27. ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε, Χριστὸν ἐνεδύσασθε· “For as many of you as
were baptised unto Christ did put on Christ.” The fact that the verbs are in
the second person, requires the insertion of the words “of you” into the
translation, though they are not in the Greek. But it must not be supposed that
ὅσοι includes only a part of
the πάντες; for this would be
itself in effect to contradict the preceding v. By ἐβαπτίσθητε the apostle undoubtedly refers
to Christian baptism, immersion in water. See Th. s. v. II; Preusch. s. v.;
M. and M. Voc. s. v. This is the uniform meaning and application of the term in
Paul (1 Cor. 1:13–17; 12:13; 15:29; Rom. 6:3), with the single exception of 1
Cor. 10:2, where he speaks of the baptism of the Israelites into Moses in the
cloud and in the sea as a thing of similar character and significance with
Christian baptism. Nowhere does he use the term in a figurative sense as in Mk.
1:8b; 10:38, 39; Jn. 1:33b; Acts 1:5b. εἰς Χριστόν is probably to be taken here and in Rom. 6:3 in the sense
“with reference to Christ” (on this use of εἰς see Th. B II 2 a), and as equivalent to εἰς τὸ ὄνομα Χριστοῦ. See more fully in fine print
below. “To put on Christ” is to become as Christ, to have his standing; in this
context to become objects of the divine favour, sons of God, as he is the Son
of God. Cf. 4:6, 7. By the whole
sentence the apostle reminds his readers that they, who have been baptised, in
confession of their acceptance of Christ, already possess all that it is
claimed that circumcision and works of law could give them, viz., the divine
favour, a relation to God like that which Christ sustains to God. It is a
substantiation (γάρ) of the
assertion of v. 26, that they are sons of God, drawn from an interpretation of
the significance of their baptism.
The idiom ἐνδύεσθαι with a personal object is found
in late Greek writers. Thus in Dion. Hal. Antiq.
11. 5:2, τὸν Ταρκύνιον ἐκεῖνον ἐνδυόμενοι, “playing the part of
that Tarquinius”; Libanius, Ep. 968
(350 a. d.), ῥίψας τὸν στρατιώτην ἐνέδυ τὸν σοφιστήν: “He
laid aside the character of the soldier, and put on that of the sophist.” It
occurs once in the Lxx with a somewhat different force: Isa. 49:18: πάντας αὐτοὺς ὡς κόσμον ἐνδύσῃ, καὶ περιθήσεις αὐτοὺς ὡς κόσμον, ὡς νύμφη, and several times in N. T.:
Rom. 13:14: ἀλλὰ ἐνδύσασθε τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. Col.
3:9–10, ἀπεκδυσάμενοι τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον σὺν ταῖς πράξεσιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν νέον τὸν ἀνακαινούμενον. Eph. 4:22–24, ἀποθέσθαι … τὸν παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον … καὶ ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον. The related figure of clothing one’s self with strength,
righteousness, glory, salvation, occurs frequently in O. T.: Prov. 31:25;
Job 8:22; 29:14; 39:19; Ps. 92:1; 103(104):1; 131(132):9, 16, 18; Isa. 51:9;
52:1; 61:10; 1 Mac. 1:28; and a similar figure with a variety of objective
limitations in N. T.: Rom. 13:12: ἐνδυσώμεθα τὰ ὅπλα τοῦ φωτός. 1 Cor.
15:53: ἐνδύσασθαι ἀφθαρσίαν … ἐνδύσασθαι ἀθανασίαν. 15:54: ἐνδύσηται ἀθανασίαν. Eph. 6:11: ἐνδύσασθε τὴν πανοπλίαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 6:14, ἐνδυσάμενοι τὸν θώρακα τῆς δικαιοσύνης. Col. 3:12: ἐνδύσασθε … σπλάγχνα οἰκτιρμοῦ. 1 Th. 5:8, ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης. These passages show that
the idiom conveyed no suggestion of putting on a mask, but referred to an act
in which one entered into actual relations. Used with an impersonal object, it
means “to acquire,” “to make a part of one’s character or possessions” (1 Thes.
5:8; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54; Rom. 13:12; Col. 3:12); with a personal object it
signifies “to take on the character or standing” of the person referred to, “to
become,” or “to become as.” See Rom. 13:14; Col. 3:10; note in each case the
adjacent example of the impersonal object and cf. the exx. from Dion. Hal. (where the context makes it clear that
τὸν Ταρ. ἐκ. ἐνδυόμενοι means “acting the part of Tarquinius,” “standing in his
shoes,”) and Libanius. This meaning is appropriate to the present passage. The
fact that the Galatians have put on Christ is cited as proof that they are sons
of God as Christ is the Son of God.
