What is the “one baptism” mentioned in Ephesians 4:5? (I have an answer, but I would like input).

[All Becomes New]

1 Corinthians 12:13 says, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”

Are you claiming Paul isn't talking about water baptism there? What is your evidence of that?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

…

 

[Bible Highlighter]

….

 

[Bible Highlighter]

….

 

[Bible Highlighter]

…

 

[All Becomes New]

The word “all” is key. Basically if you are correct, this would mean that we cannot enter into the body of Christ without water baptism. This is just absurd if one truly believes that. Surely we are baptized into the body of Christ by the Spirit and not by water baptism. This basically means we cannot become a part of the body of Christ and be saved unless we are water baptized. If that is what you are saying, then this contradicts tons of verses. You would be saved by performing a ritual or ceremonial rite and not by faith in Jesus Christ.

Mark 1:4 ¶ "John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."

Water baptism isn't the same thing as Spirit Baptism, but it is still commanded of us to do. I've debated Lutherans on this on whether baptism "saves" or not, which I don't think it does because it's not the same thing as Spirit Baptism, but it is still what Christ commanded us to do as believers is to be baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

….

 

[Bible Highlighter]

….

 

[Bible Highlighter]

….

 

[Dan Perez]

Not all, just some of those Ephesians were baptized with John's baptism which had already expired at that time therefore was an invalid baptism having been replaced by Christ's water baptism of the great commission. Therefore Paul baptized them "in the name of the Lord Jesus". This baptism in the name of Jesus is the same baptism of Acts 2:38 which is also in the name of Jesus and the same baptism of the great commission which is also the name of Jesus....human administered water baptism. Water baptism Peter commanded in Acts of the APostles 10:47-48 was in the name of the Lord.

Nowhere ever is baptism with the Holy Spirit said to be "in the name of the Lord Jesus".

You say NOWHERE evernis baptism with the Holy Spirit said to be " Min the name of the Lord Jesus ".

Turn to Acts 19:5 , and here Luke says by the Holy Spirit , And having heard this , they were BAPTISED in the NAME OF THE LORD JESUS .

As fat as to Eph 4:5 , One Lord , One Faith , ONE /HEIS the Greek wordmis NOT BAPTISM/ BAPTISM .

It is nthe Greek word BASPTISMA andm used some 22 times from Matthew , through EPHESIAN . Just check the Greek text and see .

dan p

 

[Butterball1]

You say NOWHERE evernis baptism with the Holy Spirit said to be " Min the name of the Lord Jesus ".

Turn to Acts 19:5 , and here Luke says by the Holy Spirit , And having heard this , they were BAPTISED in the NAME OF THE LORD JESUS .

As fat as to Eph 4:5 , One Lord , One Faith , ONE /HEIS the Greek wordmis NOT BAPTISM/ BAPTISM .

It is nthe Greek word BASPTISMA andm used some 22 times from Matthew , through EPHESIAN . Just check the Greek text and see .

dan p

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water baptism per Acts of the Apostles 10:47-48, Acts of the APostles 2:38.

 

[Albion]

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water baptism per Acts of the Apostles 10:47-48, Acts of the APostles 2:38.

Or we could refer to Matthew 28:18-19 --

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,...

 

[Butterball1]

Or we could refer to Matthew 28:18-19 --

and to bring out a point from Matthew 28:18-20 it says:


Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them

It says "make" disciples "baptizing" them, hence disciples are "made" by "baptizing.

What is the Purpose of Baptism? (Part 1)

The above link gives great deatial about the word "make" citing many Greek scholars.

The whole article is a good read but kind of long and I know people do not like to read long articles so here is an excerpt (in blue font below) from the above link. It speaks about "Present participles indicate action that occurs at the same time as the action of the main verb". So we have "make" as the main verb occuring at the same time as present participle "baptize". Hence baptizing is how disciples are made.

by Dave Miller, Phd
"Before turning to the Greek grammar of Matthew 28:19-20, consider the following examples in English that illustrate the function of the present participle as it relates to the main verb:

Example #1: “Go make pancakes, mixing the batter in the porcelain bowl, pouring it on the griddle.”

“Make (pancakes)” serves as the main verb of the sentence. “Mixing” and “pouring” are present participles. They refer to action that occurs at the same time as the main verb. In other words, “mixing the batter” and “pouring it on the griddle” describe how to achieve the action of the main verb. Mixing the batter and pouring it on the griddle do not refer to action that is subsequent to the action of the main verb. They do not occur after the pancakes are made. Rather, they represent actions that are contemporaneous with the action of the main verb.

