 |  |
"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, Who is above all, and
through all, and in you all" (Eph. 4: 4-6).
To which does the one baptism refer? Is it baptism with (en) water or baptism with
(en) the Holy Spirit? Or is it both (!!!), as some would maintain? Merril F. Unger is
adamant that what Paul meant was "one (spiritual) baptism" and that the apostle was not
excluding baptism with (en) water. However to state that this passage teaches that there
is "one (spiritual) baptism" and allow a second (ritual) baptism destroys the important
features of these verses. The oneness, the singleness, the uniqueness of each item
mentioned is essential. To allow another baptism, a second one, would open the way to
permitting another hope or another faith or another body. Even another Lord or another
God could be introduced, or another Spirit--a subject on which Paul expressed himself
forcibly in II Cor. 11: 3-15.
To say that Paul had in mind both baptism with (en) the Spirit and baptism with (en)
water shows a lack of appreciation of the differences between the ministries of Peter and
Paul during the Acts period. Baptism with (en) water was of vital importance to Peter's
ministry but it wasn't to Paul's. Thus in writing Eph. 4: 4-6 Paul could not be alluding
to water baptism in either a primary or a secondary sense. Commenting on the one
baptism of Eph. iv 5, 1: M. Haldeman writes:
"If it be Holy Ghost baptism, water baptism is excluded. There is no authority; no
place for it. No minister has a right to perform it; no one is under obligation to submit to
it. To perform it, or to submit to it, would be not only without authority, but useless,
utterly meaningless. If it be water baptism, Holy Ghost baptism is no longer operative.
But it must be either one or the other, Holy Ghost or water. It cannot be both. Two are
no longer possible" (Holy Ghost or Water?).
With this every unbiased reader will agree, it being impossible to make one into two.
However, what follows in Haldeman's book is quite incredible! He states that the one
baptism of Eph. 4: 5 is baptism with (en) water. To make such a statement shows that
he has failed to take into account three important facts:
(1)
Paul's attitude to water baptism in I Cor. 1: 14-16 was a result of the orders he had
been given by the glorified, ascended Christ. "Christ sent me not to baptize,
but to preach the gospel" (I Cor. 1: 17). Nowhere in Paul's ministry, either
before or after Acts 28: 28, does baptism with (en) water have an
important role let alone an essential one.
(2)
The structure of Eph. 4: 4-6 parallels baptism and Spirit:
one body
one Spirit
one hope
one Lord
one faith
one baptism
one God and Father.
This shows that the One Who inspired the writer wanted to show that the one
baptism of this dispensation is one associated with the Spirit.
(3)
It is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself Who baptizes the believer with (en) the Holy
Spirit (Matt. 3: 11). This act ensures that the believer is identified with,