Back to Ellis Homepage

Back to Ellis School page

 

 

 

 

The Concept of Burial in the New Testament Rite of Baptism

__________________________

 

 

By

Andrew B. Ellis

May 3, 2002

 

            The beautiful thing about the concept of baptism in the New Testament is that it is a multi-faceted model.  Although this rite has so many discussions surrounding it in various contexts and by various authors, it is our focus to study Paul’s theology of death, burial and resurrection in baptism.  The central portions of scripture to be discussed are in two of Paul’s letters, both of which had numerous issues to contend with in regards to their Jewish heritage.  The transition into the Christian age was in many ways overshadowed by its Jewish roots, so in each case the context of the epistle must be carefully examined.

            Lest we be misled into thinking baptism was purely a New Testament event, we should understand that its roots as a ceremonial act were used in many areas of the world and in many different religious contexts.  A.J.M. Wedderburn’s position is that Paul’s emphasis on baptism and “burial” was similar to the Hellenistic traditions of mystical initiation rites.[1]  Wedderburn also mentions that in 1887, Otto Pfleiderer likened the putting on of Christ in burial of baptism to the putting on of animal masks in Mithras mystery cultish rites.[2] 

The mysteries of Eleusis, Mithras and Isis (Egyptian as well as Hellenistic cults) all practiced baptisms “for the dead” to be “united with their dead.”[3]  Therefore, when Paul interacted with the Pagan community in Corinth, and in places such as the setting for his Mars Hill sermon to the Athenians, he would’ve had some understanding of their religious backgrounds.  One major conceptual distinction Everett Ferguson points out is that while the mystery cults would have practiced baptismal rites for their sanctified, the emphasis was generally set on those who were chosen and who were already pure.  These proceedings were usually in secret, which is why not much is known in detail of their ceremonies even through archaeology.  The staunch contrast between the pagan principle and the Christian tradition that Paul would instruct is that the burial into Christ was for all men who would respond in humility, and all were unworthy.[4]

The Jewish ceremonial washings included baptism as its primary means of cleansing, and was typically practiced in a tebilah service, which was necessary for all Pagan converts into Judaism.[5]  Although this meaning of baptizo is not the same as the meaning Paul uses in Romans and Colossians, it helps us understand the background of their practice, and their familiarity with baptism in general.  In other Jewish practice, the rite of baptism was used to cleanse from impurities for “a number of causes including contact with dead bodies, leprosy, bodily discharges, and even to cleanse men from defilement by nocturnal ejaculation.”[6]

Josephus speaks of John the baptizer’s influence as having influence on those of the Jewish Qumran community.  John’s influence there is supported by evidence of his home and his ministering to the “outlying areas”  given in the scriptures and the practice of repentant baptism used by the community itself.[7] 

Although these are but a few examples of baptismal use in the first century, it is most likely that Paul was influenced the greatest by his own culture, as a “Pharisee of Pharisees” and being well educated in the Jewish community in which he was raised.  In Philippians 3, Paul discusses his background and mentions that as pertained to the law he was “blameless.”  Undoubtedly, Paul’s primary understanding of the concept of baptism came from his heritage, although he may have also been influenced to some degree by his knowledge of Pagan ceremonies; but clearly, his words in Romans and Colossians came from the Spirit of God.

Textual Background

Romans 6 is the context for the primary instruction of Paul in regards to the Christian’s new life through burial in Christ.  Later we will discuss Colossians 2 and 3 and relate their parallelism in teaching.  In Romans 6, the beginning of the chapter offers an abrupt breakup of the context beginning in 5:18 in regards to the new realm of grace the saints are under, as contrasted with the Law’s condemnation.  This is not to say that the Law was inherently hopeless or that is was completely unable to be kept, but that it simply could not wash away sin.  (c.f. Luke 1:5, Zacharias and wife Elizabeth were “walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.”)  Under the Law, “sin reigned to death” and in Christ, grace “reigns through righteousness.”  True to the context, there must have been misunderstanding as to the nature of grace reigning in the life of the Christian.  With this, Paul begins the complex discussion of how grace can reign, as one dies to the old man of sin, without that grace giving a license for open sin.  It is safe to say that Paul never loses sight of the “soteriological center” in his understanding of baptism.[8]

As has been mentioned, in the Jews cultic behavior, baptism was a very familiar event to many.  The distinguishing thing about the Christian rite was that it bestowed the gift of the Spirit along with the benefits of justification and sanctification.[9]  So Paul begins to paint the picture of death and resurrection with Christ as the method of similitude to him.  This of course is only done through baptism, and it would seem that Paul’s understanding of burial in baptism was only a parenthetical statement of method, in the middle of the discussion of their attaining the death of the old man of sin.

