What is the Baptist identity?

Abstract:

This essay aims to present a profile of the characteristics of Baptist identity through an analysis of Baptist literature. Although it should not be assumed that Baptists possessed a single, consistent identity, we can see some general patterns: The believer’s baptism and freedom of conscience, baptism by immersion, authority from the Scripture and the Lordship of Christ, individual competency, priesthood of all believers, a “covenanted community” of regenerate believers with a strong emphasis the intentional formation of community in the discipleship process, the autonomy of the local congregation, the separation of church and state whilst standing up for human rights, a distinct Baptist emphasis on missions since the Evangelical Revival, and two ordinances.

Introduction:

John Smyth is recognised as the first Baptist, who baptised himself and his congregation in 1609.[1] Yet, this congregation split in 1610.[2] So comes a saying that this tendency to disagreeing and splitting among Baptists is one consistent feature of Baptist identity.[3] This essay aims to present a profile of the characteristics of Baptist identity through an analysis of Baptist literature.

Baptism and freedom of conscience:

Believer's baptism is a characteristic Baptist identity. From the outset, Baptists have been strong advocates for religious liberty, insisting on freedom to worship God without restraint and outside influence.[4] The freedom of the conscience of the individual[5] assumes the existence of choices and the competency to make choices. Salvation is a free offer from God, free from coercion. Positive human response is required to enact the covenant of salvation.[6] Baptism by immersion is another defining characteristic Baptist identity. The Baptists came to this conclusion because immersion is the only baptismal mode in the New Testament (NT).[7] The Second London Confession, which was a Baptist rewriting of the Westminster Confession[8] says “immersion… is necessary.”[9] In the 1850s Baptists mandated the Greek term baptizo for “baptism” be translated “immersion.”[10] However, Baptists do not see baptism as the most important Baptist distinctive nor insist that baptism is necessary for salvation.[11]

When Smyth’s and his congregation studied NT teachings on baptism, they concluded that Anglican baptism was invalid because the Church of England was a false church[12], and as there was no true church to receive true baptism from, he baptised first himself and then the rest of the congregation.[13] Infant baptism was also invalid because infants cannot exercise free conscience.[14] Smyth believed his congregation was an authentic expression in contrast to corrupt and counterfeit versions[15] and therefore “a true church of true believers”. Today Baptists are less radical, because no Christian communion can claim they are free from defects. Wright suggests that we can look at the rhetoric of “true church” eschatologically, as being something that has yet to be but towards which we are moving in our pilgrimage.[16]

Scripture, authority and individual competency:

Smyth had such a high regard for Scripture that he read and used them in the original language only.[17] Baptists are said to be “radically biblical”, but are often divided over biblical interpretation and doctrine.[18] Some Baptists are fundamentalists, identifying one for one the word of the Scripture and the Word of God. Mainstream Baptists look to the Scripture focused in the Word Incarnate.[19] Manley summarises that “under the authority of God and Lordship of Christ, Scripture as illuminated by the Holy Spirit is the determinative guide for understanding the gospel…”[20] However, commitment to the authority of Scripture does not set the Baptists apart from other Christians because not every Christian theologian committed to biblical authority are Baptists.[21] Furthermore, diverse contexts generated diverse expressions. For instance, in the seventeenth century, the main bodies are the Particular and General Baptists. The Particular Baptists were strictly Calvinistic while the General Baptists were Arminian.[22]

This leads on to the topic of individual competency and believer priesthood. Baptists believe that all regenerated persons[23] came to faith by the freedom of conscience and are therefore competent to interpret and understand Scripture for themselves.[24] Olley reminds us that the issue is not what is believed about the Bible but how the Bible is used in everyday situations, both individual and corporate[25], to live the story of a life shaped by the Bible.[26] Furthermore, “all Christians are called into ministry although there are some called into a ministry of leadership.”[27] In most Baptists understandings, ordination confers no special abilities on the one ordained. In Baptism, the disciple is committed to serve Christ in the church and society, so in a sense all Baptists are ‘ordained’[28]; the pulpit or celebration of the Eucharist and administration of baptism are not restricted to the minister.[29]

Covenanted congregation of regenerate believers:

