Romans 6:1-5, Commentary
Nov 7th, 2009 by Micah Tillman | 1 Comment |
[ Romans 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6: Intro, 1-5, 6-11, 12-14, 15-18 ]
Okay, it’s time I got back to Romans. I’ve been working on this off and on for a while, and I finally finished it today.
____
1 What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin go on living in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.
____
6:1 — At the end of ch. 5, Paul pointed out that people responded to the introduction of the Law by rebelling, and therefore sinning more. God, however, overwhelmed this rebellion with grace (whatever that means precisely).
Now Paul has to combat two things.
____
First, he has to warn any listeners who might misinterpret what he has said as giving them an excuse for sinning.
You’re not doing anyone any favors by sinning, even if God did “respond” with grace to the general rebellion against the Law, Paul argues. God may do good things “in response” to your sin, but that doesn’t mean that’s the way you should try to get God to do good things.
(It’s like the whole, “We should break windows to jumpstart the economy” thing.)
____
Second, Paul has to eliminate the possibility that other listeners will use the (supposed) fact that Paul’s theory gives people an excuse to sin as a reason for rejecting Paul’s theory.
I think it’s this second issue that is actually the more pressing. In fact, he’s already addressed it once in Romans, back in 3:8:
And why not say (as some people slander us by saying that we say), “Let us do evil so that good may come”? Their condemnation is deserved! (NRSV)
Likewise, in 3:31, he wrote:
Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. (NRSV)
____
Paul’s main argument so far in Romans has been directed against those who think that being an inheritor of the Law makes you somehow better than those who did not inherit the Law (i.e., your Gentile brethren). But if Paul’s theory leads people to break the Law, which is obviously wrong, then Paul’s theory can’t be right.
And if Paul’s theory isn’t right, then being an inheritor of the Law does make you somehow better than your Gentile brethren.
And that would mean it was okay for the people of the church in Rome to not live the kind of unified life that Paul wants them to live.
And that would mean that Paul’s argument that the church in Rome shouldn’t be divided along ethnic lines would have failed.
____
6:2 — Here Paul says that the reason it would be ludicrous to take his theory as justifying sin is that his theory claims that his listeners are dead to sin.
His theory claims we are dead to sin (whatever that means, precisely), not that we should live in it.
(I think it’s interesting that nowadays we usually refer to other things as being dead to us, rather than to us as being dead to other things.)
____
6:3 — Specifically, Paul’s theory claims that there is something called being “baptized into Christ.” Furthermore, to go through being baptized into Christ is to have something else happen to you: it is to be “baptized into [Christ's] death.”
Paul assumes his listeners know what being “baptized into Christ” means. The question we have to ask now is whether we know what it means.
____
In the talk of being “baptized into Christ” we have the fourth unifying factor that Paul has identified (by my count, at least) so far in Romans.
First, there is the fact that all Paul’s listeners are children of Abraham, in that they have all become Abraham’s (spiritual) descendants by becoming righteous through faith, just as he did.
Second, there is the fact that all Paul’s listeners are children of Adam, not only physically, but also in that they have all become Adam’s spiritual descendants by becoming sinful through their actions, just as he did.
Third, there is the implicit unification between them which has been created by their reconciliation to God through Jesus. If they are all reconciled to God, then they are reconciled to each other (as Paul says elsewhere).
Fourth and finally, there is their being baptized into Christ.
____
The language of being “baptized into” — ebaptisthemen eis (the word eis is the same as our “to” or “into”) — occurs in eight other verses in the New Testament that I can find:
Acts 8:16 (bebaptismenoi uperchon eis: “Baptized they were into [the name of Jesus]“)
Acts 19:3 (eis ti oun ebaptisthete: “Into what therefore were you baptized?” eis to ioannou baptisma: “Into the baptism of John.”)
Acts 19:5 (ebaptisthesan eis: “Baptized into [the name of Jesus]“)
1 Corinthians 1:13 (eis to onoma paulou ebaptisthete : “Baptized into the name of Paul”)
1 Corinthians 1:15 (eis to emon onoma ebaptisthete : “Into the own [that is, my own] name baptized”)
1 Corinthians 10:2 (eis ton mousen ebaptisanto: “Into the Moses baptized”)
1 Corinthians 12:13 (eis en soma ebaptisthemen: “Into one body baptized”)
Galatians 3:27 (eis christon ebaptisthete: “Into Christ baptized”)
____
That is, in the New Testament, you can be baptized into someone’s name,into someone’s baptism, into someone, or into a body.
Notice, however, that — ironically — no one is ever baptized “into” water. Instead, people are baptized in water (and in the Holy Spirit). The word is not “eis” but “en.”
The difference, I think, must be the difference between the event of baptism and the state that event produces. You are baptized in something, which leads you into a new state — even if it’s just the state of having been baptized in a certain way.
____
So, you enter the water, and then come back up out of it. But in doing so, you enter a new state of being and remain there.
You take on a new state. You take on Christ, or Christ’s body (whatever those two things might mean), or at least Christ’s name (depending on which verse you’re quoting).
You don’t take on a new watery state. The water dries up, but your new state continues. (Contrast this with being baptized in the Holy Spirit. You never “come up out of” that! Your existence is supposed to remain “drenched” as it were; the living water [of the Spirit?] is supposed to be continually welling up like a spring.)
____
6:4 — Anyway, the point is that all of Paul’s listeners have been been baptized, and therefore have taken on the state of Christ (whatever that might mean), and therefore have taken on Christ’s state of having died.
The thing is, Christ has died; He is not dead. He likewise has been raised, and therefore is alive.
Therefore, if Paul’s listeners have taken on the state of Christ, they have taken on the state not only of having died, but of having been raised. The state in which they are now is the state of having ended one life, and have begun a new life.
____
6:5– Here Paul seems to be saying that you can’t enter the state of Christ halfway. If you enter the state of Christ, you not only have to enter His state of having died, but His state of having been raised. If you do one, then you will have to do the other to.
In other words, I don’t think the point here is that his readers will be physically raised in the future. They will, and Paul says so elsewhere. I think the point here is to emphasize their current state.
They are now in the state of Christ, and therefore not only in the state of His having died, but also in the state of His having been made alive again.
____
Notice here, therefore, that even in the midst of what seems to be a very esoteric, theological passage, Paul is still hammering at the same point:
His readers, Jew and Gentile alike, are all in the same state — being from one group doesn’t put you in a better place than being from the other. They are all “united with” Christ, in that they have all entered His state(s). His states are their states; His present-perfect tenses are their present-perfect tenses; therefore, they are all in the same state(s) of having died and having been raised.
So, Paul kills two birds with one stone. In arguing that his theory means not that his listeners are free to sin, but that they are dead to sin and should be living a new life, he is arguing that they’re all in the same boat — in that they have all taken on Christ’s states of being.
____
[ Romans 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6: Intro, 1-5, 6-11, 12-14, 15-18 ]
Interesting thoughts on what we are dead to and baptised into.