The method of baptism is of small importance to some, but in fact bears much weight when the imagery is put into practical terms.  One thought on the purpose of water baptism is that it simply symbolizes Spirit baptism, and that “water baptism in Romans 6 is secondary at best.”[10]  David Plaster makes this denial of water baptism on the basis of Jesus’ commands for the disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, thereby not correlating the burial with Christ in Paul’s writing to any salvation-oriented event.  Plaster goes on to quote Tertullian’s practice of “thrice immersing” on the basis of the triune nature of God, but nowhere discusses becoming “like Christ.”

How grave are the implications of committing oneself to burial in baptism?  Certainly the idea of “becoming Christ” in our being made like him through burial and resurrection is humbling when it is truly comprehended.  Perhaps this concept may never truly be comprehended, but the practice observed by Tertullian is staggering to say the very least. “On the Thursday before the Sunday of the baptism (Passover and Pentecost were the preferred times) the candidate, according to Hippolytus, bathed.  He spent Friday and Saturday in fasting, on Saturday was exorcised by the bishop (to drive out any demons), and spent Saturday night in a vigil of Scripture reading and instruction.  Tertullian refers to fasting, praying and confessing one’s sins.”[11]  This description by Ferguson relates just one fascinating account of early attitudes toward this all-inclusive event of burial with Christ.

The text of Colossians 2 is also important in understanding Paul’s rationale because there were inherent problems in the church at Colosse.  Some false teachers had been springing up saying their faith in Christ was “not good enough” and more was required.  Among the things said to be required by some was circumcision, and even some ritualistic rules such as “do not touch, do not taste…”  It is apparent that some Judaizing influence was there, however, the touch/taste traits were not that typical of Jewish cultic rites.  The point is, in the Colossian context, Paul is explaining the all-sufficient nature of Christ and through burial, baptism, resurrection, and even circumcision makes the point about the new life the Colossians are to live.  The phrase “in Him” occurs at the beginning of each verse from 9-11, showing the position of Christ as superior to all other practices.  In this, Paul is able to show in Col. 2:11-12 that in Christ is the great circumcision, the great burial, the great resurrection, and in his dwells “all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”[12]

Schneider remarks that by linking baptism with death and resurrection, baptism took on its deepest possible meaning.[13]  What is the significance of baptism to this discussion of death?  It must be that the rite of baptism most closely assimilates the literal death of a man, his burial and his resurrection to life, as partakes in the relationship to Christ.  The motif of death/resurrection is a phenomenal illustration to correlate with Christ’s death on the cross for all humanity.  Pagan ceremonies of a similar basis in method bear no resemblance in motive to this grand imagery.[14]

Here O’brien makes the observation that the rising up with Christ in verse 12 is a rising in faith, not in the emergence from the waters of burial in baptism.  His point is to say that faith is what gives the resurrected man the new life, not simply baptism; but baptism is the grave.  He correlates this thought to Romans 6:3 as well, however, he admits that his understanding commits no damage to the imagery correlating resurrection to baptism.[15]

“The convert participates in Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.”  In this act of baptism, only immersion could closely symbolize the burial that is taking place, and as Ferguson says, baptism is at this point an act of “dynamic symbolism” in which the symbol (itself) is partaking of the reality symbolized.[16] 

One of the groundbreaking works of the past century on “burial and resurrection” was by Robert Tannehill.  His proposition was that the believer is essentially included in the death of Christ by his submission in baptism, thus becoming like Christ in his very nature.[17]  Tannehill comments that here in the context of Romans 6, Paul is not so much concerned with the methodology of baptism as a ritual, nor does he go in any depth into the exact method of the baptism, but the point of his discussion is that a believer must be transferred from the reign of one dominion to another.  E.P. Sanders put it this way: “in Romans 6:7, the perfect passive verb ‘one who has been righteoused’ is forced to mean ‘one who by dying with Christ escapes the old creation where sin reigns.’”[18] 