A Baptist church is viewed as a covenanted congregation of visible saints, “walking together” in the ways of the Lord and “watching over” one another[30], so there is strong emphasis on discipleship. The call to make disciples goes beyond evangelism to the nurture of Christians so that they are mature.[31] Christian maturity has two main focuses: playing a full part in the work of the local church, and growing in holiness. The concept of “watching over one another” is not unique to the Baptist, but the radicalness of Baptist spirituality insists that visible saints “walk together”[32] with an intention to form a “covenanted community” of regenerate believers, where, in obedience to Christ’s call, they invest their lives mutually caring for one another.[33]^,[34] Modern technology allows us to access a wealth of resources through the internet, but Sutherland[35] reminds us that face-to-face-ness of the congregation cannot be escaped. Furthermore, while God speaks to each person in an individual way, God also speaks collectively through the church, so believers are encouraged to interact with other believers when interpreting the Scripture.[36] The freedom of conscience means there is a rich diversity of ideas within the gathered community. Therefore, we need to live out “unity in diversity” by being open towards the rights of others to describe God in their own language.[37]

Autonomy of the local congregation:

The priesthood of all believers means Baptists have generally adhered to the principle of “democratic congregationalism”, which declares that the final authority in the church resides in the entire membership. Leaders are selected to teach and guide, but they do not become a governing body over the members.[38] There is autonomy of the local congregation within the associational framework, with freedom from state control, freedom from a priestly succession, freedom from fixed liturgical forms, and freedom of conscience.[39] Baptists follow a disjunctive logic: If God holds absolute power then no power on earth can be absolute.[40]

Then comes the question of denominational control. Ralph sees nothing comparable to a denomination in the New Testament.[41] A denomination is not a church. The closest thing would be an authoritative assembly such as the “Council of Jerusalem” in Acts 15.[42] Therefore, attachment to a denomination should not be the same as the attachment to the church of Jesus Christ.[43] When a choice had to made, Baptists opted for the independent congregation rather than the corporate.[44] After all, denominational super-structures may change, but local churches remain the centres of evangelism, discipleship and service.[45] Ralph suggest that a healthy approach might be to see denominations as parachurch organisations standing alongside and serving their congregations for the sake of the gospel.[46]

Separation of church and state:

The term “Puritanism” was first heard in 1565. Their aim was to purify the church of the remains of “Catholic superstition”.[47] Under the rule of Charles I, there was a movement towards Catholicism, which fostered a renewal of the separatist tendency, and it was at this juncture that several of the early churches adopted a Baptist identity.[48] Helwys, one of the co-founders of the first Baptist congregation, proposes that “the King is a mortal man and not God, therefore he has no power over the immortal souls of his subjects… For men’s religion… is between God and themselves. The king will not answer for it. Neither may the king be judge between God and man.”[49]

The first Baptists were pioneering a new way of conceiving the temporal power.[50] This does not imply the separation of church from society. The government is not society itself, but the hard edge of society, given to maintain order in society. So separation of the church and state does not imply a withdrawal into the private mystical realm and taking no place in the public realm.[51] It cannot imply the independence of the church from the state as institutions shape each other. Furthermore, it is not the separation of the church from politics because all of life is political in that our daily lives involve the processes of negotiating, agreeing, and managing. Politics is intrinsic to corporate life, be it in schools, trades or congregations. It is not the systematic exclusion of religion from public life.[52]

Rather, it is a desire to distinguish between the order of preservation served by government and the order of redemption served by the church. The order of preservation requires the use of coercion and force. The kingdom of God should not use coercion and force, as Christ gave himself up and love those who persecute him. The external preservation of human societies is essential but cannot achieve human redemption[53], so there is a need for Christian churches to maintain a critical distance from power in order to fulfil their mandate faithfully.[54] Meanwhile, the “prophetic Baptist voice” still needs to be spoken out in society[55] against oppression and moral perversions. Three great Baptists in American history, Walter Rauschenbusch, Billy Graham and Martin Luther King Jr. each had an enormous influence on their nation and beyond.[56] If the church does not stand up for human rights, the result is devastating. In WWII, German Baptists were brought up in a pietist tradition and inexperienced in opposing the Hitler regime. They held a Lutheran interpretation of Roman 13 that inhibited the resistance to duly appointed rulers.[57] Wright suggests that if there comes a day where no tension exists between Church and State: “either the Church would have become the compliant tool of a totalitarian regime, or Christ’s kingdom would have arrived on earth without our noticing it.”[58]

