Can you explain Romans 6:4

The question?...

We recently had a Wordunderstood.com user named Bruce email and ask the question, “Can you explain Romans 6:4”. What a great question. One thing in particular we love about this question is that it doesn’t argue points, shore up doctrinal viewpoints, attempt to steer us in a direction or paint us in a corner. Bruce merely asks us for our viewpoint. An open individual ready to receive “…the word with all readiness of mind…” and will hopefully search the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Hopefully Bruce won’t believe us but will believe the scriptures as he sees them even if they seemingly disagree with our viewpoint. There is always room to grow knowing none of us have it all figured out just yet. Perhaps, if I'm wrong not only Bruce but anyone will point out my error and I'll edit this written study.

The verse and my questions…

To get a better understanding of where I should go with an explanation of Romans 6:4; I asked Bruce a few questions via email before expounding my understanding of the passage as best I could. I’ll make an attempt with my current understanding using literal interpretive methods and dispensational principles using Right Division. For our readers information I asked Bruce in an email to him were, “Is Romans 6:4 confusing to you? Do you already have an interpretation, literal or other?”.

Some answers and some more questions…

I got some answers back and of course there were a few unexpected questions asked or further expounded upon. I’m glad we communicated further so I could direct my answers more appropriately. One of the first things asked was…

“…when a person accepts Christ into his or her life does it have to be done publicly and I’m referring to water baptism”.

Furthermore, I’ll summarize another question or thought expressed in that email. Bruce wanted to know about Romans 6:4 and if it’s explaining how Christ died on the cross, was buried and took all our sins with him and if when He rose our sin debt was paid.

One thing for sure…

Like many biblical matters there are varying opinions on any given verse, passage, chapter, book, or theme, etc. It seems nobody can agree…that’s for sure!!! The overriding principle we should follow is an understanding of God’s word in II Timothy 2:15 and a literal interpretive method.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth”.

Don’t listen to me, a “pastor”, a theology professor, or other outside influence. It’s good to get their opinions, insights, thoughts on various matters, read their material, etc but let the bible interpret the bible by comparing passage to passage, biblical thought with biblical thought. Right division the way I teach it attempts to allow you to study and “…shew thyself approved…”.

So what’s Romans 6:4 say…?

Romans 6:4 reads as such…

“Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life”.

The book of Romans is a “pre-prison” epistle written by Paul, of this there is little debate. What this means is that it was written in the book of Acts or better yet, during that time period. The book of Acts is somewhat of a transitional book moving from one dispensation to another, although this is debated and misunderstood by many Christians today. Because it’s debated doesn’t make it untrue. The book of Acts is like the mighty Mississippi River, fresh water although not clear, fresh and untainted by salt. It flows into the Gulf of Mexico which is salt water. What you have when these two meet is a mixture of fresh and salty water called “brackish water”, not as fresh as the pure fresh water of the Mississippi and not as salty as the Gulf of Mexico. It’s a watery mixture from two different kinds of water or in my example simply a lot of movement with the inclusion of Gentiles into the program of Israel and somewhat of a new administration of the apostle Paul. Much like the Book of Acts the beginning is clearly focused on Israel and a continuance of matter from the 4 gospels, clear unsalted Mississippi water, not diluted containing clear concise matter that is easy to follow. At the END you have Paul clearly setting aside Israel and focusing on a Gentile ministry which is not what Matthew through John or the beginning of Acts teach, the Gulf’s salty water. What you have in the middle of Acts is brackish water, progressive revelation, various sets of doctrines transitioning in practice like, water baptism, healing, laying on of hands, Gentiles being admitted into the program of God with Israel, etc. I’m listing some passages or proof texts that illustrate my points.

Pre-Acts and Acts teaching…

Matt 10:5, These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not.

Matt 15:22-24, And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Acts 3:25-26, Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Rom 9:3-5, For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

What is interesting to note is how the Gentiles are not in the program of God, how Israel is first and how Gentiles are without God in the world and without hope! Take special notice of Romans 9 as it states that "…as concerning the flesh Christ came…". That would be Christ's earthly ministry, when he was present here on the earth in the 4 gospels. Christ's goal and target was Israel not "the world" without restriction.

