R. Alan Streett on Water Baptism and Titus 3:4-7

  

Important for our study are the words “he saved us . . . according to his mercy, through (dia, by) the water (loutron, washing) of rebirth and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” This describes the means God used to rescue the Cretans out of paganism. It is hard to imagine that Titus and the Cretans would have thought water/washing (loutron) referred to anything other than baptism. Similar language is used in other baptism-related passages: “Get up, be baptized, and have your sins washed away, calling on his name” (Acts 22:16). In another situation, after describing their former life of debauchery, Paul reminds the Corinthians, “And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed . . . in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, Paul’s declaration that “Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, in order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word” (Eph 5:25-26). The term “word” should be understood as “the proclamation of the gospel, which is the basis of baptism.” In similar fashion, the writer of Hebrews issues a twofold command to his readers: “Let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who has promised is faithful” (Heb 10:22-23). The terms “washed,” “confession,” and “cleansed” point to baptism.

 

Next we ask, does Paul understand the link between “the washing of rebirth” and “renewal of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5) as two “distinct operations” or two “different aspects of one operation”? If “through” (dia) were used before “renewal” and before “the water of rebirth,” then salvation would be a two-step process involving: 1) “washing” (loutron), i.e., water baptism that leads to new birth; and 2) the “renewal of the Holy Spirit,” i.e., Spirirt baptism that follows and leads to the restoration of God’s people. If this is the case, the phrase “Spirit that has been poured out on us” (vv. 6-7) is our guarantee of a future resurrection and inheritance in the eternal kingdom.

 

However, dia appears only once in the text before “water/washing.” This means the phrase describes a single operation with the washing referring to the “activity of the Holy Spirit” that includes both rebirth and renewal.

 

It is impossible to be definitive on the matter. Water baptism and Spirit baptism are inexorably linked to conversion, justification (forgiveness) and regeneration (new birth). The Cretan believers, who were once characterized as “liars, vicious brutes, lazy gluttons” (Titus 1:2), have now “renounce[d] impiety and worldly passions” and have begun “to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly” as they “wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (2:11-13).

 

The trifecta of resurrection, kingdom, and baptism found in this pericope is consistent with the pattern in the other authentic and disputed letters of Paul. (R. Alan Streett, Caesar and the Sacrament—Baptism: A Rite of Resistance [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2018], 143-45, italics in original)

 

 

R. Alan Street on Water and Spirit Baptism Being "Interconnected and could not be separated" in New Testament Theology

  

WATER OR SPIRIT BAPTISM

 

How are water and Spirit baptism related? Are they two separate baptisms or two parts of the same baptismal process? Both John the Baptist and Peter called upon their listeners to repent and submit to water baptism for remission of sins. To this extent, their messages were identical.

 

John preached the urgency and commanded God’s people to prepare for the eschatological arrival of God’s kingdom. Hence the message, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt 3:1). Or as Mark tells the story—“John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Mark 1:4-5; Matt 3:6).

 

The phrase “baptism of repentance” describes the nature of John’s water ritual. Repentance and baptism are a couplet. The phrase “for the forgiveness of sins” (εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων) is the purpose statement. John’s and Peter’s messages look very similar (εις αφεωιν των αμαρτιων).

 

Peter’s baptism, however, differed from John’s in two ways. First, Peter administered water baptism “in the name of Jesus Christ.” Second, he promised that his respondents would receive the Holy Spirit (Spirit baptism). For Peter, water baptism “in the name” and the resultant Spirit baptism was interconnected and logically could not be separated. (Peter will eventually learn that God may give the Spirit prior to baptism or delay giving it until long after baptism) They worked in tandem.

 

When John’s and Peter’s baptism are compared, we discovered a pattern:

 

John’s Baptism	Peter’s Baptism
Called for repentance	Called for repentance
Called for baptism	Called for baptism
Element—Water	Element—Water
	“In Jesus’ Name”
Result—Forgiveness of Sins	Result—Forgiveness of Sins
	Result—Receive gift of the Holy Spirit
Purpose—Preparatory	Purpose—Participatory

 

John’s baptism prepared God’s people for the kingdom’s arrival and pointed them to Jesus’ “baptism with the Holy Spirit” that was to follow (Mark 1:8; Acts 1:3; 11:16), through which God’s people might enter the restored kingdom. The baptism in the Spirit did not supplant baptism in water. The church continued to minister the rite of water baptism, but now “in the name of Jesus” along with the exception that God would give his Spirit to the baptized ones. Peter baptized with water, but God baptized with the Spirit (Acts 1:8).

 

John’s baptism of Jesus served as a model for Peter’s baptismal practices. Although John the Baptist originally protested John’s need for water baptism, Jesus knew it was his route to receiving the Spirit, which identified him as God’s son and empowered him to fulfill his kingdom mission. In Christian baptism, believers likewise receive a new identity and become kingdom citizens through Spirit baptism. (R. Alan Streett, Caesar and the Sacrament—Baptism: A Rite of Resistance [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2018], 90-91)

 

R. Alan Streett on John the Baptist's Baptism Being "For the Forgiveness of Sins"

  

For the Forgiveness of Sins

 

Those obeying the double command (“repent and be baptized”) did so to receive forgiveness of sins and be brought back into a covenant relationship with God. John’s message was electrifying and the response was immediate and enthusiastic: “And the people from the whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins” (Mark 1:5; Matt 3:5). (R. Alan Streett, Caesar and the Sacrament—Baptism: A Rite of Resistance [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2018], 46-47)

 

R. Alan Streett on 1 Corinthians 15:29 and Baptism for the Dead

  