Missions:

In the seventeenth century, the Particular Baptist ministers argued on the basis of numerous passages in the NT that the nature of the church was a fellowship of the redeemed, but other Baptist ministers, such as Andrew Fuller, Dan Taylor, and William Carey read it differently and see an obligation to enlarge the Kingdom of God[59] and preach the gospel across the whole world.[60] The Evangelical Revival in Britain and the Great Awakening in America were branches of the same vast revival movement.[61] The overriding result of the Baptist transformation by the revival was the increase in the priority of mission.[62] Other matters, such as church order, faded into insignificance.[63] Baptist numbers exploded, and they launched new missionary ventures at home and abroad. In the nineteenth century, they remained fervent Evangelicals. More new divisions occurred but the old contrast between Calvinists and Arminians faded.[64]

William Carey, “father of modern missions”[65], learned the languages of Asia sufficiently to translate the Bible into several different languages.[66] Although missions is not a uniquely Baptist theme, there is a distinct Baptist emphasis on this theme.[67] Baptists seemed to have produced a disproportionately large number of world-leading missiologists, but have yet developed a distinctively Baptist missiology. In hearing the call to make disciples, Baptists have been committed to the work of mission.[68] Furthermore, the Baptist church’s refusal to baptise children of church members mean it is always one generation from extinction.[69] The current pattern of world mission is now summed up by the word “partnership”. Missions are no longer sent from the West to the rest of the world, but the cooperative venture between equals across the world.[70] 

Two ordinances:

Another distinctive characteristic of Baptist identity is the use of the term “ordinances” rather than “sacraments” for baptism and the Lord’s Supper. “Ordinance” is derived from “ordain”[71] and refers to those acts ordained by Jesus for his disciples to practice.[72] The Catholic tradition uses the term “sacrament” because they believe these rites to be a means of imparting grace, which is a mystery.[73] The Baptists view these rites as universal experiences for the church which serves as reminders of Christ’s presence and work in redemption, and there is no need to be overly mysterious, and hence preferred the term “ordinance”.[74]  

Conclusion:

Although it should not be assumed that Baptists possessed a single, consistent identity[75], we can see some general patterns. The freedom of conscience means baptism can only be valid for believers and not infants. Baptism is by immersion because this is the only mode of baptism in the NT. The earliest Baptists saw themselves as the only “true church.” Today Baptists are less radical, because no Christian communion can claim to be free from defects, so it is recommended that the term “true church” be used eschatologically. Baptists are under the authority of God, Lordship of Christ, and the Scripture, which, when combined with freedom of conscience means that individuals are competent to interpret the Scripture for themselves, and priesthood is for all believers. There is a strong emphasis on community in the discipleship process, because a covenanted congregation of visible saints need to “walk together” in the ways of the Lord. Although the Baptist denomination is large, when a choice had to made, Baptists opted for the independent congregation rather than the corporate. The separation of church and state represents a desire to distinguish between the order of preservation served by government and the order of redemption served by the church. Therefore, it is still necessary to stand up for human rights. There is a distinct Baptist emphasis on missions since the Evangelical Revival. Finally, the term “ordinances” rather than “sacraments” is used for baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

Bibliography:

Baptist World Alliance. “A Survey of Baptist World Alliance Conversations with other

Churches and some implications for Baptist Identity.” Accessed August 18, 2017. http://bwa-baptist-heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Survey-of-Conversations-with-Other-Churches.pdf

Beasley-Murray, Paul. Radical Believers: The Baptist Way of Being the Church. Didcot: BUGB, 1992.

Bebbington, David W. Baptists Through the Centuries: A History of a Global People. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2010.

Brackney, William H. A Capsule History of Baptist Principles. Atlanta: Baptist History and Heritage Society, 2009.

Briggs, John. “Memory, vision and mission: What our yesterdays have to say to our todays and tomorrows.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 38-53. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Callam, Neville. “Worship and the Unity of Baptists Today.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 222-235. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Chatfield, Graeme. “Contributing to the global conversation on Baptist identity.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 54-62. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Cole, Neil. Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens. San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 2005.