In the image of baptism, there is no greater picture of complete death and absorption in the character and death of Christ.  Albeit brief, the burial in water perfectly signifies what is taking place in Christ’s death and burial.[19]  Some have ventured to say that the death of which a convert is partaking is in baptism a literal joining in the cross of Christ.[20]  This literal position may give some comfort to some - in the sense of similarity- but it offers no logical help in understanding the concept of the man of sin dying and rising to walk in newness of character, being, and in every thought.

Burial of the believer in the “watery grave” of baptism is correlative of the death of Christ not in a literal sense, and cannot be a perfect symbol of Christ’s death.  Criticism has been made by some (Tannehill, Wedderburn, Agersnap) as to the nature of the symbolism Paul makes in the burial rite.  Agersnap comments that it may well be asked why Paul makes the relation to Christ’s death to be made in baptism, since Christ was not put to death by drowning.[21]  There are some who doubt that nature of baptism to be anything but a symbol, merely a way for Paul to fulfill his imagery of burial, but having no establishment of relationship at all.[22]  Agersnap also contends, “what is decisive does not occur at baptism… but when Christ died, was buried, and arose.[23]  While it is true that the event of Paul’s great case is the “decisive event,” baptism must not be underestimated in its role as an agent to establish the relationship with Christ.  Nor must we be caught up in the sense of Paul’s discussion of death and relate little or no importance to the baptismal fount.  If baptism were not a threshold event, why does Paul use the language of “being made in the likeness” with regard to burial and resurrection?    This burial must in fact be the event under our own power of decision to place us in fellowship with Christ; there can be no other clear correlation to Christ! 

Although Paul stresses it’s importance to acquiring a “fusing together” with Christ, he never states that baptism alone does anything, quite to the contrary, Peter’s teaching in I Peter 3:21 shows the “bath” accomplishes nothing.  But when accompanied by an understanding of the convert that his life is under sin’s reign and his only hope is to submit to the one who has conquered death itself, baptism is the tomb from which resurrection is possible.  How else can one contact the death of Christ, except in likeness to that death?  For Cranfield to state that no relationship is established denies that a man is “buried” in baptism at all.  Without burial, baptism is only a bath.      The concept Paul is bringing to the Romans (and Colossians) is that when they were dead, they became buried with Christ, and rose again to walk in newness.  If no relationship is established at baptism, then Paul is advocating a burial of a man that is alive to righteousness.  This would shred the case made of man’s need for contacting Christ, and tear apart the imagery of Paul’s burial/resurrection motif.  Badke says that baptism’s central theme is allegiance, thus the burial of the man of sin is only a symbol of his renewed attitude in coming to God.[24]  If allegiance is the central theme of baptism, this destroys the idea of contextual theology.  Paul is here not discussing baptism as in Corinthians, where baptism into Moses was correlated to devotion to Christ, or Galatians, where baptism is “clothing oneself” with Christ, but he is making the case for baptism in this context for the purpose it meets here.  We must be careful to neither cross over contextual lines nor to over-generalize in the rites that carry over to other situations.  In essence, the epistles themselves hide Paul’s view of baptism.[25]  To pull his discussion of baptism from its proper context is abusive and accomplishes no purpose but a false security for any person’s particular set of beliefs on the vivid role baptism plays in the killing of the man of sin.

Baptism as a burial has often become seen only as a meager ceremony, and not a catastrophic event in the bringing to life a dead person.[26]  Before continuing with the depth of Paul’s argument on participating in Christ’s death, it would be beneficial to consider the importance of the view of burial in Christ in other early Christian practice.

