cannot be called one baptism, for there were two.  If we

can speak of two baptisms as one, then how shall we treat the other members of

this unity?  Are there then two Lords, two Gods, two Bodies?

We occasionally come into touch with companies of believers who, by the

prominence which they give to baptism by water, refer to themselves as `baptized

believers'.  Moreover, it is very usual to find those who are members of the One

Body and blessed with all spiritual blessings under the dispensation of the

Mystery, conceding this point, and allowing others to say of them, they do not

believe in baptism.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  Every member of the One Body is

a `baptized believer', and in no sense should we allow any to say of us that we

do not believe in baptism.  See the strange argument which is used; while it is

conceded by those who practice water baptism that it is a typical rite,

nevertheless, we allow those who emphasize the shadow to monopolize the claim to

baptism, while we who rejoice in the substance (the `one baptism') often appear

to undervalue it.  It must be one of the objects of our endeavour, for without

it the unity of the Spirit is incomplete.  `Divers baptisms' are classified as

`carnal ordinances' in Hebrews 9:10, which together with the Tabernacle and its

offerings, were representative figures (parabole) for the season then present.