1^.;^» 
 
 
 AV tA'' 
 
 ¥^c<. 
 
 t^Jj^A' < 
 
 ;4v 
 
 '.V 
 
 f 
 
 M^ 
 
 ^^v. 
 
 Ki. t; 
 
^ PEINCETON, N. J. '^^ 
 
 Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Agneiv Coll. on Baptism, No. /./TSZ^tZ^-^ 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton TJieological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/meaningpowerofbaOOstea 
 
THE 
 
 MEANING AND POWER 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 BV 
 
 Rev. J. G. D.'STEARNS. 
 
 T6 aWouaBrivai Tov PairTi^6nevov.—BA3SL, 
 
 New York : 
 N. TIBBALS & SONS, PUBLISHERS, 
 
 37 PARK ROW. 
 
 1S77. 
 
Copyright. 
 
 J. G. D. STEARNS, 
 
 1876. 
 

 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 The Meaning Determined by Usage, . . , .IS 
 
 CHAPTER H. 
 Examples of Usage, • 37 
 
 CHAPTER HI. 
 Special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30, ... 72 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 Genuineness of the Quotation from Josephus, . . 92 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 Baptisms in tlie Septuagint, 103 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 Secondary Meaning in the Lexicons 123 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 Biblical Scholars, , . 133 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 Jewish Baptisms in the New Testament, , , . 154 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Baptism with Water, , . 180 
 
 9 
 
lo Contents. 
 
 CHAl^TER X. 
 The Baptism of Jesus, 215 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 Tiie Baptism of the Holy Ghost, 235 
 
 CHAPTER Xn. 
 Baptism into Christ, , . 258 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 OF the origin of this book some explanation 
 is due. Controversy is not congenial to 
 my feelings, nor consonant to my accustomed 
 method of treating religious truth. But the in- 
 cessant agitation of the subject of baptism by 
 those who teach that there is no baptism without 
 immersion, and, as some say, no salvation without 
 baptism, called forth from various sources the ex- 
 pression of a desire that I would preach a dis- 
 course on the subject. The discourse, whose 
 only aim was to give instruction on this as on 
 other Biblical themes, was delivered and, by re- 
 quest, was printed. Some time afterwards a harsh 
 review of the sermon appeared, to which a reply 
 was made in "The Reviewer Reviewed." An- 
 other review came, to which a reply was contem- 
 plated ; but the character of the review was such 
 that 1 decided, without making formal reference 
 to the review, to present the subject on its own 
 merits. This Avill better accomplish the purpose 
 of the book, which is not to meet the demands 
 of those who delight in controversy, but of those 
 who are sincerely desirous of knowing the truth. 
 1 shall not discuss the subject in all its myriad as- 
 pects, but shall treat of such points as from time 
 
1 2 Preface. 
 
 to time have come up for enquiry. This explana- 
 tion is given to account for the selection of the 
 topics, as well as for the occasion of the book, and 
 for the style and method in which it is written. 
 The aim has been to give to all the topics treated 
 a thorough discussion, and it is hoped that it will 
 meet a want which is widely felt and often ex- 
 pressed. 
 Clearwater, Minn., July, 1S76. 
 
. <^> '^ 
 
 THE MEANING AND POWER OF BAPTISM,^ 
 
 CHAPTER 1. 
 
 THE MEANING DETERMINED BV USAGE. 
 
 /"^HILDREN learn the mecani.ig of their 
 ^^ mother tons^ue in the daily intercourse 
 of life. Those who spoke and wrote the Greek 
 language in the times of the New Testament 
 understood its meaning as well as we do oui 
 own vernacular. The Greek word BAI'TIZO was 
 in current use among the Jewish people, who 
 had spoken the Greek language for several 
 generations, and they were so familiar with its 
 meaning that thev needed no explanation. 
 
 The usual metliod in which scholars have con- 
 ve3'ed to us the meaning of the ancient languages 
 has been by means of lexicons, commentaries, and 
 sometimes bv dissertations or treatises on words 
 of special importance. Another method is by 
 giving examples of the use of words in quotations 
 from ancient authors. This method has a signal 
 advantage. It presents the authors themselves 
 
14 The JMcaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 to our view, and g-ives us the opportunity to see 
 the meaning- of their words as the\' themselves 
 were accustomed to use them in current speech. 
 It allows " the impartial witnesses of antiquity to 
 speak directh' " to us. and we can judge of their 
 meaning as we do of the words we daily read 
 or hear. Examples will be given in the se- 
 cond chapter from Jewish and Patristic writers 
 of the meaning of baptizo in its icligious 
 usage. 
 
 As this word has a classic origin, and as its 
 classic usage sustains a relation to its religious 
 usage, and, by the laws of language-develop- 
 ment, prepared the way for it, and as appeal 
 is often made to its classic usage in the inter- 
 pretation of it in the New Testament, this 
 preliminary chapter will be given to a bi'ief 
 consideration of its meaning in classic Greek. 
 
 The two Greek words capto and eaptizo 
 resemble each other in appearance and in sound, 
 and have been " considered bv most writers as 
 perfectly identical in their signification. . . . 
 The learned Dr. Gale . . . says . . . that 
 they are exactly the same as to signification" 
 (Carson on " Baptism," p. 18). But recent inves- 
 tigation has shown that these words differ from 
 each other in meaning, and that thev each have 
 
The Mcanhig determined by Usage.. 1 5 
 
 primary and secondary significations. A com- 
 parison of these words in respect to their dif- 
 ferences and resemblances in classic usage will 
 facilitate the understanding of the meaning of 
 baptizo in Hellenistic Greek, which is the lan- 
 guage of the New Testament. 
 
 The primar^^ meaning of bapto, to dip, is illus- 
 trated in such examples as tlie following : 
 
 " One must dip [the bucket] and then draw 
 it up " (Aristotle). 
 
 "Dip honey with a pitcher" (Theocritus\ 
 
 " Take a vessel, and, dipping it, bring hither 
 some sea-water" (^Euripides). 
 
 " To-day . . . dip not " your pitchers in the 
 river (Callimachus). 
 
 These are samples from an extensiv^e usage in 
 Greek writers, and such examples make it plain 
 that bapto, in its primary signification, denotes 
 entrance into a fluid, with immediate return. It 
 is therefore represented in English by the word 
 dip^ which means " to put for a moment into any 
 liquid ; to insert in a fluid and withdraw again " 
 (Webster). It denotes a definite act — to dip. 
 
 Until recently it has been maintained that this 
 is tiie only meaning of bapto, and that baptizo 
 has exactly the same meaning; tliat the two 
 words have one and the same signification ; that 
 
1 6 The Meaning and Poiver of Baptism, 
 
 both words mean di|), and nothing but dip, in the 
 whole Greek hmguage. Dr. Gale sa^ys : " Dipping 
 only is baptism. I'll begin with the words bapto 
 and baptizo, for they are synonymous. " Dr. F. 
 A. Cox sa\s : " The idea of dipping is //-: every 
 instance conveyed ... by all the current 
 uses of the terms" (Dale, "Johannic Baptism," 
 pp. 44," 45). The translator of the Baptist Ver- 
 sion of Mark and Luke says: " There is no dif- 
 ference, as to signihcation, between bapto and 
 baptizo." The translator of the Baptist Version 
 of Acts says : '" They can Lave but one literal and 
 proper r,ieaning. . . . Bapto occurs in- the New 
 Testament three times, always ti^anslated by dipy 
 Roger Williams, on his return from England to 
 this countiy in 1644, brought ov^er a treatise 
 bearing the title: "Dipping is Baptizing, and 
 Baptizing is Dipping." In the Baptist Quarterly, 
 October, 1871, T. J. M. says : " It must never be 
 forgotten that the radical idea of baptism is a 
 dipping into"' ('' Christie and Patristic Baptism," 
 p. 151). 
 
 But the primary meaning of bapto is not its 
 only meaning. It has also the secondary mean- 
 ing to dye. In its primary meaning it denotes a 
 specihc act — to dip : but in its secondary mean- 
 ing it does not express anv S}^ccific act, but it 
 
The Meaning determined by Usage. 1 7 
 
 expresses the condition of the object which is 
 dyed. It does not express the act by wliich the 
 qualit}' of color is communicated to the object, 
 but it expresses the condition of color which is^ 
 produced in the object. This condition mav be 
 produced by any act that can bring the object 
 under the influence of the coloring material. It 
 nia\' be done by dipping, or l)v sprinkling, or by 
 pouring, or by any other mode that can secure 
 the result. 
 
 " When it drops upon the garments, they are 
 dyed'' (Hippocrates). 
 
 In this instance the net bv which the coloring 
 fluid comes upon the garments is expressed by 
 t4ie word "drops"; but the effect in the colored 
 condition of the garments is expressed bv the 
 word"rt^]rc/" (bapto). 
 
 " He fell, without even looking upwards, and 
 the lake was dyed with blood " (.Esop). 
 
 In the battle of the frogs and mice in the fable, 
 the blood of the champion that was killed tinged 
 the lake v/ith a red color. The word expresses 
 the condition of the lake as colored bv tlie blood. 
 
 '■'■ This garment, dyed by the sword of ^'Egis- 
 thus, is a witness to me " (^Eschylus). 
 
 The blood running down over the sword gave 
 it a red color. 
 
1 8 T/ie Meaning ajid l\nvcr of Jtaptisni. 
 
 "A gannciit dyed \\\ blood'" ( Rc\^ xi\. 13). 
 
 The translation '' djcd," as j^ivcn by Stuart, is 
 correct, rather than the Eng-lish version, " dipped." 
 The irarment of Him who rode on the white 
 horse was stained with tiie bh)od of iiis enemies 
 in the conflict of battle. 
 
 " The coh:)r of things djwd is chang-ed by the 
 aforesaid causes" (Aristotle). 
 
 The cliange in the color of things that are dyed 
 is an c'Jfc'ct of the causes that operate to produce 
 the change, and this change of condition is ex- 
 pressed by the word " dyed."' 
 
 " They are desirous to dye wool, so as to make 
 it purple " (f^lato). 
 
 The condition is changed from a white to a 
 purple color. 
 
 " They rt^r the robe of Venus " (Achilles Tatius). 
 
 Dr. Carson accepts this secondary meaning of 
 bapto, and admits " that dyeing is the secondary 
 meaning of this word " : that it "denotes dyeing, 
 without reference to mode." " It signifies to dye 
 in any manner'" ("Baptism," p. 44). Dr. Dale, 
 who has elucidated the subject more fully, 
 says: ''Bapto, seeondary., demands for its o'cjeet a 
 dyed eondilion. It has no form of act of its own." 
 " // drops all demand for any form of aet, and makes 
 requisition only for a condition or quality of color, 
 
Th:! Meaning detey/nined by IJsagv. 1 9 
 
 satisfied wltli asiv act whicli will meet this le- 
 quircnient" ("Classic I3aptism," pp. 351, 1-8). 
 
 The word has also other meaning-s — /o zvct, to 
 slain^ to bcdciv, to gdd, to vioistoi, examples ot 
 which arc given by Stuart and Dale. " Being 
 [Messed, it moistens and colors the hand" (Aris- 
 'otle). 
 
 Here bapto, moisten, does not express the act 
 of pressing the berry, but the effect on the hand, 
 it does not dip the hand ; it moistens the hand 
 with the juice of the berry. • 
 
 The atlmission by immersionists of a secondary 
 meaning to bapto is very recent. It was long and 
 earnestly maintained that bapto and baptizo are 
 equivalent in signification. For two and a half 
 centuries this opinion was defended. Elaborate 
 argumentation was put forth .to show that even 
 such examples of bapto as are given above have 
 only the primary meaning, to dip. Dr. Gale, a 
 learned and eminent defender of this theory, says 
 of the quotation from ^'Esop: " The literal sense 
 is, the lake was dipped in blood." In explaining 
 it he i-epresentcd the lake as " dipped b}- hyper- 
 bole." Such inflation of rhetoric must sooner 
 or later collapse. Even Dr. Carson exclaims : 
 " What a monstrous paradox in rhetoric is the 
 figure of the dipping of a lake in the blood of 
 
20 TJie Mcanino aiid Po^cer of Baptism. 
 
 a mouse!" ('p. 48). Since tiie defence of the 
 secondary meaning by Dr. Carson, it has been 
 more generally admitted. Alexander Campbell 
 acknowledges that bapto signifies both lo dip and 
 to dye. 
 
 These two meanings of bapto have widcl}- dif- 
 ferent characteristics. The primar_v meaning de- 
 notes a specific act — to dip ; the secondare' mean- 
 ing expresses condition — a dyed condition. The 
 primary meaning expresses onl}^ one kind of act- 
 to dip; the secondary meaning admits of any 
 one of several acts that can effect the condition. 
 The act bv which an object can be dyed may 
 be that of putting into, dropping upon, pour- 
 ing, sprinkling, pressing, smearing, or any other 
 act that can produce the condition of color in 
 the object. The act denoted bv bapto primary 
 is a monieutary act, transient, feeble in its in- 
 fluence; the condition which bapto secondar}' 
 expresses is permanent : it has no limit of time. 
 
