Genesis 8:13-19 1 Corinthians 10:1–13 Jude 8–10
On Baptism
After our short detour through the book of 1 Peter, we now return to our journey through the book of 1 Corinthians. And wouldn’t you know it; we pick up the trail again in chapter 10 which starts with some interesting comments about baptism.
So, let’s talk about baptism, shall we? What is this sacrament that has sparked off so much debate within the Christian community, what does the imagery symbolise, and where does that imagery come from?
Let’s start with the two very interesting passages we read from today, starting with 1 Corinthians. First, it is important to note that Paul considers the New Testament Church a continuation of Old Testament Israel. “For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren,” he says, “that our fathers were all under the cloud…” Now, we know that this was an ethnically mixed community and not exclusively Jewish, so by using the plural words “our fathers”, Paul is assuming that there is a continuity between Israel of the Old Testament and the Israel of God in the New Testament.
Second, we note that Paul is making a comparison between what happened with the people of Israel during the Exodus and what happened with the people of Corinth during their conversion process. “These things were examples (or patterns) for us…these things happened to them as an example (or pattern), but they were written down for our instruction…”
Third, we note that there is a progressive movement in what Paul says about what happened with the Israelites. To begin with, they were all under the cloud. From Exodus we learn that their journey began with the institution of the Passover where the angel of death passed over all the houses that were under the blood of the Passover lamb. This was the defining time of judgement on the Egyptians and of liberation for the Israelites…a separation of goats and sheep you could say.
Exodus tells us that “…the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light…” (Exodus 13:21–22) The Lord, the text says, was in the cloud and in the fire. But the cloud is also said to inhabit a figure usually interpreted to be the preincarnate Son of God…the Angel of the Lord who “…was going before the host of Israel…” but then when the Egyptians pursued the Israelites and cornered them at the Red Sea, he “…moved and went behind them and stood behind them, coming between the host of Egypt and the host of Israel.” (Exodus 14:19–20)
But what does Paul mean when he says they were baptised into Moses?
Well, perhaps it would help if we looked briefly at Paul’s use of the word “in” with reference to Adam and Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul speaks about those who are “in Adam” and those who are “in Christ”. In reference to these two “in” states he then says, “just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.” So, I think we can safely assume that the use of the word “in” or “into” refers to some form of spiritual union under whomever we are “in”.
Their passing through the sea (this would be the first time the Israelites physically leave Egyptian territory) marked a sharp break from their past. They transitioned from being enslaved people (who were culturally not considered a people) to becoming the free, covenant community of God. We could say that being enveloped by the pillar of cloud and flanked by the walls of water served as a figurative "immersion" into the community of faith under the authority or headship of Moses.
So, in terms of progression you have a divine deliverance of men, women, children, and a mixed multitude (Exodus 12:38) sealed or validated by an act that constitutes a major change in status. From slaves to a free nation.
But why “into Moses”? Well, my best explanation for the use of the name Moses in this context comes from a rather enigmatic and confusing passage in the epistle of Jude. In verse 9 Jude writes: “But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” Now, many scholars think that Jude 1:9 intends a straightforward, literal reference to Moses' physical corpse. They link this account to early Jewish extra-canonical literature, such as the lost portions of the Assumption of Moses, which describe a tangible struggle over his physical remains or bodily translation.
But I must ask myself: why on earth would an archangel and the devil get into a tiff over a stiff? That just doesn’t make sense to me. So, to find an answer to my perplexing riddle, I went looking in Scripture for anything that looked vaguely similar to this dispute… and guess what? Well, I found this in Zechariah 3:1–2: “Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, O Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?”
Now, in this context, Joshua the High Priest was the representative head of Jerusalem and consequently of the people of Israel. So, is it possible that this term “the body of Moses” is an allegorical reference to the people of Israel in the same way as “the body of Christ” is an allegorical reference to the Christian community? In fact, the Jews who stood in opposition to Jesus claimed to be “disciples of Moses” and Jesus says that they “sat in Moses’ seat”.
In other words, if my understanding is correct, then being baptised “into Moses” simply means that the freed slaves and the mixed multitude were united as a people under one leader, namely Moses. So, in this case, their baptism serves as a symbol of a new status for those who have passed through the waters. God had delivered them from slavery and then, through this imagery, he demonstrates that they are no longer under Pharaoh but under Moses.
But why baptism? Why water? What does passing through water have to do with a change of status? So, once again, I searched the Scriptures to see if this image was used elsewhere to illustrate a change in status. Prior to the Exodus there is, of course, the story of Noah and the Ark. Noah and his family, divinely saved by God through the instrument of an Ark, “pass” through water to begin a renewed creation. Most commentators down through the ages have seen a link between the flood and baptism, so there’s nothing odd about my discovery here.
But was there perhaps something earlier than the Flood that may help us understand the use of water to indicate a change of status? Well, I think there is. In Genesis 1:9 we read that “God said, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.’ And it was so. God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas.” But what happened immediately after the dry land emerged from the waters? Life! For the first time since the beginning, things could live and grow on earth. Vegetation, birds, animals, and, of course, humanity.