The concept of atonement and justification is a challenging ideal that Paul explores here as well.  In Christ, as one has become like Christ in the “likeness of his death” and in the “likeness of his resurrection,” Paul says Christ’s death occurred once for all.  Peter Stuhlmacher does well when he says that atonement necessitates identification with the sacrifice, such as in Jewish Levitical atonement sacrifices, where the Priest would identify himself with the sacrifice by placing his hands on the beast.  Like this example above, we can only identify with Christ through baptism, in a burial with him; a ceremonial lying of our hands upon him as a sacrifice.[27]  This image is helpful to consider what is actually taking place.   While the priests of old could only relate to their sacrifice of atonement through touching the offering – they could not become like the offering itself – we now can relate with Christ in that he emptied himself to take on our very form, and in our burial we become like him!  These points Stuhlmacher makes are very strong, but also intriguing in lieu of his heavy anchoring upon a faith-only doctrine.[28]

What does burial actually do?

One of the simplest interpretations of being buried and raised with Christ, is that of James Dunn, when he speaks of the object of being buried with Christ given in two phrases in Romans 6:4.  “’In order as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.’ The object of conversion-initiation is not a better kind of death in the future, but a new quality of life in the here and now.[29]

It is imperative to understanding burial to realize that Paul’s main emphasis is not the baptism in Romans 6.  Although perhaps not the primary emphasis in the text, baptism does however perpetuate Paul’s case in the death of the old man of sin.  The word die, or some form of death is used 16 times from 5:21-6:13.  Paul is showing the Roman Christians that their new life is “hidden with Christ in God” through their new likeness to Christ through his death; and death is the predecessor to the glory of God in the resurrection.  The use of “dead” is used figuratively of course, although there seem to be two different ideas of death.  One is that death refers to man in the state of condemnation from God, and the other is certainly the death with Christ as the means of man’s atonement.  “Though not necessarily contradictory ideas… the figurative use of ‘death’ and ‘dead’ is a common one, whereas… dying with Christ and the consequent paradox of life in and through death is anything but common.”[30]

When this topic is raised, it seems in the religious world in general there are nearly as many convictions as there are writers on the subject.  Karl Barth comments on Romans 6 that Christ “fills the void” where the death has occurred and the resurrection can begin to take shape.[31]  For the Christian the submission at the point of baptism was in essence the greatest act of martyrdom.  Herein the convert is convicted of his sin and knows the sentence that is upon his own head.  To die for his cause - which is to put away the old man of sin as the theme of his baptism - so that he can actuate the resurrection of the new life!  This imagery of the burial in the fount of baptism is so passionately held by some of the early church fathers, it is interesting to hear their perspective.  It seems any time water is brought up in many of those church fathers’ writings; it is taken to the context of baptism!

In the second century, Hermas put it this way: “The seal then is the water.  They descend then into the water dead and they ascend alive.”[32]  Irenaus said “First of all, it admonishes us to remember that we have received baptism for remission of sins in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became incarnate and died and was raised, and in the Holy Spirit of God, that we be no more children of mortal men, but of the eternal and everlasting God.[33]  Cyril recorded that the candidates for baptism were to be naked, signifying the stripping of the old man of sin, and being plunged into the grave three times.  These three immersions were, in their tradition, indicative of the three days Christ lay in the tomb, which gives a deeper emphasis than the before-mentioned “thrice immersed” man in simply the name of the triune God.  This account is valuable because Cyril was one who had the advantage of being present at the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.[34]

Although not an “Apostolic Father,” Martin Luther had a very strict adherence to Paul’s concept of burial to resurrection in the text.  Luther made many explicit references to baptism as a part of the justification process, and it is evident that Romans 6 and Colossians 2 in part shaped his baptism convictions.  One concept that Luther shrewdly observes in Romans 6:3-4 is that he “understood justification as the final execution of the wages of sin.”[35]  Barth remarks of Luther’s feelings on the grace of Romans 6 when he summed up burial and resurrection as “the death of death, the sin of sin, the poison of poison, and the imprisonment of imprisonment.”[36]

The Dominion of Death vs. The Dominion of Righteousness

The imagery of dominion that Barth also alludes to is stirring when it applies to burial and resurrection in baptism.  In the realm of death, prior to baptism, Satan’s victory is sure.  The death of Christ is clearly visible as the triumph of Satan’s perpetual mission achieves the defeat of God.  When Christ dies, Satan has succeeded, but while he revels in victory, the jeers of his stupor are disturbed by the explosive shriek of the Glory of God springing forth in resurrection!  This is the “glory of the Father” that Christ was raised in, as we imitate the death, defeat and resurrection, victory through our baptism. 