 As the meaning of bapto has been determined 
 b\' an appeal to usage, so the meaning of bap- 
 tizo can be determined bj* a similar appeal. 
 The argument of Dr. Carson from the deriva- 
 tion of the word, in which he is followed bv 
 Alexander Campbell and others, is in itself of 
 no force, and has no value unless sustained by 
 
The Meaning determined by Usage. 21 
 
 usage. Alexander Campbell says that " baptizo 
 indicates a specific action, and can have but one 
 meaning-; it derives its meaning and immuta- 
 ble form from bapto, and therefore inherits 
 the proper meaning of the hap. which is dip"" 
 ("Christie and Patristic Baptism," p. 18). But, 
 as Dr. Carson says, p. 46: ''Use is the sole 
 ARBITER OF LANGUAGE." It is in the actual 
 usage of the word that its meaning is seen. 
 Examples of usage are decisive, while deriva- 
 tion, even if ascertained, cannot be decisive ; 
 for, if bapto can undergo a change of meaning 
 by usQge, baptizo can also receive a meaning 
 from usage different from its root. 
 
 Before the two meanings of bapto and baptizo 
 were distinguished from each other, the supposi- 
 tion that baptizo was derived from bapto was re- 
 lied upon as evidence that the two words were 
 perfectl}- identical in signification. But bapto 
 has two meanings, a primary and a secondary. 
 From which of these two meanings does baptizo 
 come? Does it come from bapto primary, which 
 denotes a specific act? Or does it come from 
 bapto secondar}^ which expresses condition re- 
 sulting from any act competent to effect the con- 
 dition? x-\nd if it comes from the one or the 
 other, whichever it be, has the derivative the 
 
2 2 TJie Meaning and Pon'cr of Baptism. 
 
 same identical meaning" as ils primitive? Are 
 two words necdcci tc; express one and the same 
 identical meaning? " iiaptist writers say it comes 
 trom bap/o, to dip. 1 liev once said bapto did not 
 mean to dye ; thev now admit that it does, iiut 
 thev have not reviewed the meaning ol baptiao in 
 the light ot this correction "" (Dale'), The qnes- 
 tion returns. Does baptizo come from bapto pri- 
 mary, which denotes a specific act, "mode and 
 nothing but mode"? (^Carson). Or docs it come 
 Ironi bapto secondarv, which ''drops all demand 
 for any f 01)11 of act, and makes requisition only for 
 condition. . . . satisfied with any act which 
 will meet the requirement"? (Dale). Dr. Carson 
 affirms the former, Dr. Dale the latter. Dr. Car- 
 son, '• American Baptist Publication Society," 
 i860, p. 55, says: ''Bapto, the root, I have shown 
 to possess two meanings, and two only: to dip and 
 to dye, Bapti::o, 1 have asserted, has but one sig- 
 nification. It has been formed on the idea of the 
 primal'}' meaning of the root, and has never ad 
 mitted the secondar\-. . . . My position is 
 THAT IT ALWAYS SIGNIFIES TO DIP, NEVER EX- 
 PRESSING ANYTHING BUT MODE." 
 
 Dr. Dale, on the otlicr hand, says : " For this 
 statement there is not the shadow of support, as 
 seen by the facts of usage and the defining terms 
 
The Mi ailing deterniincd by Usrge. 23 
 
 ol lexicoi^raplr.r ^. I'lic reverse statement wt^iild 
 be iar luarcr the tnitli. There is no evidence 
 that baptizo does ever i^ive expression to dip in 
 its s|iecilic character. There is no evidence that 
 it expi-esses modal act ol anv kind. 'There is no 
 conclusive evidence that ' tiiis word has been 
 formed on the ])rimary meaning ol the root,' 
 There is, 1 think, conclusive evidence to the con- 
 trary. It is increflible that a second woi'd should 
 be created which was to be tlic simple (T^/ZA-' ol one 
 alread}' existini^. The whole history ol the word 
 declares that what was a /r/^r/ incredible has, in 
 reality, no existence. . . . On the other hand, the 
 general characteristics ol the secondar}^ meaning 
 ol the root appear in the boldest relief through all 
 the history ol the word. 1 say the general cha- 
 racteristics," not " the specia-lty oi bapto second 
 in the diixctioa of dyeing, staining, eoloring, 
 etc. . . . Baptizo is an extension of bapto 
 second (the dyeing excluded), with all its lights 
 and privileges as to freedom of act and rejec- 
 tion of envelopment, and advancing to give full 
 development to characteristic qualities, powers 
 and influences over appropriate objects. . . 
 This view harmonizes with that of grammarians 
 who deiive baptizo from baptos, a derivative 
 from bapto second" ("Johaanic Baptism," p. 6j). 
 
2 4 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 l"hc opiinun lliat baptizo is "' lorined on the 
 primary meaning" ot bapto has no reason lor its 
 support. Two words of the same identical 
 meaning in one language are not needed ; and as 
 one good word was already in use in the Greek 
 language to signify dip, it is, as Dale savs, " in- 
 credible " that another word should be created to 
 signify exactly the same thing. Instead of cre- 
 ating several words to express one meaning, we 
 find that one word has several meanings in iiu 
 mcrous instances in all languages. 
 
 The actual meaning of baptizo can be deter- 
 mined only by its usage ; anrl in its usage it has 
 the characteristics of the sccondarv meaning ot 
 the I'oot. It does not belong to that class of 
 verbs •' which make demand for a definite act to 
 be done," but to that large class which "make 
 demand for an effect, a state, or a condition to be 
 accomplished " (" Classic Baptism," p. io6). Dr. 
 James W. Dale, who has given this word the 
 most thorough investigation which it has re- 
 ceived from anv man, in the four volumes which 
 contain the result of his examination of the usage 
 of the word — Classic, Judaic, Johannic, Christie 
 and Patristic Baptism — has demonstrated that 
 the word baptiz;) does not denote a s[)ecific act, 
 as to dip, to sprinkle, to pour, but it expresses con- 
 
The I\Iea:iiug dcferviincci by Usage. 25 
 
 ditwn resulting from some competent act. It 
 thus differs essentially from the primary meaning 
 of bapto, and resembles the secondary meaning 
 in its general characteristics. " Bapting is not 
 baptizing, nor is baptizing bapting." 
 
 In classic usage baptizo has both primary 
 and secondary mean»ings. As the secondary 
 r.ieaning which it has in Hellenistic Greek will 
 be fuU}^ illustrated in the second chapter, it w>*l 
 be sufficient here to give a brief statement of its 
 meaning in classic usage, with a few examples in 
 illustration. 
 
 Baptizo denotes a change in the condi- 
 tion OF ITS OBJECT, THE NATURE OF THE CHANGE 
 BEING DETERMINED BY THE NATURE OF THE BAP- 
 TIZING POWER. 
 
 1. Baptizo expresses a change in the condition 
 of its object. The vital idea in a baptism is a 
 thorough change in the character, state, or con- 
 dition of its object. There are many baptisms 
 of a diverse nature, but this is the ground idea 
 common to all baptisms. 
 
 2. Baptizo expresses condition, but not the act 
 by which the condition is effected. It implies 
 some act or agency, but the act is not expressed 
 by the word itself, but is otherwise expressed or 
 left unexpressed. It accepts of any act or of any 
 
26 The Mi^aiiivg and Power of Baptism. 
 
 influence that L^ comp.tcnt to rffect the con- 
 dition. It expi-esses a concliticn of stupor 
 caused by the act of swallowing an opiate, 
 a condition of drunkenness caused by drinkinij 
 wine, a condition of coldness caused by pouring 
 cold water on hot iron, a condition of purit}' 
 by the use of pure water in any way. The 
 acts and agencies from which the diverse condi- 
 tions of baptism result arc very numerous, and 
 their modes of operation are diverse. More 
 than fifty baptismal agencies appear in the works 
 of Dale. Dr, Conanf, in his translation of the 
 word, gives no less than forty different acts by 
 which baptisms are effected (" Classic Baptism,' 
 
 p. 74). 
 
 3. Baptizo, in its primary meaning, expresses 
 
 iiuuss of condition. The object is in a state of 
 intnsposition — i.e., position within a fluid, a semi- 
 solid, or a solid. Aristotle speaks of " certain 
 desert places fidl of rush and sea-weed, which, 
 when it is ebb tide, are not baptized, but, when it 
 is full tide, are flooded " (" Classic Baptism," p. 
 236). The sea-coast is not taken" up and dipped, 
 into the ocean. The tide, rising up, overflows it. 
 The. baptism was its condition under the water. 
 Strabo says : " The army marched throughout 
 the entire dav b;iptized up to the waist." The 
 
The Meaning dderviined by Usage. 27 
 
 act was marching'. The baptism was the cc>ndi- 
 tion of the soldiers on the march. Plotiniis and 
 other Greek writers speak of " the soul baptized 
 by the body" ("Classic Baptism," p. 264). A 
 corporeal body is the investing- element ; but how 
 the soul becomes enclosed in the body, the mode 
 of this baptism, would be a question extraneous 
 to the meaning of the word. 
 
 4. Baptizo expresses condition without limit of 
 duration. It expresses the condition of its ob- 
 ject within the investing element for an indefi- 
 nite period of time. In this as in other res])ects 
 it differs radically from bapto primary, which ex- 
 presses momentary continuance in the fluid, de. 
 noting entrance into a fluid with immediate re- 
 turn. Baptizo does not take out what it puts in, 
 but leaves its object in the element into which it 
 introduces it. Some other agency may withdraw 
 the object, but baptizo never does. Ships bap- 
 tized — i.e., sunk in the sea — remain in that condi- 
 tion. 
 
 " Our vessel having been baptized in the midst 
 of the Adriatic " (Josephus). 
 
 " His ship having been baptized " (Diodorus 
 Siculus). 
 
 " They made incessant attacks, and baptized 
 many of the ships" (PolNbius). 
 
28 The Meaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 *' A lofty billow rising' above baptized them " 
 (Josephus). 
 
 Near!}' thirty examples occur in Greek writers 
 of the baptism of ships. The act by wliich the 
 baptism of the ships is caused is not that of dipping 
 — puttinij them into the water for a moment and 
 taking- them out. The ships sink to the bottom, 
 and remain in that condition of baptism for ages. 
 The duration of this baptism has not vet run out. 
 It still continues after the lapse of two thousand 
 years. 
 
 Animals, and also men, are in like manner bap- 
 tized. " r^lany of the land animals, enclosed by 
 the river, perish, being baptized " (Diodorus 
 Siculuf). 
 
 The animals were not dipped. The water 
 (lowed over them by the inundation of the river 
 Nile, and they came permanently under its suffo- 
 cating- power. 
 
 " The river, rolling down with a stronger cur- 
 rent, baptized many, and destroyed them " (Dio- 
 dorus Siculus). 
 
 In this baptism the soldiers were not dipped. 
 A mere dipping could not have injured them. 
 Tiicy were baptized — i.e., they were brought under 
 the watery clement, and remained under it. It 
 was a death baptism bv drowning. 
 
The Meaning determined by Usage. 29 
 
 " Being baptized by the Galatians in a pool, ac- 
 cording to command, he died " (Josephus). 
 
 " Thrust such an one on the head, baptizing him, 
 so that he can rise no more" (Timon, the Man- 
 hater, in Lucian). 
 
 " The dolphin, displeased at such a falsehood, 
 baptizing, killed him " (^Esop). 
 
 " Baptizing you by sea-waves, I will destroy 
 you " (Alcibiades ; " Classic Baptism," p, 266). 
 
 " I found Cupid among the roses, and, holding 
 him by the wings, I baptized him into the wine, 
 and took and drank him " (Julian, Egypt. ; " Clas- 
 sic Baptism," p. 245). 
 
 He was not dipped — put in and taken out. He 
 remained in the wine, and in that condition was 
 swallowed by the drinker. 
 
 " When the sons of the prophet were cutting 
 wood with axes over the river Jordan, the iron 
 fell off and was baptized in the river" (Justin 
 Martyr; "Judaic Baptism," p. 252). 
 
 This baptism of the axe would have lasted to 
 the end of time but for a miracle. The condi- 
 tion of baptism has no self-termination. Baptism 
 of itself never recovers its object from the condi- 
 tion in which it places it. This is now admitted. 
 The National Baptist sviys: " Dr. Dale has brought 
 clearly out what our examination had before 
 
30 The Meaning a?td Power of Baptism. 
 
 proved, that the word baptizo does not of itself 
 involve the lifting out from the fluid of that which 
 is put in." The Baptist Quarterly, April, 1869, 
 says: " Our Lord did not command to put people 
 into the water and take them out again, but tn put 
 them under the zvater. . . . That baptizo nez>er 
 does engage to take its subject out of the Vi^ater 
 . . . we readily admit" ("Judaic Baptism," 
 pp. 25,49). 
 
 Dr. Conant, BAPTIZEIN, ed. 1868, p. 88, 
 after saying that " the word immerse expresses 
 the full import of the Greek word baptizein^ 
 adds: ''The idea of emersion is not included in 
 the meaning of the Greek word. It means, sim- 
 ply, to put into or under water." Then the word 
 baptizo does not mean dip ; for that, in Hebrew, 
 Latin, Greek, and English, always does take out 
 what it puts in. If the idea of putting in and 
 taking out is to be expressed in classic Greek, 
 baptizo docs not express it. It is the Greek word 
 bapto, and not baptizo, which those who spoke 
 and wrote the Greek language employed to de- 
 note the deiinite act to dip. They employed the- 
 word baptizo to express the permanent condition 
 of the object under the water where it placed it. 
 We must look elsewhere than to the classic usage 
 of baptizo for a reason to take people out of the 
 
T.':c Jllianing detcriuincil by Usage. 3 1 
 
 water. " The instinctive love of life will do it," 
 it is said. True, indeed ! But this is an influence 
 outside of the Greek word baptizo. 
 
