For Further Reading: Ramsey, Basic

The term "Baal" signifies an owner or lord. It is translated by a wide range of terms, including "master" (Isa. 1:3), "owner" (Exod. 21:28), "hus­band" (Prov. 31:11), and "man" (Gen. 20:3). Any deity called Baal, such as Baal-peor (Num. 25:3) or Baal-berith (Judg. 8:33), was thought of as a lord. The term was used early to refer to Yahweh. During the period of the prophets, when Yah-wism came into sharp conflict with Baalism, it was dropped.

The most prominent deity in the Palestinian area was the rain god, Baal Hadad. The Syrian kings were named after him, Ben-hadad, "son of



BABYLON—BAPTISM 63

Hadad" (1 Kings 15:18). Rainfall, which is essen­tial to sustain life in this semiarid region, was thought of as the act of Hadad fertilizing the earth with his semen.

Worship included the ritual reenactment of the fertilization process. Periodically, the king played the part of Baal, and the high priestess, that of earth. By sympathetic magic it was believed that the gods could be induced to provide the neces­sary fertility for both crops and cattle.

Baalism thus conflicted with Yahwism in that it (1) conceived of deity as part of the forces of nature, (2) believed that deity could be controlled by magic, (3) encouraged sexual promiscuity, and (4) ascribed the reproductive forces of nature to deities other than the one who had delivered Is­rael from Egypt.

See idolatry.

Nebuchadnezzar, the most famous Chaldean ruler, besieged Jerusalem in 597 b.c. and de­ported its prominent citizens. Eleven years later he put down another revolt, destroying the city with its Temple and deporting its population.

The destruction of Jerusalem and the subse­quent Exile had profound theological effects on the people. Exile meant living in an unclean land and being ruled by people who rejected the Lord as their God. The corruption, luxury, power, and immorality of the city typified all that God op­posed. Babylon became symbolic both of exis­tence alienated from God and of the powers of wickedness opposed to God.

In 1 Pet. 5:13, Babylon is interpreted by Catho­lics (and others) as being used metaphorically for

Rome. In the Revelation, Babylon represents those forces of evil ranged against God and His people. As the city in which every type of wick­edness exists, it stands in opposition to the city of God, Jerusalem.

See city, revelation (book of).

The term is not used in the NT, but the danger of reversion to the old life by those who begin the Christian life is affirmed (Mark 4:16 ff; Luke 9:62; Gal. 5:1-5; 1 Tim. 5:15; 2 Tim. 4:10; Heb. 2:1-4; 10:38; Rev. 2:4ff).

Backsliding refers to any degree of loss of com­mitment, fervor, spiritual priorities or testimony, with apostasy as a final consequence if un­corrected. Viewed as a process, backsliding be­gins with neglect of the means of grace or light, and leads to sin, broken fellowship with God, a defiled conscience, spiritual indifference and hardness of heart, unbelief, and apostasy.

It may be viewed as grieving, quenching, or resisting the Holy Spirit, and may extend to even "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit."

Arminian teaching is that backsliding may reach a point where a Christian becomes un­repentant and by turning his back on Christ does "despite unto the Spirit of grace," is no longer covered by Christ's sacrifice for sins (Heb. 10:26 ff), and has, therefore, fallen from grace and would be eternally lost if he were to die in such a state. Such can happen under the permis­sive will of God while probation continues.

Calvinistic teaching is that positional im­putation and predestination to salvation secures even the backslider, though some affirm rather that if a person does not "endure to the end" (Matt. 24:13), it is evidence that the person was never truly saved.

Scripture holds out the offer of forgiveness and restoration to the backslider.

See apostasy, eternal security, restorationism.

Some people have supposed that baptism is not very important, in part because the apostle Paul said to the divided church at Corinth, "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17, nasb). But the context of this shows that he had not baptized very many people lest those baptized by him would form a clique. He says, "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, that no man should say you were baptized in my name" (vv. 14-15, nasb).

