Put On The Armor Of God: A Corporate Or Individual Command?

By Kenneth W. Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society]

I. Introduction

In Eph 6:11, Paul exhorts his readers to “put on the whole armor of God.” In 6:13 he repeats the command, even though he uses a different but synonymous verb. These are the only times in the NT where believers are commanded to do this.

It is safe to say that in the West, we naturally see these verses in a highly individualistic way. Almost automatically, we assume that Paul is telling each believer to put on the articles of armor he lists in Eph 6:14–17. Many Christians have purchased “armor of God kits” at Christian bookstores for their children, and have seen such toys used in this way in children’s programs in local churches. These kits come with a helmet, a sword, a shield, covering for one’s feet, and a plastic breastplate. Each young person is told to live righteously, share the gospel with others, grow in faith, and study the Word of God. The different pieces of armor represent these different spiritual disciplines.

Adults often interpret these commands in the same way. We measure our own individual spirituality by how well we are wearing the armor Paul discusses. We are to see ourselves as dressed for battle against Satan and make sure that as we confront him, we are taking advantage of the weapons God has given each one of us.

It is not difficult to find support for this understanding in Evangelical commentaries on Ephesians. Stott sees the individual Christian being called to battle here. He warns that there are some Christians who think they can fight against Satan in their own strength and armor. This is a mistake. Each believer must take advantage of God’s enabling power. At the same time, the believer must co-operate with God in the battle. He must decide to put on the armor.[1] Bruce takes a similar view. In his view, Eph 6:10–12 describes individual warfare. In 2 Cor 12:7–9 Paul describes how, through prayer, he took advantage of the resources God gave him to combat Satan. That is an example for all believers to follow. We must have the Lord’s help if we want to be victorious in our individual struggle with evil forces.[2]

Lloyd-Jones takes Paul’s admonition in this manner but in an extreme way. In his view, one of the tricks of the devil is to rob the believer of the assurance of his salvation. For each Christian to gain assurance he must have a radical change of life, which Paul illustrates by the armor of God the believer wears. The person who claims to be a believer but does not have the visible signs pictured by the different pieces of armor is a liar.[3] Best also takes the view that failure to take up the armor of God determines the final destiny of each individual. For him, failure in this spiritual warfare will result in the loss of eternal salvation.[4]

Whatever view one takes about the subject of these commands, the notion that one must put on the armor of God to either prove one’s possession of eternal life or in order to keep it is a mistaken one. Eternal life is given as a free gift by God’s grace through faith in Christ alone. As such, it cannot be lost, nor can it be gained by practicing spiritual disciplines.

This article will argue that the command to put on the armor of God is not directed to individual Christians. It is a corporate command, directed towards the Church. Best at least hints at this possibility when he acknowledges that the verses immediately before Eph 6:10–12 are addressed to groups within the Church and not individual believers.[5] Hoehner also maintains that Paul is calling the Church to battle here, even though he says this command by Paul is directed primarily to individuals.[6]

As will be discussed below, there is a connection between 6:10–12 and 1:19–21. In considering whether Paul is making a corporate command in 6:11, we note that his discussion in 1:19–21 is relevant. Hughes sees the corporate nature inherent in 1:19–21 when he says that Paul is clearly talking about the Church and that the exalted Christ has given power and gifts to the Church. However, he then says that Paul is addressing individuals.[7]

Both Kitchen and Arnold are more direct in seeing a corporate command here. In Eph 6:10–12, Satan is at war with the Church, in Eph 6:10–12, not with individual Christians.[8] Paul is calling the Church as a whole to battle against this enemy and his forces.

The idea that Paul is addressing the Church goes against a strong western tradition of individualistic spirituality. To challenge that tradition, this article will first look at the strong corporate emphasis in Ephesians, which suggests that Eph 6:10–12 most naturally points to that emphasis. Then, it will be seen that these verses form an inclusio with Eph 1:19–21, where Paul speaks of the Church. A discussion will follow on what Satan’s battle with the Church involves. Finally, the article will suggest certain applications of such a corporate command for believers today.

II. The Corporate Emphasis In Ephesians

Even a casual reading of Ephesians leads the reader to see that the Church is the main topic of the book. Paul explains that the Church is a mystery that was not revealed in the OT (1:9; 3:3–9; 5:32; 6:19). In Stott’s words, Paul says that Christ through the work of the Spirit has brought about this “new society.”[9]

The predestination mentioned in Eph 1:5 does not refer to God’s choosing individuals for an eternity in the kingdom or the lake of fire. Instead, Paul’s point is that in eternity past God predestined that the Church would be the Body of Christ. This body would be comprised of both Jewish and Gentile believers. Even though it was not revealed in the OT, it was God’s determined plan that the Church would rule with Christ when He comes in glory.[10]

Not surprisingly, throughout the book, Paul seeks to promote the unity of the body. Specifically, he wants Jewish and Gentile believers to understand that they form a single body. He speaks of Jewish believers who were the “first” to believe in Christ. Paul refers to these Christians as “we” since he was one of them (1:12).

But he quickly adds that “you” (Gentiles) were also “sealed with the Holy Spirit” (1:13). The Church, made up of both Jews and Gentiles, is a demonstration of the mystery of God’s will (1:9), and is now God’s “purchased possession” (1:14).[11] After discussing what God has done for the believers at Ephesus, Paul says that the Church is the Body of Christ (1:22–23).

Ephesians 2 continues the idea of unity between Jewish and Gentile Christians. Both “you” (Gentile believers) and “we” (Jewish believers) have been placed in Christ, that is, His Body (2:1, 3, 6). Together, they are God’s “workmanship” (2:10).

The idea of being God’s workmanship is traditionally understood to mean that each believer is a work of God. Paul adds that this workmanship was “created in Christ Jesus for good works.” This is often interpreted to mean that when a person believes in Jesus, he is a new creation, and God has given each believer good works to do.

Some then take this to mean that the good works that a believer does is proof that by His grace God has saved him. God accomplishes these good works in everyone who has been truly saved.[12] The ramifications of seeing an emphasis on the individual in Ephesians becomes apparent. It leads at least some to believe that assurance of salvation is found in good works.

However, even the hint of such false teaching disappears if Paul is dealing with corporate realities. Ephesians 2:10 does not teach that each believer is a “workmanship” of God. The word is in the singular. If Paul was talking about all believers, the word would have been in the plural, as it is in Rom 1:20. In the plural, the point would be that believers are the works of art created by God.

Instead, Paul is speaking of a single work of God. The Church is God’s creation. The meaning is clear. In uniting both Jewish and Gentile believers into one body, God has created His masterpiece, the Church. In the eternal plan of God, He has prepared work for the Church to do. The Church is the instrument through which Christ works in the world today.

The discussion in Ephesians 2 supports this interpretation. Prior to the church age, Gentiles were “far off” regarding the promises God had made to the nation of Israel. But Paul goes on to say that God has made peace between Jews and Gentiles when He formed the Church. The Church is the “new man” God has created. The Church is now the holy temple of God, indwelt by the Spirit (2:13–22).

In Ephesians 3, Paul specifically states that God had revealed the mystery of the Church to him. Gentiles are fellow members of the Body of Christ (3:6). The Church shows the wisdom of God (3:10). Who in the OT could have seen the formation of the Church? Who could have considered that Gentiles would become equal members of the body that would rule with the Messiah in His kingdom? Such is the power and wisdom of God.

Ephesians 4 continues to speak about corporate truths. Believers are to love one another, being at peace and unified. They belong to one body (4:4). The Spirit has given spiritual gifts so that the body can mature and grow to be like the Head of the Body, Christ (4:11–16).

The members of the body are to share with one another, edify one another, and forgive one another (4:28–32).

As members of the one body, they are called to walk in love towards one another (5:2). This would impact even the way they speak to each other (5:19). Because of who they were in Christ, they were to be subject to one another in the same body (5:21). This subjection should show itself in how different groups within the Church relate to each other. These groups included husbands and wives, parents and children, and slaves and owners (5:22–6:9).

After all these admonitions that the Jewish and Gentile believers at Ephesus see themselves as a body, and are to live in that way, Paul tells them to put on the whole armor of God (6:10–12). Even though it appeals to our individual self-worth and our cultural sensibilities, to see this as directed to individual believers should cause us to pause. After speaking of the mystery of the Church and the need for unity and peace, would Paul conclude his letter with a command for each individual believer to fight against Satan by himself? Wouldn’t that go against the corporate emphasis he had so forcefully advocated? Why would a particular believer need the gifts available in the body if he could rely on his own armor, even if provided by God, to combat the evil forces around him? This understanding of the armor of God seems to promote a picture of Christian warfare carried on by Rambo, who takes on the enemy by himself. Such a picture contradicts what Paul teaches in the book.

The idea that Eph 6:10–12 is speaking to the Church as a body also finds support when one considers it has many similarities with Eph 1:19–21, which clearly speaks of the Church and not individual believers. These two passages form an inclusio of the book.

III. The Inclusio Of Eph 1:19–21

As Paul begins to close the Book of Ephesians in 6:10–12, it is evident that he reminds his readers of things he discussed in the first chapter. In addition to prepositions and adjectives, there are also six words that are found in both 6:10–12 and 1:19–21. All of these words are uncommon ones, which strongly suggests that their occurrence in both places is more than a coincidence.

The phrase “His mighty power” in 1:19 (kratous tēs ischuos autou) contains the same Greek words as the “power of His might” in 6:10 (kratei tēs ischuos autou).[13] In fact, the words for “power” and “might” only occur in these two places in Ephesians. The entire phrase occurs nowhere else in Pauline writings.

The word for “principality” (archē) and a different word for “power” (exousia) also occur in both 1:21 and 6:12. The reference to “this age” (aiōn houtos) also occurs in these same verses. The word for “heavenly” (epouranios) is found in both 1:20 and 6:12.[14]

Even though they are not the exact same, there are words in the two passages which suggest a link between the two as well. In 1:19, when Paul speaks of the greatness of Christ’s “power,” he uses still another word to describe the strength of the Lord. In 6:10, Paul tells the church at Ephesus to be “strong” in the Lord. In 1:19 the word is a noun. In 6:10 he uses a related verb form of the noun.

Arnold makes an interesting suggestion in reference to another possible connection between 1:19–21 and 6:10–12. In 6:12, Paul mentions “rulers” of darkness. The word only occurs here in the NT (kosmokratoras). It seems clear that this refers to some kind of evil angelic forces, like the principalities and powers found in both passages. It is not found in 1:19–21, but in verse 21, Paul does mention that Christ is greater than “every name that is named.” Perhaps the “name” of these evil rulers is an example of what Paul is talking about.[15]

To observe the clear connection between these two passages, let us view them side by side. The bold words represent the exact same words and the italics the possible synonymous connections:

and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come (1:19–21, emphasis added).

Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places (6:10–12, emphasis added).

In Ephesians 1, then, Paul says that God had chosen the Church in eternity past. Christ has risen from the dead, far above all heavenly powers. The Lord will reign in the world to come. The Church has been risen with Him. Paul concludes this discussion by saying that Christ has become the Head of the Church. In Him, the Church will also reign (Eph 1:22–23). Such is the power displayed in the Church because of and in Christ.

The similarities of 1:19–21 compel the reader to conclude that Paul has the same ideas in mind in 6:10–12. The Church is to rely on the power of Christ. This power is necessary because the Church is at war with these heavenly forces. If that is the case, it is the Church that is called on to take up the armor of God. This certainly agrees with the emphasis on the Church throughout the Book of Ephesians.

Often, however, Christians do not think in terms of corporate spiritual warfare. It is difficult to understand how a church could take up the armor of God. It would be beneficial to look more closely at what Paul is saying in Eph 6:10–12.

IV. Satan’s Battle With The Church

Satan is not mentioned in Ephesians 1 when Paul discusses the powers and authorities in the heavenly places. The devil is, however, named in 6:11. He is the one behind these heavenly forces. These forces are described as belonging to the darkness of this age (6:12). Their evil nature is also seen in that they are further designated as “spiritual hosts of wickedness.” Specifically, the phrase “spiritual hosts of wickedness” is probably in apposition to the phrase the “rulers of the darkness of this age” and refers to the same group of evil forces.

In 1:21, taken by itself, the principalities and powers could be said to refer to unfallen angels and even human government. However, when considered with the inclusio of 6:12, there is little doubt that Paul is describing evil, fallen angels.[16] They have as their leader the devil. They are at war with and are attacking the Church. The word “spiritual” describes the nature of these enemies of the Church. The adjective “heavenly” indicates from where they originate or from where they are able to operate.

In 6:12, when Paul speaks of principalities, powers, and rulers, he may be describing characteristics of Satan and the fallen angels. They have power and the authority to exercise that power. This authority extends over a wide area around the world. If the phrase “spiritual hosts of wickedness” is indeed appositional, it describes the character of these beings who have this extensive power and authority.

It is also possible that these words describe different types of fallen angels. This would mean there is a hierarchy among them, with Satan being their commander.[17] This would not be surprising since there is a hierarchy among the unfallen angels. Some good angels are archangels, some cherubim, other seraphim, and many others are what could be called ordinary angels. The satanic evil forces evidently are arranged like an army, with different soldiers in that army possessing different levels of strength, authority, and the sphere in which they can use that power.

The word “rulers” in 6:12 indicates some kind of authority in this world, as does the references to “this age.” Even though these forces are spiritual in nature and originate in the heavens, they exercise authority over men and women on earth. In some sense they have an influence in the affairs and activities of mankind.[18] This includes the affairs of the Church.

The Scriptures do not give much information on the hierarchy of the fallen angels and how they use their power among mankind. The Book of Daniel, however, does give us a glimpse of these unseen realities. In Daniel 10, Daniel prays to God, but there is a delay in the answer given by the Lord because of angelic warfare.

Daniel 10:10–21 speaks of both unfallen and fallen angels. Those involved in the warfare are called “princes,” a word which speaks of authority and power. A fallen angel is called by this title in v 13. It is clear that this is an evil being since he resists the work of God. Michael, the unfallen, holy angel, is also called a prince in vv 13 and 21.

A good angel attempted to give Daniel the answer to his prayer, but the evil prince of Persia prevented this from happening for twenty-one days. In this case, at least, God allowed this evil angel to hinder the will of God among His people.[19]

This evil angel has some type of authority over the nation of Persia. The kingdom of Greece (Dan 10:20) will also be impacted with this angelic combat. Walvoord comments that it is plain that there is evil angelic influence on the political and social conditions in the world. He also maintains that this is what Paul has in mind in Eph 6:10–12.[20] Leupold states that this passage in Daniel points out that evil angels exercise a strong influence over nations and governments, even to the point of controlling certain nations’ policies. They do so to thwart the will and work of God.[21]

Daniel also mentions the “prince of Greece” (v 20). The angel who speaks to Daniel said that not only would that angel have to fight against the evil prince of Persia, but also with the one associated with Greece. This most naturally refers to a fallen angel who has influence over Greece. The reference to the prince of Greece could also refer to the coming of Alexander the Great. Evil forces would attempt to play a role in his world-wide conquest.[22]

Walvoord makes an interesting observation that speaks of the power of these evil forces as they oppose the work of God. In the Book of Daniel, Greece and Persia are two of the kingdoms that receive much focus (Daniel 2, 7–10, 11). These kingdoms would greatly impact God’s chosen people Israel. Many of the details of God’s prophecy to the nation of Israel during this period involved an unseen struggle of angelic forces concerning the will of God.[23] In Ephesians, Paul says that the Church is the people of God in this dispensation, in “this age.” God had determined this in eternity past, and the Church has been given the task of doing the work of the Lord (Eph 2:10). It is not surprising that evil forces would attempt to thwart that work in the world today, just as they did in the time of Daniel.

In Eph 2:2, Paul calls Satan the “prince of the power of the air,” who has influence over the world.[24] John says that the whole world lies under his power (1 John 5:19). In 2 Cor 4:4, Paul calls him “the god of this age.” The words “this age” are the same ones used here in Eph 6:12. When Satan tempted the Lord in the wilderness, he offered Him the glory of all the kingdoms of the world if the Lord would worship him (Matt 4:8–9). The Lord does not dispute Satan’s rights in this offer. In all these cases, including Daniel 10, we see that Satan has authority over the nations of the world.

God can and does limit the exercise of the power and authority Satan and his forces have over mankind and the nations of the world. This is seen in the angelic warfare described in Daniel 10, as well as in the account of Job (Job 1:12; 2:6).[25] But in this present age, it is correct to say that these evil forces exercise ruling power over the world. This would explain the reason for Satan’s attack on the Church.

A. The Role Of The Church In The World To Come

In Eph 1:19–23, Paul says that Christ will rule the world to come. He has been seated at the right hand of the Father (v 20), which appears to be an allusion to Psa 110:1.[26] The author of Hebrews explains how this Psalm looks forward to the day when all Christ’s enemies will be defeated and, as a result, He will rule forever.[27] These enemies certainly include Satan and his evil forces that wage war against His Church.

Ephesians tells us that the Church is the Body of Christ and will rule with Him in that day (1:22–23). While this does not mean that every individual Christian will rule with Christ, the Body of Christ will. This is the predestined will of God.

God originally created man and woman to rule over the works of His hands (Gen 1:28). In Christ, the Church will fulfill God’s created purpose (Psa 8:5–6; Heb 2:5–10).[28] Whatever power and authority Satan and his forces have in this present age over the world will be gone when Christ returns with His Church. In this present age, the Church is preparing for the role it will have for eternity.

In eternity past, God predestined the Church for this glorious future. In the Church, God has brought together both Jews and Gentiles to accomplish His created purpose for men and women. The Church shows the power and wisdom of God. In Eph 3:10, Paul specifically states this and connects it with the spiritual warfare of 6:10–12. He uses the same words to describe both the powers attacking the Church and their place of origin: “…to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places” (Eph 3:10, emphasis added).

It is to be noted that it is the Church as a whole which teaches fallen angels something. In the Church God demonstrates His wisdom to these evil forces. It is the Church which will have authority in the world to come. In a very real sense, it can be said that the Church will assume the power that Satan and his fallen angels have over the world in this present age. They attack the organization that will replace them. The power that Satan exercises today is limited by what God allows, so the power of the Body of Christ in His eternal kingdom will be even greater. The birth of the Church and its continued existence show Satan and his angels the hidden purpose of God that was a mystery in the OT (Eph 3:9).[29]

While we cannot understand much about the spiritual world, it is clear that Satan has an intense hatred towards the Church. Evil forces cannot attack Christ personally, so they turn their attention to His Body. Satan wanted to prevent the first Adam from ruling over the works of God’s hand and certainly resents the fact that the Body of the Second Adam will. He evidently wants to see the Church fail in the works that God has given it (Eph 2:10). Perhaps this is out of jealousy, or perhaps he takes evil pleasure when the Church does not honor its Head. Christ is dishonored when the Church does not function as Paul instructs it to in the Book of Ephesians. One might suggest that Satan enjoys it when the Church does not conduct itself in a way that reflects what it will be.

In the context of the Book of Ephesians, one of the aims of Satan is to create division in the Body of Christ (4:1–3). He attempts to make local assembly members fight with one another. He does not want to see a church where the members love one another (5:2), grow in sound doctrine, and living righteously (4:11–16).

Even though we cannot fully understand the thinking of the evil one or all the reasons for his actions, Paul makes it clear that he and fallen angels have an interest in the Church. This is supported by the fact that good angels do as well.

B. First Peter 1:12

Peter speaks of a salvation in the future for believers (1 Pet 1:9). While many assume this refers to salvation from the lake of fire, it is clear that is not the case. Believers already have eternal life. It is not something they will receive in the future. In addition, this salvation will occur as the result of trials (1 Pet 1:5–9). Eternal life is a free gift and is not gained through trials.

The salvation that Peter talks about here is sharing in the rule of Christ. The soul, or life, that suffers with Christ is saved in the sense that the works done have eternal value and are not lost. It is something in addition to receiving eternal life.[30] In speaking about this kind of salvation, Peter comments that “angels desire to look into” this matter (1:12). The phrase pictures the angels as longing to understand something and they try to gaze into the matter to have a clearer view of things. Simply put, even good angels cannot fully comprehend the glorious future of men and women in the Church who will reign with Christ.

C. Hebrews 1:14

The author of Hebrews also addresses the interest good angels have concerning believing men and women ruling in the world to come. Like Peter, he uses the word “salvation” to describe the honor that will be given to them. Those who rule will be saved from all their trials and enemies after they have suffered with the Lord.[31]

These angels, who are stronger and wiser than human beings, serve these men and women who will rule with Christ. In some ways, the good heavenly beings assist these people as they prepare for their eternal roles of ruling over the works of God’s hands.