Example #2: “Go clean the yard, mowing the lawn, raking the leaves.”

The main verb of this sentence is “clean (the yard)” followed by the two present participles “mowing” and “raking.” Being present participles, “mowing” and “raking” represent action that occurs simultaneous with the action of the main verb. The father is not instructing his son to clean the yard, and then after doing so, to subsequently mow the yard and rake the leaves. Rather, mowing the yard and raking the leaves indicate how the action of the main verb (clean the yard) is to be achieved.

Turning now to the Greek grammar of Matthew 28:19-20, our Lord uttered an imperative directive couched in the main verb matheteusate frommatheteuo—“to make disciples.”13 The apostles were to go throughout the world and “make disciples.” Jesus clarified this directive with two present participles: “teaching” and “baptizing.” Southern Baptist scholar of New Testament Greek A.T. Robertson says these two participles in this passage are “modal participles,”14 i.e., they identify the manner, means, or method by which the action of the main verb is accomplished. Samuel Green agreed, listing Matthew 28:19 as an example of the “modal” use, “setting forth the manner in which the given action was performed.”15 Dana and Mantey state that the “Modal Participle” “may signify the manner in which the action of the main verb is accomplished.”16 Hence, they pinpoint the mode by which the action of the main verb is achieved (also “manner or means”).17

Observe that the English reader might be tempted to interpret Jesus’ command to mean that the apostles were first to make disciples, i.e., convert people to Christianity, and then baptize them, and then after baptizing them to teach them additional Christian doctrine. However, the Greek grammar of the passage, i.e., Matthew’s inspired Greek translation of Jesus’ (perhaps Aramaic) remarks, weighs heavily against this interpretation and clarifies succinctly Jesus’ intended meaning.18

The main verb of the sentence, “make disciples,” is followed by two present participles that represent actions that occur at the same time as the action of the main verb. “Teaching” (didaskontes) and “baptizing” (baptidzontes) are actions that occur simultaneous with “making disciples,” i.e., they indicate what Jesus meant when He directed the apostles to go throughout the nations and convert people. To make disciples, the apostles were required to teach people the Gospel, including the necessity of observing all of Jesus’ commands, and then to baptize them in water. Those individuals who complied with these two actions were thereby made disciples.19 Alexander Bruce, 19th-century Scottish theologian and chair of Apologetics and New Testament Exegesis in the Free Church Hall in Glasgow, who authored the commentary on Matthew in Nicoll’s series The Expositor’s Greek Testament, wrote: “baptism the condition of discipleship = make disciples by baptizing.” 20 In his commentaries on the Greek Testament, another 19th-century scholar, English churchman, theologian, and textual critic, Henry Alford, specifically noted concerning Matthew 28:19-20: “Both these present participles are the conditioning components of the imperative aor. preceding.” 21 In other words, being taught and baptized are the conditions for becoming a disciple. As Matthew Poole explained: “make disciples…must be first by preaching and instructing them in the principles of the Christian faith…. I cannot be of their mind, who think that persons may be baptized before they are taught…. They were first to preach and to baptize amongst the Jews, and then thus to disciple all nations.” 22 Hence, John Lightfoot explained: “Make disciples: Bring them in by baptism…. When they are under baptism, they are no longer under heathenism; [baptism] puts a difference between those who are under the discipleship of Christ, and those who are not.” 23 Or as British Baptist scholar and professor of New Testament Interpretation G.R. Beasley-Murray noted: “the participles describe the manner in which a disciple is made…. It is when a hearer believes and is baptized that he becomes a full disciple; which is the same as saying that a disciple is made such in baptism by faith…. Baptizing belongs to the means by which a disciple is made.” 24

Endnotes:
1 “The participle has not time in itself. Time with the participle is purely relative; it gets its time from the verb with which it is used”—William Davis (1923), Beginner’s Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: Harper & Row), p. 99; cf. John Huddilston (1961), Essentials of New Testament Greek (New York: Macmillan), p. 73.

2 J. Gresham Machen (1923), New Testament Greek for Beginners (Toronto: Macmillan), pp. 105-106, emp. added.

3 Ray Summers (1950), Essentials of New Testament Greek (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press), pp. 89-90, emp. added.

4 H.E. Dana and Julius Mantey (1955), A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto: Macmillan), p. 230, emp. added.

5 A.T. Robertson (1909), Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: A.C. Armstrong & Son), p. 197.

6 James Hadley (1885), A Greek Grammar for Schools and Colleges (New York: D. Appleton), p. 272, italics in orig., emp. added.

