   |
|
|
2 Ne. 31:13 13 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, I know that if ye shall follow the Son, with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism—yea, by following your Lord and your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost; and then can ye speak with the tongue of angels, and shout praises unto the Holy One of Israel. This equivalency of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is even more obvious in the Doctrine and Covenants: D&C 19:31 31 And of tenets thou shalt not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea, even the Holy Ghost. In spite of this correlation, the New Testament origins of the idea of a baptism of fire are interesting, and lead to a different interpretation of the meaning of the baptism of fire. The texts that I am particularly interested in are: Mark 1:7-8 7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. Luke 3:15-17 15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not; 16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable. Matt. 3:9-12 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: 12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. These are three recountings of the same incident. The language of both Luke and Matthew are dependent upon Mark 1:7-8, with the basic information from Mark being brought into a single verse for both Luke and Matthew (Luke 3:16, Matthew 3:11). What is interesting is not the correspondence, however, but the differences in both text and context. However, before I can move to a particular analysis of those verses, I need to digress to the some more general comments on the New Testament usage of the term "baptism." We first encounter the term baptism in relation to John the Baptist (and not without reason also find in this very location the references to the baptism of fire). The "baptism of John" has two important elements to it, a physical performance and a spiritual meaning. The physical performance of the baptism of John is widely, and correctly, understood as an immersion in water. The physical performance of the baptism of John obviously becomes the model for the physical performance of the Christian baptism, as evidenced in the Didache: "And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit." (Didache 7) Of course the Didache comes later and shows the addition of Hellenistic practices (based on Paul’s baptismal theology), but the preferred mode of baptism is still immersion. The spiritual meaning attached to the baptism of John is the remission of sins. (scriptures).This meaning also carries over into the Christian practice of baptism. Indeed, it will be an interesting examination to discover what, if anything, would have distinguished the practice or meaning of John's baptism from the Christian baptism (leaving aside LDS questions of authority). While we are very familiar with the ordinance of baptism having this dual meaning, combining a physical and a spiritual dimension, the New Testament usage of the term "baptism" appears to occur in places where the physical definition of baptism as it relates to the baptism of John does not appear to be appropriate. The typical Greek meanings attached to the word all deal with dipping in water. Presumably, the basis for the baptism is the same for all water-ablutions. The cleansing power of water is understood and "borrowed" from the physical into a metaphysical context. Nevertheless, there are times in the New Testament when it does not appear that baptism is used in the context of a physical ablution: Matt. 20:21-23 21 And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. 22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. 23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father. In this verse the disciples are arguing over who should be the ones to sit in positions of authority in Christ’s Messianic reign. Jesus responds with a question, asking them if they are willing to be baptized "with the baptism that I am baptized with." While we might think that this would refer to Jesus baptism at the hands of John, that baptism is in the past, and does not fit into the context of these verses, for when the disciples respond that they are able, Jesus tells them that it will surely come. Jesus is speaking of some future "baptism" and the context clearly supposes that it will be a difficult baptism. In the context, Jesus appears to be speaking of his coming death, and the similar martyrdoms of those disciples. In this usage and another to be discussed later, baptism becomes separated from the normal context of the physical association with water and takes on another connotation of an event in which the person is completely immersed - though in circumstances other than water. With this background, we are now able to examine the changes in text and context between Mark and Luke and Matthew. Remembering that the text of Mark is the base on which Mark and Luke made additions in their gospels, the changes in text and context may tell us something about the message that Luke and Matthew are presenting that is an expansion on Mark. The context in Mark is simply the person and mission of John the Baptist. The text before the cited verses simply introduce John. The following text begins the story of Jesus’ baptism. Note the changes in Luke: Luke 3:15-17 15 And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not; 16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable. The first important change is context. Where Mark has the story appear in a simple discussion