So, I ask, is it possible that this is the origin of the imagery of baptism? It seems to symbolise the change that takes place when something emerges out of the waters. With the creation, it was life. With Noah, it was new life. Creation and re-creation. So, could it be that this is the same imagery for this baptism into Moses? Well, I think it is. They passed from one status to another. From slavery to freedom. From not a people to a people.
And this is not simply a connection I have invented by putting these stories beside one another. Some of the earliest Christian writers understood baptism in precisely this larger biblical pattern. For instance, Tertullian connected the waters of creation, the Flood and the Red Sea with Christian baptism, while Ambrose saw in them a continuing movement from creation, through the Flood, into the new creation represented by baptism. In other words, the Early Church itself saw baptism not as an isolated ritual, but as part of God's continuing work of creation, deliverance and re-creation.
But what makes this image of baptism confusing is the fact that the same Greek word “baptizo” is sometimes used in the Septuagint for the ritual washings in the Old Covenant cultus. In this case, most people “baptised” in water were being prepared to meet with God. For instance, in Exodus 19 the people were instructed to consecrate themselves, a ritual that included washing even their garments, because in three days God would manifest his presence on the mountain.
These Old Testament rites of spiritual cleansing continued through the Old Testament period into the New Testament period as any believer who wanted to approach the Tabernacle or the Temple precincts for whatever reason had to first wash themselves. Today, one can still see the many ritual baths (mikva'ot) at the foot of the Southern Steps at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The rites of cleansing were sometimes administered by the individuals themselves (Leviticus 15:13) or by the priests (Leviticus 14:1–7) as ablutions were considered a prerequisite to approaching God at feasts, festivals, and sacrifices. In other words, these were “baptisms of repentance” and cleansing prior to approaching a holy God.
Now, I believe that this rite of cleansing was the baptism that John the Baptist administered. First, because John was a priest, and second, because his ministry was one of preparation. “Prepare the way of the Lord; make his paths straight.”
And then, John also spoke of a different baptism yet to come. “I baptise with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I…he will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” Now, I think it is possible that John’s “Holy Spirit and fire” may very well be a reference to the pillar of cloud and fire in the Exodus because when the Holy Spirit does come on the day of Pentecost, it is with the sound of a mighty rushing wind that manifests itself, not as a single pillar of fire, but tongues of fire that rest on each and every believer.
But be that as it may, John’s baptism is not the same as Jesus’ baptism. How do I know that? Well because when Paul meets followers of John the Baptist in Acts 19 and is told that they were baptised into John’s baptism, he says, “John baptised with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” In other words, John’s baptism was preparatory.
This distinction was also made by the Early Church. Tertullian described John's baptism as preparation and anticipation, while Chrysostom pointed out that those who had received John's baptism still needed Christian baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit. The point is not that John's baptism was meaningless. It was divinely appointed, but it was pointing forward to something greater that had not yet arrived.
What then is Jesus’ baptism if it is not the same as John’s? You might well point out that Peter said in Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”? Yes, he did say that, but then he added, “For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”
Now, you need to do two things here. First, you need to think like an Old Covenant Jew whose faith taught him that the promises of God belonged to covenant families…men, women, and their children. And second, you need to hear a little word often overlooked that is used by Paul in our Corinthian text. And that little word is “all”. All were under the cloud. Men, women, children, and a mixed multitude. All passed through the sea. Men, women, children, and a mixed multitude. All were baptised into Moses. Men, women, children, and a mixed multitude. All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. Men, women, children, and a mixed multitude.
Now, this is important because Peter's Pentecost promise deliberately uses the same expansive language: “…the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off (a mixed multitude, if you will), everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” This is more than likely why many of the baptisms recorded in the book of Acts were household baptisms. If the standard practice for the people of God was the inclusion of every member of the household and if that standard practice was suddenly changed or reversed in the New Testament period, surely those who understood how the covenant worked would have raised their voices in protest as they did when Paul did not require the Gentile converts to be circumcised.
An argument from silence I grant you, but I think that this is where Paul's comparison in 1 Corinthians 10 becomes particularly important. Whatever else baptism means, Paul chooses an event in which men, women, children and a mixed multitude together pass through the water and together become one covenant people. The emphasis is not on the age or even the decision of individuals but rather on God's gracious act of incorporating all whom he delivered into his covenant people.
So to recap, the progression in this text is as follows. Divine deliverance, despite themselves, illustrated primarily through the shedding of the blood of the Passover lamb. A divine change of status illustrated by passing through water as at creation and as at the flood, again, despite themselves. Then a divine feeding on spiritual food and drink, both of which were images used by Jesus when speaking about himself as the Bread from Heaven and the Water of Life.
Now the New Testament echoes the same pattern. Divine deliverance, despite ourselves, fulfilled through the shedding of the blood of Jesus, THE Passover Lamb (1 Corinthians 5:7). A divine change of status, in this case from death to life, illustrated by passing through water as at creation, the flood, and the Exodus. Followed by a divine feeding on spiritual food and drink illustrated through our participation in the Holy Communion.