It is of interest that in Heb 1:13 the author of Hebrews quotes from Psa 110. All enemies will be put under Christ’s feet. Christ is currently seated at the right hand of God. Paul refers to this in Eph 1:20 when he says that all evil forces will be a part of those defeated. On that day, the Church will rule with Christ. Unfallen angels are amazed at what the Lord has done and will do for believers. Fallen angels are in spiritual warfare against this group of men and women.

V. Conclusion And Application

The Book of Ephesian emphasizes the Church, which was predestined by God to be the Body of the King and has a glorious future. It will rule with Him.

When Paul tells the readers to put on the armor of God, he is telling the Church to do so. The reason the Church needs to put on this armor is that it is under attack. The Church is to see itself as being at war. Satan and his forces understand that the Church will one day rule over creation in place of the power they exercise in a limited way now.

The Church is a display of the power and wisdom of God in accomplishing His purposes. The rule and power of Satan and the fallen angels in the affairs of this world will soon come to an end. The hatred they have towards the coming King is directed towards His Body.

In light of the future the Church will have, it is to conduct itself in a manner that reflects its Head and this glorious future. Like its Head, they are called to be a church where the members love and serve one another. The Church is to be unified as a body. It is to grow by the power of the Spirit that united them as one body. As a body, they are to live in a righteous way. This includes growth in sound doctrine through the word of God. These are the pieces of armor the Church is to wear (Eph 6:13–17). In doing so, the Church will become like the King it represents.

This may sound strange to anyone accustomed to hearing about spiritual warfare in individualistic terms. The Book of Ephesians challenges us to take a corporate view of things. How we each do as individuals in our walk with the Lord and how much we are being transformed into His image are certainly important. But it also important how the local church we are attending is doing in these areas.

Where we attend church is important. The doctrine taught in that church is as well. We are to pray for one another and be concerned about how the church is doing spiritually. We can be spiritually immature and lukewarm both as an individual and as a church body.

In the West, we have a tendency to switch churches if that church does not meet some individual need or preference. We may not like the music, or perhaps it does not have enough activities for the children. If my preferences are not being met, I may very well go church shopping. It might not even occur to us that the focus should not be on us as individuals, but on the health of the church as a whole and our role as a member of the Body of Christ.

To a large degree, we have lost the ability to see the importance of the Church. This may explain why we even read Ephesians as through it described individual spiritual realities instead of corporate ones. Almost universally, for example, the mention of predestination is seen as God choosing individuals.

Ephesians forces us to look at things differently. We should see ourselves as part of a body, and not just as an individual. Of primary importance for us in this area should be whether the church we are attending is teaching sound doctrine. Such teaching will play a large role in a church that lives righteously. We should pray that the body grow to be like the Lord and to hear Him say at the Judgment Seat of Christ to the church, “Well done.” The evil principalities, powers, and rulers of this age are fighting to prevent that.

Notes

1. John R. W. Stott, The Message of Ephesians (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1979), 266.
2. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Ephesians (London, England: Pickering & Inglis, 1973), 217–19.
3. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Christian Warfare: An Exposition of Ephesians 6:10–13 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1976), 222–26. Lloyd-Jones remarks that the lukewarm people at Laodicea in Rev 3:16 are examples of people who have not put on the armor of God and demonstrate they are not children of God.
4. Ernest Best, Ephesians (New York, NY: T & T Clark, 1989), 586.
5. Ibid., 585. He claims that Paul immediately switches from addressing groups to addressing individuals.
6. Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 818.
7. R. Kent Hughes, Ephesians: The Mystery of the Body of Christ (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1990), 60.
8. Martin Kitchen, Ephesians, ed. John Court (New York, NY: Routledge, 1994), 119–26; Clinton E. Arnold, Ephesians: Power and Magic (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1997), 67.
9. Stott, Message, 24.
10. Shawn Lazar, Chosen to Serve (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2017), 201–12. See also William Klein, The New Chosen People: A Corporate View of Election (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990), 180.
11. Ibid., 47.
12. John F. MacArthur, Jr., Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1993), 61.
13. The phrases use the same word for “power” (kratous/kratei); it is in the genitive case in 1:19 and in the dative in 6:10.
14. The word “places” is placed after “heavenly” in the NKJV in both verses even though it does not occur in the original Greek in either verse. It is a legitimate addition, adding clarification.
15. Arnold, Ephesians, 67. It is also possible that the word for “ruler” in 6:12 is synonymous with the word “dominion” in 1:21 (kuriotētos).
16. Hoehner, Ephesians, 279, 826.
17. William J. Larkin, Ephesians: A Handbook on the Greek Text (Waco, TX: Baylor Univ Press, 2009), 158; Hughes, Ephesians, 215.
18. Larkin, Ephesians, 24.
19. Gleason L. Archer Jr., “Daniel,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol 7 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985), 124–25.
20. John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1971), 247.
21. Herbert C. Leupold, Exposition of Daniel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Press, 1949), 457–58.
22. Charles L. Feinberg, Daniel: The Kingdom of the Lord (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 1981), 145.
23. Walvoord, Daniel, 250.
24. Francis Foulkes, The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1963), 69.
25. Archer, “Daniel,” 125.
26. Hoehner, Ephesians, 279.
27. Kenneth W. Yates, Hebrews: Partners with Christ (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2019), 32–33.
28. Ibid., 40–43.
29. E. F. Scott, The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians, to Philemon and to theEphesians (London: MNTC, 1930), 189.
30. Gary Derickson, “1 Peter,” in The Grace New Testament Commentary, ed. Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2019), 565.
31. Yates, Hebrews, 32–34.

Examples Of The Four Soils In The Gospel Of Mark

By Kenneth W. Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society]

I. Introduction

The Parable of the Four Soils is found in Mark 4:3–8. The Lord interprets the parable in 4:15–20.[1] At face value Jesus says that the Word concerning Him and His coming kingdom will go out through His teaching and the teaching of His disciples. People will respond to that Word in various ways. The Word is like a seed planted in the soil. Each person’s response is represented by a particular soil, which pictures how that person’s heart receives the Word given to him.

The four soils are the hardened soil on the side of a road, the rocky soil, the thorny soil, and the good soil. Since only the good soil is said to produce an abundant crop—even though there are various degrees of that abundance—many maintain that only this last soil is a picture of believers. Associated with this idea is the belief that all “true” believers will have a good crop of spiritual fruit. The hardened soil, the rocky soil, and the thorny soil all describe different kinds of unbelievers.[2]

However, any fair reading of the parable will not come to those conclusions. There are not three kinds of unbelievers. A hearer either believes or he doesn’t. The good soil is not the only one that produces life; the rocky and thorny soils do as well. All three of these soils result in a plant, which is a proof of life. Unbelievers do not have eternal life.

It is not the purpose of this article to address the specifics of the different soils. There are excellent treatments of the subject which the reader can access. This article will start with the assumption that the last three soils describe people who have believed in Jesus Christ for eternal life. In these soils, the issue is not eternal salvation, but fruitfulness. Some believers will not produce a rich spiritual crop in their lives.[3]

After giving the parable, the Lord tells the disciples that it is the key to understanding all of His parables (4:13). It would not be surprising, then, if the reader of Mark’s Gospel sees the truths of this parable worked out in the book. In fact, that is exactly what one sees. There are numerous illustrations of the soils, which also serve as warnings and instruction to all the disciples. I will look at these various illustrations, leading up to the Lord’s entrance into Jerusalem in chap. 11.

II. The Disciples In The First Boat Scene (4:35–41)

In the Gospel of Mark, there are three boat scenes in which the disciples are involved (4:35–41; 6:45–52; 8:13–21). In each instance, the reader sees how these men respond to what the Lord has told them. How do their hearts respond to the seed of Christ’s Word? In each case, the disciples come across in a negative light. If we compare them to the different soils, they do not illustrate believers with hearts made up of good soil. While some might conclude they were not believers, this is certainly incorrect. The Gospel of John, particularly, makes it clear they believed (John 1:41–49; 2:11).[4]

This first boat scene occurs immediately after Jesus taught them through parables, including the Parable of the Four Soils (4:33–34). In all of these parables, there is the promise of a coming, eternal kingdom. Jesus is obviously the King of that kingdom. That is the “seed” given to the disciples. Mark wants to make a connection between the teachings of the Lord and this boat scene in v 35. They all happened on the same day.[5]

How did they respond to that teaching? While in the boat with the Lord, a severe storm arises. The disciples are terrified and fear that they are going to die (vv 37–38). They wake up the Lord and plead for Him to save their lives.

The response of the Lord indicates that there was a problem deeper than their fear of dying on the lake. He asks them why they do not have faith (v 40). Since this occurs right after they were taught the parables, the connection strongly suggests that these men did not believe what they had been told in those parables. The faith spoken of here is not the faith that leads to eternal life. This faith involves believing what Jesus just told them in the parables about the coming kingdom. Marshall calls it a faith that involves practical confidence in the power of God to deliver through the miraculous.[6]

The second soil is the rocky soil. The Lord says it represents those who believe the Word spoken, but when hard times come, they fall away. While the falling away in this instance in the boat is not permanent, it is easy to see that the disciples have forgotten what the Lord taught them. They found themselves in difficult circumstances and their faith failed them. When in the boat, they had hearts that could be described as those composed of rocky soil.

III. The People Of Gadara (5:1–20)

After Jesus and the disciples get out of the boat, they come ashore in the land of Gadara.[7] While there, Jesus casts a large number of demons out of a man into a herd of approximately 2,000 pigs. The pigs rush down a cliff and drown in the Sea of Galilee.

Clearly, this man was given a great deliverance by the Lord. His previous condition was well known to the people of the region. They were witnesses of the miraculous power needed to deliver him.

The Lord spends several hours in the region, and it is certain that He did some teaching. It is clear that He taught the man who previously had the demons about who He is (Mark 5:19–20). Others would have heard this truth as well. How did the people in Gadara respond to the “seed” spread among them in the teaching and power of Christ?

Mark relates how the people became frightened at what they had seen (v 15). They then ask the Lord to depart from that area. At first glance it appears they reject His work and words because they are afraid of the power they have just seen.[8] But more is at play here. The death of 2,000 pigs would have been a tremendous economic loss to the citizens of Gadara. In v 16, the emphasis on the pigs suggests this was the main reason they wanted Him to leave. His actions had cost them a great deal of money.[9]

How should we characterize the spiritual condition of all the people who heard and saw the Lord? No doubt, many did not believe in Him. Their hearts were hardened to the Word of God. Their fear of the supernatural power displayed or the resentment at the loss of their livelihood made them unwilling to consider the possibility that Jesus was the Christ. They were, in the words of the Parable of the Four Soils, like the hardened first soil.