Costello, Tim. “World mission: Seeking the prophetic Baptist voice.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 152-156. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Cupit, Tony. “Baptist identity in the 21^st century.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 169-175. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Dyer, Keith. “Suitably Abrahamic Australia? The Bible and Baptists in the twenty-first century.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 73-79. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Grenz, Stanley J. The Baptist Congregation. Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 1985.

Haymes, Brian. “One church, one faith, one Lord: Questions of Baptist identity.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 25-37. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

Helwys, Thomas. A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity. Amsterdam: N.P., 1612.

Holmes, Stephen R. Baptist Theology. London: T&T Clark, 2012.

Lumpkin, W. L. Baptist Confessions of Faith. Valley Forge: The Judson Press, 1959.

Manley, Ken. Baptists: Their Heritage and Faith. Brisbane: Baptist Union of Queensland, 1974.

Manley, Ken. “’The Beating of the Baptist Heart’: Mission and Baptist Identity.” In Mission: The Heart of Baptist Identity, edited by Graeme Chatfield, 15-39. Macquarie Park: Morling Press, 2009.

McAlpine, Steve. “The Little Church That Could.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 101-115. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Moore, Richard K. “Baptist Witness to New Testament Baptism beyond 2009.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 171-185. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Olley, John. “Shaped by the Bible: Acting together in the continuing drama.” In Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, edited by Frank Rees, 80-86. Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016.

O’Neil, Michael D. “Beyond Identity Crises?” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 56-72. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Parsons, Michael. “Church as (Covenant) Community – Then and Now.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 207-221. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Ralphs, Peter. “Is a Denomination a Church?” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 73-85. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Sutherland, Martin. “Meeting for Minutes? Baptist Congregational Life in the Age of Twitter.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 207-221. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Smyth, John. “The Character of the Beast (1609).” In The Works of John Smyth, edited by W. T. Whitley, 564-574. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1915.

Smyth, John. “Prepositions and Conclusions.” In The Works of John Smyth, edited by W. T. Whitley, 733-750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1915.

White, B. R. The English Baptists of the 17^th Century. London: Baptist Historical Society, 1983.

Wright, Nigel G. “Baptist Christians: Repentant and Unrepentant.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 1-16. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

Wright, Nigel G. “Human Religion: Evangelical Faith, Baptist Identity, and Liberal Secularism.” In Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, edited by David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons, 17-33. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011.

---

[1] David W. Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries: A History of a Global People (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2010), 32.

[2] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 35.

[3] Brian Haymes, “One church, one faith, one Lord: Questions of Baptist identity,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 27.

[4] Tony Cupit, “Baptist identity in the 21^st century,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 169.

[5] John Briggs, “Memory, vision and mission: What our yesterdays have to say to our todays and tomorrows,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 46.

[6] William H. Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles (Atlanta: Baptist History and Heritage Society, 2009), 24.

[7] Brackney, A Capsule History, 47.

[8] Stephen R. Holmes, Baptist Theology (London: T&T Clark, 2012), 69.

[9] W. L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Valley Forge: The Judson Press, 1959), 291.

[10] Brackney, A Capsule History, 28.

[11] Richard K. Moore, “Baptist Witness to New Testament Baptism beyond 2009,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 172.

[12] John Smyth, “The Character of the Beast (1609),” in The Works of John Smyth, ed. W. T. Whitley (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1915), 564-574.

[13] B. R. White, The English Baptists of the 17^th Century (London: Baptist Historical Society, 1983), 24.

[14] Smyth, “The Character of the Beast (1609),” 564-574.

[15] Nigel G. Wright, “Baptist Christians: Repentant and Unrepentant,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 9.

[16] Wright, “Baptist Christians: Repentant and Unrepentant,” 11.

[17] Brackney, A Capsule History, 54.

[18] Keith Dyer, “Suitably Abrahamic Australia? The Bible and Baptists in the twenty-first century,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 73.

[19] Haymes, “One church, one faith, one Lord,” 35.

[20] “A Survey of Baptist World Alliance Conversations with other Churches and some implications for Baptist Identity,” Baptist World Alliance, accessed August 18, 2017, http://bwa-baptist-heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Survey-of-Conversations-with-Other-Churches.pdf

[21] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 83.

[22] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 52.

[23] Parsons, Michael. “Church as (Covenant) Community – Then and Now,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 208.

[24] Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles, 34.

