Chapter 9 is an enigma in Reversing Hermon as it draws from earlier work many of us have read before. Because of this, these notes will be drawing from both books (i.e., Reversing Hermon and Unseen Realm), fusing the data as needed.
Material in this chapter is drawn from the author’s book, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible (Lexham Press, 2015) 335–339 [chapter 38: Choosing Sides]. Overlaps in prose content from that book are presented here by permission.
Tertullian gives us perhaps the best overview of both chapter 9 in Reversing Hermon and chapter 38 in Unseen Realm. The following quote is taken from the footnotes of Reversing Hermon, chapter 9. The elements of a close and careful reading of the quote are bolded in the text.
“When we are going to enter the water, but a little before[a], in the presence of the congregation[b] and under the hand of the president[c], we solemnly profess that we disown[d] the devil[e], and his pomp[f], and his angels[g]. Hereupon we are thrice immersed, making a somewhat ampler pledge[h] than the Lord has appointed in the Gospel. Then when we are taken up “as new-born children[i]”
(Source: Tertullian, “The Chaplet, or De Corona,” in Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian [ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe; vol. 3; The Ante-Nicene Fathers; Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885] 394. See also, Tertullian, On the Shows 4; On the Soul 35.3. For a discussion of this practice, see Ansgar Kelly, The Devil at Baptism: Ritual, Theology, and Drama (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985) 94–105.
Baptism isn't just about the water. There is a critical matter coming before the water that Tertullian is relating, which will make baptism a two-step dance.
Baptism is not a private matter. It is public, at least as far as the church is concerned. Would wider be better (i.e., more than church members present)?
President is a trusted and ordained of God church leader. It is not just any member of the church.
The phrase "under the hand of the President" is found in Tertullian's work, "On Baptism" (De Baptismo). Here, Tertullian describes the early Christian practice of baptism and the role of the "President" (Latin "Praeses"). This term was used in ancient Rome to denote various types of leadership — city governors, leaders of local senates, or heads of guilds, among others. In the context of Tertullian's use, it refers to the leader of the local Christian community, often the bishop but possibly a presbyter or elder.
The first part of the term, "praeses", is a Latin word meaning "protector" or "leader". The term was a commonly used title for certain Roman officials including governors and military commanders. In the Christian context, it became associated with the overseer of the local congregation or church.
The phrase "under the hand of" is reminiscent of the biblical notion of laying on of hands as a means of imparting blessing, authority, or commissioning for service (see Numbers 27:18–23, Acts 6:6, 1 Timothy 4:14). So when Tertullian says that the baptism ritual is conducted "under the hand of the President", it suggests that the authority for carrying out the sacrament comes directly from the leader of the Christian community.
This fits neatly into the ancient near eastern (ANE) and Greco-Roman understanding of authority. Just as kings and rulers were anointed or set apart for royal or sacred office (see 1 Samuel 15:1, 1 Kings 19:16), so too were leaders in the early Christian communities set apart for their roles, often through the laying on of hands (see 1 Timothy 5:22). This understanding also finds parallels in Second Temple Jewish writings, notably in the depiction of priestly ordination (like Jubilees 30:19; 2 Maccabees 1:10-36).
Overall, Tertullian's terminology thus offers a glimpse into the world of early Christian practices and reflects the continuity of biblical and post-biblical conceptions of religious authority in the ancient world.
The first step in the two-step dance is disowning or disavowal of our former masters, declared in a public forum (see [b] and [c] above).
Our disownment or disavowal begins with the leader of the opposition in his person, specifically. In the minds of many, this was a direct stab at Genesis 3, but also at Genesis 4 and another crush of the head of the Nechash.
Not only is the personage of the devil disowned, but everything connected with him.
In ancient Christian contexts, particularly in early baptismal rites and creeds, the term "pomp" (Latin: pompa) has spiritual and symbolic connotations. In the early Christian confession you quoted, "his pomp" refers to the empty show or spectacle associated with the devil and the powers of the world he is thought to dominate.
The term "pomp" captures a wide range of cultural, religious, and socio-political phenomena that were viewed as part of the devil's worldly splendor and influence. This could include idolatrous rituals, popular spectacles (such as theatre and gladiatorial games), political systems and hierarchies, and in general, material excess or anything else that could distract from the worship of God. By disowning the "devil, his pomp, and his angels," early Christians were rejecting idolatry, sinful pleasures, the lure of secular wealth, and needless extravagance.
It is worth noting that this concept can be illustrated by several biblical passages, for example, the Temptation of Christ in the wilderness, where the devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world and their glory (Matthew 4:8-10, Luke 4:5-8, ESV). This "glory" can be understood as the pomp of the devil.
Moreover, there seems to be an extrabiblical parallel in the Jewish Pseudepigrapha work, "The Life of Adam and Eve", where the devil (as Satan) is depicted as a former archangel with significant influence and grandeur, who desired to rival God’s power and glory (14:1-3).