of John, Luke’s story occurs as an integral discussion about the Messiah. The common citation from Mark is the same citation about the relationship of John to Jesus, but in Mark it comes in response to a question that specifically examines Messianic possibilities. John defers a title of Messiah, but bestows it by implication on the "one mightier than I." The change in text is the ending verse. Verse 16 is not found in Mark, but appears in both Luke and Matthew’s versions. In the new context of Luke and Matthew, this added verse is important. Noting the added verse, however, may miss another very significant addition. In both Luke and Mark, John’s original statement that the "one mightier than I" would baptize with the Holy Ghost has added to it the additional "baptism" of fire. Examine the same textual and contextual alterations in Matthew: Matt. 3:9-12 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: 12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Matthew’s text agrees with Luke, but the specific context does not. Rather than a discussion about the Messiahship of John, the context is one of the rightful children of Abraham, and in particular the righteous. In verse 10 Matthew places the statements of baptism in a context of a judgement, where the wicked are separated and burned. It is this context of Matthew that is perhaps most instructive about the meaning both of the addition of the word "fire" in verse 11 and the addition of the entire verse 12. Verse 12 echoes the theme of verse 10. We have a purging of the wicked - a separation of the good from the evil. In both verses 10 and 12, the wicked are burned. This is a very common image in the Old Testament: Ezek. 5:4 4 Then take of them again, and cast them into the midst of the fire, and burn them in the fire; for thereof shall a fire come forth into all the house of Israel. Isa. 5:24 24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel. Perhaps the best reference for Matthew’s contextual examination of these passages comes from Isaiah: Isa. 10:16-23 16 Therefore shall the Lord, the Lord of hosts, send among his fat ones leanness; and under his glory he shall kindle a burning like the burning of a fire. 17 And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day; 18 And shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body: and they shall be as when a standardbearer fainteth. 19 And the rest of the trees of his forest shall be few, that a child may write them. 20 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. 21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God. 22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness. 23 For the Lord GOD of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land. Isaiah presents two themes. The first is the burning destruction of the wicked (verses 16-19). This is followed by a redemptive section which exalts the righteous remnant in the midst of the destruction of the wicked who have not followed God’s ways (verses 20-22). I suggest that is precisely this context in which Matthew, and to a less obvious degree Luke, ask us to see the comments of John the Baptist. In particular, what has begun as a discussion of the difference between the baptism of John and Jesus and become a theological statement of the Messianic mission of Jesus. In Mark, the baptism of water is simply contrasted to the baptism by the Holy Ghost. This contrast between two baptisms is a very neat parallel to the contrast between the two performers of the baptisms. What changes in Luke and Matthew, however, is the addition of yet another aspect to Jesus’ "baptism." Rather than only baptize with the Holy Ghost, Jesus will baptize with fire. The context of the baptism by fire in both Luke and Matthew suggests that the baptism by fire refers to the apocalyptic cleansing at the time of the Messiah’s triumphal return. It is the burning of the wicked and simultaneous redemption of the righteous. It is Jesus in his Messianic role predicted by Isaiah and the other prophets. In the context of the New Testament only, I suggest that the baptism of fire is distinct from the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and that it refers to the events of the end of the world when Christ will come in glory and his glory will "burn" the wicked. In this Messianic context we can now understand better another of the "baptism" verses: Luke 12:49-56 49 ¶ I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? 50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished! 51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: 52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 54 ¶ And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is. 55 And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass. 56 Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time? We should remember that for many of the disciples, the expectations of Christ’s second coming were that it was imminent. Luke is writing after the resurrection, and in the hope of the immediate return. Understanding the "baptism" here to be the crucifixion of Jesus, the rest of the context is the apocalyptic Messiah. Luke places this statement of Jesus in the context of the final Messianic triumph, an idea reinforced by verses 54-56 which enjoin those who understand the signs to look forward to the event. |
||
| by Brant Gardner. Copyright 1999 |
The baptism of fire
is frequently associated with the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and is used in that context in the Book of Mormon:
|
|
|
|
 |