[25] John Olley, “Shaped by the Bible: Acting together in the continuing drama,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 83.

[26] Olley, “Shaped by the Bible,” 85.

[27] “A Survey of Baptist World Alliance Conversations”

[28] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 111.

[29] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 113.

[30] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 151.

[31] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 151.

[32] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 156.

[33] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 157.

[34] Michael D. O’Neil, “Beyond Identity Crises?,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 61.

[35] Martin Sutherland, “Meeting for Minutes? Baptist Congregational Life in the Age of Twitter,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 54.

[36] Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles, 34.

[37] Dyer, “Suitably Abrahamic Australia?,” 78.

[38] Stanley J Grenz, The Baptist Congregation (Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 1985), 56.

[39] Wright, “Baptist Christians: Repentant and Unrepentant,” 3.

[40] Wright, “Baptist Christians: Repentant and Unrepentant,” 6. This contrasts with the conjunctive logic of Roman Catholics and monarchies, which tells us that because there is one God, so there should be correspondingly one pope, and one emperor.

[41] Peter Ralphs, “Is a Denomination a Church?,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 74.

[42] Ralphs, “Is a Denomination a Church?,” 77.

[43] Ralphs, “Is a Denomination a Church?,” 85.

[44] Haymes, “One church, one faith, one Lord,” 30.

[45] Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles, 98.

[46] Ralphs, “Is a Denomination a Church?,” 85.

[47] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 16.

[48] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 21.

[49] Thomas Helwys, A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity. Amsterdam: N.P., 1612.

[50] Nigel G. Wright, “Human Religion: Evangelical Faith, Baptist Identity, and Liberal Secularism,” in Beyond 400: Exploring Baptist Futures, ed. David J. Cohen and Michael Parsons (Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 17.

[51] Wright, “Human Religion,” 18-19.

[52] Wright, “Human Religion,” 19.

[53] Wright, “Human Religion,” 20.

[54] Wright, “Human Religion,” 21.

[55] Tim Costello, “World mission: Seeking the prophetic Baptist voice,” in Baptist identity into the 21^st century: Essays in honour of Ken Manley, ed. Frank Rees (Melbourne: Whitley College, 2016), 156.

[56] Costello, “World mission,” 155. Walter Rauschenbusch was the father of the social Gospel, Billy Graham is a well-known evangelist and Martin Luther King Jr. was a leader of the Civil Rights Movement.

[57] Briggs, “Memory, vision and mission,” 48.

[58] Wright, “Human Religion,” 30.

[59] Brackney, A Capsule History, 25.

[60] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 162.

[61] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 71.

[62] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 81.

[63] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 187.

[64] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 277.

[65] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 142.

[66] Brackney, A Capsule History, 25.

[67] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 142.

[68] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 151.

[69] Holmes, Baptist Theology, 143.

[70] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 230.

[71] Grenz, The Baptist Congregation, 30.

[72] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 179.

[73] Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles, 46.

[74] Brackney, A Capsule History of Baptist Principles, 46.

[75] Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries, 2.

New Testament ethics

What is the ethic of Paul? (major themes: freedom, ethics, Holy Spirit)

Background

l   Paul was a Pharisee before he became a Christian. He is quite explicit about the value to be attributed to the OT traditions (For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope. Romans 15:4), and his practical exhortations reflect this background.

l   Paul saw himself as apostle to the Gentiles, which is why Rabbinic Judaism is not more prominent. Many of the images Paul uses are Hellenistic instead.

Ethics

Faith:

l   This is receptivity to what God has done in Christ (I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. Galatians 2:20).

l   Good works are not prior but posterior to faith (For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. Ephesians 2:10).

l   Faith realises itself in obedience.

New Covenant:

l   Pauline ethics has to do with life in the Spirit, not life disguised as though it is a continuation of life under the Law.

l   Life in the Spirit means far more than just ethical behaviour. We are an eschatological people, who live the life of the future in the present.

l   The whole of life under the new covenant is now lived in and by the Spirit, including worship, one’s relationship to God, and everyday life itself.

l   As the renewed presence of God, the Spirit, having given life to his people, now leads them in paths of righteousness for his name’s sake.

l   Paul called upon Christians to exercise a new discernment, not conformed to this age but ‘transformed by the renewing of your mind’ (Romans 12:1-2). This discernment invoked some fundamental values, most notably freedom and love, which are intimately associated with the work of the Holy Spirit.