 5. Baptizo, like innumerable words in all lan- 
 guages, has a secondary meaning, and, in its 
 secondary use, it expresses condition rcsuUing 
 from causes withoiit intusposition in water, or in 
 any other element. An opiate drunk from a cup 
 baptizes — i.e., brings into a condition of stupor 
 (Achilles Tatius;" C. B.,"p. 318). Wine drunk from 
 a cup baptizes, brings into a state of drunkenness 
 (Conon;"C. B.," p. 3(7). Drinking from the Silenic 
 fount baptizes, makes one heavy-headed and dull 
 (Lucian; " C. B.," p. 330)- Waterpoured into wine 
 baptizes, dilutes, tempers the wine, thus changing 
 its condition (Plutarch; " C. B.,"p.339). Puzzling 
 questions put to a boy in school baptize him, put 
 him into a condition of bewilderment (Plato; 
 " C. B.," p, 334). In these and countless other 
 Greek baptisms there is no immersion. The per- 
 sons baptized, and the various otlier objects of 
 baptism, are not dipped into the element. The 
 subjects of the opiate-baptism were not dipped 
 ii>to the cup. The}' drank the baptizing element 
 from the cup. 
 
 6. Baptizo, both in its primary and in its second 
 ary use, secures tJ:e influence of the baptizing cle- 
 
32 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 mcnt over the object baptized. Unlike bapto 
 primary, which expresses only a transient act of 
 feeble influence, baptizo is a ivord of POWER. 
 This idea of power originates in the primary use 
 of the word. The starting point is the condition 
 of intusposition for a long, indefinite period in 
 which baptizo places its objects. As the object 
 which baptizo puts into the water or other in- 
 vesting element remains in the element and is not 
 withdrawn, the baptizing element has time to 
 exert its full influence upon the object encom- 
 passed by it. Some objects, like flint, or the iron 
 in the axe-baptism of Justin Martyr, receive no 
 perceptible influence from the surrounding me- 
 dium. But most objects do receive an influence 
 from the enveloping element. Complete envelop- 
 ment in a fluid, a semi-solid, or a solid will, in 
 time, develop its full influence over the object 
 which comes under its power. The object re- 
 ceives the quality of the baptizing element, and 
 is thus changed in its condition. A bag of salt in 
 water dissolves. A sponge in water imbibes the 
 element and is drenched. Ships sunk in the sea 
 gradually undergo change by the constant action 
 of the water. Men and animals encompassed by 
 the watery element are suffocated. Fruit bap- 
 tized in brine receives the qualitv of the brine and 
 
TJie Meaning detoinined by Usage. 'i,-}^ 
 
 is changed to pickle (Nicander; " C. B.," p. 273). 
 Objects enclosed in marsh mud arc b}^ it changed 
 in the course of time. The soul baptized in the 
 body develops and receives " the oppressive, sen- 
 suous influence of the body." Objects remaining 
 enclosed in the baptizing clement for years and 
 for ages receive more than a dipping. They come 
 under the controlling influence of the fluid or 
 solid elements that enclose them. The encom- 
 passing element penetrates the object which it 
 surrounds, and pervades it with its own peculiar 
 influence, and changes its condition. Thus by 
 usage baptizo becomes a word expressing a 
 tJiorough change in the condition of its object by the 
 controlling influence of the baptizing element. 
 
 In its secondary use, also, baptizo develops and 
 secures the influence of the baptizing agency over 
 the baptized object. There is no immersion in 
 secondary baptism. Intusposition disappears; 
 but those baptizing agencies which operate with- 
 out intusposition exert their own peculiar in- 
 fluence over the baptized objects. The opiate 
 drug has a powerful influence in baptizing the 
 man who drinks it. It penetrates his system and 
 produces a condition of stupefaction. The re- 
 semblance between primary and secondary bap- 
 tism consists in the idea of influence which is 
 
34 The ]\ leaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 common to both. Intusposition is eliminated in 
 secondary use. There is no immersion, no en- 
 closing medium, no receptive element into which 
 the object baptized is introduced, no encompass- 
 ing fluid or solid, as in primary baptism, but the re- 
 semblance is in the influence which the baptismal 
 agencies exert over the objects which come under 
 their control. In both classes of baptisms, primar}' 
 and secondary, the baptismal agencies exert each 
 its own peculiar influence, and the nature of the 
 baptism corresponds. 
 
 In both primary and secondar}' baptisms, the 
 character of the ehange in the baptized object cor- 
 responds to the nature of the baptizing power. 
 The baptizing agency communicates its own 
 characteristic quality to the object which it bap- 
 tizes, and assimilates it to its own nature. Each 
 baptizing agency exerts its own specific influence 
 upon the object which it baptizes. Water envel- 
 oping a living man penetrates and pervades his 
 system, and by its peculiar influence over him 
 produces suffocation. Ships penetrated by the 
 water of the surrounding ocean become subject 
 to its influence. 
 
 So the opiate drop, in baptizing the man who 
 drinks it, communicates to him its stupefying in- 
 fluence and puts hi^i to sleep. Wine drunk from 
 
The MiGJiijig d.termimd by U.ag^. 'i^-^ 
 
 a cup penetrates and pervades the human system, 
 and baptizes the man by communicating to him 
 its intoxicating influence. The alcoholic quality 
 baptizes him, makes him drunk. There are nu- 
 merous examples of these wine-baptisms in Greek 
 writers, extending through a period of more than 
 a thousand years. The specific influence of each 
 baptizing agency on the character of its objects 
 corresponds to the characteristic quality of that 
 agency. Some baptismal agencies have purify- 
 ing qualities, and these purifying qualities give 
 them a special influence in the service of religion. 
 A baptized man is a man brought into a baptized 
 condition by some baptizing agency, and the cha- 
 racter of the baptism corresponds to the charac- 
 teristic quality of the baptizing power. The spe- 
 cial influence of those baptismal agencies which, 
 from their purifying qualities, are employed for 
 religious purposes, will be illustrated in the next 
 chapter. 
 
 What has thus far been said is only prepara- 
 tory to the main question respecting the religious 
 signification of the word. It is no inconsidera- 
 ble advantage to distinguish between bapto and 
 baptizo, which have been so long confounded, and 
 to illustrate the principle on which the argument 
 from usage in the next chapter will proceed. The 
 
o 
 
 6 The Meaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 Hellenistic usage rests upon a classic foundation. 
 Even the secondary meaning — purification — has 
 an illustration in Plutarch (" C. B.," p. 342). But 
 the Hellenistic meaning has an ample illustration 
 in its own sphere. This meaning will be deter- 
 mined by examples of usage, in confident reliance 
 upon the principle which Dr. Dale has applied 
 with such eminent success, that " USE IS OF SU- 
 PREME AUTHORITY AND THE RULE IN THE LAN- 
 GUAGE." 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 EXAMPLES OF USAGE — JEWISH BAPTISMS. 
 
 '"r^HE Patrists call the purifications under the 
 ■^ Law baptisms; and these baptisms they 
 represent as typical of baptism under the Gospel. 
 The baptismal agencies were sacrificial blood, 
 heifer-ashes, and water; the mode of applying- 
 them was by sprinkling ; and the baptism result- 
 ing was a condition of ceremonial purification. 
 A few examples will illustrate this. 
 
 I. Ambrose, in commenting on the Septuagint 
 of Ps. I. 9, " Sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall 
 be clean ; wash me, and I shall be whiter than 
 snow," calls the purification a baptism : " He 
 asks to be cleansed by hyssop according to the 
 Law ; he desires to be washed according to the 
 Gospel. He who wished to be cleansed by typi- 
 cal baptism was sprinkled with the blood of the 
 lamb by a bunch of hyssop " (" Christie and Pa- 
 tristic Baptism," p. 534). 
 
 In the baptism which Ambrose thus describes, 
 the baptismal agency was the blood of the sacrifi- 
 cial lamb, the means of applying it to the person 
 
 37 
 
o 
 
 8 The Meaning and Power of Baptism 
 
 was a Iijssop-branch, the mode was by sprinkling, 
 the baptism resulting was a condition of ceremo- 
 nial purification ; and this baptism was a type of 
 baptism under the Gospel. 
 
 2. Ambrose : " He who is baptized, whether in 
 conformity with the Law or in conformity with 
 the Gospel, is cleansed: in conformity with the 
 Law, because Moses sprinkled the blood of the 
 lamb with a bunch of hyssop ; in conformity with 
 the Gospel, because the raiment of Christ was 
 white as snow. . . . Therefore he is white as 
 snow whose sins are forgiven" ('-Judaic Bap- 
 tism," p, 1 88). 
 
 Baptism under the Law and under the Gospel 
 is purification, and Ambrose identifies these bap- 
 tisms as type and antitype baptisms. 
 
 3. Basil : " The blood of the lamb is a type ot 
 the blood of Christ " (p. 217). 
 
 4. Hilar}' : " Sprinkling according to tlie Law 
 was the cleansing of sin, through faith purif3'ing 
 the people by the sprinkling of blood (Ps. 1. 9) ; a 
 sacrament of the future sprinkling of the blood 
 of the Lord" (" The Baptism of Calvar}^" p. 34). 
 
 5. Didymus Alexandrinus, teaclier of the most 
 renowned Greek school of his age, says : '' The 
 very image of baptism both continually illumi- 
 nated arid saved all Israel at that time, as Paul 
 
Examples of Usage 39 
 
 wrote (i Cor. x. i, 2), and as prophesied Eze- 
 kiel (xxxvi. 25) : * I will sprinkle clean water 
 upon 3'ou, and you shall be clean from all your 
 sins'; and David (Ps. 1. 9): 'Sprinkle me with 
 hyssop, and I shall be clean.' For the sprinkling 
 with hyssop was Judaic purification, which is con- 
 tinued to the present time ; but ' whiter than snow ' 
 denotes Christian illumination, which means bap- 
 tism." He further compares the " baptism which 
 was formerly in shadozu ' with " that which is in 
 reality,^' which he calls "the antitype baptism" 
 (" Jud. Bap.," p. 196 ; " C. and P. B.," p. 342). 
 
 6. Cyril, xVrchbishop of Alexandria, on Isaiah, 
 Book I. Dis. I., referring the expression (i. 16), 
 " Wash you, make you clean," to baptism, 
 says: "And this the ancient law imaged forth 
 to them as in shadows, and preached before the 
 grace which is through the holy baptism. For 
 he said (Num. viii. ^, ^)'- ' Take the Levites and 
 cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do to cleanse 
 them: Sprinkle water of purifying upon them '" 
 (Conant, p. 123; Beccher, p. 164). 
 
 7. Ambrose : " The Lord also commanded 
 Moses that if any leprous person would be 
 cleansed. . . . Whoever wished to be cleansed 
 m proper form was sprinkled by these three ; 
 because no one can be cleansed from the leprosy 
 
40 The Ivleaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 of sin by the water of baptism except under 
 the invocation of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost. . . . And he cleanses 
 us, who are designated by the leper, by their in- 
 vocation and by the water of baptism" ("Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 185). 
 
 In thus interpreting Jewish baptism in cleans- 
 ing the leper as emblematical of Christian bap- 
 tism, Ambrose again teaches that the essential 
 nature of baptism under the Law and under 
 the Gospel is a condition of purification. 
 
 8. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, in his ad- 
 dress to the candidates for baptism, sa3's: "Re- 
 joice, O heavens! and be glad, O earth! be- 
 cause of those who are about to be sprinkled 
 with hyssop, and to be purified by the spiritual 
 hyssop, through the power of Him who drank, 
 in his suffering, from the hyssop and the reed " 
 (p. 188). 
 
 Cyril speaks of the rite of baptism, which he 
 was about to administer, in the same terms that 
 describe Jewish baptisms. The resemblance 
 which he traced between Jcwisli and Christian 
 baptism did not consist in the act or mode, but 
 in the essential nature, of the baptism, which 
 was a condition of puriiication. 
 
Examples of Usage 41 
 
 BAPTISM BY HEIFER-ASHES. 
 
 1. Sirach, xxxiv. 30, more than 200 B.C., speak- 
 ing of the purification from the defilement caused 
 by touching- a dead body, calls the purification 
 a baptism : " Being baptized from a dead body, 
 and touching it again, what is he benefited by 
 his cleansing? " (•' Jud. Bap.," p. 112). 
 
 This purification is described in Numbers, 
 chapter xix., as a purification effected by sprink- 
 ling the ashes of a heifer on the person cere- 
 monially defiled, 
 
 2. Josephus, "Jewish Antiquities," IV. iv. 6: 
 " Those, therefore, defiled by a dead body, in- 
 troducing a little of the ashes and hyssop- 
 branch into a spring, and • baptizing of this 
 ashes [introduced] into the spring, they sprinkled 
 both on the third and seventh of the days " 
 (" Jud. Bap.," p. 100). 
 