When buried in baptism into Christ’s death, one is coming nearer to the experience of Golgotha than ever.[37]  Although we are not physically on the cross with Christ, we are, as it were, crucified with Christ as the thieves were.  The imagery Paul uses in Romans 6:6 of our old self being “crucified with him” shows through in this context as Schneider reminds us.  Lorna Brockett points out that Romans 6:5 statement “if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death,” shows the true nature of our new relationship of transformation from buried to alive.  The Greek word translated “united” literally means “grown together.”[38]  Dunn uses the term “fused” to describe the meaning of “united” in the likeness of his death.[39]  Dunn also discussed the end of the reign of death and the beginning of the reign of Christ.  The modern-day image of epoxy in model airplane assembly also correlates with Christ’s fellowship with us:  rather than a “glue pasted to glue” adhesive, the epoxy literally takes on the chemical nature of whatever it is applied to.  This is the sharing with Christ.

The fusing of us to Christ is not merely identification with him, but more importantly a sharing with him in transition from one era to another.  The life of sin no longer reigning over us, and although not exempt from sin, we are exempt from the reign of it.  Still further, the point is made that as Paul is instructing here in Romans 6:11, the death to sin is an imperative cessation of the old lifestyle.  To live as though Christ “never died” is to allow sin to remain in its dominating condition, and this is not the state of dominion that Christians are in after they submit in burial to be fused to Christ.[40]

Criticism of the Text

Considerable skepticism has been made of the texts of Colossians and Romans in regard to Paul’s use of burial and resurrection to depict the death of the sin-man, and rise of the righteous man.  Agersnap contends that Paul should have used more condemning language if he was correcting a false doctrine of baptism, or even a false doctrine of resurrection, as if Christ’s resurrection was the only one referred to.  It appears to Agersnap that the religio-historical background impairs Paul from correcting, as he should.[41]  Although Wedderburn questions the validity of the practice and the origin of Paul’s baptism in Romans and Colossians, he rightly maintains “whatever the case, the Romans knew their baptism was a break with the old life and the start of the new life.  They may have even thought they were obeying Jewish law.”[42]  Although Wedderburn questions the authenticity of Paul’s theology in the Romans account, he seems to get the main point of the text, that they certainly did know that their life was now a different one entirely that it was before.

The Ethics of Burial and Resurrection

So what does it all mean?  When burial and resurrection is discussed, we’ve got to get it down to practical application.  The question must be raised, “how does that newness of life occur?”  Not only does the life of the individual change as a benefit of the grace it is offered through justification, but also the Spirit fills the Christian as the fulfillment of the promise of Pentecost, when Peter said that all who were baptized would receive “remission of sins… and the gift of the Holy Spirit.”  As baptism is now liberation from sin, the Christian is free from slavery and bondage to that sin to act in a manner indicative of righteousness.[43] 

For Paul the ideas brought forth in Colossians best describe the ethics associated with the new life.  The resurrected man walks in an implied fellowship with Christ.[44]  Paul addresses the former state when he instructs in Romans 6:9 that Christ is “never to die again,” which implies the character that the Christians should be now exemplifying.  This is not to say that sin is impossible in the resurrected life, but in theory the practice of sin is inconceivable. 

The Colossian Christians had the seal of Christ’s death set upon them in their baptism (Col. 2:12), and in this burial they were truly involved in his death and laid in his tomb.[45]  Here they are buried not literally like Jesus (as Beasley-Murray says)[46], but in condemnation of the fate of sin, and the cessation of the carnal nature.  Murray also states that in the Colossian mention of circumcision, Paul contrasts that spiritual circumcision with the “new creation” of the man in burial with Christ.  That one can only be made like Christ in baptism is sure, because this is the only true type given in the scripture to show the meeting of sinner and propitiation in a single state.  Circumcision in Col. 2:11-12 is merely to show the attitude of the heart that is also shown through its spiritual correlative, baptism.