Baptism's importance is signified in part by Jesus' being baptized and by His including it in what we call the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). Also, John the Baptist baptized many; and "Jesus was making and baptizing more disci­ples than John (although Jesus himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were)" (John 4:1-2, nasb). Besides, according to Acts, whenever peo­ple were converted to Christ, they were baptized in or with water (see Acts 2; 8—11; etc.).

The mode of baptism was not made altogether clear in Scripture. Sprinkling is only possibly al­luded to when it was asked, "What did you go into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind?" (Matt. 11:7, nasb). Perhaps John the Baptist was dipping a long reed into the Jordan and sprinkling water upon the believers. Im­mersion might be implied by the "buried with him by baptism" reference in Rom. 6:4. Pouring might be suggested because twice in Acts 2 (vv. 17-18), reference is made to the prophecy in Joel 2:28 about the Spirit being poured out; and surely Pentecost fulfilled that prophecy, as well as those in Matt. 3:11-12 and Acts 1:4-5.

See infant baptism, baptismal regeneration, sacraments, sacraments (quaker and salvation army views). sacramentarianism.

For Further Reading: Cullmann, Baptism in the New Testament; Wiley, CT, 3:155-89; GMS, 586-91

J. Kenneth Grider

Numerous possible meanings have been given by commentators, most of which are not deserv­ing of mention here. Some are a little more de­serving, but are still not apt interpretations. One of them is that it refers to baptisms of Christian believers "for the dead," meaning, to take the place, in the church, that is left vacant when Christians die. The main problem with this inter­pretation is that it would not apply to Paul's ar­gument: it would not be an argument for the resurrection of the body, but for the need of new Christians taking the place, in service, of Chris­tians who die.

The passage probably refers to a practice which Paul did not believe in, but which his readers would have known about, of the living being baptized on behalf of the dead—as is now practiced in Mormonism. He is saying that if the dead do not rise, why do people who are not even Christian evidently believe that they do, and show such by being baptized for them? This would suit the argument, and it would interpret a difficult passage consistently with the plain passages (in which baptism is only entered into by the living). This meaning might also be sug­gested by the switch Paul seems to be making, from non-Christians to themselves, by saying, in the very next words, "And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour?" (1 Cor. 15:30, niv).

see baptism, baptismal regeneration. For Further Reading: BBC, 8:465; WBQ 5:232.

J. Kenneth Grider

BAPTISM WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT. "You shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now" (Acts 1:5, nasb). This promise-command is Christ's last word to His disciples, and it consummates His redemptive ministry. Seven passages in the NT refer to being baptized with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:18; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16; 1 Cor. 12:13). However, this doctrine is implicit throughout the NT.

Baptism with the Holy Spirit is distinctive of the NT and does not occur in the OT per se, al­though it is anticipated there (see Joel 2:28-32; 3:1-2; Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 39:29). The NT

In Christ's fulfillment of "all righteousness" (v. 15), John notes that Christ's symbolic water bap­tism preceded His Spirit enduement (vv. 13-17). John then links Christ's own Spirit enduement with His mission to baptize His followers with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33), which was not to be accomplished until the Pentecostal effusion (Luke 24:49; John 7:38-39; Acts 1:5; 2:1-4).

All of the promises concerning baptism in the Spirit find their fulfillment in the Pentecostal ef­fusion but never before. When Jesus "breathed on them [His disciples], and said to them, 'Re­ceive the Holy Spirit'" (John 20:22, nasb), He was acting symbolically and in anticipation, ac­cording to some scholars. However, Wesley un­derstood it to be an "earnest of Pentecost" (Notes).