 3. Cyril of Alexandria, in his comment on Isa, 
 iv. 4, says : " The Creator and Lord of all, who 
 is abundant in mere}', . . . will wash away the 
 filth of the transgressors, and will thoroughly 
 cleanse the blood from their midst by the spirit 
 of judgment and the spirit of burning. . . . 
 We call the spirit of burning the grace at 
 the holy baptism begotten within us not with- 
 
4 2 The Aleaniug and Power cf Baptism. 
 
 out the Spirit; for, indeed, zve have not been BAP- 
 TIZED by bare zoater, nor yet by the ashes of a 
 heifer, (since we liave been sprinkled for the 
 purification of the llesh onl}-, according to the 
 sa3-ing of the blessed Paul), but by the Holy 
 Spirit and by tlie divine and spirit nal fire " (Dale, 
 MS.) 
 
 The punctuation of this passage is that of 
 C3rirs GrecK text as given by the Abba Migne, 
 of Paris. In this passage Cyril speaks of thj-ee 
 baptisms, differing from each other as the agen- 
 cies by which they were effected were different. 
 T/ie first baptism is by mere or bare water ; the 
 seeond, by heifer-ashes ; the third, by the con- 
 j(jint agency of the Moly Spirit and the divine 
 and spiritual fire. 
 
 4. Gregcjr^' Nazianzen : " Therefore let us be 
 baptized, that we may overcome ; let us partake 
 of the purifying waters, more purging than 
 hyssop, more purifying than the blood of the 
 Law, more sanctifying than tlie ashes of a 
 heifer sprinkling the unclean, and having, for 
 tlie time, power for the purification of the body, 
 but not for the complete removal of sin" 
 (" jud. Bap.," p. 188). 
 
 In the comparis(jn which this Greek writer 
 makes between the Jewish purifications by sprink- 
 
Examples of Usage. 43 
 
 ling sacrificial blood and heifer-ashcs and the 
 baptism of Christianity, he teaches that the 
 former only purifies the body cercraoniall)^ 
 while the latter is superior, more purifying, a 
 purification of the most complete character, 
 
 5. CN'ril of Alexandria: "The ancient law 
 . . . preached the grace in the holy baptism. 
 For He said (Num. viii. ^,7)'. ' Take the Levites, 
 and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do to 
 cleanse them : Sprinkle water of purifying upon 
 them.' What the water of purifying is the most 
 wise Paul shall teach, sa3-ing : ' The ashes of a 
 heifer sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the 
 purifying of the flesh.' " 
 
 This passage is repeated here because Cyril 
 represents purification by sprinkling the ashes 
 of a heifer as one of the things in the ancient 
 law which give a shadow or type of baptism. 
 
 DIRECT ASSERTIONS. 
 
 The Patrists te.ich by direct assertion that 
 baptism signifies purification. 
 
 I. Athanasius: "'He shall baptize you by the 
 Holy Ghost.' Tliis means that he will purify 
 you " (" C. and P. B.," p. 600). 
 
 This is a direct assertion of this Greek writer 
 that baptisin means purification. 
 
44 The Meaning arid Pozver of Baptism. 
 
 2. Clemens Romanus : "I am fully persuaded 
 that the holy baptism of Christ is spiritual purifi- 
 cation and regeneration both of soul and body " 
 
 (P- 597)- 
 
 3. Theophylact : " He calls his death a baptism, 
 as being a purging of us all " ("Jud. Bap.," p. 217). 
 
 4. Basil the Great: " What is the purport and 
 power of baptism? The baptized is thoroughly 
 changed as to thought and word and deed, and 
 becomes, according to the power bestowed, the 
 same as that by which he was born " (" C. and P. 
 B.," p. 491). 
 
 Basil defines baptism as a thorough change in 
 the spiritual condition of the baptized, by which 
 his character is assimilated to the nature of the 
 baptizing agency. He says nothing of dipping 
 or of any other act. Baptism is a change in the 
 character of its object, the nature of the change 
 being determined by the nature of the baptizing 
 power. 
 
 5. Hippolytus : "As Isaiah says, 'Wash ye.' 
 Dost thou see, beloved, how the prophet declared 
 beforehand the purifying character of this bap- 
 tism ? " (" Jud. Bap.," p. 27S). 
 
 6. Gregory Nazianzen,on Baptism, says : " But 
 we being twofold, I mean spiritual and corporeal; 
 . . , purification is also twofold, by water and 
 
Examples of Usage. 45 
 
 Spirit, . , . the one typical, the other real, and 
 purifyinw- the depths" (" C. and P. B.," p. 342). 
 
 7. Basil the Great: "There are three mean- 
 ings of baptism : purification from defilement, re- 
 generation by the Spirit, and trial by the fire of 
 judgment" (" Jud. Bap.," p. 249). 
 
 Each of these three baptisms is a change of 
 condition corresponding to the nature of the 
 baptizing power. Purification is a condition of 
 purity, regeneration a condition of new spiritual 
 life, and trial by the fire of judgment a test of 
 our condition to enter Paradise. 
 
 8. Clemens Alexandrinus : "Being baptized, 
 we are illuminated. . . . This is variously 
 designated. ... It is called washing because 
 we are cleansed from our sins " (" C. and P. B.," 
 
 P- 553)- 
 
 9. Theophylact, in his comment on Luke xi. 38 : 
 " He marvelled that he was not first baptized 
 before dinner," sa)'s : "Jesus, dci'iding their 
 foolish custom — I mean their purifying them- 
 selves before eating — teaches that they ought to 
 purify their souls by good works " (Dr. E. 
 Beecher, p. 222). 
 
 10. Theophylact, on John iii. 25, says : " Dis- 
 puting concerning purification — i.e., baptism — 
 they came to their Master" (pp. 214, 221). 
 
46 The Meaning and Power 0/ Bapiisju. 
 
 BAPTISM BY THE EXTENDED HAND. 
 
 1. John of U.iniascus: '• John was baptized by 
 putting iii^ iKind upon the divine head of his 
 Master" ("Joiiannic Baptism," p. 220). 
 
 This baptism was effected by the touch of the 
 hand. The baptismal virtue was thus conveyed 
 from Jesus to John. 
 
 2. Hippolytus: "He bowed his head to be 
 baptized by John " (p. 222). 
 
 The act of bowing the head to receive baptism 
 is customary among all except immersionists. 
 
 3. Gregory Thaumaturgus : " The Baptist hav- 
 ing heard these things, stretching out his trem- 
 bHng hand, baptized the Lord " (p. 405). 
 
 BAPTISM OF TEARS. 
 
 I. Clemens Alexandrinus : " He w^ept bitterly. 
 . , . Having been baptized a second time b}' 
 his tears" (" C. and P. B.," p. 514). 
 
 Clement is speaking of the captain of a band 
 of robbers, once a disciple of the Apostle John, 
 and he calls his restoration a baptism of tears. 
 His second baptism was a thorough cliange in the 
 spiritual condition of his soul through penitential 
 scjrrow for his sin. In this baptism a dipping is 
 impossible. It would exhaust the laclu-ymal 
 
Examples of Usage. 47 
 
 fountains of many men to furnish a sufficient 
 quantity of tears to immerse a single indivi- 
 dual. 
 
 2. Gregory Nazianzen : "And 1 know yet a 
 fifth baptism, that by means of tears, . . 
 washing nightly his bed with tears " (p. 507). 
 
 The bed was not dipped in tears, neither was 
 the penitent man, weeping on account of his sins. 
 His penitential sorrow was a purification of the 
 soul, a thorough change of his character, state, or 
 condition. 
 
 3. Athanasius : " A sixth baptism is that by 
 tears, which is painful, as one washing nightly his 
 couch and repenting " (p. 514). 
 
 The baptism was the change of character by 
 repentance. 
 
 4. Athanasius: " God has granted to the nature 
 of man three baptisms purifying from all sin 
 whatsoever. I mean . . . third, the baptism 
 by tears into which the harlot was purified. And 
 likewise Peter, the chief of the holy Apostles, 
 after hi.s denial, having wept, was received and 
 saved " (p. 514). 
 
 Peter was not dipped in water when he wept 
 over his denial of his Master. His baptism of 
 tears was his repentance — a change in his spiri- 
 tual character. This Greek writer thus ex- 
 
48 The Uleaiiing and Poiuer of Baptism. 
 
 prcssly teaches that this baptism was a purifica- 
 tion, and both of his examples illustrate this 
 siijnification. 
 
 BAPTISM IN ONE'S OWN BLOOD. 
 
 No man can be dipped in his own blood. By 
 the baptism of blood the Patrists mean purifica- 
 tion. 
 
 1. Basil Magnus: ''There are some who, in 
 striving for piety, have undergone death for 
 Christ, . . . needing for salvation nothing of 
 the water-symbols, being baptized by their own 
 blood " (" Johannic Baptism," p. 225). 
 
 Basil did not believe water-baptism essential to 
 salvation. He calls it a symbol. He believed a 
 man can be baptized in his own blood. He be- 
 lieved men can be saved by the baptism of 
 blood. 
 
 2. Cyril of Jerusalem: "The Saviour redeem- 
 ing the world by the cross, and wounded in his 
 side, shed forth water and blood ; that some, in 
 times of peace, might be baptized with water, and- 
 others, in times of persecution, might be baptized 
 with their own blood " (p. 224). 
 
 There was no dipping in this baptism. A man 
 cannot be dipped in his own blood. Mis body 
 
Examples of Usage. 49 
 
 cannot be covered over with his own blood. 
 There is not blood enough in a man to immerse 
 him in it. In this baptism a dipping- is impos- 
 sible. 
 
 3. John of Damascus: "John was baptized 
 . . . also by his own blood " (p. 223). 
 
 We know how this baptism was effected. His 
 head was severed from his body by order of 
 Herod. He w^as not dipped in his blood ; he 
 was beheaded. 
 
 4. Jerome : " Thou dost baptize me with water, 
 that I may baptize thee, for myself, with thy 
 blood" (p. 228). 
 
 5. Tertullian : " Because he would teach men 
 to be baptized not only by water, but also by 
 their own blood ; so that, baptized by this bap- 
 tism only, they ma}^ secure a true faith and a pure 
 cleansing, and, baptized in the one way or in the 
 other, equall}^ to secure one baptism of salvation 
 and honor " (" C. and P. B.," p. 38). 
 
 Thus Tertullian teaches that baptism is a 
 cleansing, and that blood-baptism and w^ater- 
 baptism are one baptism, which shows that dip- 
 ping was not the idea in his mind, but spiritual 
 condition. 
 
 6. Augustine teaches that even in a blood)' 
 death there is no baptism unless the character of 
 
50 ■ The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 the person is duly changed. " If all who ai'C slain 
 are baptized by their blood, all robbers, un- 
 just and impious persons who arc put to death 
 must be reckoned martyrs, because thc}^ are bap- 
 tized by their own blood." 
 
 This, he says, cannot be. " If none arc bap- 
 tized by their own blood but those who are slain 
 for righteousness ..." The baptism depends 
 upon the character of the person slain. It does 
 not depend upon the quantity of blood in his 
 veins, or on the possibility of dipping him in his 
 own blood. If it did, a robber might be baptized 
 in his blood as well as a martyr, which Augustine 
 denies. The reality of the martyr-baptism de- 
 pends on the spiritual condition of the person Avho 
 suffers death. " If you die as a sacrilegious per- 
 son, how are you baptized with your blood?" 
 p. 40). 
 
 7. Bassillius, speaking of the forty martyrs, says : 
 " They were baptized, not witli water, but with 
 their own blood " (" Baptismal Question," p. 104). 
 
 8. Cyprian : " The Lord declares that those 
 baptized with their own blood obtain divine 
 grace, when he says to the thief on the cross in 
 his very Passion that ' he should be Vv'ith him in 
 Paradise' " (" C. and I\ B.," p. 510). 
 
 The baptism t^f the thief on the cross was not 
 
Examples of Usage. 5 1 
 
 a dipping. He was not dipped in his own blood. 
 He was nailed to the cross. By his faith in the 
 divine Redeemer he obtained divine grace in liis 
 crucifixion-baptism. 
 
 9. Cyprian : " Can the power of baptism be 
 greater or better than confession, than martyrdom, 
 when one confesses Christ before men, and is bap- 
 tized by his own blood?" ('' Johannic Baptism," 
 p. 227). 
 
 10. Origcn:. " If God would grant to me that I 
 might be cleansed by my own blood, that I might 
 attain that second baptism dying for Christ, I 
 would depart out of this world secure" ("Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 197). 
 
 Dying for Christ was the martyr-baptism, and 
 this baptism consisted in being cleansed. 
 
 11. Jerome: "That ye should be baptized by 
 my blood by the washing of regeneration, which 
 alone can remit sin " (" C. and P. B.," p. 512). 
 
 12. Athanasius: " God hath granted to the na- 
 ture of man three baptisms purifying from all 
 manner of sin ; I refer to that which is through 
 water, and again that which is through our own 
 martyr-blood, and, third, that which is through 
 tears " (p. 42). 
 
 The three baptisms here described are purifi- 
 cations, and Llie baptismal agencies instrLunenlal 
 
5 2 The Meaning and Poivcr of Baptism. 
 
 in effecting these baptisms are water, martyr- 
 blood, and tears. 
 
 CHRIST'S BLOOD-BAPTISM. 
 
 The baptism of Christ on the cross was the 
 central baptism in which all other Bible baptisms 
 meet. It was a purification by atonement for the 
 sins of mankind. 
 
 1. Gregory Nazianzen : " And I know a fourth 
 baptism — that by means of martyrdom and blood, 
 with which, also, Christ himself was baptized, 
 and, indeed, much more admirable than the 
 otiiers " (" C. and P. B.," p. 507). 
 