Beasley-Murray also assesses that the death and resurrection of Christ alone are not adequate acts to effect man’s redemption; this is true because anything else would support a faith-only doctrine such as Stuhlmacher weakly proposes.  The sinner must initiate the relationship with Christ; he cannot be made like him except by his own will.[47]  Nor can Christ’s offering of his own self as the supreme sacrifice atone for the sin of an impenitent person.  The greatest challenge in our practice of the ethics of this burial is to “keep our perspectives clear, that our attitudes to the relationships and attractions of this world be determined in the light of these epochal and decisive events, that he lives in this world as one who does indeed share in Christ’s death, not yet fully liberated from the power of death but no longer behoven to sin, as one who draws his vital energies and motivations from God in Christ Jesus.”[48] 

The positive counterpart to one’s death with Christ is certainly his resurrection with him.  In Colossians 2:12, and also 3:1, Paul uses the past tense to describe their resurrection.  This most certainly could not be mistaken for the final resurrection at the eschaton, but the resurrection into their new lives of righteousness.  The ethical obligation now to the resurrected man is in 3:1, “therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things which are above.”  In this chapter, Paul clearly shows exactly what the realistic new man will do.  He will, as Christ did before him, keep seeking those above-earthly things, as indeed “Christ is seated at the right hand of God.”  Here again, Paul mentions their death, and that their lives are hidden with Christ in God.”  Herein lies the ethics of burial in baptism; to think on things above, to consider the members of the earthly body as dead, and to walk as the man renewed in knowledge (Col. 3:10).

Because now the person of faith has entered into a new aeon of salvation, “that person has died with Christ (Rom. 6:5); he or she has been crucified with Christ (Gal. 2:20); the old self has been crucified with him (Rom. 6:6); the flesh has been crucified (Gal. 5:24); the body of flesh has been put off in circumcision of the heart (Col. 2:11; Deut. 30:6).”[49]  Here the old man is put away in action, in reality, in symbolism, and in the intellect.  Every action of the sinful state of dominion has been put aside to participate in the death and resurrection of Christ.

One of the interesting correlations to this life of change is the wording of Ambrose in the 4th century speaks of the death and resurrection of the Christian in symbol, as that of a fish.  The fish whose submersion is its life participates in his own resurrection daily.[50]  This is the life of the Christian who has died with Christ, and now participates in newness of life daily.  Christ cannot be put to death again; he has conquered that realm of which death was the curse of sin.  Neither can the buried Christian be interred again in the sinful dominion of the past life. 

The burial of Christ is a “rite of passage” or a crossing over.  A transition from one state to another, and that state is the state of justification, of Christ as our unified correlative in the Spirit, of whom we have likened ourselves through burial and resurrection.  “By taking the moral condition of man to its most extreme expression – the death of a just man for the unjust race of men – an event is made both moral and metaphysical.  Baptism is a repeat of this event.”[51]

The “putting to death” of whatever is earthly in Colossians 3:3ff is the continued daily practice of our burial in baptism.  By mortifying those things, our lives no longer bear any resemblance to that form of past failure.

As Oepke words it, baptism shares with Christ’s death a “once for all” character.[52]

Consequently, burial in baptism is the most comprehensive similarity with Christ that a Christian can take part in.  Although the Christian is not daily baptized, the Christian daily offers himself as a “living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God”  (Rom. 12:1). 

The thoughts of Justin Martyr seem appropriate to describe this new-found relationship that is so blissful: “For Christ, being ‘the firstborn of all creation,’ became also the beginning again of another race, who were born again by him through water, faith, and wood (the mystery of the cross).[53]

So I guess the method of burial is important!

 

 

 

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Agersnap, Soren.  Baptism and the New Life.  Translated by Christine and

Frederick Crowley.  Oxford: Aarhus University Press, 1999.

 

Badke, William B.  “Baptised into Moses-Baptised into Christ:  A Study in

Doctrinal Development.”  The Evangelical Quarterly, 88:1: 1988.

 

Barth, Karl. Epistle to the Romans.  Translated by Edwyn C. Hoskyns.  London:

Oxford, 1957

 

Beasley-Murray, G.R.  Baptism in The New Testament.  London: Macmillan,

1962.