Acts and post Acts teaching a brackish situation…

Some of what Paul does in the Acts period is hard to be understood if not looked at as a transition or a progression of events and revelation. This isn’t an Acts 9, 13, 28 or anywhere in between debate, I’m merely attempting to establish Acts as a book with somewhat of a transition in it, doctrinal variations pop-up which can be confusing and seemingly contradictory especially when Gentiles are allowed Israel's spiritual things. Because of the progressive character of revelation, that is; revelation is not typically revealed to an individual in one straight shot but over a period of time. Some events taking place in Acts done by Paul can easily confuse individuals (Please see another study on Progressive Revelelation).

Those included in the confusion are other apostles (Acts 15), Paul’s disciples (I Cor 1), and extends to individuals today in the various denominations practicing everything from water baptism to snake handling.

Things Paul did in Acts include miraculous healing, special miracles with handkerchiefs, water baptism, laying on of hands for the receiving of the Holy Ghost, snake handling, vow taking including head shaving and more none of which occurs today or is necessary which ultimately relates to the Romans question.

Because it’s not the nature of this article to explain the difference in Paul’s ministry during the Acts period versus the post Acts period I will briefly say that Paul was doing what he knew to be truth at that particular time based on a current understanding revealed to him by Christ. As Bullinger comments in his book How To Enjoy The Bible he explains that you can’t read the past into the future nor the future into the past (See page 106). It can be a crime to read truth from the future, drag it to the past and apply it. I suggest anyone read that part to better understand basic Bible study principles. Paul could only preach Christ with the information he had at that particular time….i.e. his current revelation or what he already knew to be truth. We shouldn’t try to make Paul understand more than he knew. New revelation could usurp or override past revelation thus a transition may occur or a shift in the dealings of God otherwise known as an administration or dispensation, however, because there is a shift in a doctrine doesn’t mean there is necessarily a new dispensation. The revelation in a particular place like Acts must be explained where it is, where it sits and we shouldn’t take what was later revealed at a different time further in the future perhaps even later in a book like Acts and apply it to a place it can’t be applied. I say this simply because books written by Paul like Romans were written during that Acts period, a very doctrinally unstable time that cause debate and confusion even among the Apostles. I hope that doesn’t sound like double talk, because it often sounds as if it is and takes some thought to sort it out. I recommend reading Bullingers section part “IV. Rightly Dividing The Word As To It’s Dispensational Truth And Teaching” which actually begins on page 105 in How To Enjoy The Bible – A guide to better understanding and enjoyment of God’s Word” published by Kregel Publications, ISBN # 0-8254-2213-2.

When Paul fist got saved he could only preach Christ as the one prophesied in the Old Testament who had really come, died, was buried and rose again just as the prophets proclaimed. It was what he knew, there was no new truth really revealed on the day of his salvation although some people might argue that point to their own destruction.

Rom 1:1-4, Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Also compare Acts 13:13-39, Paul’s first official documented sermon where I suppose nothing really new is spoken of; again, contrary to some opinions but we’ll let the text speak for us.

Nothing new with Romans 1:1-4, or Acts 13; what is taught lines right up with what everyone else has said and is saying up to that point. As time moves on and further information is revealed by the Lord his knowledge increases, and practices eventually change or change in importance. In brief, this is why Paul practices water baptism in Acts but the practice falls out of favor after Acts, compare Acts 10:34-48 with Peter, Acts 16:13-35 with Paul and finally I Corinthians 1:14-17 where Paul says Christ sent him not to baptize and if the 12 were sent was Paul a part of the 12’s commission? Was baptism an important issue even in Acts? (Why did he baptize then?). Until Christ revealed how unimportant water baptism was for Paul’s commission he practiced it. It was in fact at that current time the accepted revelation by the 12, the disciples and elders, who all water baptized. Paul later taught the “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 which doesn’t include water but the Spirit and says there is only ONE baptism, again, the Spirit baptism trumps the water baptism in importance and in Paul's post acts writing isn't mentioned and isn't stressed as a doctrine to practice. That baptism was present in the Acts period of this there is no question however you often see it preceded or followed by water. Later only the Spirit baptism is presented without water again this is nicely documented by Bullinger on page 135 of How to Enjoy the Bible. This is to say that I’m not a Bullingerite as some would suppose, he merely has a clear teaching on the matter with a nice graph that is easy to comprehend and matches up well with my points. It's very foundational material.