Paul finds no need to explain “baptism on behalf of (υπερ) the dead.” His readers are familiar with it. Unfortunately, modern-day readers may be uninformed. Since the word υπερ can be translated variously as “on behalf of,” “over,” and “beyond,” it makes for a wide range of possible and often bizarre interpretations. The most viable theory is that certain individuals (“those people” v. 29a) are being baptized by proxy on behalf of the dead to assure they have a place in God’s future kingdom. Paul does not condemn the practice, but uses it to argue for a resurrection, i.e., if a person is not raised from the dead, why do the Corinthians participate in a ritual that symbolizes resurrection? (R. Alan Streett, Caesar and the Sacrament—Baptism: A Rite of Resistance [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2018], 135, emphasis in bold added)

 

R. Alan Streett on Jesus Calling God "Father" as a Counter-Imperial Statement

  

Augustus and all future emperors who succeeded him were given the title “Father of the Fatherland” (Pater Patriae), which implied that the Empire was a big family over which the emperor stood as a father figure who protected, disciplined, and blessed his family members. The designation also spoke of the emperor’s divine right to rule the earth on behalf of Jupiter, the highest Roman god (equal to the Greek god Zeus), and to carry out his will.

 

When Jesus called God his “Father” and admonished his disciples to “call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father—the one in heaven” (Matt 6:9; 23:9), he was saying that they were to look only to God for their welfare and not Caesar. (R. Alan Streett, Caesar and the Sacrament—Baptism: A Rite of Resistance [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2018], 24)

 

 

Paul carried on this tradition when he wrote, “Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6). Such counter-imperial statements were politically subversive, and if overheard, would bring down the wrath of Rome on all who subscribed to them. (Ibid., 24 n. 9)

 

Ogden Goelet, "The Nature of the Term pr-`3 during the Old Kingdom"

My copy of volume 10 of Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar arrived today. The following is an important article on the use of "Pharaoh":

Ogden Goelet, “The Nature of the Term pr-`3 during the Old Kingdom,” Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar 10 (1989/1990): 77-90.

One can find a scan of the article here.

Brant Gardner on 2 Nephi 10:10-13

  

In this passage, Jacob ties Isaiah to the New World situation, both currently and in the future. While Jacob does not tell his audience that these verses are directed at them, he likely does not need to. It is important for us to read this sermon with those contemporary allusions in mind. In his introduction, Jacob had explained: “And now, the words which I shall read are they which Isaiah spake concerning all the house of Israel. And there are many things which have been spoken by Isaiah which may be likened unto you, because ye are of the house of Israel” (2 Ne. 6:5).

 

Jacob is pointing to a particular circumstance facing his community. To underscore the relevant to their current situation, Jacob quote a revelation, but which one? Jacob does not say. The clue is Jacob’s reference to those who fight against Zion despite the promise of liberty in the land of promise. Thus, the context for this promise is the New World. Jacob is alluding to Nephi’s vision in 1 Nephi 22:14: “And every nation which shall war against thee, O house of Israel, shall be turned one against another, and they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord. And all that fight against Zion shall be destroyed, and the great whore, who hath perverted the right ways of the Lord, yea, that great and abominable church, shall tumble to the dust and great shall be the fall of it.”

 

Nephi’s vision identifies two components of the fight against Zion: the battle itself, and the “great and abominable church.” In his first-day sermon, Jacob explicitly notes the fight against Zion in the context of the great and abominable church: “And blessed are the Gentiles, they of whom the prophet has written; for behold, if it so be that they shall repent and fight not against Zion, and do not unite themselves to that great and abominable church, they shall be saved; for the Lord God will fulfil his covenants which he has made unto his children; and for this cause the prophet has written these things” (2 Ne. 6:12).

 

Thus, Jacob is referring to Nephi’s vision, which he no doubt expects his listeners to recognize. The great and abominable church is still the enemy, while the Gentiles, in a departure from their typical role as outsiders, are agents of salvation for Zion—Isaiah’s theme upon which Jacob built his sermon. (Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 6 vols. [Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007], 2:186-87)

 

 

History: “There shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles” is typically read as an indication that the United States will not have kings. For example, Chris B. Hartshorn, editor of the Saints’ Herald for the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (now Community of Christ) suggested in 1964: “Though European nations have held possessions in or near the Americas, in no instance has a kingdom worthy of the name been set up and long maintained.” (Chris B. Hartshorn, A Commentary on the Book of Mormon [Independence, Mo.: Herald Publishing House, 1966], 119) Such a statement focuses on the United States and ignores Canada and any country south of the border which recognized European monarchies for centuries. It also ignores the context in which Jacob presents his case. Because Nephi has been named a king for the people, there is already something problematic in saying that there would be no kings.

 

Verse 9 offers an explanatory context: “the kings of the Gentiles shall be nursing fathers unto them.” Jacob’s statement makes more sense by removing a comma: “There shall be no kings upon the land who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.” The context thus is one of conquering Gentile kings and the opposition that might “rise up” and defeat them. In other words Jacob is prophesying that no non-Gentile kings will defeat the Gentiles, whose kings are the nursing fathers who will provide salvation to the colony of Israeltes. Verses 12-13 confirms this context. Here the promise is clearly that Yahweh’s people will be protected against those who fight against Yahweh. In verse 14 Yahweh declares that he is the king of heaven and will be the Nephites’ king.

 

In short, Jacob in quoting this passage from Isaiah, is not saying that there will be no kings. He cannot, for his brother is the king. His point is that no other kings shall stand against the Nephites if they are righteous, for their true king is Yahweh who has promised to preserve them. (Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 6 vols. [Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007], 2:187-88)

 

Further Reading:

Resources on Joseph Smith's Prophecies (see the section "Resources on Book of Mormon prophecies fulfilled post-1830")