7 William Goodwin (1893), A Greek Grammar (Boston: Ginn & Company), p. 275, italics in orig.

8 William Mounce (2003), Basics of Biblical Greek (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), p. 255, emp. added.

9 Raphael Kuhner (1872), Grammar of the Greek Language, trans. B.B. Edwards & S.H. Taylor (New York: D. Appleton & Co.), p. 471, italics in orig., emp. added.

10 James H. Moulton (1906), A Grammar of New Testament Greek: Prolegomena (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), second edition, p. 126, emp. added.

11 e.g., Ernest Burton (1898), Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), p. 54; H.P.V. Nunn (1973 reprint), A Short Syntax of New Testament Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 123; Jeremy Duff (2005), The Elements of New Testament Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 85.

12 Henry Robison (1913), Syntax of the Participle in the Apostolic Fathers (Chicago: University of Chicago), pp. 11ff.

13 James Moulton (1919), A Grammar of New Testament Greek: Accidence and Word Formation (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), 2:400.

14 A.T. Robertson (1934), A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman), p. 1128.

15 Samuel Green (1886), Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament (New York: Fleming H. Revell), p. 332.

16 p. 228. Also Curtis Vaughan and Virtus Gideon (1979), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman), pp. 157,160—“The circumstantial participle (sometimes called ‘adverbial’) defines the circumstances under which the action of a verb takes place…. The circumstantial participle may be modal, denoting the manner in which the action of the main verb is effected.” Classical scholar Herbert Weir Smyth agreed: “The circumstantial participle expresses simply circumstance or manner in general. It may imply various other relations, such as time, manner, means, cause, purpose, concession, condition, etc…. The time denoted by the participle is only relative to that of the governing verb;” “The action set forth by the present participle is generally coincident (rarely antecedent or subsequent) to that of the leading verb”—(1963), Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press), pp. 457,419.

17 See also Burton, p. 172—“The participle expressing manner or means often denotes the same action as that of the principal verb…. [A]s respects its modal function it is a participle of manner or means.” Also Cleon Rogers Jr. and Cleon Rogers III (1998), The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), p. 66.

18 “Two or more participles…unconnected by kaiv, are frequently…joined to one principal verb”—George Winer (1870),A Treatise on the Grammar of the New Testament Greek, trans. W.F. Moulton (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), p. 433. Lange notes that “there is no kaiv before didavskonte$, so that baptizing and teaching are not strictly coordinate, as two successive acts”—John Lange (1884), A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Matthew (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons), 1:558. Again, in other words, both occur coincident with “make disciples.”

19 Word order in Greek is far more flexible than in English (“The freedom of the Greek from artificial rules and its response to the play of the mind is never seen better than in the order of words in the sentence”—Robertson, 1934, p. 417), which explains the sequence of the participle “baptizing” occurring before the participle “teaching,” even though in actual point of time a person logically would have to be taught before he could be baptized. One beauty of Koine Greek is the way participles minimize this confusion by deriving their “time” from the action of the principal verb. Again, Robertson noted concerning aorist participles: “It is needless to press the point…that the order of the participle is immaterial” (p. 861). Since both participles in this instance are present participles, both refer to activity that must be associated with the action of the main verb. Though they follow the verb, their action cannot occur after the action of the main verb. (A future participle would more appropriately serve that function). Both actions must occur in concert with “make disciples.” No linguistic justification exists for assigning the action of one of the present participles (“baptizing”) as occurring concurrently with the leading verb while assigning the action of the other present participle (“teaching”) as occurring subsequent to the action of the leading verb. Note further, as a point of clarification, that the two present participles do not indicate simultaneous action with each other—but rather both are contemporaneous with the leading verb. Some writers demonstrate confusion on this point by assigning the “teaching” to post-baptism indoctrination. While the New Testament certainly requires new converts to continue their study and instruction after their conversion, Jesus’ use of present participles demonstrates that He was referring to the teaching that is initially necessary to enable a person to become His disciple. Both “baptizing” and “teaching” are necessary in order to become a disciple of Christ. New Testament scholar William Hendriksen succinctly summarized the point: “In such a construction it would be completely wrong to say that because the word baptizing precedes the word teaching, therefore people must be baptized before they are taught…. The concepts ‘baptizing’ and ‘teaching’ are simply two activities, in co-ordination with each other, but both subordinate to ‘make disciples.’ In other words, by means of being baptized and being taught a person becomes a disciple”—William Hendriksen (1973), Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), p. 1000, italics in orig. Though Carson sends mixed signals in this regard, he at least states plainly that “matheteuo entails both preaching and response…. The NT can scarcely conceive of a disciple who is not baptized or is not instructed. Indeed, the force of this command is to make Jesus’ disciples responsible for making disciples of others, a task characterized by baptism and instruction”—D.A. Carson (1984), Matthew in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), 8:597. Stanley Porter explains that “the syntax probably indicates that the action of the two participles is logically concurrent in that the two actions of baptizing and teaching indicate, at least in part, what it means to make disciples,” and so inserts into his “interpretative translation” just before “baptizing” the word “including” (pp. 251-252). Though he ends up applying “teaching” to post-baptism instruction in obedience, he rightly concludes: “The command to make disciples is defined by two further prominent concepts, grammaticalized by two participles: baptism and teaching”—(2015), Linguistic Analysis of the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), p. 253. Note further that Mark’s wording of the “Great Commission” places “preach the Gospel” parallel to Matthew’s “make disciples.” So where Matthew has make disciples by teaching and baptizing, Mark has save people by preaching the Gospel to them, causing them to believe and be baptized. Matthew and Mark intended to say the same thing. Observe in summary: Even if a solid linguistic case could be made proving that “teaching” refers to post-conversion teaching that follows baptism, nevertheless, the design of baptism remains the same, since the “baptizing” occurs simultaneous with “make disciples,” i.e., baptism is essential to salvation, pinpointing the moment when a penitent believer becomes a disciple of Christ.