But is it necessary to conclude that this was the case with all those who asked Jesus to leave? Could some have believed in Him as the Christ but still desired that He leave because of the cost His presence might bring? It will be argued later that among the Jews, the preaching of the Word to the masses definitely included believers in the crowd along with the many who did not believe. The man who previously had the demons falls within this category.

If there were believers among the general population of unbelieving Gadara, they are examples of the third, thorny soil. They asked Jesus to leave because they were carried away by the worries of this world and the deceitfulness of riches (4:18–19).

This was not the case with the man who previously had the demons. Even though he had experienced the power of the Lord in a very personal way, he was not afraid. He wanted to follow the Lord in discipleship. In addition, the Lord sent him to proclaim the good news of what Christ had done for him in a region that had rejected the Lord. He faithfully did so. He is a graphic illustration of the fourth soil.

IV. Jairus And The Woman With An Issue Of Blood (5:21–43)

Jairus is a ruler in the synagogue at Capernaum. The woman with the issue of blood is not named. While one may hold that they are unbelievers, there are arguments for the contrary. We know Jairus’ name, which suggests he was known to the early church. In the case of the woman, Jesus tells her that her faith has saved her (v 34). This is the exact same phrase Jesus uses with Bartimaeus in Mark 10:52, and he is certainly seen as a believer. While she was clearly saved from her illness, it is reasonable to conclude that her faith also included believing that Jesus is the Christ and that she was saved spiritually by her faith as well. Williams accurately points out that in Mark’s Gospel, these two are minor characters who offer a rebuke and example for the twelve disciples.[10]

These two accounts are an example of intercalation or sandwiching. This means there are two episodes that go together and interpret each other.[11] Both Jairus and the woman are connected by the fact that each grows in his or her faith and overcomes fear and difficulties, and each is associated with the number 12.[12] In addition, in the healing involved with each, Jesus touches a person that would have brought ritual defilement according to official Judaism.

Prior to these two healings, the disciples are fearful and lack faith (4:40–41). In this sense, they were like the people of Gadara (5:15). Jairus is faced with fear as well when he hears that his daughter has died and is told to have faith (v 36). The woman confronts the same issues (vv 33–34). Jairus knows that Jesus can heal his daughter as long as she is alive, but the Lord tells Him to also believe in His ability to raise the dead and to cast his fear aside even though the situation seems hopeless. The woman is called to publicly come forward to proclaim what happened to her.[13] She does this even though she was a social and religious outcast, and her condition was one of private embarrassment.[14]

Both Jairus and the woman overcome their fear. Jairus continues going with the Lord even after his daughter has died and the woman publicly comes forth to explain to the Lord and the crowd what she had done. More importantly, each grew in his or her faith in the sense that each believed new things that the Lord taught him or her. Jairus learned that Jesus could even raise his daughter from the dead. The woman learned that it was not touching the garment of Jesus that saved her from her illness. This is what she thought at first, based upon what she had either seen or heard or even perhaps her superstition (cf. Mark 3:10). Jesus had the authority to heal her by His power, not the magical qualities of His clothes. The connection between Jairus and this woman also involves the fact that this woman was a teaching lesson for him. He saw this woman overcome her fear and take Jesus at His Word. He could do the same.

In other words, both Jairus and the woman grew in their faith. They already believed in Jesus as the Messiah and believed that He could heal. But as they were given new information, they believed what Jesus told them. Throughout Mark, Jesus is teaching the disciples new things. They needed to follow the examples of Jairus and this woman in this regard.

The word about Jesus Christ had reached Jairus and the woman; they had believed it. It would have been easy for Jairus to avoid any association with Jesus. The religious leaders at his synagogue were opposed to Him (3:1–6), and those from Jerusalem had condemned Him (3:22). Whether it was simply the dire circumstances he found himself in with his daughter’s illness or the boldness of his faith, he was willing to publicly come to Christ, even if it meant the loss of whatever privileges came his way as a respected leader in the synagogue. Neither did he shy away from any persecution that might come his way. His heart was not made up of rocky or thorny soil. While the woman may not have faced the possible persecution Jairus did, she too overcame the difficulties she needed to in order to approach Christ.

Both Jairus and the woman had hearts made up of good soil. They believed what the Lord told them. In them, the reader of Mark learns a lesson about that soil. Discipleship involves growing in faith when it comes to new things. The fourth soil is one that when it hears these new things, it casts aside fear and believes what the Word of God says. The twelve disciples could learn a lesson from these two minor characters.

V. People In Jesus’ Hometown (6:1–6)

Mark records a trip that the Lord makes to His hometown of Nazareth. It is a particularly sad event. He speaks in the synagogue and the people know that He has performed many miracles. When He speaks, they also recognize He is a man with profound wisdom.

The “seed” of His Word goes out to them. How do they respond? They were offended by Him (v 3). The expression they were offended (eskandalizontō) carries with it the idea of deep rejection and denial.[15] Since Jesus was a common laborer who grew up in Nazareth and the people of the town knew His family, they concluded that He could not be the Christ. Nobody with such a common background could be the long-awaited promised king.

Lane suggests that the depth of their rejection is seen in their recognition of His power and wisdom. These things had to come from some source. Since they had concluded that Jesus was not sent from God, such supernatural power had to come from Satan. This is what certain religious leaders had concluded as well (3:22). Jesus “marveled” at such unbelief (v 6). This is the only place in the NT where Jesus has this reaction in a negative situation.[16]

The unbelief at Nazareth is a clear example of the hardened first soil in the Parable of the Four Soils. The vast majority of people in the town were not willing to listen. Their hearts were hardened to the truth Jesus taught and showed them. The seed of Christ’s Word could not penetrate that hardness.

But even in this terribly sad situation, not all is bleak. Even at Nazareth, there appears to be some spiritual success. Mark tells us that Jesus was even able to heal a few people in Nazareth (v 5). There were some there who were open to what He was doing.

It is also completely reasonable to conclude there were even a few who were open to what He was teaching. In fact, Mark relates how He continued teaching in the surrounding area (v 6). In the Parable of the Four Soils, the Lord said that people will respond to His Word in four different ways. What the Lord taught in Nazareth and the surrounding area did not fall only on hardened hearts.

We should not conclude that whenever a crowd of people heard the Lord, all responded in the same way. Dillow points out a common, probably incorrect, practice of Bible readers. Whenever the reader of the NT reads about a crowd or the “multitude,” there is a tendency to contrast them with the disciples and conclude that the crowd is made up of unbelievers.[17] There is no reason to see the multitudes in Mark in that way. It also does not make sense logically, since a large group of people will not react in uniformity to what they hear. In the crowds, there were certainly some believers.[18] In at least one instance, Jesus says that the “multitude” was made up of believers (Mark 3:32–34). In Mark 7:14–15 the “crowd” is contrasted to the unbelieving Pharisees. Jesus calls the crowd to Him in order to teach those who are a part of it. The most natural implication is that there were those in the crowd who had believed in Him.

Put simply, Jesus spoke to large crowds. When He did so, the hearts of the different hearers were made up of different kinds of soils. In the rest of Mark 6, there is another example of the Lord speaking to a large group, as well as the account of the disciples doing so.

VI. The Mission Of The Twelve And The Feeding Of The 5,000 (6:7–13, 30; 31–44)

In Mark 6, Jesus sends out the twelve disciples in order to continue His work in the towns and villages of Galilee. When He called them to be His disciples, He told them they would be fishers of men (1:17). They now begin that process. They proclaim the same message and perform the same miracles that He did (1:15; 6:12–13).

This mission is discussed in all three Synoptic Gospels (Matt 10:1ff; Luke 9:1–6). However, only Mark mentions that when they returned, they told the Lord all that they had taught the people (6:30). They were also able to cast out many demons and heal many sick people. Their message certainly included the fact that Jesus was the Christ. They were now spreading the seed of God’s Word. The miracles they performed through the authority Christ gave them demonstrated the veracity of their message.

According to the Jewish historian Josephus, Galilee at the time of Christ had over 200 villages and was heavily populated.[19] With all twelve disciples going out teaching, a large group of people would have heard the message. The seed would have been sown in many hearts, and there would have been many different kinds of responses. While some did not believe, others did. Among those who believed, there would have been different levels of commitment to following the Lord. At least some of those who had believed wanted to know more and sought to do so.

In Mark’s account, immediately after the disciples returned from their mission, Jesus wanted to take them to a lonely place for rest (6:30–31). However, this was not possible because there was a large crowd of people coming to them. No doubt, this crowd was due in large part to the successful teaching tour of the disciples. They had come to hear more not only from the disciples, but also from the One about whom the disciples had preached. They were following the disciples for that very purpose. In other words, they were seeking to hear and be with the Lord.

Jesus spends many hours teaching them in this deserted place. While, once again, some might say this crowd was made up entirely of unbelievers, this would be highly unlikely. There are no reported miracles performed by the Lord during those hours of teaching.[20] The people stayed during these long hours without food or water. This demonstrated their commitment to Him at least at some level. Because of the Lord’s compassion on them, He miraculously feeds them in the wilderness with only a few fish and loaves of bread. This display of power would have helped demonstrate the truth of what He had taught them for all those hours.

It strains belief to conclude that the Lord did not speak of Himself and the coming kingdom of God. This is what Jesus proclaimed (1:15).[21] In fact, in John’s account, many in the crowd followed the Lord the next day, and He told them of their need to believe in Him for eternal life (John 6:22–40).

Mark tells us that Jesus fed a multitude which consisted of 5,000 men. Since this number did not include women or children (Matt 14:21), the total number who heard the words of Jesus that day probably numbered over 10,000.[22] Jesus sees Himself as the shepherd of this large group (Mark 6:34). That is why He feeds them both physically with bread and spiritually with His Word. Their religious and political leaders had abandoned them.[23] Of the more than 10,000 individuals present, most would have been unbelievers. These would have been people who perhaps were there simply to see some miracle performed. But there also would have been believers of various stripes in the group. Some would have feared being publicly associated with Christ and the consequences of such an association (rocky soil). Some would have not wanted to follow the Lord because they loved the comfort of their lives (thorny soil). But some, after seeing His power and hearing His Word would have desired to follow Him and learn more from Him.

