A “NoN-ETHNIC” PEoPlE? 111 ther Jew nor Greek” in Christ seems to assume that both Jews and Greeks have clothed themselves with Christ in baptism 34. If Jews had not clothed themselves with Christ in baptism, there would be no need to emphasize that there is neither Jew nor Greek among those who are baptized. Paul’s emphasis on the fact that all have become one demands an inclusive understanding of baptism 35. Thus, even if Paul’s argument is prompted by the question of how non-Jews could be in- cluded in Abraham’s covenant, Paul’s solution has implications also for Jews. The case for the view that also Jews need to be baptized, ac- cording to Paul, receives strong confirmation by a statement in 1 Cor 12,13, which is strikingly similar to Gal 3,28: “For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free persons, and we were all given to drink of one Spirit” 36. If both Gal 3,28 and 1 Cor 12,13 allude to a baptismal formula, as many scholars assume 37, it would be strong evidence for a baptismal prac- tice which included Jews as well as non-Jews 38. If Paul held that Jews too needed to be baptized, this speaks against the solution Buell and Hodge attribute to Paul. one could argue, however, that Paul in Galatians constructs an entirely new ethnic identity for the followers of Jesus, which is neither Jewish nor Greek, but which is still ethnic. love Sechrest has adopted this po- sition 39. Yet, as Buell and Hodge correctly argue, this interpretation fails to account for the fact that Jews, according to Paul, belong more naturally to Abraham’s descendants than do non-Jews 40. Although Paul unambiguously affirms that both Jews and non-Jews have become members of Abraham’s covenant (Gal 3,7.28), this does not necessarily imply that Paul constructs a new people from scratch. 34 SECHREST, A Former Jew, 196-197, argues persuasively that even if Gal 3,26-29 is primarily addressed to non-Jews, what is said pertains to Jews as well. 35 on this emphasis, see D.G. HoRREll, Solidarity and Difference. A Con- temporary Reading of Paul’s Ethics (london 2005) 105-106. 36 A.C. THISElToN, The First Epistle to the Corinthians. A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids, MI 2000) 997. 37 For a helpful summary of the arguments in favor of a baptismal formula, see M.D. BoER, Galatians. A Commentary (NTS; louisville, KY 2011) 245-247. 38 R.E. CIAMPA – B.S. RoSNER, The First Letter to the Corinthians (The Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI 2010) 595. 39 SECHREST, A Former Jew, 15. 40 For a helpful engagement with, and in my opinion also a convincing refu- tation of, some of Sechrest’s more radical claims, see N.T. WRIGHT, Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Parts III and Iv (vol. 4 of Christian Origins and the Question of God [london 2013]) 1448-1449.