Paul in Acts did submit to decisions by the 12 and he also bucked them from time to time, see Acts 15, especially verses: 19-20. I would recommend reading the whole chapter to get the context. Paul submits to the recommended doctrine of the Apostles and Elders or rather agrees with it and proceeds to disseminate that information to his converts. Some dispensationalists might have a hard time submitting to this point because their need to maintain a particular doctrine of Pauline separation, separate commission, separate and distinct revelation, etc but this teaching of Paul’s total separation can’t continue in light of that and other passages. Paul reiterates or re-teaches those recommendations by the Apostles and Elders in his epistle to the Corinthians which was written during the Acts period. Paul reiterates Acts 15:19-20 to his Gentile disciples in I Corinthians chapter 6:13, 8:1, 8:4-13, 10:20-28. There are of course other passages but we won’t belabor the point.

The one baptism and the one body are all truths revealed in Acts or shortly thereafter, perhaps after Acts 28 but they aren’t as clearly seen until After Acts 28. Keep in mind “progressive revelation” and progressive understanding.

So what’s all this got to do with Romans 6:4…?

I’m finally getting to my point about Romans 6:4, I didn’t forget!!! In my opinion we couldn’t fully understand Romans 6:4 without a background or foundation to Acts since Romans was written during the Acts period and the little lesson on progressive revelation. I never assume readers know too much or even know anything about literal interpretive or dispensational methods of Bible study. Because of a transition period with Gentile's in the mix and doctrinal changes, progressive revelation, etc the water is brackish, it can seem unclear and hard to udnerstand. Right division, literal interpretation and common sense clear all that up for us. What we learn about Romans 6:4 when we look up definitions is this…

Baptism in this verse according to Strong’s means immersion, baptism (technically or figuratively). Can something be figuratively baptized?

I Corinthians 10:1-4 sheds light on this matter for me personally.

Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Notice Paul using the phrase “spiritual” in I Corinthians 10 and what seems to be paralleled with what was said in Romans 6 in theme or thought even though Paul doesn’t actually use the same word “spiritual”. The thought is expressed by Paul of oneness in that we all partake in one particular event and share in that particular event similar to that of Israel with Moses. Paul says Spiritual meat, spiritual drink and spiritual Rock of Israel’s experience in I Corinthians 10. Paul compares that literal natural and physical act that Israel went through with that opposite spiritual thing that took place. There is a parallel in thought in my view between I Corinthians 10 and Romans 6 that can be applied. Mainly that “baptized” into or unto something can be; as Stong’s states in his definition - figurative. In fact, Moses is a type or figure of Christ; see Deuteronomy 18:15. As Israel was baptized unto Moses without water is it entirely possible to be baptized unto Christ without water?

Notice again Romans 6 in context coupled with a few other passages that explain the situation better for me. Perhaps it will shed light on the situation for you too…

Rom 6:1-9;

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion.

Things to notice are the words “like” and “as”. Some of the greatest things to notice are when someone is using a simile or metaphorical language as is done here with the words like or as. For example; we’re not literally buried with Christ or literally / physically planted in His death, we’re not even literally dead - yet!!! Paul in Romans 6 is doing what he did in I Corinthians 10, describing a literal physical thing that took place, Christ’s death; and showing how we “spiritually” or metaphorically have taken place in that event as a body of believers. More to come on that when we couple Romans 6 with these other verses. Romans 6 isn’t talking about water at all, it’s talking about identification by a spiritual baptism as the following verses explain.

1 Cor 1:17-18;

17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

1 Cor 12:13-14;

13 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.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.

Col 2:8-15;

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
12 BURIED WITH HIM IN BAPTISM, WHEREIN ALSO YE ARE RISEN WITH HIM THROUGH THE FAITH OF THE OPERATION OF GOD, WHO HATH RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD.
13 AND YOU, BEING DEAD IN YOUR SINS AND THE UNCIRCUMCISION OF YOUR FLESH, HATH HE QUICKENED TOGETHER WITH HIM, HAVING FORGIVEN YOU ALL TRESPASSES;
14 BLOTTING OUT THE HANDWRITING OF ORDINANCES THAT WAS AGAINST US, WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO US, AND TOOK IT OUT OF THE WAY, NAILING IT TO HIS CROSS;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

The thing to notice first is that Paul was never commissioned to water baptize and although he did do some water baptisms as I Corinthians 1 explains it was NOT part of his commission. One question to ask then….could Paul be part of the so called “Great Commission” if “Go ye into all the world…he that is baptized shall be saved…” isn’t what he was doing or a part of his mandate from Christ? No question about it that the “Great Commission” has in it the mandate to water baptize as it was later seen in Acts 2:38-41 where three thousand individuals, Jews from all over the world at that time; do exactly that. They repent and get water baptized!!! Wow, amazing numbers!!! Also remember that at that particular time it was the current most up-to-date revelation. If it’s not Paul’s commission to water baptize would he be telling someone that water baptism should be done publicly and out in the open or even done at all? As we've read, Paul’s commission was to preach not to water baptize!