 

Block, Abraham P.  The Biblical and Historical Background of Jewish Customs

and Ceremonies.   New York:  DTAV Publishing House, Inc., 1980.

 

Brockett, Lorna.  The Theology of Baptism.  Notre Dame, IN: Fides Publishers,

Inc., 1971.

 

Burnish, Raymond.  The Meaning of Baptism.  Great Britain: Alcuin Club/SPCK,

1985.

 

Cramer, Peter.  Baptism and Change in the Early Middle Ages c. 200-c.1150.

New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

 

Cranfield, C.E.B.  “Romans 6:1-14, Revisited.”  The Expository Times. 106 (1994):

40-43.

 

Dunn, James D.G.  Baptism in the Holy Spirit.   Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson,

Inc.,  1970.

 

Dunn, James D.G.  Romans.   Word Biblical Commentary 38a.  Dallas, TX: Word

Publishing, 1988.

 

Dunn, James D.G.  “Salvation Proclaimed.”  The Expository Times. 93 (Je 1982):

259-264.

 

Ferguson, Everett.  Backgrounds of Early Christianity.  Second Edition.  Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

 

Ferguson, Everett.  Early Christians Speak.  Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing, 1971.

 

Ferguson, Everett.  The Church of Christ: an Ecclesiology for Today.  Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

 

Hartmann, Lars.  “Baptism.”   The Anchor Bible Dictionary.  Edited by David

Noel Freeman.  New York: Doubleday, 1992.

 

Kolb, Robert.  “God Kills to Make Alive.” Lutheran Quarterly.  12 (1998) 33-55.

 

Ladd, George Eldon.  A Theology of the New Testament. Revised Edition.  Edited

by Donald A. Hagner.  Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

 

Martin, Ralph P.  “How the First Christians Worshipped.”  Introduction to the

History of Christianity.  Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995.

 

NASB Study Bible.  Edited by Kenneth Barker.  Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

 

O’brien, Peter T.  Colossians, Philemon.  Word Biblical Commentary 44.  Waco,

TX: Word Publishing, 1982.

 

Oepke, Albrecht.  “Baptism.”  Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.  Vol.

1.  Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

 

Plaster, David R.  “Baptism By Triune Immersion.”  Grace Theological Journal.

6.2:  (1985) 383-390.

 

Sanders, E.P.  Paul: A Very Short Introduction.  New York: Oxford, 1991.

 

Schneider, Johannes.  Baptism and Church in the New Testament.  Translated by

Ernest A. Payne.  London: The Carey Kingsgate Press Ltd., 1957.

 

Sloven, Gerald S.  “Jewish Ritual of the First Century C.E. and Christian

Sacramental Behavior.”  Biblical Theology Bulletin.  Vol. 15: 98-103.

 

Stuhlmacher, Peter.  Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification.  Downer’s Grove,

IL: Intervarsity Press, 2001.

 

Tannehill, Robert C.  Dying and Rising with Christ.  Berlin: Verlag Alfred

Topelmann, 1967.

 

van Donge, Gloria.  “In What Way Is Paul’s Gospel (Euangelion) of Freedom

Theology of the Cross (Theologica Crucis)?”  Colloquium.  21 (1988): 19

-27.

 

Wainwright, Geoffrey.  “Images of Baptism.”  Reformed Liturgy and Music. 19

(Fall 1985):  171-191.

 

Wedderburn, A.J.M.  Baptism and Resurrection.  Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul

Siebeck), 1987.

 

Wedderburn, A.J.M.  “Hellenistic Christian Traditions in Romans 6?”  New

Testament Studies. Vol. 29: 339-355.

 



[1] A.J.M. Wedderburn, Baptism and Resurrection, (Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul

Siebeck), 1987) 68-69.

[2] Wedderburn, 3.

[3] Lars Hartmann, “Baptism” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel

Freeman.  (New York:Doubleday, 1992),: 583.

 

[4] Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 2 ed., (Grand

Rapids:Eerdmans, 1993): 482.

[5] Ralph P. Martin, “How the First Christians Worshipped” in Introduction to the

History of Christianity, (Minneapolis:Fortress Press, 1995): 123-124.

 

[6] Abraham P. Bloch, The Biblical and Historical Background of Jewish Customs

and Ceremonies, (New York: DTAV Publishing House, Inc. 1980): 61-62.