20 Alexander Bruce (no date), The Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 1:339.

21 Henry Alford (1874), Alford’s Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1980 reprint), 1:306, emp. added.

22 Matthew Poole (no date), A Commentary on the Holy Bible: Matthew-Revelation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson), 3:146.

23 John Lightfoot (1979 reprint), A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew-Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), pp. 379-380, italics in orig.

24 G.R. Beasley-Murray (1976 reprint), Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), pp. 88-89, italics in orig. It is surely eye-opening for renowned Baptist pastor and President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in the late 19th century, John Broadus, to acknowledge the undeniable grammatical function of the present participles in this passage (“‘disciple by baptizing…by teaching’; and so many understand it”) only to dismiss the clear import of the language in order to evade the contradiction between his personal doctrinal belief and the words of our Lord. John Broadus (1886), Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Philadelphia, PA: American Baptist Publication Society), p. 594.

 

[Albion]

and to bring out a point from Matthew 28:18-20 it says:
Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them

It says "make" disciples "baptizing" them, hence disciples are "made" by "baptizing.

No, it doesn't say that. What it does say, though, is that the same people who are doing the evangelizing are the ones who have been commissioned to do the baptizing of the converts.

 

[Butterball1]

No, it doesn't say that. What it does say, though, is that the same people who are doing the evangelizing are the ones who have been commissioned to do the baptizing of the converts.

The Greek language shows (many Greek scholars were cited) that disciples are made by teaching and baptizing....not taught, not baptized = not a disciple.

 

[Albion]

The Greek language shows (many Greek scholars were cited) that disciples are made by teaching and baptizing....not taught, not baptized = not a disciple.

You're saying that a non-member of the church, if subjected to sacramental baptism, becomes a believer because he's received it??

 

[Butterball1]

You're saying that a non-member of the church, if subjected to sacramental baptism, becomes a believer because he's received it??

Baptism does not make one a believer one must first be a believer before one is baptized.

What Matthew 28:19-20 is saying is that the way one is made a disciple is by teaching and baptizing. Teaching and baptizing are both prerequisites before one can be a disciple.

 

[Albion]

What Matthew 28:19-20 is saying is that the way one is made a disciple is by teaching and baptizing.

Yes, but we were talking about baptism and the fact that these same teachers were instructed to baptize.

 

[Butterball1]

Yes, but we were talking about baptism and the fact that these same teachers were instructed to baptize.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, but the point I was making from Matt 28:19-20 is that it is impossible for one to be a disciple apart from teaching and baptizing. This baptism of Matt 28:19-20 is the one baptism of Eph 4:4-5 which is human administered water baptism by which men are made disciples.

 

[Albion]

I get your point now. IMO the original language was a bit confusing. But anyway, the idea that a person cannot be a disciple, a follower of Christ, unless he also is a "teacher" is an unusual POV.

Is it based solely upon an interpretation of that one verse? Or is it that either "disciple" or "teacher" is being interpreted in a way that most Christians do not?