Freedom:

l   Judaizers (Itinerant Jewish Christians) argue that for believers in Christ to be identified with God’s people they must also observe Torah.

l   Paul argues the Spirit, and the Spirit alone, identifies the people of God under the new covenant.

l   Pauline freedom is both freedom from and freedom to.

l   It is freedom from the Law as the means to salvation:

n   Freedom from some of the ceremonial requirements of Jewish Tradition, freedom from bondage to sin. Paul did not require Jewish Christians to act like Gentiles or Gentile Christians to keep the law of Moses, but he did require them to ‘accept one another’ (Romans 15:7).

n   The failure of the covenant of law, was that even though the Torah came by the way of Spirit-inspiration (Romans 7:14), it was not accompanied by the empowering Spirit.

n   It is unable to set people free.

n   The New Covenant, by the means of the life-giving Spirit, is written on “tablets of human hearts” (2Corinthians 3:3).

n   The promised new covenant has replaced the old, and the gift of the Spirit proves it.

n   Truly meaningful righteousness is a righteousness coming from an obedient heart, rather than dutiful observances.

n   God’s intent with the Torah was for his character to be revealed in the way his people worshipped and lived.

n   Paul sometimes speaks of the Law in a negative way, and sometimes affirms Torah as good. The Law of Moses was ‘good’ (Romans 7:16). The Law brings knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).

n   Faith does not nullify the law; rather it establishes or upholds it (Romans 3:31).

n   The Law as a means of achieving right standing with God has had its day, to be replaced by faith in Christ.

l   It is freedom to participate in a relationship with Christ: the freedom to act righteously.

n   Those who are led by the Spirit are not under Torah (Galatians 5:18).

n   The fruit of the Spirit is the Spirit’s producing in our lives the righteousness of God. This is the new form of revelation.

n   The goal of Torah, God’s own righteousness reflected in his people, is precisely what the Spirit can do, which Torah could not.

n   When Paul addressed the Colossian’s heresy (Colossians 1:9-11), rather than giving them Christian rules to live by Paul gives them the Spirit.

l   A responsible freedom, and not licence.

n   Paul usually uses the term “sanctification” to refer to Christian conversion.

n   For Paul, “holiness” is abstaining from some sins absolutely.

Love:

l   Love as a fulfilling of what had been contained in the Law (Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. Romans 13:8).

l   Love is the central value of Christian faith and life (1Corinthians 13).

l   The mind renewed by the Spirit leads us to understand that love must rule over all.

Community:

l   Pauline ethic is not focused on the isolated individual, but to indicate that Christian faith is to be lived and expressed in relation to others. It is not an individualistic, one-on-one brand of personal holiness.

l   It is living the life of the Spirit in Christian community and in the world. Paul’s instructions are in second person plural, with the whole church in mind. But the instructions are expressed in such a way that they are experienced and obeyed at the individual level.

l   It is far easier to be a Christian in isolation than it is to live out one’s faith in the context of all those other imperfect people who make up God’s church.

l   To be in isolation makes it too easy because it turns Christians into easily performed codes of conduct having to do not with caring for one another but with stuff like food and drink.

l   To be unified by love for the one Lord. (For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. Romans 12:4-5)

l   There are more extortions in Hebrews 13: brotherly love, hospitality to strangers, sympathetic identification with the imprisoned and oppressed, respect for marriage, and freedom from the love of money.

Humility:

l   Paul was captivated by the person of Christ, therefore the humiliation of Christ became a central motif in his ethical teaching. We are to have the mind of Christ (Philippians 2).

l   All status symbols are no better than garbage. He had little time for status and wished to affirm the human dignity of all as there is a new identity in Christ. (There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28). Paul did not lead a slave revolt etc but did not simply accept without qualifications existing social roles and relationships either.

Suffering:

l   The ethic of joy in suffering.

l   Life was not meant to be easy.

l   Those who suffer through faithfulness are following in the footsteps of the Lord (I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. Romans 8:18).

Civil obedience:

l   Pauline ethic has a strong sense of civil obedience (Romans 13).

l   Tension between present and future:

n   The present evil age continued.

n   We are citizens of heaven, whose triumph is awaited.

n   Spirit ethics is neither ethical perfectionism nor triumphalism.

n   Life in the Spirit is ethical realism, life lived in the already/not yet.