 Agency, and not mode, is here expressed. 
 
 2. Petilianus : " The Saviour himself, also, 
 having been lirst baptized by John, declared that 
 he must be baptized a second time — not now by 
 water nor b}^ Spirit, but by the baptism of blood, 
 b}' the cross of his Passion " (p. 40). 
 
 The blood was the baptizing agency in his bap- 
 tism on the cross. 
 
 3. John of Damascus : " The baptism through 
 blood and martyrdom with which Christ was 
 baptized for us " (p. 43). 
 
 The Saviour's baptism was vicarious. He was 
 baptized, not for himself, but for us. 
 
 4. Thcophylact : " Me calls liis death a baptism, 
 
Examples of Usage. 53 
 
 as being a purification for us all " (Cremer, p. 
 105). 
 
 The baptism of Clirist on the cross was on our 
 account. It is called a baptism, not because it 
 was a dipping-, but a purification. Jesus was 
 not immersed on the cross, but he was baptized. 
 This is a direct assertion of this Greek writer that 
 the baptism of Christ on the cross was a purifica- 
 tion. 
 
 5. Orii^en: "The Lord says: ' I have a baptism 
 to be baptized with. . . .' You see that he 
 called the pouring out of his blood, baptism " 
 ("C. and P. B.," p. 41). 
 
 Not immersion in his blood, but the pouring out 
 of his blood {profusioitan sangjiiuis sui BAPTISMA . 
 
 6. Tcrtullian : " These two baptisms he shed 
 forth from the wound of his pierced side " (p. 
 510). 
 
 Tlie idea that Jesus was immersed either in 
 the water or in the blood that flowed from the 
 wound in his side is, of course, wholly inadmissi- 
 ble. 
 
 7. Jerome : " That ye should be baptized by 
 my blood, which alone can remit sin " (p. 512). 
 
 It was the sin-remitting power of Christ's 
 blood which gave it its virtue and efficacy. 
 
 8. TertuUian: " Martvrdom will be another 
 
54 The ]\Icaning and Ponwr of Baptism. 
 
 baptism. For He says (Luke xii. 50) : ' I have 
 also another baptism.' Whence from the wound- 
 ed side of the Lord water and blood flowed 
 forth, providing each washing: . . . first, wash- 
 ing by water; second, by blood" (p. 510). 
 
 Here we have TertuUian's own explanation 
 of both of the baptisms. The water and the 
 blood are two baptismal agencies, each of which 
 effects a cleansing. The mode has nothing what- 
 ever to do with the nature of the baptism. 
 
 9. Petilianus : "Blush, O persecutors! 3'e make 
 martja-s like to Christ, whom [quos], after the 
 water of true baptism, baptizing blood sprinkles " 
 (p. 40). 
 
 The baptismal virtue is in the blood. The 
 blood of Christ has an atoning efhcacy, a sin- 
 remitting power, and the sprinkling of this 
 blood baptizes, cleanses from sin, 
 
 10. Origcn : " Christ, whom we follow, shed 
 his blood for our redemption, that we may de- 
 part washed by our own blood. For it is the 
 baptism of blood only which can make us purer 
 than the baptism of water has made us" (p. 41). ' 
 
 The baptism of water is a purification. The 
 baptism of blood is a more complete purilica- 
 tion. Y\nd this cleansing comes to us through 
 the baptism of Christ on the cross, which was 
 
Examples of Usage. 55 
 
 n purification for us. The idea of a covering of 
 the body either with water or with the blood 
 that flowed from the Saviour's side is no part 
 of the baptism. The bnptisni is an effect pro- 
 duced by these agencies, a purification for our 
 sins. Christ's baptism on the cross was " a bap- 
 tism into penal death," an atonement for the sins 
 of mankind. 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF FIRE. 
 
 One of the effects of fire arises from its puri- 
 fying efficacy. This purifi jatioa by fire the Pa- 
 ti ists call baptism. 
 
 1. Ambrose: "There is also a baptism at 
 the entrance of Paradise which formerly did 
 not exist ; but after the transgressor was ex- 
 cluded, the flaming sword began to be, which 
 was not before when sin was not. Sin began 
 and baptism began, by which they might be 
 purified who desired to return" (" Jud. Bap.," 
 p. 223). 
 
 2. Origen : " Physicians say that to cure 
 certain diseases not onl}^ is the cutting by a 
 knife necessar}^ but burning, also. . . . Our 
 sin is a cancer for which neither cutting nor 
 burning, alone, is sufficient; both are needed. 
 
 . . . Therefore the Saviour uses both sword and 
 
56 The Mea7iing and Powoi^ of Baptism. 
 
 fire, and baptizes those sins which could not be 
 purged b}^ the purification of the Holy Spirit " 
 ("C. and P. B.," 595). 
 
 The only possible meaning of the word " bap- 
 tizes" here is purifies, cleanses. 
 
 3. Ambrose : " Who is it that baptizes b}' this 
 fire ? . . . Therefore the great Baptist \bap~ 
 tista, purifier] . . . shall come, and shall see 
 many standing at the entrance of Paradise, and 
 shall wave the sword turning every way. . . . 
 Therefore consuming fire must come and burn up 
 in us the lead of iniquity, the iron of transgres- 
 sion, and make us pure gold " (p. 520). 
 
 4. Basil the Great: "Baptized by the fire — that 
 is, by the word of doctrine " ("'Johannic Bap- 
 tism," p. 201). 
 
 Basil, by his definition of this fire-baptism, 
 makes it, not a dipping into the fire, but an ef- 
 fect of the instrumentality of the fire — that is, the 
 doctrine. 
 
 5. Jerome : " Happy is he who receives the 
 cleansing of the Holy Spirit, and does not need the 
 cleansing of fire. But wretched and worthy 
 of vreeping is lie who, after the cleansing 
 of the Spirit, must be baptized by fire " (p. 
 201). 
 
 6. Macarius ^Egyptus : " The baptism of fire 
 
Examples of Usage. 57 
 
 and of Spirit purifies and cleanses the polluted 
 mind " (p. 207). 
 
 7. Gregory Thaumaturgus : "Christ says to 
 John: 'Baptize me, who am about to baptize 
 those who believ^e, tJinmgh water, and the Spirit, 
 and fire '■ — by zvatcr, which is able to wash away 
 the filth of sin; by the Spirit, who can make the 
 earthly spiritual ; /;/ Jirc, whose nature it is to 
 burn up the thorns of sin" (p. 237). 
 
 Water, Spirit, and fire are agencies by which 
 the purification is accomplished. 
 
 8. Gregory Nazianzen : " And there is a final 
 baptism hereafter, when they will be baptized b}- 
 means of fire, both more painful and more pro- 
 tracted " C'C. and P. B.," p. 507). 
 
 This baptism is not a mere momentary act, a 
 dipping into the fire ; it is a condition or state of 
 long, indefinite duration. 
 
 9. Athanasius : " The eighth baptism is the 
 final baptism, which is not saving, but burning 
 and punishing sinners for ever and ever " (p. 507). 
 
 This is a destructive baptism, a condition 
 which has no termination. 
 
 HAND-WASHING BAPTISM. 
 
 I. Clemens Alexandrinus : " Purity is to think 
 
58 The Meaning ajid Power cf Bapiism. 
 
 purely. An image of this baptism ^vas communi- 
 cated to the poets, from Moses, thus : 
 "'Having washed, and being clothed with clean 
 vestments, 
 
 Penelope comes to prayer,' 
 * But Telemachus . . , 
 
 Having washed his hands of the hoary sea, 
 
 prays to IMinerva.' 
 "This is a custom of the Jews to baptize often 
 upon the couch. Therefore it is well said : 
 
 " ' Be pure, not b}^ washing, but by thinking ' " 
 ("Jud. Bap.," p. 176). 
 
 A condition of mental purity is a baptism. 
 Clement calls it " this baptism." A condition of 
 ceremonial purity, a baptism by washing the 
 hands, as done b}^ Telemachus, is a symbol, " an 
 image," of this baptism, which the heathen poets 
 learned from Moses. This hand-washing bap- 
 tism was a frequent practice, he says, among the 
 Jews. The couch on which the Jews were accus- 
 tomed thus to baptize was the dining couch, the 
 triclinium on which they reclined at meals. 
 
 2. Thcophylact, in his comment on Luke xi, 38, 
 where Jesus reproves the Pharisee who " mar- 
 velled that he was not first baptized before din- 
 ner," says: "Jesus, deriding their foolish custom — 
 I mean their purifying themselves before eating — 
 
Examples of Usage. 59 
 
 teaches that they ought to purify their souls by 
 good works; for washing the hands by ivater puri- 
 fies the body onl}^, not the soul" (Beecher, p. 
 222; Dale, "Johannic Bap.," p. 117). 
 
 3. Origeii: "The word of the precept, trul}', 
 with the feet, orders the washing with internal 
 water, announcing figurativel}'' the sacrament of 
 baptism" (" Jud. Bap.," p. 175). 
 
 4. Cyril of Jerusalem : " The high-priest first 
 washes, then sacrifices ; for Aaron was first washed, 
 then became high-priest. For how could he be 
 permitted to pray for others who was not first 
 cleansed by water? And the laver placed within 
 the tent was a symbol of baptism " (p. 175). 
 
 The design of the water in the laver was fi)r 
 the cleansing of the high-priests. But they were 
 not immersed in the laver; the water was taken 
 out of the laver for use in their cleansing. 
 
 Dr. William Smith, in his " Dictionary of the 
 Bible," edited by Professor H. B. Hackett, Vol. 
 IV. p. 2877, says that " the water was drawn out 
 b}^ taps from the laver, so that the priests might 
 be said to wash ' at,' not * in,' it." Lightfoot, 
 quoted on the same page, cites Jewish testimony 
 making " twelve cocks (epistomia) for drawing 
 off the water." The Septuagint translation of 
 Exodus XXX. 19 teaches that the water was used 
 
6o The Meaning and Power of Baptism, 
 
 for washing the hands and feet of the priests, not 
 in the laver, but out of it. " Aaron and his sons 
 shall wash their hands and feet with water out of 
 ity The water was taken " out" of the laver for 
 the washing. The English version likewise sa^-s : 
 " They shall wash their hands and feet thereat" 
 The Septuagint employs the word iiipto to denote 
 the washing of the priests in Ex. xxx. 19, a 
 word that never means " dip." The Septuagint 
 also employs the instrumental dative " with Wvi- 
 ter. " This is the more significant in contrast 
 with the preposition ijtto in the previous vci'sc: 
 "Pour water into it" (the laver). Cvi"il also 
 uses the preposition eiia, which denotes tlie means 
 of cleansing — " cleansed by water." The water was 
 not the element into zuhich they were dipped, but 
 the means by wJiich they were cleansed. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION BAPTISM. 
 
 Circumcision and baptism both denote purifica- 
 tion. The Patrists, therefore, call circumcision 
 baptism. 
 
 I. Justin Martyr: "Wash you and be clean; 
 and put away iniquities from vour souls, as God 
 commanded 3'ou to wash this washing and to 
 circumcise the true circumcision. . . . What 
 need, then, have I of circumcision, who have re- 
 
Examples of Usage. 6 1 
 
 ceived witness from God? What need is there 
 of that baptism for me, who have been baptized 
 by the Holy Spirit?" (" C. and P. B.," p. 
 540). Justin calls it "that baptism," yet in it 
 there was neither dipping, nor pouring, nor 
 sprinkling. 
 
 2. Chrysostom, Hom. xl: "There was pain 
 and trouble in the practice of that Jewish cir- 
 cumcision ; but our circumcision — I mean the 
 grace of baptism — gives cure without pain, and 
 this for infants as well as men " (Taylor's 
 " Apostolic Baptism," p. 74). 
 
 3. Justin Martyr: " We Gentile Chi'istians . . . 
 have not received tiiat circumcision which is 
 according to the flesh, but that circumcision 
 which is spiritual. . . . We have received 
 this circumcision in baptism" ("Bib. Sacra," 
 Vol. XV. p. 75). 
 
 4. Cyril : " We receive the spiritual seal, be- 
 ing circumcised through washing by the Tloly 
 Spirit. . . By the circumcision of Christ 
 being buried with him by baptism" (" Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 207). 
 
 5. Origen: "Christ came and gave to us the 
 second circumcision by the baptism of regenera- 
 tion, and purged our souls " (p. 207). 
 
62 The Meaning and Pozuei' of Baptism. 
 
 WATER BAPTIZED BY THE HOLY SPHHT. 
 
 • The Patrists did not believe tliat mere water in 
 its natural state, in any mode of its use, could effect 
 Christian baptism. They believed that the water 
 must first be baptized —/.<^., purified — by the Holy 
 Spirit, and, having- thus received a divine, spiri- 
 tual quality, it could eflect Christian baptism in 
 whatever mode applied. In this they deviated 
 from the Bible teaching', which is that water-bap- 
 tism is only a symbol of the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost. Yet the main idea which pervades all 
 their v/ritings, that baptism signifies purification,, 
 here applies in all its force. 
 
 1. Tertullian : "It is necessary, also, that the 
 water be purified and sanctified first by the priest, 
 that it may be able by ITS OWN baptism to cleanse 
 the sins of the baptized man. For the Lord sa3'S, 
 through the prophet Ezekiel, 'And I will sprinkle 
 you with pure water, and I will purify you ' " 
 ("C. and P. B.," p. 541). 
 