Even though Wiersbe sees this crowd in a mostly negative light, he recognizes that there were believers in it. He says that the crowd failed to understand the “spiritual message” of Christ’s teaching and followed Him only for the help He gave them when He fed them. However, he acknowledges that this was only for the “most part.”[24] There were some who followed Christ with good and noble hearts. This agrees with the proposition that there were other types of soil among the crowd, other than the hardened soil. This writer would add that we simply cannot determine the percentage of each type of soil in such a large crowd.

Later, Jesus leaves the predominately Jewish Galilee and travels to a mostly Gentile area. Mark records two instances where multitudes are exposed to the Lord. In one case, in Decapolis,[25] He heals a deaf man who also had difficulty speaking. It is clear that He did other things because the multitude concludes that He had done all things well, even healing the deaf and dumb (7:31–37). This certainly indicates that the hearts of many people in that region were open to what He was doing and saying. There would have been different responses to the seed Christ was sowing in Decapolis.

This is supported by the fact that immediately after the reaction of the people in Decapolis, Mark records another account of Jesus feeding a multitude. He connects this with the people in Decapolis by saying that this feeding took place “in those days” (8:1). Once again, it is a desert area (8:4), and in this case the people remain with the Lord for three days. Many of them had also traveled at a great distance to be with Him (8:3). The cost of being with Him was that they were experiencing hunger because of lack of food.

This crowd numbered in the thousands (8:9). Matthew states that Jesus healed many sick people (Matt 15:31), but in three days the Lord would have also taught the people many things. There would have been many there who did not need healing. Among this group would have been believers in what Jesus was teaching. These believers would have been made up of the last three soils in the Parable of the Four Soils. The positive descriptions Mark gives of these individuals demand such a conclusion.

Whenever the Lord spoke to these large crowds, especially when He did so over a long period of time, the words of the Lord Himself suggests that there would have been all four types of soils among the people. When Jesus gave the parable, He said that when the sower spread the seed of His Word, that seed would come to rest on all four (Mark 4:3–8). Among thousands of listeners, this would certainly be the case.

VII. Disciples And The Second And Third Boat Scenes (6:45–52; 8:12–21)

The second boat scene involving the disciples occurs after the feeding of the 5,000. The Lord comes to them, walking on the water in the midst of a strong wind storm. They think Jesus is a ghost and are frightened (6:50). This is the same reaction they had in the first boat scene.

When the Lord gets into the boat with them, the wind stopped and they are amazed. Mark says that the reaction of the disciples was because they had not understood what happened when Jesus fed the 5,000. In that feeding, Jesus showed that He would meet the needs of His sheep. He was their Shepherd, just as God was the Shepherd of His people in Psalm 23. As a result, they had nothing to fear.

In this example, the disciples did not believe what Jesus had revealed to them. Their hearts were not receptive to this new information. It is of interest that Mark says that their hearts were “hardened” (6:52). This description reminds the reader of the first soil, where the seed of God’s Word cannot penetrate the ground it falls on. In fact, in Mark 3:5 the unbelieving Pharisees are described as having hard hearts. The disciples were believers, but their hearts were too hard to understand the new truth Jesus had just taught them.

In the third boat scene, a similar thing occurs. After seeing Jesus miraculously feed the 4,000, the disciples think that the Lord is not pleased with them because they did not bring bread with them. Once again, He rebukes them for not learning from what He has taught them. How could they possibly conclude that He was concerned about the amount of bread they had brought, after they had seen Him feed thousands of people with a few loaves of bread? As in the second boat scene, He points out that their hearts are hardened.

But He adds a further rebuke. He quotes from the OT and asks if they were blind and lacked understanding (8:18). Earlier, He had used such imagery to describe unbelievers who were on the “outside” (4:12). Those on the outside did not understand the things Jesus taught.

The reference to the hardness of hearts of the believing disciples in Mark is telling. This, along with their blindness and inability to understand what Jesus was saying, indicates that they were acting like unbelievers. We must conclude that when it comes to appropriating spiritual truths, believers can indeed act in that way. When that happens, the heart of the believer is like the first soil. Hornok suggests that these words by the Lord were an attack on the pride of the disciples. Perhaps they thought they had hearts represented by the good soil because of their closeness to the Lord and that He had privately explained the meaning of the parable to them (4:10–20). In practice, however, they were acting like those outside of this favored position.[26] This would have been a call for them to take heed to how they responded to all the things Christ was teaching them.

As the Book of Mark progresses, the Twelve continue to struggle with understanding the Lord’s instruction. As He teaches them about the suffering that will result from following Him, they are not able to understand. James and John demonstrate a heart made up of thorny soil as they reveal that they are more interested in power, prestige, and getting ahead of others than suffering for Christ (Mark 10:35–37).

VIII. Bartimaeus: A Great Example Of The Fourth Soil (10:46–52)

Blind Bartimaeus is an important person in Mark’s Gospel. He is the only person Jesus heals who is named in the book. He is the only one in the book who calls Jesus the Son of David, a Messianic title. He is one who gains his sight, which is a picture of spiritual insight as well. When the reader considers this man, there can be no doubt that he was a believer. But he was more than that. He becomes a model for others to follow.[27] He is an example of the fourth soil.

Bartimaeus has heard about the deeds and words of Jesus. He knew that Jesus had healed others just like him. He knew that the Messiah would be able to heal. All of his actions show that his heart is fertile ground for the things he has heard. That heart is not rocky. He does not let difficulties prevent him from coming to Jesus and following Him. He is blind and an outcast in that society. As a result, the people tell him to be quiet when he calls out to the Lord. It would have been easy to conclude that Jesus could not be bothered by someone as insignificant as he was. Yet, he continues to call out to the Lord. When he is healed, he follows Him on the difficult road to Jerusalem, where Jesus will meet His ignoble death.

But his heart is not thorny either. His meager possessions, whatever they might be, are nothing compared to being with the Lord. He tosses aside his important coat and whatever alms were in it when the Lord calls him.

In following Jesus on the road to Jerusalem, Bartimaeus is following in His path of suffering. No doubt, the Lord taught him more as they traveled that road together. Bartimaeus is presented in such a positive light that the reader is left with the impression that his heart will believe and that he will act upon the things he learns as he leaves Jericho with the Lord. He becomes an outstanding example of a believer whose heart firmly grasps the words of the Lord and bears much fruit.

IX. Conclusion

The Parable of the Four Soils in Mark 4 is a key part of Christ’s teaching. He Himself says it is a basic part of what He teaches the disciples. If they don’t understand it, they won’t be able to understand the other parables He gives them. Not surprisingly, the application of this parable can be seen throughout the book.

It is unfortunate that many have grossly misunderstood such an important parable. They begin with their theological view that all true Christians are fruit bearing, and therefore the thorny and rocky soils must represent unbelievers. This not only contradicts Christian experience, but Mark shows that believers can indeed respond in ways that do not produce spiritual fruit. This is most clearly seen in the twelve disciples who were closest to the Lord. Of all the Synoptic Gospels, Mark paints a picture of the disciples which indicates that even though they were believers and had eternal life, they did not have hearts made up of good soil when it came to taking in the teachings of the Lord.

When the Lord spoke in parables, He indicated that it was of extreme importance that the person listening to Him should be careful how He listens (Mark 4:9, 23–24). Marshall is correct when he says that this is especially true with the Parable of the Four Soils. He states that, “the parable is concerned with the way in which men hear the Word of God, and constitutes a summons to them to take care how they hear it.”[28]

Interpreters can quibble over the parable’s main audience. Hornok maintains that the first soil can be applied to unbelievers but holds that the main idea of the parable is not about the eternal salvation of those who hear the Word of God. Jesus is talking to the disciples and tells them to be careful how they hear. The hardness of their hearts in the boat scenes shows that believers can be represented in the first soil. Her view is that the primary purpose of all four soils is to be an admonition to believers. The Word of God needs to grow, bear fruit, and reproduce itself. In order for that to happen, it needs to find a fertile heart in the believer. If believers do not listen carefully with a receptive heart, the Word can be stolen, starved or strangled.[29] Once again, the example of the disciples in Mark provides a lesson of how believers can refuse to believe new truth from God’s Word.

However, it can also be maintained that the primary reference of the first soil is to unbelievers.[30] Those who hear the Word and are not willing to believe, for whatever reason, do not have life. But it is also clear, based upon the example of the disciples, that believers can act like unbelievers when they do not grow in their knowledge of God’s Word and put it into practice.

Regardless of the main emphasis, Mark makes it clear that believers can learn from observing all four soils and how they each respond to God’s Word. Believers should constantly ask themselves: What is the condition of my heart? Do I believe what God reveals to me in His Word?

But believers can also learn another example from the disciples. The condition of our heart is not a static thing. It can change. If, like the disciples, I find that I am receiving the Word of God with a rocky or thorny heart, I do not have to leave it in that condition. Even though Mark paints the bleakest picture of the disciples, all students of the Bible know that the instruction of the Lord produced great results in these men. It is not a guarantee, but the Lord can do the same thing in any believer’s life. We can be like Bartimaeus!

This parable also leaves us with a strong encouragement. Like the Lord and the disciples, we too can sow the seed of God’s Word. If we are faithful in doing so, we can expect that there will be some who respond positively. Some will not believe. But some will. And among those who do, some will even produce much fruit.

