This has the merit, at least, of realising that the context absolutely
rules out, as being woefully inadequate, the notion of a symbol in
Romans 6. We are, most decidedly, thinking of a baptism that is
effectual. But, granting that, in light of Romans 4 how can
anybody think that a rite – water baptism – can regenerate and
therefore lead to justification? Circumcision couldn’t. The law
couldn’t. And yet, we are told, water can! Are we to believe that
Paul was teaching that water baptism actually regenerates a sinner,
and unites him to Christ: that by water baptism a sinner dies with
Christ, is buried with Christ, is raised, ascended and seated with
Christ? |