The nature of Christian ethics for Paul

l   The purpose: Glory of God (1Corinthians 10:31).

l   The pattern: Son of God (1 Corinthians 4:16-17), into whose likeness we are predestined to be transformed (Romans 8:29).

l   The principle: Love, because that’s the essence of who God is.

l   The power: the Spirit

Was Paul a relativist in his approach to ethics?

You have been asked to address a conference for evangelical graduate students on the subject, “Paul and Ethics”. You are told the majority attending have been taught in their churches that Paul was not “into” ethics.  Therefore he did not emphasise justice and other broad ethical issues.  Rather he focused on personal salvation. Your task is to show Paul had a “heart” for ethics. Outline your address.

There is a New Covenant so there is life in the Spirit, which means far more than just ethical behaviour. It makes us an eschatological people. The Law as a means of achieving right standing with God has had its day, replaced by faith in Christ. Faith does not nullify the law but rather it establishes or upholds it. The Spirit gives a new form of revelation. With the presence of God, the Spirit leads his people in paths of righteousness, and there is a new discernment which involves the renewal of our minds. Freedom and love are intimately associated. There is freedom from the Law as a means of salvation because the New Covenant is written on "tablets of human hearts". The goal of the Torah, God's own righteousness reflected in his people, is precisely what the Spirit can do, which Torah could not. Love is the central value, and a mind renewed by the Spirit leads us to understand that love must rule all and love is a fulfillment of what has been contained in the Law. So when Paul addressed the Colossian's heresy, rather than giving them Christian rules to live by Paul gives them the Spirit.

What is the ethic of Jesus?

Principles of Jesus’ ethical teaching:

Living as Kingdom of God people:

l   The Kingdom of God involves repentance (Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near. Matthew 3:2).

l   The Kingdom of God is focused on the powerless (Blessed are you who are poor, Luke 6:20-21).

l   Our social responsibility (Sheep and goats…I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. Matthew 25:31-36).

l   The Kingdom of God is near (Mark 1:15).

l   Jesus broke through the nationalistic dreams of the seers for Israel’s revenge against ‘the nations’.

l   In the great reversal of God’s good future, the blessings of God would fall first not on Israel but on those in Israel conventionally thought least likely to receive them: the poor, women, children and ‘sinners’.

Radical obedience to and trust in God:

l   Jesus spoke as ‘one who had authority’. Christ is authoritative because he is God incarnate.

l   Allegiance to God was placed above other possible commitments such as family or possessions (If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. Luke 14:26).

l   Obedience includes inner attitudes as well as outward acts (Anger and lust in Matthew 5:21-30). God placed a claim on the whole person, not just some limits on their external behaviour.

l   Radical concern for the good of the neighbour. The Golden Rule: love your neighbour as yourself (Mark 12:31).

n   The ethic of Jesus attacked the self-centeredness of the individual but at the same time it did not deny the individual’s immense value.

n   His estimate of God’s concern for a single individual is best expressed in the parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:1-7).

A reward motif:

l   It is most prominent in Matthew, but appears also in other Synoptics.

l   The term ‘reward’ may be a misnomer since it is clear that these come more from the grace of God than from the ‘merit’ of the person involved. We are unworthy servants.

l   A strong eschatological element with respect to reward.

The Sermon on the Mount: Central teaching of Jesus:

l   The single largest block of moral teaching given by Christ.

l   Scholars say the Beatitudes are prescriptions of moral practices appropriate to his disciples as salt and light.

l   6 examples of true righteousness (Matthew 5:21-48)

n   Taken from the traditional teachings from the Ten Commandments in the OT: Jesus prefaces his teaching by affirming the continuing authority of that word.

n   The six examples all deal with relationships. Interestingly there was restriction on revenge in the OT but Jesus takes it further to do not resist.

l   3 Jewish religious practices

n   Alms, prayer and fasting, Matthew 6:1-15.

n   All stressing the inward secret aspect at the expense of the false external action.

l   Other teachings: wealth and security, judgement, the foolishness of giving good things to the unworthy, the goodness of our heavenly Father, the Golden rule, the two ways, and the importance of practicing what has been heard.