Notes

1. Matthew and Luke also contain this parable (Matt 13:3–9; Luke 8:5–8).
2. John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1955), 153–55; John D. Grassmick, “Mark,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 119–20; John F. MacArthur, “The Four Soils: Fertile Ground,” https://www.gty.org/library/blog/B170823/the-four-soils-the-fertile-ground. Accessed Jan 4, 2021. Of course, some would modify this view somewhat by saying that the last believers (rocky and thorny) can lose their eternal salvation if they do not produce a crop of good works.
3. Robert N. Wilkin, “How Deep Are Your Spiritual Roots? Luke 8:11–15, ” JOTGES 12 (Spring 1999): 5–12; Zane C. Hodges, A Free Grace Primer: The Hungry Inherit, The Gospel Under Siege, Grace in Eclipse (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2011), 51–56; Joseph C. Dillow, Final Destiny: The Future Reign of the Servant Kings (Monument, CO: Paniym Group, Inc., 2012), 518–22.
4. Judas was the lone exception.
5. France points out this connection. Richard T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 222.
6. Christopher D. Marshall, Faith as a Theme in Mark’s Narrative (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 217–18.
7. The Critical Text says it is the land of Gerasa.
8. H. van der Loos, The Miracles of Jesus (Leiden: Brill, 1965), 393.
9. William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 187.
10. Joel F. Williams, “Discipleship and Minor Characters in Mark’s Gospel,” BibSac153 (1996): 338.
11. James A. Brooks, Mark (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 1991), 73.
12. Jairus’ daughter who died was 12 years old, and the woman had been sick for 12 years.
13. Williams, “Discipleship,” 338.
14. Anybody touching her before she was healed was considered ceremonially unclean and would have to perform a ritual bath (Lev 15:25–27). When she touches the Lord, she does not want anybody to notice her actions. If she was from that particular place and had not traveled a long distance to get there, many in the crowd would have known of her condition. In that case, she would have approached Jesus in as much secrecy as she could have mustered.
15. BDAG, s.v. “skandalizō,” 926; France, Mark, 243.
16. The only other instance when Jesus “marvels” at something is when He marvels at the great faith of the centurion in Matt 8:10.
17. Dillow, Final Destiny, 265.
18. Paul S. Minear, “Audience Criticism and Markan Ecclesiology,” in Neues Testament und Geschichte (Tübingen: Mohr, 1972), 79–89.
19. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus, trans. William Whiston (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 1980), Vita 45; Bellum Judaicum 3.3.2.
20. Matthew does mention that the Lord healed their sick prior to teaching, but Mark does not (Matt 14:14).
21. Jesus preached a message of repentance, as did John the Baptist. This is not the same message believers today proclaim, at least not to unbelievers. Repentance, when defined as turning from sin, is not a requirement of receiving eternal life. Jesus and John preached to the nation of Israel. For the kingdom to come to the nation, the nation as a whole was required to turn from their sin. The point of this article is that when the disciple of the Lord proclaims God’s word, in whatever age and to whatever audience, people will respond differently. For a discussion on the meaning of repentance and how it is not a part of receiving eternal life, see Zane C. Hodges, Absolutely Free, Second Edition (Corinth, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2014), 146–50. All of chapter 12 deals with repentance.
22. John A. Martin, “Luke,” The Bible Knowledge Commentary, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 229.
23. In the previous chapter, Mark records the evil character of the political “shepherd” of the people, Herod Antipas (Mark 6:14–29).
24. Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 1:132.
25. The word Decapolis literally means ten cities. Nine of the ten cities were east of the Jordan River in Gentile territory. See, Barry K. Mershon, Jr., “Mark,” The Grace New Testament Commentary, ed. Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2019), 90.
26. Marcia Hornok, “Excavating the Parable of the Sower: Discerning Jesus’ Meaning,” Journal of Dispensational Theology 19 (2015): 195.
27. Kenneth W. Yates, “The Healing of Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46–52), Part 1, ” JOTGES 29 (Autumn 2016): 3–15.
28. I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978), 318.
29. Hornok, “Excavating,” 198.
30. In the Lukan version of the parable, a comparison of Luke 8:12 and 8:13 shows that the first soil there unambiguously represents unbelievers only. However, the Lord taught His parables on many different occasions and in different ways. It is possible, therefore, that when the Lord presented the parable as recorded in Mark that He did not intend the first soil to be understood as exclusively representing unbelievers.

Jesus Will Baptize With The Holy Spirit (Mark 1:8)

By Kenneth W. Yates

[Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society]

I. Introduction

“I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit” (Mark 1:8).

In Mark 1, John the Baptist comes to the nation of Israel. His ministry is one of preparation. He paves the way for the coming Messiah. Part of that ministry involved baptizing the people in water. But he also informs the people that the ministry of the Messiah will be different. One difference will involve baptism. John declares to the people: “I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit” (v 8).

Clearly, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is greater than the baptism with water. The Messiah’s ministry will not only be different from John’s, it will also be greater. But to what does the “baptism of the Holy Spirit” refer? Who received this baptism? This article will attempt to address these issues.

II. The Majority View

It is safe to say that in Acts 2, the majority of Evangelical scholars see in the birth of the Church the fulfillment of John’s statement concerning the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In Acts 1:5, the Lord tells the disciples that they will be baptized in the Holy Spirit in a few days, and this occurs on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4). It appears as if this baptism initially was experienced by approximately 120 people (Acts 1:15).

Grassmick takes this view. He claims that this baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted in the OT as an expected feature of the Messiah’s ministry (Isa 44:3; Ezek 36:26–27; Joel 2:28–29).[1]

Stein agrees and says that the baptism of the Spirit here in Mark 1:8 is associated with the Christian Church. The water baptism of John must be understood as Christian baptism. Both of these baptisms are to be taken together and are literal. The baptism of the Spirit begins in Acts 2 when the Spirit brings in the new age.[2]

In a similar fashion, France suggests that this baptism is also the fulfillment of Joel 2. It points not just to Acts 2, but to the “whole experience of the early Christian movement.”[3] While this may be interpreted to mean he believes this was fulfilled in the first century, France later comments that the baptism of the Spirit is not what Pentecostals today maintain it means. Instead, it is associated with “authentic Christian experience.”[4] This implies it refers to something all Christians today experience, probably when they are baptized by the Spirit into the Body of Christ when they believe (1 Cor 12:13).

The other Synoptic Gospels contain passages parallel to Mark 1:8. The majority view is often found in discussions of those passages as well.

A. Matthew 3:11

Matthew 3:11 contains the statement by John that Jesus will “baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” In the Majority Text the verse ends there. However, there is a textual problem. The Critical Text adds “and with fire.” Because both the Majority and Critical Texts contain “and with fire” in the Lucan parallel, the significance of the phrase becomes an issue and will need to be discussed since it contributes to a proper understanding of baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Walvoord holds that John’s baptism by water was strictly for the Jews and therefore is not to be equated with Christian baptism. It belonged to the old dispensation. However, the baptism of the

Holy Spirit only applies to the Christian Church. It begins in Acts 2 and places the Christian into the Church, the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13). He says that the baptism of fire does not deal with the Church, but will occur at the Second Coming of Christ.[5]

Morris feels that the baptisms of the Holy Spirit and fire are connected and apply to the Christian. This is because only one preposition governs both.[6] Fire is involved in the baptism of the Spirit on Pentecost with the tongues of fire (Acts 2:3). The reference to fire points to the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian.[7] He says that in the Lucan parallel it means the Christian is strengthened by the Holy Spirit.[8]

According to Keener, the baptism of the Spirit is experienced by Christians and the baptism of fire by non-believers. Joel 2:28–29 is the OT background for the Spirit baptism. It brings eternal salvation, but also prophetic empowerment. The baptism of fire refers to the eternal flames in the lake of fire.[9] In the context, John also seems to speak of judgment (vv 10, 12). In v 10, John speaks of every tree that does not bear good fruit as being cast into the fire. In v 12 John says that the chaff will be burned with fire.

Carson does not see the fire mentioned in vv 10 and 12 as being connected with the baptism of fire. He agrees with Keener that Joel 2 predicts the coming baptism of the Spirit, but thinks that the baptism with fire is also for the Christian because the Spirit brings purification of sin.[10] The fire of vv 10 and 12 refers to hell and the judgment on unbelievers.

B. Luke 3:16

Luke is the only Synoptic Gospel which unequivocally adds “and with fire” to the fact that Christ will baptize with the Holy Spirit. Bock discusses the difficulty in understanding the significance of the relationship between the two. In regards to how fire is associated with the Spirit, he gives four options.

One is that it refers to the tongues of fire which appeared at the birth of the Church in Acts 2:3. The second option is that both the baptism of the Spirit and baptism of fire point to the judgment of God, which is a minor view. The third option is that Spirit baptism is for the believer and speaks of eternal salvation, and the baptism with fire is one of judgment. This judgment is not necessarily a picture of hell since fire is a familiar metaphor for other judgments in the OT (Ezek 38:22 and Mal 3:2).[11] As in the case with Matthew, Luke also speaks of judgment in the immediate context; this judgment involves fire (vv 9, 17).

However, Bock says it is unlikely there are two separate baptisms since it does not say “or” fire. He takes the fourth option. The Spirit and fire refer to one baptism. The Spirit purges people by dividing everyone into two groups: believers and unbelievers. The baptism of the Spirit began at Pentecost (Acts 2), which Ezekiel and Joel predicted (Ezek 36:25–27; Joel 2:28–32). Eternal salvation is offered to all. The fire here represents the fires of hell and not the tongues of fire in Acts 2. Jesus’ message means people either receive salvation or eternal judgment. It is a message for all people today.[12]

Hughes agrees with Bock that there is only one baptism in view here, but does so based on the existence of only one preposition governing both “Holy Spirit” and “fire.” He disagrees with Bock, however, that the fire refers to hell. Instead, like Morris, he says that the Christian is the recipient of both actions. The Spirit carries on an ongoing work of cleansing and purification, just as fire purifies metal. Both refer to an inner baptism of the Spirit at the moment of faith and continue throughout the life of the believer.[13]

Recognizing the difficulty of the connection between the Spirit and fire, Marshall freely admits that we cannot know what the baptism of fire means. In the OT, fire is associated with various types of judgment (Isa 29:6; 31:9; Ezek 38:22; Amos 7:4; Zeph 1:18; 3:8; Mal 3:2; 4:1). The pouring out of the Holy Spirit can be understood from the OT as a picture of judgment as well. But it can also be a picture of salvation.[14]

Green thinks Acts 2 is clearly the ultimate fulfillment of the baptism of the Spirit. But the context (v 17) also speaks of judgment so the reference to fire can have this connotation. This judgment is eternal and will come to those who do not accept the message of John to repent.[15]

Among the scholars discussed above, there are obvious differences of opinion. While most see the baptism of the Spirit as something Christians today have experienced, there is disagreement on whether judgment is also a part of Jesus’ message in Mark 1:8. The contexts of the parallel passages in Matthew and Luke certainly include the idea of judgment. The concept of a baptism with fire does as well. As will be discussed, the context of Mark also implies judgment. This will play a role in determining what is meant by the baptism of the Spirit.

II. Judgment In The Context Of Mark 1:8

Not only does Mark not mention a baptism of fire, but in the context of Mark 1 there is no mention of a burning fire as there is in Matthew and Luke (Matt 3:10, 12; Luke 3:9, 17). However, the idea of judgment is not absent in Mark 1.

John the Baptist comes to the nation in the wilderness and calls the people to come out to him (v 4). This strongly implies that this prophet of God is not pleased with what is going on in the nation, especially Jerusalem. John’s clothes (v 6) remind the nation of Elijah (2 Kings 1:8).[16] John is identified as the messenger of Mal 3:1 (v 2), and Mal 4:5 identifies that messenger with Elijah. The Lord will later say that John came as Elijah (Mark 9:13).