The preposition εἰς with βαπτίζω signifies (a) literally and spatially “into,” followed by
the element into which one is plunged: Mk. 1:9; cf. 1:8 a; (b) “unto” in the telic sense, “in order to obtain”:
Acts 2:38; (c) followed by ὄνομα,
“with respect to,” specifically, “with mention or confession of”: 1 Cor. 1:13,
15; Mt. 28:19; Acts 8:16; 19:5; with similar force but without the use of ὄνομα: Acts 19:3. It was formerly
much discussed whether here and in Rom. 6:3 the meaning is the same as in 1
Cor. 1:13, 15, etc., or whether εἰς
signifies “into fellowship with,” Th. (cf.
βαπτίζω, II b. aa) Ell., S. and H. on Rom., et al. hold; Sief. combines the two
views. As between the two the former is to be preferred, for, though the
conception of fellowship with Christ in his death is expressed in the context
of Rom. 6:3, neither general usage of the phrase nor that passage in particular
warrant interpreting βαπτίζω εἰς as having
other than its usual meaning, “to baptise with reference to.” But if this is
the case with Rom. 6:3, then usage brings to the present passage no warrant for
finding in it any other than the regular meaning of the phrase, and the context
furnishing none, there is no ground for discovering it here. More recent
discussion, however, has turned upon the question whether in both groups of
passages (1 Cor. 1:13, 15; Acts 8:16; 19:5, as well as Rom. 6:3 and here) there
is a reference to the use of the name in baptism with supposed magical effect,
as in the mystery religions. See Preusch. s.
v. βαπτίζω and literature
there referred to, esp. Heitmüller, Taufe
und Abendmahl; also Lake, The Earlier
Epistles of St. Paul, pp. 383–391; Case, The Evolution of Early Christianity, pp. 347 f. For the purposes of this commentary it must suffice to point out
the following outstanding facts affecting the interpretation of Paul’s thought:
(a) The use of βαπτίζω εἰς τὸ ὄνομα was in
all probability derived from the usage of the mystery religions, and to one
familiar with that usage would suggest the ideas associated with such
phraseology. (b) The apostle constantly lays emphasis on faith and the Spirit
of God (see, e. g., 5:6, 16, 18, 22)
as the characteristic factors of the Christian experience. It would seem that
if, denying all spiritual value to such a physical rite as circumcision, he
ascribed effective force to baptism, his arguments should have turned, as they
nowhere do, on the superiority of baptism to circumcision. (c) 1 Cor. 10:1–12
makes it probable that the Corinthians were putting upon their Christian
baptism the interpretation suggested by the mystery religions, viz., that it
secured their salvation. Against this view Paul protests, using the case of the
Israelites passing through the Red Sea, which he calls a baptism into Moses, to
show that baptism without righteousness does not render one acceptable to God.
This may, of course, signify only that he conceived that the effect of baptism
was not necessarily permanent, or that to baptism it is necessary to add a
righteous life. But it is most naturally interpreted as a protest against
precisely that doctrine of the magical efficiency of physical rites which the
mystery religions had made current. If this is the case and if the thought of
the apostle here is consistent with that in 1 Cor. 10, the relation between the
fact referred to in the relative clause and that of the principal clause is not
(as in 3:7; Rom. 8:14) causal, but that of symbol and symbolised fact. The
requirement of the passage that there shall be a natural connection of thought
both between this v. and the preceding, and between the two clauses of this, is
met by supposing (1) that the exceptional mention of baptism in this passage
(as, e. g., instead of faith) was
suggested by its relation as the initiatory Christian rite to circumcision (cf. Col. 2:11, 12) which the Galatians
were being urged to accept, and (2) that there was something in the act of
baptism as thought of by the apostle which suggested the figure of being
clothed with Christ. This may have been that in baptism one was, as it were,
clothed with the water, or, possibly, that the initiate was accustomed to wear
a special garment. To such a relation in thought between fact and outward
symbol there can be, despite Lake’s statement that such a thought was almost
unknown to the ancients, no serious objection in view of Gal. 2:20; Rom. 5:14;
1 Cor. 11:26. If, indeed, the relation is causal, the apostle must have changed
his conception of the matter between the writing of Gal. and 1 Cor., or he
conceived of the rite as having no necessarily permanent effect and its value
as conditioned upon the maintenance of a morally pure life. (Ernest
De Witt Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the
Galatians [International Critical Commentary; New York: C. Scribner’s Sons,
1920], 203-6)