 By being " purified and sanctified," the water 
 is thoroughly changed in its character, and this' 
 purified condition is its " BAPTISM." 
 
 2. Ambrose : " Christ was therefore baptized, 
 not that he might be sanctified by the waters, bu* 
 
Examples of Usage. 63 
 
 that he might sanctify the ivatcrs, and by his own 
 piuity purify the stream which he touches. . . . 
 For when the Saviour is washed, the whole water 
 is cleansed /"c^r our baptism'' (p. 552). 
 
 3. Jerome: "How is the soul which has not 
 the Holy Spirit purged from old defilements? 
 For water does not wash the soul unless it \s first 
 tvashcd by the Holy Spirit, that it INIAY EE ABLE 
 SPIRITUALLY to zvash others " (p. 552). 
 
 4. TertuUian : " For neither can the Spirit oper- 
 ate without the water, nor the water without the 
 Spirit " (" Jud. Bap.," p. 197). 
 
 The conjoint agency of both water and the 
 Spirit is nccessar3\ 
 
 5. Council of Carthage: ^^ For zvatcr only, unless 
 it have the Holy Spirit also, cannot purge sins or 
 sanctify man. Wherefore they must admit the 
 Holy Spirit to be there where they say baptism 
 is, or that baptism is not where the Holy Spirit 
 is not ; for baptism cannot be zuhere the Holy Spirit 
 is not'' ("C. and P. B.," p. 548). 
 
 Dipping can be without the Holy Spirit. But 
 mere dipping is not Christian baptism in the 
 judgment of the Patrists. Dipping a person in 
 mere natural water is not Christian baptism. 
 There can be no baptism with w\atcr unless the 
 
64 The Meaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 water itself is first baptized — i.e., purified — by 
 the Holy Spirit, that it may have a baptizing 
 power. 
 
 6. Cyril of Jerusalem: ''Do not regard this 
 tvashing as by SIMPLE tuatcr, but as by the spiritual 
 grace given luith the water. . . . The siuiple 
 water, receiving the invocation of the Holy Spirit, 
 and of Christ, and of the Father, acquires the 
 POWER of sanctification " (p. 554), 
 
 The Holy Spirit communicates a spiritual qual- 
 ity to the water, giving the water power to bap- 
 tize. Merc water is insufficient. 
 
 7. Cyril of Alexandria : " We have not been 
 baptized by bare zvater, . . . but by the Holy 
 Spirit." 
 
 8. Justin Mart3'r: " Isaiah did not send you to 
 the bath, thci-c to wash away murder and other 
 sins, which 7iot all the zvater of the sea is sufficient 
 to purify. ... Be baptized as to the soul from 
 anger, and avarice, and envy, and hate, and behold, 
 the body is pure " (p. 598). 
 
 9. Jerome : " Do you offer to me THE SOUL 
 ivashcd with SLMPLE water ? . . . The bap- 
 tism of the Church without the Holy Spirit is 
 nothing " (" C. and P. B.," p. 513). 
 
 10. Epiphanius: "Christ, baptized by Jolin, 
 
Examples of Usage. 65 
 
 came to the waters, not needing washing, . . . 
 giving TW'E'si power for those who were to be per- 
 fected " (p. 552). 
 
 11. Cyril of Alexandria : "As water in a cal- 
 dron, set to the fire, receives the foixe of the fire, 
 so the water ©f baptism by the Spirit is raised to 
 a divine and ineffable virtue" (" Johannic Bap- 
 tism," p. 106). 
 
 12. Augustine: "The Holy Spirit works in 
 that water, so that those who before baptism were 
 guilty of many sins . . . merit, after baptism, 
 the kingdom of heaven " (" C. and P. B.," p. 555). 
 
 Many other examples are given by Dr. Dale in 
 his thorough discussion of this subject in " Patris- 
 tic Baptism." He also traces to its source the 
 error of uniting the Holy Spirit with the water in 
 Christian baptism. 
 
 POURING BAPTISM. 
 
 1. Jerome: "And I will pour out [or sprinkle] 
 upon you clean water. ... I will pour out 
 the clean water of saving baptism, and I will 
 cleanse them" (" Jud. Bap.," p. 196). 
 
 2. Basil JMagnus : " Elias has shown the power 
 of baptism by burning the sacrifice upon the altar 
 of burnt-offerings, not by means of fire, but by 
 
66 The Meaning and Poiver of Juiptism. 
 
 means of water, . . . When the water is 
 m3'stically poured thrice upon the altar, the lire 
 begins and kindles into a flame, as though it 
 were oil" (" C. and P. B.," p, 536). 
 
 3. Origen,on i Kings xviii. 34, where Elijah com- 
 manded water to be poured three times upon the 
 sacrifice on the altar, says: " But why is it be- 
 lieved that the coming Elias will baptize, when he 
 did not baptize what needed cleansing upon the 
 wood of the altar? . . . For he commanded 
 the priests to effect this baptism " (" C. and P. 
 
 B.,"p. 535)- 
 
 Tlie baptism was a cleansing (loutron) effected 
 by pouring water. The baptism did not consist 
 in the act of pouring, but in the effect of the water 
 which they poured. Baptism does not consist in 
 the act, but in the effect of the baptizing agency. 
 
 4. Gregory Nazianzcn : " I have three overflow- 
 ings vvdth which I will purif^^ the sacrifice, kind- 
 ling fire by water" (p. 536). 
 
 5. Ambrose: "Baptism, like a fire, consumes 
 sins, for Christ baptizes by fire a«d the Spirit. 
 You read this type in the Books of the Kings (i 
 Kings xviii. 34), where Elias put v/ood upon the 
 aUar, and said that they should throw over it 
 water from water-pots. . . . Thou, O man ! 
 
Examples of Usage. Gy 
 
 art upon the altar, who shalt be cleansed- by wa- 
 ter" (p. 537.) 
 
 6. Jerome: "And I will no more pour out 
 upon them t!ie waters of saving baptism, but 
 the waters of doctrine and of the Word of God" 
 
 (P- 534)- 
 
 7. Ambrose, on 2 Maccabees i. 20-36, " Nehe- 
 rniali commanded the Avater that was left to be 
 poured upon the great stones. When this was 
 done there was kindled a flame. ... It was 
 told the King of Persia that Neliemiah had puri- 
 fied the sacrifices therewith," sa3's : "The narra- 
 tive of the preceding event . . . betokens 
 the Holy Spirit and Christian baptism" (p. 538). 
 
 8. Bernard, speaking of the baptism of our 
 Saviour by John, says: "The, creature pours 
 water on the head of the Creator" (Fairchild, p. 
 63, note). 
 
 SPRINKLING BAPTISM, 
 
 I. Cyril of Jerusalem : " Thou seest the power 
 of baptism. Be of good courage, O Jerusalem ! 
 The Lorel will take away all thine iniquities. 
 . . . He x\\\\ sprinkle upon you clean vrater, 
 and yc shall be purified from all your sin " (" Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 196). 
 
68 The Meaning aiid Pozvcy cf Baptism. \ 
 
 < 
 
 2. Didyraus Alexan'drinus : "The very image \ 
 
 of baptism both continually illuminated and sav- j 
 ed all Israel at that time, ... as prophesied 
 Ezekiel, xxxvi. 25 : ' I will sprinkle clean water \ 
 upon you, and you shall be clean from all your ; 
 sins'; and David, Psalm 1. 9 : 'Sprinkle me with ' 
 hyssop, and I shall be clean ' " (p. 196). j 
 
 3. Jerome, in his interpretation of Ez. xxxvi. 25, i 
 thus expresses it: "I will pour out or sprinkle 
 upon you cl-^an water," using both words, cffiui- \ 
 dam sive aspcrgani, showing that the baptism does ! 
 not consist in the act, which is a matter of indif- \ 
 ference, but in the effect." He savs : " It is to be \ 
 observed that a new heart and a new spirit may ! 
 be given by the pouring and sprinkling cf zcater'' \ 
 (p. 196). 1 
 
 He thus gives emphasis to the validity of pour- ! 
 ing and sprinkling as modes of applying the bap- 
 tismal agenc}'. The baptism is a change in the | 
 spiritual condition of the soul effected by the J 
 pouring or sprinkling of water. He does not \ 
 mean that mere water can save, for he says in 
 anotherplace : "Baptism is not without the Holy : 
 Spirit" (•' C. and P. B." p. 552). 
 
 4. Petilianus: " Blush, O persecutors ! ye make j 
 martyrs like unto Christ, whom [quos], after the \ 
 
Examples of Usage, 69 
 
 water of true baptism, baptizing blood sprinkles " 
 ("C. and P. B.," p. 40). 
 
 It is the quality of the baptizing agency whicii 
 efiects the baptism, not the mode of its applica- 
 tion. It can be applied by sprinkling. 
 
 5. Ambrose, on 2 Mac. i. 20-36, where we read, 
 " When the sacrifices were laid on, Nehemiah 
 commanded the priest's to sprinkle with the water 
 both the wood and that which lay upon it. When 
 this was done . . . there was a great fire 
 kindled, . . '. the sacrifice was consumed " — 
 commenting on this, Ambrose says : " The narra- 
 tive of the preceding event, and especially of the 
 sacrifice offered by Nehemiah, betokens the 
 Holy Spirit and the baptism of Christians " (p. 
 538; " Jud. Bap.," p. 346). 
 
 6. Tertullian, speaking of heathen nations, says : 
 " They everywhere purif\' villas, houses, temples, 
 and whole cities by sprinkling water. . . 
 Here we see the work of the devil emulating the 
 things of God, since he practises even baptism 
 among his own people" (" C. and P. B." p. 532). 
 
 7. Ambrose, on clinic baptism, which was per- 
 formed by sprinkling, says : " There are not want- 
 ing sick persons who arc baptized, almost daily" 
 (P- 53^^)- 
 
70 The Aleaiiing and Pozvcr of Baptism.' \ 
 
 8. Basil Magnus, speaking of the baptism of 
 Arianthens, wiio was baptized by liis wife by i 
 sprinkling on his death-bed, calls it a purification : { 
 " He washed away all the stains of his soul at the | 
 
 .close of his life by the washing [loutron] of re- I 
 generation" (p. 501). 
 
 9. The Codex Sinaiticus has the word " sprin- 
 kled " instead of " baptized " in Mark vii. 4. It \ 
 reads : " Except they sprinkle themselves from the ' 
 market," instead of *' Except they baptize them- i 
 selves" (Tischendorf, New Testament, Leipsic, j 
 1873). In accounting for the variation, it must 
 be admitted that the copyist " saw no dulicult}^ in : 
 a baptism being effected by sprinkling." 
 
 10. Lactantius: "So, also, he would save the ' 
 Gentiles by baptism — that is, by the sprinkling of ; 
 the purifying dew'' (" Johannic Baptism," p. 317). j 
 
 11. Cyprian quotes the following passages from i 
 the Old Testament to prove that baptism by i 
 sprinkling vv'as equally valid with other modes : ' 
 " The Holy Scripture says, Ez. xxxvi. 25, 26: ' I ; 
 w^ill sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall ; 
 be cleansed from all 5-our uncleanness, and from j 
 all vour idols wmII I cleanse you; and I wdll give i 
 a new heart to you, and put a new spirit within ; 
 you ' ; likewise in Num. xix. 8, 12, 13 : . . . ' He ! 
 
Examples of Usage. yi 
 
 shall not be clean, and that soul shall be cut oil 
 from Israel, because the water of sprinkliny^ was 
 not sprinkled upon him ' ; and again, Num. viii. 5, 
 7: 'The Lord spake to Moses, saying: . . . 
 Thus shalt thou purify them : Thou shalt sprinkle 
 them with the water of purification ' ; and again, 
 Num. xix. 9 : ' The water of sprinkling is purifica- 
 tion.' WJicnceit appears thai the sprinkling of water 
 POSSESSES EQUAL VALUE with the Saving zvash- 
 ing" ("C. and P. B.," p. 524). 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 SPECIAL DISCUSSION OF SIRACII XXXIV. 30. 
 
 'T~^HE view given above is that the purification 
 -^ which Sirach calls a baptism is efiected 
 wholly by the agency of heifer-ashes. 
 
 To this view an objection has been drawn from 
 Num. xix. 19: "And the clean person shall 
 sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and 
 on the seventh day : and on the seventh day he 
 shall purily himself, and wash his clothes, and 
 bathe himself in water, and siiall be clean at 
 even." The objection is that the purification con- 
 sists either wholh', or chiefly, or in part in wash- 
 ing the clothes and bathing in water. 
 
 But this verse alone in itself is not decisive. 
 V^iewed in itself alone, it admits of more than one 
 interpretation, and it has received a diversity of 
 interpretations. When the meaning of a passage 
 is ambiguous and doubtful, the rule of interpreta- 
 tion is to resort to the context and other sources 
 f(jr aid in ascertaining its true meaning. That 
 this necessity exists in Num. xix. 19 is evident 
 72 
 
special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30. ']2i 
 
 ■rom the diversify of interpretation to which it 
 has given rise. 
 