Elijah looked for repentance from the Jewish nation of his day (1 Kings 18:37).[17] He ministered at a time of apostasy. Elijah had to flee and live in the wilderness because of the rebellion of the Jews against God (1 Kings 19). John not only dressed like Elijah and lived in the wilderness like Elijah, he also preached repentance (v 4).

To repent means to turn from sin (Jonah 3:8–10; Matt 12:41). The Jews in Elijah’s day needed to repent, and so did the people in John’s day. He was calling them to confess their sins (v 5). Jesus was offering them the kingdom of God (v 15). Before the kingdom could come to the nation, they needed to repent. In Deuteronomy 28, God told the nation of Israel that He would bless them if they obeyed Him and curse/judge them if they disobeyed. This was a part of the Law of Moses, the Old Covenant. During Jesus’ ministry the Law of Moses was still in effect. To be blessed with the kingdom, they needed to obey the voice of John, the prophet of God. With the coming of Jesus, God was offering the Jewish nation the blessing of the kingdom. If the nation did not turn from its sins, instead of blessing it, God would judge the nation for its sins.[18]

The Gospel of Mark shows that the nation did not listen to the message of John or Jesus and did not repent of their sins. Most did not believe in Jesus as the Christ to receive eternal life, either. As a result, the nation would be judged. In the Olivet Discourse in Mark 13, Jesus speaks of this coming judgment. This judgment fell on the nation in AD 70 when the temple was destroyed and the nation was scattered among the Gentiles.

III. The Audience Of John’s Message

As mentioned above, Walvoord is correct when he says that John’s message of water baptism was directed towards the Jews. France, based upon Acts 19:3, also recognizes that John’s baptism must not be equated with Christian baptism.[19] Simply put, John was preaching to the Jews, and his baptism was directed towards them.

This is also seen in the kind of baptism he performed, i.e., a baptism of repentance that would result in the forgiveness of sins. This is not the purpose of Christian baptism. A new believer is not baptized in order to be forgiven. He does not have to confess his sins or turn from his sins prior to being baptized.

This makes it clear that John the Baptist is not on this occasion telling people how to become believers, that is, how to receive eternal life. He did proclaim the promise of everlasting life to all who believe in Jesus on other occasions (cf. John 1:7–9; 3:36; Acts 19:4). But here he does not speak of believing in Jesus for everlasting life. He does not speak of the grace of God. It is a mistake to use John’s preaching as a model for reaching unbelievers today.

This is confirmed by the word “repentance,” which is rare in Mark. The noun only occurs here in 1:4 and in 2:17. The verb “to repent” only occurs in 1:15 and 6:12. In all of these cases, the message is directed towards the nation of Israel. John’s baptism was to prepare the Jewish people for faith in the Christ who was to come.[20] When John began his ministry of water baptism, he did not know who the Christ was; therefore, the people being baptized were not called to believe in Him before they were baptized. Of course, Christian baptism is different in that it takes place after a person believes in Christ.

It also needs to be noted that in John’s mind, the same group that he baptized in water was the group that was to be baptized in the Holy Spirit. John says, “I indeed baptized you (humas) with water.” Then, speaking of the Christ, John says that, “He will baptize you (humas) with the Holy Spirit.” The same Greek word occurs in both instances.

At face value, this seems to suggest that the baptism of the Holy Spirit here is something that the nation of Israel will experience. They are the ones to whom John ministered. A problem with many interpretations of this verse is that the different baptisms are for the benefit of different groups. Walvoord’s view, for example, is that John’s baptism is for the Jewish nation of his day. But the Spirit baptism is for believers in the church age and is not for the nation of Israel. He then goes on to say that the baptism of fire refers to unbelievers, who are not part of the Church, at the end of the Tribulation.[21] Bock disagrees about the baptism of fire, but agrees that John’s baptism and the baptism of the Spirit are directed towards different groups. John’s baptism was for the nation of Israel, and Christ’s baptism of the Spirit was for the Church.[22] This certainly creates confusion, and one can be certain that John and the original hearers would not have understood such distinctions.

France takes a similar approach. In Mark 1:8, he rightly says that the recipients of John’s baptism were not a part of the Christian Church. However, the baptism of the Spirit is for Christians. Since he does not believe in a Tribulation immediately before the coming of Christ, he does not see a third baptism of fire for a third group. Instead, he discusses Joel 2:28–32 and its description of the Tribulation and concludes it also describes conditions relevant to the Church.[23]

Stein attempts to erase this confusion by saying that both baptisms are directed towards the same group in Mark 1:8. To do so, however, he maintains that John’s baptism with water must be the Christian rite, since he believes that the Spirit baptism is referring to Acts 2. Stein goes on to say that the readers of Mark’s Gospel would have understood John’s water baptism in a Christian context.[24] Even if some readers would assume that, the bigger question is whether John and his audience would have seen his baptism in that way. The Church did not exist. Jesus was unknown to them. John did not even know who the Christ was at that time. How could this be a reference to Christian baptism?

As discussed above, a common opinion among scholars as it relates to the recipients of the baptism in the Spirit concerns Joel 2:28–32. There is widespread belief that these verses predict this baptism.[25] In a similar way, the promise of the New Covenant in Ezek 36:25–27 is often seen as predicting it as well. Those who take this view maintain that the baptism of the Spirit spoken of in Mark 1:8 is a description of the believer who receives the Holy Spirit at the moment of faith. This promise was fulfilled in Acts 2 at the birth of the Church. Peter quotes from Joel 2:28–32 during his sermon on that Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21). It is also held that this was not a promise just for the nation of Israel because the promise of the Spirit involves “all flesh” (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17). This would include Gentiles and is an allusion to the Church in the OT.

However, the passage in Joel 2 is a prophecy to the nation of Israel. The reference to “all flesh” refers to all kinds of Jews.[26] Women, men, old, young, slaves, and free would receive the blessing of the Holy Spirit. Joel is describing the events immediately before the Second Coming of Christ. At that time, the nation of Israel will turn to the Lord in faith. The context (Joel 2:27) makes it clear that the Lord is addressing the nation of Israel with this promise. Barbieri correctly points out that while there was an outpouring of the Spirit in Acts, Joel 2:28–32 was not fulfilled. Israel did not enter into the benefits promised by Joel.[27] It is clear that the descriptions of Acts 2:19–20 were not fulfilled and would not be until the whole nation of Israel repented. There was still a contingent aspect to Joel 2:28–32 being fulfilled.[28]

The same could be said about the New Covenant. This prophecy (Ezek 36:25–27 and Jer 31:31–34) is also a promise to the nation of Israel. Jeremiah 31:31 specifically mentions that the New Covenant is for Judah and Israel. It will be fulfilled at the Second Coming as well, when believing Israel enters into the kingdom.

Joel 2 does not say that the Jewish people will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. It says that God will pour out His Spirit upon His people, the Jews. The Church and Israel are not the same thing. Those who are part of the Church do indeed experience the baptism with the Holy Spirit when they believe (Acts 11:16; 1 Cor 12:13). But in Mark 1:8 when John preached in the wilderness, he had no concept of these things. He had something else in mind.

In light of Acts 11:16, it is best to see two different types of baptisms of the Spirit.[29] There would be a baptism of the Spirit that members of the Church would receive. But this was not predicted in the OT. The Church was a mystery not revealed in the OT (Eph 3:3–6). The Church and this kind of baptism in the Holy Spirit would come after the nation of Israel rejected the offer of the kingdom by the Lord. What new believers experience with the baptism in the Spirit was a marvelous blessing that Mark 1:8 only foreshadows.

But John said that the same audience he preached to, the Jews, would also be baptized in the Holy Spirit by the Coming One. They were the ones who submitted to his water baptism. It was a large number of people (Mark 1:5). Most of those who were baptized by John did not believe in Christ. These unbelieving Jews will also be baptized by the Holy Spirit in some way.

IV. Figurative Or Literal?

When John says that Jesus will baptize his audience with the Holy Spirit, it is important to determine if this baptism is literal or figurative. The water baptism of John is clearly literal, and it is possible that the baptism administered by the Lord must be as well since John places them side by side in Mark 1:8. Stein takes it that way.[30] This literal sense would indicate that the new believer in Christ experiences an immersion into the Body of Christ by the Spirit.

But it is certainly an option to see it as figurative. France points out that even if we take the position that the baptism with the Spirit describes the experience of the new Christian (1 Cor 12:13), there is no literal immersion or dipping into the Spirit.[31] Morris agrees and concludes that since the other Synoptics link it with a baptism of fire, it must be figurative because we cannot imagine a literal fire baptism.[32] Hughes claims that the baptism with the Spirit cannot be seen in the same way as John’s baptism because the work of the Spirit is an inner reality, while John’s water involved an external rite.[33]

In addition, there is plenty of evidence in the NT that the word “baptism” can be understood in a figurative way.

V. Examples Of Figurative Baptisms

It is almost universally held that the baptism of fire in Matt 3:11 and Luke 3:16 is figurative. If it refers to the fires of hell, the destruction of the nation in AD 70, or to the purifying work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, it clearly does not refer to a literal baptism. Even today, in the military we use this word in such a figurative way—when a military unit first goes into combat, it is said that it experienced its baptism in fire.

In 1 Cor 10:2, Paul says that the Jews of the Exodus generation were “all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” While they did pass through the Red Sea, they did so on dry ground and were certainly not immersed in it or even became wet. The cloud led them in the wilderness. This is another example of a figurative baptism. Garland says it simply means they were associated with Moses and were placed under his leadership. A religious connotation may be found in that the cloud represented the presence of God. Moses was God’s ordained leader.[34] Thiselton takes a similar view. In his opinion, this baptism simply indicates that the Jews of that generation were baptized under the influence of Moses.[35]

Fee also says it is figurative but that being baptized into Moses means that He was their deliverer. At the Red Sea he saved them from the Egyptian army. With the guidance of God in the cloud, he safely passed them through the desert.[36] In this sense, Moses was a savior for them.

In Mark 10:38–39, Jesus uses the word baptize in a figurative sense. It refers to His suffering and death on the cross. He would be overwhelmed with agony and pain and tells the disciples that they will have a similar experience. They will also experience suffering because of their association with Him

A leading Greek lexicon says that this figurative use of the word baptism was common in the first century. A person can be baptized, that is, overwhelmed, by various things such as grief, lust, or debt.[37]

A few relevant examples outside of the NT also show a figurative use of the word baptism.