Consequently, the statement, “we solemnly profess that we disown the devil, and his pomp, and his angels,” amounts to a public declaration of rejection of [loyalty to] the devil's dominion as well as the worldly and spiritual allurements it represents in exchange for the exclusive worship and service of the One True God. This would have been an integral part of early Christian identity and spiritual praxis in the face of the dominant pagan culture and its associated spiritual influences.
And here the full Enochian backstory comes completely into view. It aligns with Tertullian's acceptance of 1 Enoch and its story as critical if not canonical scripture. Another matter to notice is the absence of demons. Why?
Tertullian notes that as a church and in their own reasoning, they go slightly beyond ("somewhat ampler") the leading of the Lord Jesus in baptism by dunking people three times instead of one. Why?
I used to not believe in "water baptism saves" and in some ways, I still do not believe it. However, the water is muddy here. The question is: Why is it muddy? What is the mud?
The mud is simple: Are we saved because of Cross and indwelling Spirit that marks us spiritually—or—are we only "saved" and "born-again" when we have completed the last step of water baptism? For me—the answer is: God is gracious and fair, but for those who have time and opportunity to undergo water baptism and the preparation for it, the matter is one of taking the time to ensure one's obedience to the Lord before both heavenly realms and earthly.
ANY VETERAN WHO HAS EXPERIENCED COMBAT WILL TELL YOU THAT WAR IS a terrible thing. Caught in such a conflict, you must take sides. Many modern people, particularly in developed countries, like to think that diplomacy and neutrality provide a more enlightened path. But some wars—and some enemies—don’t offer that option. When an enemy wants nothing but your defeat and annihilation, neutrality means choosing death.
The war raging in the unseen world for the souls of human imagers of Yahweh is that kind of war. Neutrality is not on the table. We’ve seen from the writings of Paul in particular that the advance of Yahweh’s kingdom rule was cast as a turf war pitting him against hostile divine beings. That spiritual conflict is shown most dramatically in two unlikely places.
Dr. Heiser does an outstanding job in the quote above of framing both where and how water baptism fits. Not only does this war frame baptism, but it also frames the Cross and the purpose of the indwelling Spirit of God in loyal believers.
Spirits in prison, chained in gloomy darkness
Whoever they are: Noah is the timeframe. But who are they: People who died in the flood? Fallen sons of God? Demon spirits (ex-giants)? All of the above?
Both angels (sons of God) or evil spirits (ex-giants). See:
Matthew 12:43, ESV: "When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none."
Mark 1:23, ESV: "And immediately there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit. And he cried out."
Mark 1:26, ESV: "And the unclean spirit, convulsing him and crying out with a loud voice, came out of him."
Mark 3:30, ESV: "for they were saying, 'He has an unclean spirit.'"
Mark 5:2, ESV: "And when Jesus had stepped out of the boat, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit."
Mark 5:8, ESV: "For he was saying to him, 'Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!'"
Mark 7:25, ESV: "But immediately a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit heard of him and came and fell down at his feet."
Mark 9:25, ESV: "And when Jesus saw that a crowd came running together, he rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, 'You mute and deaf spirit, I command you, come out of him and never enter him again.'"
Luke 8:29, ESV: "For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. (For many a time it had seized him. He was kept under guard and bound with chains and shackles, but he would break the bonds and be driven by the demon into the desert.)"
Luke 9:42, ESV: "While he was coming, the demon threw him to the ground and convulsed him. But Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit and healed the boy, and gave him back to his father."
Luke 11:24, ESV: "When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, 'I will return to my house from which I came.'"
Hebrews 1:14, ESV: "Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?"
Hebrews 12:9, ESV: "Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live?"
Revelation 18:2, ESV: "And he called out with a mighty voice, 'Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast.'"
For human spirits (or breath) (Matthew 27:50; Acts 7:59; Hebrews 12:23);
One instance: Human spirit as ghost (Matthew 14:26; Luke 24:37). [227]
For humans, Peter uses psyche instead of pneuma in 1st Peter 3:20 "eight persons [psyche] were brought safely through the water." This sets up a dichotomy between pneuma and psyche as non-human vs. human.
This answers the question: The spirits of verse 19 are non-human (e.g., sons of God, Watchers, ex-giants, demons, unclean spirits, evil spirits, et al).
There is no place where human spirits are said to be in an otherworldly prison. Only the Watchers are in Tartarus ("hell").
The Syriac Peshitta has an interpretation of phylakē as sheol. This changes the notion of prison to a wider notion of the underworld, which results in an erroneous church tradition of Christ's "harrowing of hell". Therefore, (Dalton note) "This later, non-biblical tradition cannot be used to interpret the text of 1 Pet[er] 3:19".
On the other hand, phylakē is used in the New Testament for the prison in which Satan is chained: “And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be loosed from his prison.” This usage is quite normal….
