Recently, a Protestant friend used “antitupon” and “sozo” to back up his belief that baptism is symbolic (it should be noted that he uses NKJV). He used antitupon to say that baptism is a “symbolic counterpart” to faith, and sozo indicates the healing presence of God in the believer.
Symbol is a specific Greek word: ask your friend if he can find
any reference to baptism which uses that Greek word (symbolon).
A symbol, within scripture, generally refers to a contract or other item which needs identification (authenticity checked). A symbol, then, was often an agreement written on an object that was then broken – so that the two pieces could be checked to have broken along the same lines and to therefore be proof of “the same contract”. etc.
A symbol, then, is “part” of a whole or something pointing to a “whole”.
(God is a Whole in One!)
I think it more important to ask him to use his words and explain how they function in a biblical context; including the flood. For if baptism is a symbol – so is the flood – by the “type” argument. (They are the same “type” of thing, at least…)
You might want to spend some time studying the relationship of the “flood” world to that which followed it; for baptism is a transition from one world to the next. (age to age). In 1Pete 3:20, there is a very specific logical statement which defines the domain of the “Type” argument used by Peter.
(KJV)
1Pete 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1Pete 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
There are (at least) a couple of questions to consider when reading this passage.
St. Peter does not go back to the time of “Adam” – but only to the time of Noe.
Either, then, his argument doesn’t apply to Adam – or the entire age from Adam to Noe is one “world”. If it’s a “world”, I would characterize this world as one of water and mud; eg:Adam made from the slime of the earth – is unfired clay.
In the post flood story, the first major sin recorded is the tower of Babel – where man “burnt” brick (so that water could not wash it away again); So that the wold of earthenworks is replaced by one of burnt/stone. Mere water destroyed the prior, or cleansed it, but it will now take fire to destroy or cleanse the new world.
I bring this up to highlight some of the difficulties in reading 1st Peter.
Since Peter is talking about the “disobedient” or “incredulous” in English (I am not checking the Greek yet) he is calling them “disobedient spirits” who are “encrypted” which means ( buried/ hidden/ the “dead” );
These disobedient are different from the Eight “souls” (body and spirit) which " are found in the Ark (kiboton) of Noe; Compare the idea to that of the ark which the Levites
carry through water
The fact that Peter is speaking of two groups of people simultaneously, eg: they who were incredulous, or disobedient, vs. the eight IN the boat points to the idea baptism saving ONLY those inside of the instrument which cuts the water by a device containing wood. (Cross, Ark, acacia wood).
See Joshu 3:8-3:17 for a parallel story/image;
In terms of the story of Noe, the immediate reason for the building of the Ark is intimately tied up with the “sons of God” (angels/devils/Adam?) becoming entrapped by a certain kind of woman into evil.
Genes 6:2 The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair (Like Rachel, 2nd wife of Jacob…), took to themselves wives of all which they chose.
Genes 6:3 And God said: My spirit shall not remain in man for ever, because he is flesh,
The reason for the building of the “ark of the Covenant” too, follows immediately upon the creation of “idols” which enslave the Israelites.
Exodu 32:8 … they have made to themselves a molten calf, and have adored it, and sacrificing victims to it, have said: These are thy gods, O Israel, that have brought thee out of the land of Egypt.
Exodu 32:10 Let me alone, that my wrath … may destroy them,
The angels, being spirits, can form or
deform the matter and body of people on earth – although, the spirits “themselves” can’t reproduce – they can attach themselves to people and people’s children like parasites and deform them. The contrary idea is that union with the Spirit (logic/logos) of God can truly form man.
What it means, then, that “my spirit will not remain in man” forever – is that God will not continue to fight against the deformities introduced by evil spirits forever (the deformity of flesh/body) but that they will eventually have to be washed away, returned to mud or dust, or burnt up (purgatory).
Implicit in this kind of thinking, is that the body/flesh is a war zone of “clay” which is being “molded” by opposing forces; Those which make a figure, and those which destroy (dis-figure) a man.
I think Augustine, in one of his works, against Pelagianism, pointed out that all churches (regardless of their interpretation of baptism) – inherited in their rites of baptism a common element: that all baptisms contain an exorcism.
That is to say, that Augustine was noting the problem of parasitic evil spirits who had gained access to the children through the sin of the parents. This idea is integral to
all baptisms known in the christian churches of his day.
I’d be curious to see what your friend thinks is “baptismal” about Noe & his children, and those OUTSIDE the boat who St. Peter also includes in “baptism”. This is something that needs to be developed in the dialog between protestants and Catholics if we are to truly come to a consensus about what scripture says on baptism.