Once again, the early Christians saw this same pattern. Augustine, for example, could move directly from the Red Sea to baptism and then from the manna in the wilderness to the Eucharist: deliverance through water, followed by feeding on Christ. So Paul's sequence is not simply about three unrelated privileges. It is a movement from deliverance, to incorporation, to nourishment.
Then finally, in both the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament, obedience to the will of God is expected. Remember, the Law came after the deliverance…Sinai came after the Exodus from Egypt. Salvation demands obedience as obedience is the natural consequence of salvation.
And with that in mind I now want us to look at what Paul says in verse 5. “Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness.” Now, if these things happened to them as an example for us and were written down for our instruction, what are we to make of this understatement of all time? Remember, only three of the original adults who left Egypt entered the Promised Land.
Now, we need to keep in mind that Paul was writing to the church in Corinth to warn them against overconfidence and complacency. So, in these verses, he reminds them that, like them, the ancient Israelites shared great spiritual privileges…they were all divinely delivered by God despite their unbelief and doubt…they all experienced "baptism", in which their deliverance was made clear again, despite their lack of faith and their fear…they all ate miraculously provided spiritual food, and drank miraculously provided spiritual water, despite their grumblings and arguments. Yet, at some point their rebellion robbed them of their promised goal as many of them fell away in the wilderness.
Paul’s point then is that religious rituals or rites or sacraments do not automatically guarantee the inheritance of the promise if they are not backed by living, obedient, and enduring faith. Remember obedience is the natural consequence of salvation. So baptism and the Lord’s Supper are not assurances in and of themselves. They are symbols of an inward grace that must be made visible through obedient perseverance.
In his first epistle, John echoes this understanding. “They (and here he means those who were anti-Jesus) went out from us,” he writes, “but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.”
In other words, while all in the covenant family may receive the signs and symbols of covenant inclusion, men, women, children, and all whom the Lord our God will call, it is only those who obediently persevere who enter the proverbial Promised Land. The proof of salvation is therefore not in our participating in the sacraments but in our perseverance in obedient faith.
But to get back to our original questions. What is this sacrament of baptism that has sparked off so much debate within the Christian community, what does the imagery symbolise, and where does that imagery come from? And here we are going to look briefly at some other passages in the New Testament that might help us to answer these questions.
The Early Church Fathers connected Paul’s comment in Romans 6 to the Flood. “Do you not know,” Paul says, “that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” So, according to Paul, in baptism, there is a symbolic movement from death to life.
But there is also a deliverance from spiritual slavery. As Paul says in Colossians 2:13–15, “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by cancelling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.”
And here we find another important biblical image for understanding Christian baptism. Paul does not merely associate baptism with washing. In Colossians he places baptism alongside circumcision, burial and resurrection: “you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands,” he says, and then immediately speaks of being “buried with (Jesus) in baptism” and “raised with him through faith.” The Early Church noticed this connection too. Chrysostom explicitly understood Paul's spiritual circumcision and burial as referring to what takes place in baptism. So baptism is not simply another ritual washing. It is the sign of God's new-covenant work of putting off the old life and raising us into a new one.
In Jesus, God provided the deliverance from slavery to the sin that cut us off from our only source of life – and from the death that came about through the disobedience of our ancestors, Adam and Eve, in whom we all once were. Jesus, the one who was like us in every way except for sin, died in our place. But because there was no sin or disobedience in him, death could not hold him, so he was raised from death to life.
As Paul says in Ephesians 2, “And God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved) and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus…” This transition from death in sin to life in Jesus is symbolised by us rising out of the waters of baptism into a renewed status as the people of God.
And perhaps that gives us the simplest way of putting all of this together. The Scriptures give us a remarkable sequence: creation, the Flood, the Exodus, the crossing (and re-crossing) of the Jordan, and finally Christian baptism. Again and again, water becomes the boundary between what was and what God is making new. The waters of creation give way to life. Noah emerges from the Flood into a renewed world. Israel passes through the Red Sea from slavery into freedom. Israel crosses the Jordan to dwell in the Promised Land. And in Christian baptism we pass through the waters as a sign of dying to the old life and rising with Jesus into new life.
That is why baptism is such a rich sign. It speaks of God's deliverance, God's covenant, God's cleansing, God's incorporation of us into his people, God's gift of his Spirit, and God's promise of new creation. But it also reminds us that the journey does not end at the water. Israel had to continue in faith after the Red Sea. And we too are called to continue following Jesus after the waters of baptism.
So today, as we have witnessed Ray’s baptism, let us remember both sides of the sacrament. It is a sign of God's gracious initiative and God's covenant promise. And it is also a call to a life of faith, obedience and perseverance. We enter the water because of what God has done for us in Jesus; and we rise from the water to live as people who belong to Jesus.
Shall we pray?
© Johannes W H van der Bijl 2026
No comments:
Post a Comment