A. Isaiah 21:4

In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT, Isa 21:4 contains the word “baptism.” However, because of its highly figurative use, the English reader would not know the word was even present in any English translation. No such translation would use the word since a literal meaning would make no sense.

There is disagreement about the background of this verse. Some believe it refers to the fall of Babylon in war, while others think Isaiah is seeing a threat to Israel by Assyria.[38] Whatever the particular situation, the prophet Isaiah is terrified by the prospect of war and the destruction it will bring. Isaiah says that he was overwhelmed (baptized) by fear because of lawlessness. The NKJV gives it a completely figurative translation: “fearfulness frightened me.” The NET says the Hebrew means “shuddering terrifies me.” A literal translation of the Greek would be “lawlessness baptizes me.” While this is figurative language, the meaning is clear. Isaiah is overwhelmed by terror. He is “immersed” in fear because of what he sees.

B. Josephus

The historian Josephus, writing in the first century, also used the word in a highly figurative way. Before the Romans besieged Jerusalem, the city allowed people from the surrounding areas to come into it for protection. The inhabitants thought these new tenants would be of help. However, Josephus says that this course of action “baptized the city.” As in the case of Isa 21:4, English translations of Josephus do not use the word baptized.

It is not possible to understand this phrase apart from the context. One must continue reading. Josephus goes on to explain that these new dwellers in Jerusalem depleted the provisions the citizens had stored up to support the defenders. This resulted in famine and led to rebellion. Their actions brought destruction upon the city in a strong way.[39] One author translates the word baptized with the paraphrase, “direct cause of (the city’s) destruction.”[40] The city was baptized in chaos and destruction because of their decision to take in these people.

VI. “Baptize” In Mark 1:8

Knowing that the word baptize can be used in a figurative way allows the exegete to look at other possibilities for the use of the word in regard to the baptism of the Holy Spirit. A literal understanding of the phrase would perhaps lead one to adopt the majority view and equate it with what happens to a believer in Jesus Christ when the Spirit places him in the Body of Christ. Mark 1:8 would point to Acts 2 and the birth of the Church.

However, there are problems with this view. John is speaking to the Jewish people. Such a literal interpretation would conflate Israel with the Church. Is it possible that the Jewish nation John addressed was baptized by the Spirit by Christ in another way?

The Gospel of Mark provides the answer to that question. In the immediate context, in fact in the very next verses, Jesus is anointed with the Holy Spirit (vv 9–10). The Holy Spirit descends upon Him in the form of a dove. This is the key to understanding what it means that Jesus will baptize the Jews with the Spirit. He is coming to them in the power of the Spirit. He is calling the people to Himself. The Spirit of God rests on Him. In light of the opposition from the religious leaders against Christ in the Book of Mark, we could add that the power of the Spirit does not reside in the temple in Jerusalem nor official religious Judaism.[41]

In the Book of Mark, Jesus will give overwhelming evidence of that power. It will be obvious and will occur right before the eyes of the people. It will be clear that the presence of God is in the Person of Christ. When Mark quotes from Isa 40:3 in v 3, the reader is reminded that the Messiah would come with the power of the Spirit (Isa 61:1).

This power and presence bring with them the possibility of judgment. The nation is called to repent of and confess its sins. If they do not, this judgment will come. In v 2, Mark had quoted from Mal 3:1, which speaks of judgment as well. The Messiah will come and purify the nation, and nobody can stand before Him (Mal 3:2–3). In the Malachi passage there is a reference to the righteousness of God, and in Jesus the nation would see that as well.

John calls Jesus the One who is “stronger” than he is (v 7). This strength comes, in part, from the power of the Spirit. This power is immediately put to the test when Jesus is impelled by the Spirit to go into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan (vv 12–13).

Jesus, then, begins His ministry with the anointing and power of the Spirit. This power is evident in casting out demons (1:25–26). He is also able to heal a variety of illnesses (1:29–34). A leper is healed simply by His word (1:41–42). A lame man is made whole, and Jesus shows that He is even able to forgive sins (2:1–12). He also claims to have power over the Sabbath (2:28). He continues to cast out demons and heal the sick as His ministry continues among the Jews (3:1–11).

Perhaps we could add that the power of the Spirit is also seen in His teaching. He teaches with authority and the people are amazed by the things He says (1:27).

Because of His Person, as well as the power of the Spirit, He is stronger than John and, as He shows, stronger than Satan when He casts out demons. He shows the nation this power over and over again. He has overwhelmed them with this power. How will they respond?

In answering this question, Mark makes a connection between the beginning of Jesus’ ministry and the rejection of the Lord and His ministry by the religious leaders in Mark 3:22–30. They proclaim that the display of Christ’s power was not in the power of the Spirit, but in the power of Satan. The only two times Mark uses the word “strong” are in 1:7 (“stronger”) and 3:27. He is “stronger” than John (1:7) and “stronger” than Satan (3:27).

As He begins His ministry being tempted by Satan (1:13), the next time Satan is mentioned is in 3:23. After John says He will baptize with the Holy Spirit (1:8), the next time the Holy Spirit is mentioned is 3:29. When Jesus begins His ministry, He offers the nation the kingdom of God (1:15). The next time the word kingdom is mentioned is 3:24. After His rejection by the religious leaders, Jesus gives a series of parables about the kingdom of God (4:11).

The connection between the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in Mark 1 and His rejection by the leaders in Mark 3 suggests a figurative sense of the baptism of the Spirit He brings to the nation of Israel. His miraculous works show that He is stronger than Satan and is able to bring the kingdom of God to the nation. His power is obviously through the power of the Spirit. In the Person of Christ, the nation has been “baptized” in that power. It was right before their eyes. Jesus tells the leaders that He has gone into the house of Satan (Israel) to set people free from disease and demon possession (3:27). After seeing the miracles the Lord performed, when they claimed that He was empowered by Satan, they were actually blaspheming the Holy Spirit since Jesus had gone out and done what He did through the Spirit (3:29).

This understanding of the baptism of the Holy Spirit in Mark 1:8 compares favorably with other figurative uses of the word. The baptism into Moses in 1 Cor 10:2 refers to being under the influence of Moses. In Jesus’ ministry, the nation would be under the influence of the Lord who came in the power of the Spirit. As Jesus would be overwhelmed by suffering with His baptism on the cross (Mark 10:38–39), so the nation of Israel would be overwhelmed by the dazzling display of the power of the Spirit in the ministry of Christ. This also is similar to the use of the word in the Greek translation of Isa 21:4.

We could also compare the reference in Josephus mentioned above. The actions of the people “baptized” the city of Jerusalem in a negative sense, as it was a baptism of destruction. The actions of the Lord baptized the nation in a positive sense, as He released people from what sin and Satan had brought to the nation of Israel in particular.

VII. Conclusion

John the Baptist was sent and ministered to the nation of Israel. He had no concept of the Church or Christian baptism. He paved the way for the Messiah and the coming of the kingdom of God for the Jewish people.

What did he mean, then, when he said that the Christ would baptize the people with the Holy Spirit? While it is possible that he was speaking prophetically, without knowing it, about the coming church age and Acts 2, the connection with Mark 3 suggests a better alternative.

John knew that the Messiah would come in the power of the Spirit (Isa 61:1; John 1:33). The figurative use of the word baptism is well attested both in the NT and other contemporary writings.

John was saying that the Christ would baptize the nation with the Spirit in the sense that He would do works among them that would overwhelmingly prove that He came in the power of the Spirit of God. Just as the presence of God was at hand when the Jews were baptized into Moses, the presence of God through the Spirit would be abundantly evident in His ministry. The Spirit would be operating in their very midst.

The rejection of the Lord by the leaders in Mark 3 indicates that this work of the Spirit was also rejected. The nation would not turn from their sins in anticipation of believing in the Christ (Mark 1:4). The nation did not heed John’s call to repent. As a result, another figurative type of baptism awaited them. It would be a baptism of fire and judgment. Jesus predicted this judgment in Mark 13:2. It came to them in AD 70.

Notes

1. John D. Grassmick, “Mark,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 104.
2. Robert H. Stein, Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2008), 50–51. See also, Barry K. Mershon, Jr., “Mark,” in The Grace New Testament Commentary, rev. ed., ed. by Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2019), 77.
3. Richard T. France, The Gospel of Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 72.
4. Ibid., 73.
5. John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago, IL: Moody, 1974), 31–32.
6. The preposition en occurs before the words “Holy Spirit” but not before the word “fire.”
7. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992), 62.
8. Leon Morris, Luke (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989), 107.
9. Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), 127–28.
10. D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 104–105.
11. Darrell L. Bock, Luke: 1:1–9:51 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), 322.
12. Ibid., 324.
13. R. Kent Hughes. Luke: That You May Know the Truth (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1998), 117–19.
14. I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978), 146–48.
15. Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 181–82.
16. France, Mark, 69.
17. James A. Brooks, Mark (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 1991), 40.
18. Joseph Dillow, Final Destiny (Monument, CO: Paniym Group, 2012), 870.
19. France, Mark, 71.
20. Zane C. Hodges, “Harmony with God: Part 3 of 3, : Chafer Theological Seminary Journal 9 (2003): 25.
21. Walvoord, Thy Kingdom, 32.
22. Bock, Luke, 320–22.
23. France, Mark, 71–73.
24. Stein, Mark, 50–51.
25. Morris, Matthew, 61; Keener, Matthew, 128; Carson, “Matthew,” 105; France, Mark, 72; Bock, Luke, 322; Marshall, Luke, 146.
26. Robert B. Chisholm, Interpreting the Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990), 63.
27. Louis A. Barbieri, “Matthew,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 25.
28. Stanley D. Toussaint, “Acts,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 358.
29. A similar thing occurs with the promise of the New Covenant. In the NT, there are two New Covenants. Israel will enter the New Covenant promised by the Lord to them in Ezekiel 36 and Jeremiah 31 when the Lord returns. But the Lord also entered into a New Covenant with the Church (1 Cor 11:25). These two New Covenants are not the same and are not made with the same group of people.
30. Stein, Mark, 50.
31. France, Mark, 72.
32. Morris, Luke, 107.
33. Hughes, The Truth, 117.
34. David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003), 450–52.
35. Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 724.
36. Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014), 492.
37. BDAG, 165–66.
38. John A. Martin, “Isaiah,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1067–68
39. Josephus, B.J., 4.137.
40. Flavius Josephus, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, trans. by William Whiston (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1980), 670.
41. Allan Chapple, “Jesus’ Intervention in the Temple: Once or Twice?,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 58/3 (September 2015): 564.