It is noteworthy that Christ claimed these dis­ciples as His own before their baptism with the Spirit at Pentecost (John 17:6-18). He endued them with authority and power and commis­sioned them to preach, heal the sick, raise the dead, and cast out demons long before their Pen­tecostal experience (Matt. 10:1-16; 28:18-20). This would appear absurd had they not been truly converted. But again He verified their spiri­tual citizenship in God's kingdom (Luke 10:20) long before their Pentecost baptism. And more­over they were communicant members of His Church (Matt. 26:26-29), and they waited ex­pectantly for the promised baptism with the Spirit (Acts 1:13-14; 2:1).

The baptism with the Spirit fulfills the predic­tive promises of the OT prophets (Joel 2:28-32; cf. 3:1-2; Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 39:29); of John the Baptist (Matt. 3:11); of God the Father (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4-5; 2:33); of Christ himself (John 7:38-39; 14:16-17, 26; 15:26; 16:7; Acts 1:8); and of the apostles (Acts 2:38-39).

The disciples' experience of the baptism with the Holy Spirit is recorded in Acts 2:1-4 and re­flects the following four main aspects: power for holy living and effective service; purity or sancti­fication, symbolized by "tongues as fire" (cf. Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:44-47; 11:5-17; 15:8-9); full possession of their beings as "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"; and proclamation or wit­ness for Christ as they "began to speak ... as the Spirit was giving them utterance" (nasb). Thus converted and baptized with the Holy Spirit, these servants of Christ were to inundate the Ro­man Empire with the message of full salvation from all sin.

See holy spirit, entire sanctification, pente­cost anointing, dispensation of the spirit.

For Further Reading: Carter, The Person and Ministry
of the Holy Spirit, 89-247; Agnew, The Holy Spirit: Friend
and Counselor; Chadwick, The Way to Pentecost; Wood,
Pentecostal Grace. Charles W. Carter

BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. This doctrine holds that the sacrament of water baptism, if ad­ministered by prescribed persons according to the prescribed form, communicates to the bap­tized the blessings and the benefits of the new birth. An extreme position is that without such water baptism regeneration and hence eternal salvation are impossible.

The NT does connect regeneration with water, as in John 3:5; Acts 22:16; Titus 3:5. However, careful exegesis does not justify understanding these passages to teach that water is the actual means by which people are regenerated.

The best-known passage is John 3:5, "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (nasb). If the water here refers to the rite of baptism, then in­deed we have strong support for the idea of bap­tismal regeneration, since Jesus clearly makes water an equally indispensable condition for en­tering into the kingdom of God. However, John Calvin took the position that water here is a metaphor and that there is no more need to in­terpret it literally than to demand literal fire in our understanding of Matt. 3:11.

If water is to be understood metaphorically, what does it represent? Some have seen it as "a symbol of the old order of the Law with its ritual of baptisms, purifications, and cleansings" (BBC). Therefore, Jesus is saying to Nicodemus, in effect "Begin where you are, but fulfilment, life,... will come only with birth from above, the birth of the Spirit!" (BBC). Still others understand the phrase "of water" to refer to the water of natural phys­ical birth, and they point to Isa. 48:1 as sug­gesting this. Another understanding of the word "water" as a metaphor is to see it as representing the Word in its rejuvenating, regenerating, and cleansing power so that the two agencies in our new birth are the Word and the Spirit (John 15:3; Eph. 5:26, nasb). This view is to be preferred.

In Acts 22:16 the real meaning seems to be, "Be baptized in water and thereby assert to all that your sins have been washed away." Speaking of this passage, A. T. Robertson says: "It is possible, as in 2:38, to take these words as teaching bap­tismal remission or salvation by means of bap­tism, but to do so is in my opinion a complete



66

BAPTISTS—BEATITUDES


subversion of Paul's vivid and picturesque lan­guage. As in Rom. 6:4-6 where baptism is the picture of death, burial and resurrection, so here baptism pictures the change that had already taken place when Paul surrendered to Jesus on the way (v. 10)" (Word Pictures).