l   Important ethical issues:

n   Radical difference between the common human values and those of the Kingdom of God.

n   Motive and intention (in the 6 examples).

n   Matching inward devotional life and outward actions.

n   Trust in God.

n   Practicing what is taught by Christ

l   Bonhoeffer

n   The Sermon on the Mount had converted him from being an ambitious theologian to being an actual Christian.

n   When Hitler came to power, Bonhoeffer was beginning to write his book Discipleship. It was while he was focusing on his concrete interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount that he made the crucial decision to oppose Hitler.

n   One only learns to have faith by living in the full this-worldliness of life. This-worldliness referring to: living fully in the midst of life’s tasks, questions, successes and failures, experiences, and perplexities. Then one takes seriously no longer one’s own sufferings but rather the suffering of God in the world.

n   Bonhoeffer develops love, not renunciation, as the central theme. Love is “a real belonging-together and being-together of people with other human beings and with the world, based on God’s love that is extended to me and to them.” The Sermon on the Mount calls for self-denial not as a principle of renunciation, but as a call “to love one another, thus to reject everything that hinders fulfilling this task”.

n   Jesus is no Platonic idealist; Jesus is a Jewish realist.

n   Sermon on the Mount from Matthew 5:21 to 7:12 have been misinterpreted as dyadic antithesis instead of the transforming initiatives. For example, 5:21-26 has been misinterpreted as an antithesis commanding us never to be angry, which would be an impossibly high ideal. These are actually fourteen triads: Beginning with a traditional instruction. Then offers a realistic diagnosis of vicious cycles and power dynamics that cause injustice if we handle them inappropriately. Then concludes with a constructive alternative.

n   Martin Luther’s translation of Matthew 5:38-42 as “do not resist evil” led him to develop his two-realms ethics, limiting the Sermon on the Mount to individual relationships. Such a compartmentalised ethics had disastrous effects in history, causing many Christians to think they should not resist Hitler.

n   Jesus taught in the tradition of Hebrew prophets: he frequently revisited evil, including Pharisees and authorities and Satan.

n   Jesus advocates justice for the poor, inclusion of enemies, and peacemaking rather than violence, and he confronts the domination of the Pharisees.

n   The transforming initiatives point us toward participating in the work of the Holy Spirit in our midst, the breakthrough of the reign of God, the presence of God.

The imitation of Christ:

l   Two fundamental theological difficulties associated with an ethic of the imitation of Christ

l   Exemplarism which shows Christ as one who is outside us and historically distant from us.

l   Christ may indeed be the great moral educator of mankind, but the human capacity for moral education gives every indication of being sadly limited, conditioned and restricted by forces over which we have little control (Romans 7:15-24).

l   Pelagian view: perfectionist illusions, unrealistic and un-Christian view of human nature.

l   The idea of the “imitation of Christ” suggests that we imitate him externally, like a human ability to imitate an external example, of a salvation dependent on our efforts. The idea of “being conformed to Christ” is a better wording because it speaks of an internal process of transformation by which the real presence of Christ within us gradually changes us as we are conformed to him.

l   It’s about being Christlike, not by imitating but by being changed by the grace of God, to achieve something that otherwise lies completely beyond our grasp.

The politics of Jesus

l   No Zealot. Rejected vengeful nationalism.

n   The enemy was to be loved, not destroyed.

n   He entered Jerusalem riding no war horse but a donkey.

l   No Sadducean collaborator.

n   The temple cleansing, a political act in protest against those who used their authority in the temple to make themselves rich as the expense of pious pilgrims and the poor.

l   No political programme in Jesus’ announcement of the Kingdom. But there was a political posture:

n   A posture ready to condemn the pride of power of those who ‘lord it over’ their subject (Mark 10:42-44).

n   A posture that seeks peace and turns against the Zealot’s desire for revenge.

n   Seeks justice and turns against Sadducean collaboration in exploitation.

Resources:

Clifford, Ross. Lecture notes on the ethical thought of Paul and the ethical thought of Jesus.

Fee, Gordon D. Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God. Peabody: Baker Academic, 1996.

Hays, Richard B. The Moral Vision of the New Testament. New York: Harper One, 1996.

New Dictionary of Christian Ethics &Pastoral Theology. Editors David J. Atkinson and David H. Field.