 I. Dr. Fairbairn (" Herraeneutical Manual," p. 
 298) explains the baptism of Sirach as referring- 
 to the " purification for those who had come into 
 contact with a corpse ; and this, we learn from 
 Num. xix. 13, 19, included a threefold action- 
 sprinkling the person with water mixed with the 
 ashes of a red heifer, bathing it, and washing the 
 clothes. Plainl}^ therefore, the baptism of the 
 son of Sirach is a general term expressive of the 
 whole of these, ... all the ablutions prac- 
 tised on the occasion." 
 
 This makes the baptism a purification ; but it 
 makes the process a complex operation, "a three- 
 fold action," to which no allusion is elsewhere 
 ever made, 
 
 2. Dr. Gale makes the baptism consist chiefly 
 in washing the clothes and bathing: "A further 
 washing is necessary besides the sprinklings, 
 and this washing was the finishing of 
 the ceremony. The defiled person was to be 
 sprinkled with the holy water on the third and 
 on the seventh da}^, onl}- as a preparatory to the 
 great purification, which was to be by washing 
 the body and clothes on the seventh da}'." 
 
 This interpretation Dr. Fairbairn rejects, be- 
 
74 The JMeaniiig and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 cause it makes the " bathing at the close the 
 chief thing," while it " was evidently one of the 
 least." 
 
 The fatal objection is that it makes that " the 
 great puriiication " which is never spoken of else- 
 where as any part of the purification ; and it 
 makes that "only a preparatory to the great pu- 
 rification " which is elsewhere the only thing 
 spoken of as the purification, 
 
 3. Dr. Carson wholly excludes the agency of 
 the heifer-ashes from the baptism, and makes it 
 consist in " immersion only." It is "his dipping 
 or baptism'' (pp. 66, 320, 455). 
 
 4. Dr. Geo. D. Armstrong (" The Doctrine of 
 Baptisms," p. 72) says that the person who in 
 Num. xix. 19 was required to " wash his clothes 
 and bathe himself in water," was not the person 
 upon whom the ashes were sprinkled, but it was 
 the person who did the sprinkling. Dr. Arm- 
 strong thinks the pronoun "he" in the expres- 
 sion, " he shall purify himself," has for its antece- 
 dent " the clean person." and that this person 
 sprinkled the ashes, and then washed his own 
 clothes and bathed himself, and that the man who 
 was defiled by a dead body was only required to 
 have the heifer-ashes sprinkled upon him. 
 
 But if there be an uncertainty in the verse 
 
special Discussion of Si rack xxxiv. 30. 75 
 
 itSclf respecting the antecedent of the pronoun, 
 the context is decisive against making the clean 
 person the antecedent. The clean person, after 
 sprinkling the ashes, was only required to " wash 
 his clothes" (v. 21), but the other was required 
 to ''wash his clothes and bathe himself in water" 
 (v. 19). 
 
 This interpretation also leaves unsolved ;he 
 quer}^ why all the others who came in contact 
 with the heifer-ashes should be required to wash 
 their clothes, and some of them also to bathe, 
 while the man on whom the ashes were sprinkled 
 was alone exempt from this requirement. Would 
 not the contact with the heifer-ashes render the 
 use of water as needful for him as for them ? 
 
 5. The interpretation of Dr. Dale is that there 
 were two different kinds of defilement, from two 
 different and opposite sources : one from touch- 
 ing a dead body, the other from touching the 
 heifer-ashes ; and that these two different kinds 
 of defilement were removed respectively by 
 two different agencies. The defilement from 
 a dead body was removed by heifer-ashes, the 
 defilement from the heifer-ashes was removed by 
 water; and as the person whose purification is 
 described in Numbers xix. 19 had incurred both 
 kinds of defilement, he needed both kinds of puri- 
 
76 The Meaning and Pozvev of Baptism. 
 
 fication. From the defilement he had contracted 
 by touching a dead body he was purified by the 
 heifer-ashes sprinkled upon him. But while the 
 ashes had power to remove from him the defile- 
 ment from the touch of a dead body, they im- 
 parted to him another sort of defilement, as they 
 did to all the others with whom they came in 
 contact ; and this defilement was i^emoved by the 
 agency of water. 
 
 This is the only interpretation which is consis- 
 tent in all respects with the context, and with all 
 the facts and testimonies that relate to the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 1. There are two kinds of ceremonial defile- 
 ment mentioned in this chapter, arising from two 
 different and opposite sources. One kind of de- 
 filement resulted from touching a dead bod3^ 
 " He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall 
 be unclean seven days" (v. ii). The other kind 
 of defilement was incidental, resulting from con- 
 tact with the heifer-ashes, the water of separation. 
 '' He that toucheth the water of separation shall 
 be unclean until even " (v. 21). 
 
 2. These different kinds of defilement were i-e- 
 moved by different agencies: the one by heifer- 
 ashes, the other by watei". The defilement from 
 a dead bodv was the greater ; and for the renujval 
 
special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30. yj 
 
 of this greater defilement the elaborate prepara- 
 tion of the heifer-ashes was required. The lighter 
 and incidental defilement caused by the heifer- 
 ashes was removed by the use of water. The ex- 
 amples described by Moses in this chapter make 
 this sufficiently plain. These persons had not 
 touched a dead body, but, in preparing the heifer- 
 ashes and applying them, they contracted a defile- 
 ment, and were required to make use of water for 
 purification. 
 
 " The priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall 
 bathe his flesh in water, and . . . shall be un- 
 clean until the even " (v. 7). 
 
 " And he that burneth " the heifer " shall wash 
 his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in wa- 
 ter, and shall be unclean until the even" (v. 8). 
 " x\nd he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer 
 shall wasli his clothes, and be unclean until 
 the even " (v. 10). 
 
 Also, " he that sprinkleth the water of separa- 
 tion shall wash his clothes" (v. 21). He was 
 clean before he sprinkled the water of separation, 
 but he incurred defilement in the act of sprinkling 
 the ashes. 
 
 As all the other persons incurred defilement by 
 contact with the heifer-ashes, so the man on whom 
 the ashes were sprinkled incurred the same kind 
 
yS The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 of defilement ; and as they were required to make 
 use of water for its removal, he also was required 
 to do the same. " On the seventh day he shall 
 purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe 
 himself in water, and shall be clean at even" 
 (v. 19). He had incurred a double defilement, 
 and therefore was required to have a double 
 purification. 
 
 The defilement from touching a dead body was 
 a much deeper defilement, requiring a more effec- 
 tive agency for its removal. A blood-red heifer 
 must be slain and burnt, and her ashes must be 
 mixed with water, and this consecrated mixture 
 must be applied on the third day and on the 
 seventh day. 
 
 3. The purification from the defilement by a 
 dead body was accomplished solely by the agency 
 of heifer-ashes. 
 
 It was for this purpose that the ashes were pre- 
 pared and kept. The ashes of tlie heifer " shall 
 be kept for the congregation of the children of 
 Israel for a water of separation : it is a purifica- 
 tion for sin" (v. 9). " For an unclean person they 
 shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of puri- 
 fication for sin " (v. 17). 
 
 It was by means of the ashes that the person 
 defiled was purified and made clean. " He that 
 
special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. ^^o. 79 
 
 touchetli the dead body of any man shall be un- 
 clean seven days. He shall purify himself with 
 it on the third day, and on the seventh day he 
 shall be clean " (vs. 11, 12). 
 
 The sprinkling of the ashes was the only thing 
 for the neglect of which the penalty for non- 
 compliance with the requirement was inflicted. 
 " Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man 
 that is dead, and purifieth not himself, . . . 
 that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because 
 the vrater of separation was not sprinkled upon 
 him " (v, 13), 
 
 This is made doubly prominent by the emphatic 
 repetition of the penalty for neglect of the 
 sprinkling. " That soul shall be cut off from 
 among the congregation, because he hath defiled 
 the sanctuary of the Lord : the water of separa- 
 tion hath not been sprinkled upon him : he is un- 
 clean " (v. 20). Thus with emphasis it is made to 
 appear that the sole agency of the heifer-ashes is 
 the one essential thing \n this purification. 
 
 4. The two classes of cases are entirely distinct 
 from each other. The points of difference are 
 lunnerous and broad. 
 
 I. The sources of defilement were different: 
 the one from touching a dead body, the other 
 from contact with the heifer-ashes. 
 
So The Meaning and Pozver of Bapiisjn. 
 
 2. The duration of the two kinds of defilement 
 was different: the one lasting seven davs, the 
 other only one daw 
 
 3. The means of purification were different: 
 the one heifei'-ashes, the other water. 
 
 4. The modes of applying the different agencies 
 were different: the one by sprinkling, the other 
 b}' washing the clothes and bathing in water. 
 
 5. The number of times in which the agencies 
 must be applied were different : in the one case 
 twice, in the other only once. 
 
 6. The persons performing the operation were 
 different : in the one case another person must 
 appl}^ the purifying agency ; in the other the per- 
 son himself must do it by his own act. 
 
 7. In the one case the agency was heifer-ashes 
 only ; m the other, water onl}*. 
 
 Thus clear, broad, and distinct are the two 
 classes of cases. The failure to distinguish be- 
 tween them has been a fruitful source of obscu- 
 rity and error. 
 
 The distinction of the two classes which Moses 
 makes in the context of Num. xix. 19 determines 
 the true interpretation of that verse. It makes it 
 clear that the interpretation of Dr. Dale is the 
 true one. The sole agency for the removal 
 of the defilement from a dead bodv Nvas the 
 
Special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30. 8 1 
 
 sprinkling of the heifer-ashes. The use of watcr 
 was for the removal of another and different ile- 
 filement. 
 
 This interpretation is conhrmed by the unani- 
 mous testimon}^ of Jewish, inspired, and Patristic 
 writers. 
 
 I. The great Jewish historian Josephus, in liis 
 description of this purification, represents it as 
 accomplished solely by tlie sprinkling of heifer- 
 ashes. In his " Antiquities of the Jews," IV. iv. 
 6, he has informed us what the process of this 
 purification was. He says: "Moses purified the 
 people after this manner" ; and, having given the 
 description, he adds: "When this purification, 
 ... as it has now been described, was over." 1 
 will give Dr. Conant's translation of the text of 
 Immanucl Bekker (ed. i853, p. 33) : 
 
 " Those, therefore, who were defiled by the 
 dead bod}', casting a little of the ashes into a 
 fountain and dipping a hyssop branch, they 
 sprinkled on the third and seventh of the 
 days." 
 
 Thus, even according to the reading of Im- 
 manucl Bekker, and the translation by T. J. 
 Conant, tJic one and only thing which Vv'as done for 
 the purification of those defiled by the dead bodv 
 was sprinkling upon them the ashes prepared for 
 
82 The UleaniJig and Pozver of Baptism. 
 
 this purpose; and this is what Sirach calls a 
 baptism. 
 
 2. Philo, another Jewish writer, nearly contem- 
 porary with Josephus, and, like him, well versed 
 in the knowled^^e of Jewish customs, gives his 
 testimon}^ in harmony with that of Josephus, to 
 the nature of this Jewish rite. He says: " INIoses 
 does this philosophically ; for most others are 
 sprinkled with unmixed water, some with sea or 
 river water, others with water drawn from the 
 fountains. But Moses emplojxd ashes for this pur- 
 pose. Then, as to the manner, they put them into 
 a vessel, pour on water, then moisten branches of 
 hyssop with the mixture, then sprinkle it upon 
 those who are to be purified " ("Jud. Bap.," p. loi). 
 
 3. A greater than Josephus and Philo, the 
 Apostle Paul, has described this rite (Heb. rx. 
 13), and he teaches that the purification was ac- 
 complished by the sprinkling of heifer-ashes. 
 "The ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean 
 sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh." 
 
 4. Cyril of Alexandria, on Isa. iv. 4, says: 
 " We have not been baptized by bare water, nor 
 yet by the ashes of a heifer, (since we have been 
 sprinkled for the purification of the flesh only, ac- 
 cording to the saying of the blessed Paul), but 
 by the Hol}^ Spirit." 
 
special Discussion of SiracJi xxxiv. 30. .S3 
 
 5. The same writer, on Isa. i. 16, speaking of 
 'the water of purif3dng" as a t3'pe of baptism, 
 says: " What the water of purifying is the most 
 wise Paul shall teach, saying, The ashes of a 
 heifer sprinkling the unclean." 
 
 6. Gregory Nazianzen : " Therefore let us be 
 baptized, that we may overcome: let us partake 
 of the purifying waters . . . more sanctifying 
 than the ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, 
 and having, for the time, power for tlie purifica- 
 t<on of the body." 
 
 There is complete unanimity in the testimonv, 
 extending over the interval of five hundred years 
 from Sirach to Cyril, that the purification from 
 defilement by a dead body was accomplished by 
 the sole agency of the sprinkling of heifcr-ashes. 
 This Sirach, Cyril, and others call a baptism. 
 
 Another point in this special discussion which 
 requires attention is the translation of the last 
 word in Sirach xxxiv. 30 (loutron). Dale trans- 
 lates: ''What is he benefited by his cleansing?'' 
 Carson : " What availeth his dipping? " 
 
 The translation of Dr. Carson is shown to be 
 erroneous by the unanimous testimony of Jose- 
 phus and all the other Greek writers who refer 
 to this subject. They all with one voice describe 
 this rite as a purification effected by the sprinkling 
 
84 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 of heifer-ashes. The appeal to Num. xi. 19, iso- 
 lated from its connection with the context, proves 
 nothing, on account of the ambiguity of the pas- 
 sage. Elsewhere all the facts and all the testi- 
 monies are clear and decisive that the baptism 
 was a purification effected by the sprinkling of 
 the heifer-ashes. 
 