Moreover; Colossians 2:12-14 parallels Romans 6 in language and thought but adds revelation to it, it's written after Acts 28. Colossians 2 moves us along in our understanding in what happened on the cross. No doubt it could be said that Romans 6’s context could be used to show the forgiveness of sin however, Colossians plainly spells it out and says it in verse 13!!!

Conclusions…

Bruce brought to light a newsletter he receive and read which I’ll copy here with his permission…


MATTHEW 28:16-20

In the passage known as the Great Commission, Jesus mentions discipleship, baptism, and teaching. We all agree that discipleship and teaching are essential to growing in faith; however, some Christians postpone or ignore the commandment to be baptized. The will of God is that every person who receives salvation participate in the biblically mandated practice.

Once Jesus delivered this charge to His followers, baptism was no longer optional. Scripture contains several examples of new Christians who submitted in obedience immediately after salvation. Paul and Silas instructed their jailer to receive Christ and be baptized (Acts 16:27-33); likewise, Philip took the Ethiopian eunuch right into the water after hearing his confession of faith. (Acts 8:36-38)

Too many believers today procrastinate because they do not perceive baptism as a command or recognize delay as rebellion. The ordinance is important because it is a public confession of faith: we claim God as our Father and Jesus Christ as Savior, and we acknowledge that the Holy Spirit lives in us. The willingness to humble ourselves in this way honors God as Lord of our life. Baptism by immersion also symbolizes the transforming power of salvation: we are "buried" to demonstrate we have died to old habits; we are raised to show we now walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4)

Have you obeyed God's command to undergo believer's baptism? If not, decide now to call your pastor and arrange your public confession of faith in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.


This Month's Devotionals


Things to notice about this particular devotional are…

1- Lack of dispensational understanding.
2- Lack of comparison passages that contradict his proof texts like Paul being sent not to baptize, etc.
3- The doctrine of Lordship Salvation – “Lord of our Life” and although that may be true the only way to get saved is by trusting in the finished work of Christ on the cross, that he suffered, died, was buried and rose again the third day for the forgiveness of our sin and sins or as Paul says in Colossians; our trespasses.
4- Complete misunderstanding that there is more than one baptism in the bible. Matthew 3:11 has three in one verse in addition to the few we covered in our article. Matthew 3:11; 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:

More could be said on this matter but the misinterpretation of the bible is running rampant in communities and especially on the Internet where anyone has the opportunity to voice their opinion about doctrinal matters, just like we do!

Study, study, study, study!!! Knowing how to literally interpret the bible and studying with dispensational methodology will keep an individual out of doctrinal muck. Right division is essential, parsing out what is and isn't applicable at any given time or in any given passage is your first step. Application can be made in all things but that's only after you recognize what a passage is literally saying, to whom and at what time.

As to public confessions of faith and its place in today’s dispensation I would say…

Phil 2:10-11; That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Should to me seems like an optional thing, something that would be wise but is obviously not necessary for salvation in today’s dispensation. Water baptism and confessions of faith are legalistic and of that I have no doubt. It is definitely something we should not practice today although almost every denomination does it. Its part of a program that has been temporarily set aside and will one day be appropriate to do but for now it has been set aside.

Gal 3:1-3; O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, RECEIVED YE THE SPIRIT BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW, OR BY THE HEARING OF FAITH? ARE YE SO FOOLISH? HAVING BEGUN IN THE SPIRIT, ARE YE NOW MADE PERFECT BY THE FLESH?

Confession of faith or water baptism doesn’t make anyone complete or perfect nor does following the law. Confessions and water baptism are legalistic and of the flesh if practiced today. It was at one time a proper practice but with right division can be seen as having its place and time as being for a season. That statement might offend some people attempting to toe the line between law and grace but I've said it. Believing in the shed blood of Christ for the forgiveness of sin instantaneously makes you “complete in Him” or “perfect” (Col 2:10) not a confession of faith and not following the law.

Homework…

Read the recommended reading in How To Enjoy The Bible, click the link to download it.



RW - Bible Student
Edited 10/24/06 for misc. wording errors and content

Copyright © theWORDunderstood.com