Titus 3:5 speaks of "the washing of regen­eration and renewing by the Holy Spirit" (nasb). Gould comments: "Baptism is not to be under­stood as the actual means by which men are saved, but rather is to be regarded, here at least, as symbolical of the experience of death to sin and spiritual resurrection in newness of life" (BBQ.

Theologically, the concept of baptismal regen­eration is totally antithetical to the spiritual em­phasis of the NT. The gospel order is not the perpetuation but the termination of the religious mechanics by which spiritual privileges are de­pendent upon prescribed times, places, and ex­ternal rites. This basic and pervasive NT principle is expressed by Paul: "Neither is cir­cumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation" (Gal. 6:15, nasb).

See SACRAMENTS. BAPTISM, SACRAMENTARIANISM. For Further Reading: Hills, Fundamental Christian Theology, 2:282-325; Wiley, CT, 3:161-71.

The movement began as a protest against in­fant baptism. The Anabaptists rebaptized adults who had been baptized as infants. Before 1640 immersion was not an issue, but became a cus­tom and belief by 1644.

Although there are at least 27 Baptist denomi­nations (or sects), there are common beliefs and principles among them:

(1) Church membership is restricted to bap­tized (immersed) believers; (2) the local church is autonomous (independent); and (3) church and state should be completely separate. They hold in common with evangelical churches the inspi­ration and trustworthiness of the Bible, the Lord­ship of Jesus, the freedom of the individual to come to Christ, and salvation by faith.

The Baptists vary in their understanding of atonement and salvation. Some (Freewill Bap­tists) accept a universal atonement and freedom of a person to choose, while others (Primitive Baptists) believe strongly in predestination. Most Baptists, however, hold a moderate Calvinism. This is salvation by faith, and freedom to choose.

Often they teach the security of the believer as fixed, and that sinning does not separate from God. Complete freedom from sinfulness is usu­ally denied.

See CHURCH, CHURCH GOVERNMENT, REBAPTISM, BAPTISM.

For Further Reading: Baker's DT, 89-91; Hardon, The Protestant Churches of America, 19-43; Henry, ed., Chris-tian Faith and Modern Theology, 375-86.

The two large collections of Beatitudes in the NT are the ones which Jesus used to introduce the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:3-12; Luke 6:20-26). When we compare the two collections as recorded by Matthew and Luke, we are im­pressed by the resemblances and the differences between them. In Matthew we find nine Beat­itudes, while in Luke we find four (6:20-23), fol­lowed by four woes (6:24-26). While Matthew emphasizes the moral and eschatological view­point, Luke emphasizes more the present and so­cial aspects.

The Beautitudes should not be interpreted as portraying separate types of Christian character, but rather as a list of qualities and experiences which are typical of the ideal character of the Christian as conceived by Jesus Christ, and as ex­emplified in His own life and person.

Following the literary structure described above, each one of the Beatitudes associates a blessing with a promise. This promise sometimes has an immediate realization, and sometimes a future and even an eschatological fulfillment. The declaration of the blessedness is based not only on the possession of the quality or experi­ence, but rather on the present or future reward.

The term beatitude is not only used in the Bible as an abstract term denoting blessedness, but also in a secondary, concrete sense of a particular declaration of blessedness. In the OT we find ex­amples of this kind of beatitude in the Wisdom Literature, particularly in the Psalms (1:1; 32:1; 41:1; 65:4; 106:3), and in Proverbs (3:13; 8:32, 34; 20:7; 28:14). Although the nearness of God is the source of such happiness, the rewards are usually in terms of a full life on earth. In the NT Jesus on several occasions used the term in this sense (Matt. 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; John 13:17; 20:29).



BEAUTY

67


See happiness, holiness, whole (wholeness), hope.

For Further Reading: Barclay, The Beatitudes and the Lord's Prayer for Everyman; Pink, An Exposition on the Sermon on the Mount, 15-42. ismael E. amaya

Socrates knew that the beauty of outward form and the goodness of inner form did not necessarily appear together. He insisted that for the concept to be true it must characterize the inner life of man as well.