[7] Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 492.

[8] Hartmann, 587.

[9] Gerald S. Sloyan, “Jewish Ritual of the First Century C.E. and Christian

Sacramental Behavior,” in BiblicalTheology Bulletin, 15: 102.

[10] David R. Plaster, “Baptism By Triune Immersion,” in Grace Theological

Journal, 6.2 (1985): 384.

[11] Everett Ferguson, Early Christians Speak,(Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing, 1971):

39.

[12] Peter T. O’brien, Colossians, Philemon, Word Biblical Commentary 44, (Waco,

TX: Word Publishing, 1982): 118. 

[13] Johannes Schneider, Baptism and Church in the New Testament, tr. Ernest A.

Payne, (London: The Carey Kingsgate Press Ltd., 1957): 37.

[14] James D.G. Dunn, Romans Word Commentary Series 38a, (Dallas, TX: Word

Publishing, 1988): 313.

[15] O’brien, 119.

[16] Everett Ferguson, The Church of Christ: an Ecclesiology for Today, (Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996): 190-191.

 

[17] Robert C. Tannehill, Dying and Rising with Christ, (Berlin: Verlag Alfred

Topelmann, 1967): 24.

[18] E.P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short Introduction, (New York: Oxford, 1991): 88.

[19] James D.G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson,

Inc.): 141.

[20] Wedderburn, 69.

[21] Soren Agersnap, Baptism and the New Life, tr. Christine and Frederick

Crowley, (Headington, Oxford: Aarhus University Press, 1999): 269.

[22] C.E.B. Cranfield, “Romans 6:1-14, Revisited,” in The Expository Times, 106

(1994): 41.

[23] Agersnap, 39.

[24] William B. Badke, “Baptised into Moses-Baptised into Christ:  A Study in

Doctrinal Development,” in The Evangelical Quarterly, 88:1 (1988): 29.

[25] Hartmann, 587.

[26] Geoffrey Wainwright, “Images of Baptism,” in Reformed Liturgy and Music, 19

(Fall 1985):  176.

[27] Peter Stuhlmacher, Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification, (Downer’s

Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2001): 59n.

[28] Stuhlmacher, 11.

[29] James D.G. Dunn, “Salvation Proclaimed,” The Expository Times, 93 (Je

1982): 262.

 

[30] A.J.M. Wedderburn, “Hellenistic Christian Traditions in Romans 6?” in New

Testament Studies, 29: 339-340.

[31] Karl Barth, Epistle to the Romans, tr. Edwyn C. Hoskyns, (London: Oxford,

1957): 195.

[32] Ferguson, Early Christians Speak, 33.

[33] Ibid, 35.

[34] Raymond Burnish, The Meaning of Baptism, (Great Britain: Alcuin

Club/SPCK, 1985): 93.

[35] Robert Kolb, “God Kills to Make Alive,” in Lutheran Quarterly, 12 (1998) 35.

[36] Barth, 174.

[37] Schneider, 31.

[38] Lorna Brockett, The Theology of Baptism, (Notre Dame, IN: Fides Publishers,

Inc., 1971): 22.

[39] Dunn, Salvation Proclaimed, 263.

[40] Dunn, Salvation Proclaimed, 261.

[41] Agersnap, 39.

[42] Wedderburn, 67.

[43] Hartmann, 588.

[44] Gloria van Donge, “In What Way Is Paul’s Gospel (Euangelion) of Freedom

Theology of the Cross (Theologica Crucis)?” in Colloquium, 21 (1988): 21.

[45] O’brien, 118.

[46]G.R.  Beasley-Murray, Baptism in The New Testament, (London: Macmillan,

1962): 155-158.

[47] Beasley-Murray, 266.

[48] Dunn, Salvation Proclaimed, 264.

[49] George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, Revised edition,  ed.

Donald A. Hagner, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993): 536.

[50] Peter Cramer, Baptism and Change in the Early Middle Ages c. 200-c.1150,

(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993): 70.

[51] Cramer, 34.

[52] Albrecht Oepke, “Baptism” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 1:

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964): 542.

[53] Everett Ferguson, Early Christians Speak, 34.