St. Paul also puts baptism and the Holy Spirit together (1 Co 107°) in a way to make it seem certain that he traced both to Christ (11%, ef. Mt 20”). St. Peter, too, describing conversion (Ac 2°), united baptism in the name of Jesus, and reception of the Holy Ghost, just as we should expect on our view. Baptism ‘into the name’ meant baptism unto God (Jer 14°), who is revealed, not through but in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Jehovah was the name of God for the OT covenant; the new name of God for the new covenant in Christ is Father, Son, and Spirit. Their equal Divinity, personality, and _participa- tion in man’s redemption so form the doctrine of God and His work in the teachings of Jesus, that Mt 28” may well be regarded as a culmination and synopsis of the gospel of the risen Lord. This baptismal formula was the centre of a solemn act of worship in which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were equally adored. It was a solemn profession of faith in which each was regarded as indis- pensable ground of man’s salvation. It was a solemn confession of covenant relation in which each was equally looked to as source of consecra- tion and blessing. Jesus speaks of these distine- tions as of spiritual realities. It seems impossible to paraphrase His words into, ‘Baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Messiah, and of God as Spirit,’ as some modern critics say Jesus meant (cf. Kaftan, Wesen der Chr. Rel. ii. 345 f.; see H. M. Scott, Nicene Theol. 255 f.). ‘The Trinity of revelation, according to Jesus’ own teachings, leads up to a Trinity of Being’ (Schlottman, Compendium d. Bib. “Theol, 134). The historicity of Mt 28” is not weakened by later opposition to Gentiles entering the Church (Ac 11° 151%, Gal 21°) ; for that controversy turned not on the fact but on the mode of their admission : must they enter the Church through the syna- gogue or not? (cf. Schmid, Theol. of NT’, 163). On the other hand, this Trinitarian confession has an argumentative relation to all nations; the spread of the gospel would be a proof of the truth of the doctrine. Upon such teaching Christ pro- mised His blessing ; with it He would be in His Church unto the end of the world (v.2°, ef. Mt 2414 30"), Out of this confession of faith in baptism, taught by Jesus, has grown the first and onl creed of all the ages : ‘I believe in God the Father
... and in Jesus Christ our Lord . . . and in the
Holy Ghost.’ ‘The baptismal symbol in its whole contents goes back beyond all question to the Apostolic age’ (Caspari, @Quellen 2 Cesch. d. Tauf-symb, i. 5); and no other than a Trinitarian formula has ever appeared in the history of the Church (ef. Resch, 424f.); ‘Trinitarian baptism was universal in the earliest churches and among the earliest heretics.’ No Judaizer or Gnostic ad- ministered Christian baptism without the tpi.- paxapla émovoyacia, the ‘trina invocatio, nomen trinz beatitudinis,’ that sprang from Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Clem. Hom. ix. 23).
lii. Apostolic Teaching. —(1) The outpouring of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostolic Church brought first the personality of the Spirit into greater pro- minence, and, secondly, shed new light from the Spirit upon the Son. (a) This new light showed (a) the great importance of the Person as well as the words of the incarnate Christ—He was much more than a prophetic Messiah ; (8) the unique value of His atoning death; and (y) the vital relation for believers between this shameful death and His glorious resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the Father, where He represents and rules His people. The first martyr, full of the Holy Ghost, saw the heavens opened and Jesus standing on the right hand of God (Ac 7°: 8; ef. 1 P 119-21 318% Ph 26, He 1%), He who ascended to Divine glory, it was felt, must ever have dwelt - in Divine glory ; and His incarnation, instead of being His life, was but an incident in His eternal existence. These Jewish Christians all start from Ps 110", and declare by the Holy Ghost that the Psalmist knew by the Holy Ghost that Christ was Lord of David and Lord of all (Ac 2°4: 36 1036 1123, Ja 2}, Jude+; the Didache calls him ‘the God of David,’ 10°). ‘Our God and Saviour Jesus Christ’ and ‘our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’ meant the same thing (2 P 11:1 2°), Jesus was equal with Jehovah (cf. Weiss, NZ’ Theol.® 132); His throne was God’s throne (He 1:8 3°) ; because He was God (He 18). Language failed these Jewish Christians to say more of the glory of the Son of God. The whole OT, as revelation of the Holy Spirit, testified to the Divine Christ (He 37 15%. 2*!- 56 10°). The ruling idea in Hebrews is that the old covenant of Jehovah with Israel was sup- planted by the new, in which Jesus takes the place of Jehovah, Christians take the place of Jews (cf. Ep. of Barnabas 4), and the Holy Spirit, which led Israel towards Canaan, leads Christians through the Son to the rest in heaven (122* 4 41#.), This eternal Son is as the Jehovah of the OT (He }3- 13 81 122), and is described there as such (Ps 110, He 18, Ps 1026-8, He 11°). He became incarnate to save men ; and, in co-operation with the Holy Ghost the eternal Spirit (9"), the eternal Son (18) became author of eternal salvation (5°), and eternal redemption (9) unto an eternal inherit- ance (9), The relations of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are eternal. An attempt is made to set forth the connexion of the Son with the Father by comparing it with a brightness streaming from the Divine glory. Christ is one with God as a ray of light is one with the sun: out of such relation He takes form as a Personal Being distinct from the Father, yet so one with Him that to see the Son was to see the very glory which constitutes the Father (He 1°), the very ‘character of His being’ (cf. Weiss, 493). ‘He was everything lofty that could be imagined. Everything that can be said of Him was already said in the first two generations after His appearance’ (Harnack, Dog- mengesch, i. 66).