Plato distinguished between relative or instru­mental beauty, and intrinsic or absolute beauty. Beauty includes all aspects of the Greek aesthetic consciousness. The lover of beauty is classified with the lover of truth. He is a philosopher.

According to Aristotle, the main characteristics of beauty are: "order, symmetry, and definite lim­itation." Virtues are beautiful and are worthy of praise.

Generally, after Plato the whole question of aesthetics revolved around the question of beau­ty. In the history of philosophy efforts to specify a set of conditions by which intrinsic beauty could be recognized have been disappointing. In the 16th and 17th centuries conditions for recog­nizing beauty were detailed and formalized. But a rebellion against the stated criteria soon fol­lowed.

In the 18th century a number of thinkers turned from primary examination of the beau­tiful as such to the subject who recognizes beau­ty. They began by examining the experiences of the percipient to determine the conditions under which beauty and art are appreciated. Francis Hutchison (1725) maintained that the beautiful is that which excites or raises the idea of beauty in us. Later, Kant raised an obvious question about this estimate of beauty: If the aesthetic judgment arises from subjective feeling and predicates nothing inherently true about the ob­ject, how can the "beautiful" claim to be more than an autobiographical report? Or, how can an aesthetic judgment claim to be universally bind­ing if beauty is not a property of that which is judged to be beautiful?

In sharp contrast to such thinkers as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and Plotinus, the Bible does not attempt to define beauty (Gr. to kalon). There is in the Bible no articulated aesthetic doc­trine as such. Rather, the Bible describes that which is beautiful. Here there is no sharp dis­tinction between the aesthetically beautiful and the ethical. A rich and diverse vocabulary is used to speak of beauty.

In the OT numerous Hebrew words, trans­latable by "fair," "honor," "glory," "delightful," "lovely," "handsome," "splendor," and "grace" are used to speak of that which is beautiful. In the NT several Greek terms bear the meaning of "beautiful," "charming," "attractive," "handsome," "fine appearance," and "honor."

In the Bible, nature is judged to be beautiful (good). Genesis and the Psalms express repeated wonder over the beauty of God's handiwork in nature (Psalms 8; 19:1-6; 29; 65:9-13; 104; 147:8-18). Hebrew appreciation for the beauty of nature is made possible in part because of the belief that the world is the direct creation of the God of the Covenant.

The Bible lavishly describes the beauty of Pal­estine and Jerusalem, the Jewish nation and the Temple (Jer. 3:19; Ps. 48:1; Lam. 2:15; Ezra 7:27). People such as Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Es­ther are described as beautiful. The same is true of Joseph, Moses, David, Absalom, Jonathan, and Daniel. According to Isa. 33:17, the Messiah will be beautiful.

God himself is described as being beautiful. His beauty passes before Moses (Exod. 33:19). He is the God of glory (16:7, 10; 24:16-17; Lev. 9:6, 23; Deut. 5:24; Josh. 7:19). He is a beautiful emblem of regal power and dignity for His peo­ple (Isa. 28:5).

In the NT the word kalon (noun; kalos, adjec­tive) is used to speak of the beautiful and the good. It denotes that which is of good quality or disposition. Jesus describes fertile and rich soil as beautiful (Matt. 13:8, 23). It can also mean that which is useful and profitable (Luke 14:34). Ka­lon is also used to describe what is excellent, choice, select, goodly (Matt. 7:17, 19), pleasant, and delightful (17:4). In the NT beauty also has a clear association with what is morally excellent, worthy, upright, and virtuous (John 10:11, 14; 1 Tim. 4:6). Good deeds and rectitude (Matt. 5:16; Rom. 7:18, 21), as well as the fulfillment of one's duty may also be spoken of as beautiful.

See aesthetics, values, axiology.