It is important to note that, in both [1 Enoch and 2 Enoch], the fallen angels are described expressly, as being “in prison,” or in equivalent terms. In 1 Enoch, they are condemned by God to prison as they await their final judgment (1 Enoch, 14:5; cf. 18:14). [230]
As Dr. Heiser writes: The reference to spirits is now decisive. The reference is to non-human spirits as the Watchers. Any Second Temple Era Jew would know this and see it this way.
- Jewish views on Enoch informed Peter's use of spirits.
- 1 Enoch "spirits" = "souls of the dead" (1 Enoch 22:3, etc.)
- Always with qualifying "genitives" or "preceding phrases"
- Sons of God usually qualified as "angels" or "Watchers" and not "spirits"
- However—two touch-points in 1 Enoch for "spirits" = "Watchers"
- First—Enoch reminds them: Before defilement of women, they were "spiritual [Greek: spirits]"
- Second—closest ref is Enoch 15:8-10 "... giants born of spirits [Watchers] and flesh [human women] ... evil spirits have come out of their bodies ...."
Enoch, Adam, Jesus and Typology
Understanding "typology" helps us understand 1 Peter.
- Typology = type of prophecy: predictive v. typology
- Predictive prophecy: What most people think of
- Type = unspoken prophecy: Foreshadowing event, person, institution, et al
- EXAMPLE TYPE: Adam does something to affect all humanity, whereas "anti-type" = Jesus who also does something to affect all humanity
- EXAMPLE TYPE: Passover (type) prefigures Jesus crucifixion (anti-type); both have a Lamb of God
- "anti-type" synonymous with "type-fulfillment"
- Flood (type) = Gospel & Resurrection (type-fulfillment)
- Baptism commemorates the type/anti-type above
The above needs to be "unpacked". To do this, we step backwards to prior discussions of 2nd Peter 2 and Jude 1.
- Tight connection: Gen 6:1-4 & 2nd Peter 2 and Jude 1
- Only 1 Enoch: Details of Peter & Jude only in 1 Enoch
- Sins of the Watchers: Gen 6:1-4 Watchers defile women; 1 Enoch 6-15 Watchers put in prison; 1st Peter 3:19 Watchers are "spirits in prison"
- Tartarus: Peter's use of this word comes directly from Greco-Roman renderings which agree only with the details of 1 Enoch and nowhere in the OT.
- Watcher Appeal: Only in Enoch do Watchers appeal their case to God through Enoch; God rejects the appeal.
- Primary Point: Enoch visits the watchers in the "bad part of town" (i.e., the prison in sheol/underworld). Therefore, the notion of "prison" plus "Watcher" comes directly from 1 Enoch.
- Bring back Typology: Peter saw a connection between the events of Genesis 6 and the Resurrection, where Genesis 6:1-4 story unfolded in 1 Enoch is the type and the Resurrection is the anti-type or type-fulfillment.
- Jesus as Second Enoch: For Peter, Enoch is a type of Jesus; descending to the spirits in prison to give them bad news that they are still defeated despite His crucifixion. Enoch gave them Bad News Part I, Jesus gave them Bad News Part II (sealing their fate).
- Victory Declaration: This is why 1st Peter 3:14-22 ends with Jesus risen, seated at the right-hand of God, above all angels, authorities, and powers!
- Adds up to Deliberate Message: Peter is putting a supernatural Enochic view on Genesis 6:1-4 and wrapping up the work of Jesus in literal victory in Him.
- Rule through Children: The message is deeper; not only did Jesus win, but His plan to rule and judge through Himself together with His children (us; Watcher replacements) is finished and moving forward. They have not only lost, but will be judged by Himself together with the very ones they attacked!
- Two terms: Verse 21 has two terms to answer question.
- Term One: "appeal (to God)" — a [loyalty] pledge (ἐπερώτημα or eperōtēma - pledge)
- Term Two: "(good) conscience" — not "inner voice of right or wrong", but of "the disposition of one's loyalties" as seen in other Greek contexts of the day
- Reread 1st Peter 3:19-21: "19 [Jesus] went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20 who were formerly disobedient, when the patience of God waited in the days of Noah, while an ark was being constructed, in which a few—that is, eight souls—were rescued through water. 21 And also, corresponding to this, baptism now saves you, not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."
- Saved/Not Saved: Water baptism does not literally save you, but points to what does (by analogous type and anti-type): We pledge (promise loyalty) to Christ who has made a Way towards salvation (eternal life delivered to us on the Day of the Lord).
- Public Avowal: Who is on the Lord's side in the war between good (Himself) and evil (Watchers and demons)?
Baptism as a Holy War: 1 Peter 3:14-22
Every baptism is therefore a reiteration of the past and future doom of the Watchers in the wake of the gospel and the kingdom of God. Early Christians understood the typology of this passage and its link back to 1 Enoch and Genesis 6:1–4. This is why early baptismal formulas included a renunciation of Satan and his angels. Baptism was anything but routine. It was a symbol of spiritual warfare.