 The translation " cleansing," which Di\ Dale 
 gives, is sustained also by the most ample proof 
 from the usage of the Greek word. 
 
 1. Even in classical Greek it sometimes denotes 
 "offerings for purification." Hermann Cremer, 
 "Bib. Theo. Lex.," p. 418, refers to passages in 
 proof of this signification. 
 
 2. In Hellenistic Greek this is its usual signi- 
 fication, as Dale has shown in " Christie and Pa- 
 tristic Baptism," A few examples arc here se- 
 lected. Basil, speaking of the baptism of the 
 pr^tor Arianthcus, who was baptized by his 
 wife by sprinkling on his dying-bed, says : " He 
 washed away all the stains of his soul at the close 
 of his life by the wasJiing [loutron] of regenera- 
 tion " (p. 501). 
 
 This example is decisive. The " washing " 
 was not a dipping, but a purification by sprink- 
 ling, a cleansing. 
 
 Justin Martyr: " Therefore through the zvash- 
 
special Discussion of Siracli xxxiv. 30. 85 
 
 iiig [loutron] of repentance ... is the only bap- 
 tism which is able to cleanse the repenting " (p. 
 501). The word here means spiritual washing, a 
 cleansing, as Justin explains it. 
 
 The same writer saj's : " And the demons, hav- 
 ing heard of this zuashing [loutron], . . . requir- 
 ed their worshippers to sprinkle themselves " (p. 
 501). 
 
 Origen says : " That which was upon the wood 
 of the altar needed cleansing [loutron] " (" Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 328). This cleansing was effected by 
 pouring on water. 
 
 Clemens Alexandrinus : " It is called washing 
 [loutron] because we are cleansed from our sins " 
 ("C. andP. B.,"p. 553). 
 
 The same writer : " It is especially necessary 
 to wash the soul by the purifying word. . . . 
 Therefore the best zvasJiing [loutron] cleanses the 
 defilement of the soul, and is spiritual " (p. 506). 
 
 3. In New Testament Greek the word always 
 means purification, cleansing. Prof. Stuart trans- 
 lates and explains Tit. iii. 5 : " He saved iis by THE 
 WASHING [loutron] of regeneration — i.e., by that 
 purification or cleansing which regeneration con- 
 fers." In Eph. V. 26 he also translates it wasJi- 
 ?,7^, and explains it to mean " cleansing "(" Bib. 
 Rep." iii. 336). 
 
86 The Mea7iing and Pozver of Baptism. 
 
 4. The lexicons give the word the same signi- 
 fication. Robinson, in his " Lexicon of the New 
 Testament," after giving its classical meanings — 
 bath, water for bathing, zvasJiing — gives as its mean- 
 ino- in the New Testament a washins:, ablution. 
 
 Hermann Cremer, in his " Biblico-Theological 
 Lexicon of New Testament Greek," applies the 
 word " purification " as the signification of this 
 word in Eph. v. 26, Tit. iii. 5, and Sirach xxxiv. 
 30- 
 
 BATHING. 
 
 Dr. Conant, BAPTIZEIN, 1868, p. 86, trans- 
 lates the last part of Sirach xxxiv. 30: " What is 
 he profited by his bathing?" meaning by bathing 
 iuiiiicrsion. The word bathing is used in Num. xix. 
 19, " Shall bathe himself in water," and it is claimed 
 that bathing is done by immersion. The Greek 
 word louo is used in Num. xix. 19 and elsewhere 
 in the Old Testament (Sept.), and from this verb 
 the noun loutron^ which is used in Sirach xxxiv. 30, 
 is derived. The subject has been much discussed. 
 The examples quoted above, and others in Dale, 
 prove that in its religious use, both ritual and 
 spiritual, tlic word signifies purification. The 
 whole argument for immersion rests on the fact 
 that bathing was sometimes performed by immer- 
 
special Discussion of Si rack XXX iv. 30. 87 
 
 sion, overlooking \\\Q fact that it was also performed 
 in other and various modes, and not taking cog- 
 nizance of its religious usage in the sense of puri- 
 fication. ] will append some testimonies concern- 
 ing other modes of bathing. 
 
 Bathing was frequently performed in Oriental 
 countries by pouring z^nd other modes. 
 
 In Dr. William Smith's " Dictionary of Christian 
 Antiquities," 1875, Vol, I. p. 168, it is stated that 
 " one common mode of bathing among the ancients 
 was the pouring of water from vessels over the 
 body. . . . And it is remarkable that, in al- 
 most all the earliest representations of baptism 
 that have been preserved to us, this is the special 
 act represented." 
 
 In Smith's " Dictionary of Greek and Roman 
 Antiquities," third American edition, by Charles 
 Anthon, LL.D., under the article Loutron, p. 598, 
 Dr. Smitli says: "On ancient vases, on wliich 
 persons are represented bathing, we never find 
 anything corresponding to a modern bath, in 
 which persons can stand or sit ; but there is al- 
 ways a round or oval basin {\ovTt)p or Xovtypiov) 
 resting on a stand, by the side of which those who 
 arc bathing are represented standing undressed 
 and washing themselves, as is seen in the follow- 
 ing woodcut, taken from Sir \V. Hamilton's vases. 
 
88 The Aleaning aiid Power of Baptism. 
 
 The word dcvtosia upon it shows that it belong'cd 
 to a public bath." 
 
 Dr. Smith, " Die. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.," p. 143, 
 speaks of the vessel for bathing which, in the 
 age of Homer, was called asaniintJios, and says : 
 " It would appear, from the description of the 
 bath administered to Ulysses in the palace of 
 Circe, that this vessel did not contain ivatcr itself, 
 but was only used for the bather to sit in while 
 the warm water zvas poured ovci- Jiini, vv'hich was 
 heated in a large caldron or tripod, under which 
 the lire was placed, and, when sufficiently 
 warmed, was taken out in other vessels and 
 poured over the head and shoulders of the person 
 who sat in the asaminthos. . . . The vessel 
 was of polished marble, like the basins (labra) 
 which have been discovered in the Roman 
 briths." There v/ere " similar basins," says Prof. 
 Wilson, "at the porticos of Christian churches, 
 in the earlier centuries, for washing the hands." 
 
 Among the paintings in an ancient tomb at 
 Thebes, described by Sir Gardner Wilkinson 
 in his work on "The Manners and Customs 
 of the Ancient Egyptians," is one v,-hich 
 contains a representation of a lady enjoying 
 the luxury of a bath : " One attendant ic- 
 movcs the jewelry and clothes she has taken 
 
Special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30. 89 
 
 off, or suspLMids tlicm to a stand ia tlie apart- 
 ment ; another pours water from a I'asc over Iter 
 head, as the third rubs her arms and body with 
 Iicr open hands; and a fourth, seated near her, 
 holds a sweet-scented llowcr to her nose, and 
 supports her as she sits (on a carpet or mal)." 
 Wilkinson further says : " The same subject is 
 treated nearly in the same manner on some of 
 the Greek vases, the water being poured over the 
 ^bather, who kneels or is seated on the g-round. 
 The mode of bathing in Egypt is thus identified 
 with that of Greece " (" Jud. Bap.," p. 121). 
 
 I^ev. Mr. Lowenthal, missionary in India, says: 
 "The Hindoos use a small urn, called iota, with 
 which the}' bathe at the yI^qy, pouring water over 
 the body " (p. 122). 
 
 In Ovid's description of Diana's bath, he says : 
 " They pour water out of the urns " (urnis undara 
 efifundunt). 
 
 Porphyry says: " It was customary for married 
 women to purify maidens by sprinkling or affu- 
 sion, before marriages, with water taken from 
 fountains and living springs." Photius tells us 
 " that the water used for this purpose was 
 brought in a pitcher" (" C. and P. B.," p. 501). 
 The water was sometimes brought by a bo}', and 
 sometimes by a girl, as the representations on 
 
90 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 ancient monuments indicate (•'Die. of Gr. and 
 Rom. Ant.," p. 599). 
 
 Dr. Dale sa3-s : " The common way of bathing 
 among the Greeks was not by immersion, but by 
 pouring water over the body" (" C. and P. B.," p. 
 504). Prof. Stuart says of the word as used in the 
 Old Testament: "Neither ivasJiing nor bathing 
 appears to be the same as plunging or immersing; 
 for neither the word fabal, to iiiiiiicrsc^ nor the 
 word shataph, to iinindati\ is used in reference to 
 these ceremonial washings" (p. 340). "We fmd 
 no example among all the Levitical washings or 
 ablutions where immersion of the person is re- 
 quired. The word raliafs, which is ahnost uni- 
 formly employed, and which our translators have 
 rendered ivasJi and bathe, does not imply iinvier- 
 .fW7^ " (p. 341). Even Dr. Carson, near the close 
 of his discussion, says of louo: "That the word 
 does not necessarily express mode, I readily 
 admit" (p. 4S6). All the historic facts that relate 
 to the usage of the word in its different forms 
 furnish demonstration that it does not denote a 
 delinite and specific act, to dip, but is used in the 
 general sense of washing, or cleansing by an}^ 
 ot tlie different modes of applying the cleansing 
 agency. The effort to force the word in Sirach 
 xxxiv. 30 to signify a dipping is without warrant in 
 
Special Discussion of Sirach xxxiv. 30, 91 
 
 the usage of the word, and is in complete opposi- 
 tion to the universal testimony of ancient writers, 
 jMoscs, Joscphus, Fhilo, Paul, Cyril, and the rest, 
 that the loutron which Sirach calls a baptism is a 
 cleansing- by sprinkling the heifer-ashes on the 
 person needing purification. 
 
CHAPTER 1\^. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF THE QUOTATION FROM JOSE- 
 
 PIIUS. 
 
 'T~^HERE is one phrase in the quotation from 
 Josephus which is omitted in the text of 
 Immanuel Bekker. Dr. Dale refers to this 
 omission in his "Judaic Baptism," but gives 
 good I'casons ibr retaining the common read- 
 ing as given in the other critical editions and 
 in the manuscripts of the woiks of Josephus. As 
 the value of the quotation in relation to baptism 
 depends on the genuineness of the words omitted 
 b}- Bekker, I will give the reasons in proof of 
 their genuineness. I am indebted to Dr. Dale 
 for the means of proof, not only as given in his 
 book, but for the Greek and Latin quotations 
 from critical editions of Josephus. That the 
 words omitted by Bekker are genuine is proved 
 b}^ the fact that no good reason has ever been 
 given for their omission, and that they are found 
 in the manuscripts and in all the critical editions 
 of the works of Josephus, except tiiat of Bekker. 
 
 I. The reading of the passage given by Dr. 
 9a 
 
Genuineness of Quotation from josephus. 93 
 
 Dale is the common reading. This is acknow- 
 ledged by Dr. Conant, who calls it "the common 
 Greek text," "the common reading," and he 
 gives it (BAPTIZEIN, 1868, p. 33) in a note prc- 
 cisel}' as it is given by Dr. Dale. 
 
 2. William Whiston, in his translation of Jose- 
 phus, 1737, gives the whole passage, without the 
 slisfhtest intimation of a different reading:. Else- 
 where he notices the various readings in the 
 copious notes to his translation, but makes no al- 
 lusion to any variation in this passage. He had 
 ample means of knowing, for in a note, "Ant.," 
 xviii. iv. 6, he says of a certain date that it is 
 made out by " a calculation from all Joscphiis' 
 Greek copies!' He had before him, also, Hud- 
 son's critical edition, to which, he frequently 
 refers as of the highest authority, and he doubt- 
 less was satisfied with the judgment of Hudson, 
 who rejects Bekker's alteration and retains the 
 common reading. 
 
 3. Hudson, Principal of St. INIary's Hall, Ox- 
 ford, in his critical edition of the works of Jose- 
 phus, bearing date 1720, gives the reading of this 
 passage just as it is given by Dr. Dale. This 
 edition was the work of an eminent scholar, criti- 
 cally prosecuted, with voluminous and learned 
 notes. On the title-page of his edition we read : 
 
94 The JMcaniji^ and Power of Baptisjn. 
 
 "FLAVII JOSEPIII 
 OPERA OMNIA. 
 OXONIl, 
 MDCCXX. 
 
 Ad codices fere omnes cum impresses turn 
 manuscriptos diligenter recensuit, nova versione 
 donavit, et notis illustravit Joannes Hudsonnis, 
 S.T.P., Aulas Beatae Marias Virginis Principalis, 
 et Protobibliothecarius Bodleianus," 
 
 The text of Hudson's edition, it thus appears, 
 is the result of a careful collation of "almost all 
 the printed editions and manuscript copies " of 
 the works of Josephus to be found. Thus his 
 edition conforms to the printed editions and man- 
 uscript copies previously existing. 
 
 Immanuel Bekkcr, taking up a suggestion 
 which had been thrown out by Bonfr^re, erased 
 the phrase in question in his edition. The read- 
 ing of Bekkcr, translated by Conant, was given 
 chap. iii. p. 8i. Hudson had Bonfrere's sugges- 
 tion before him, thoughtfully considered it, found 
 it wanting in validity, and rejected if. 
 
 4. Nearly two centuries earlier, in 1544, the 
 critical edition of Jerome Frobcnus and Nicholas 
 Episcopius was printed at Basle, in Switzerland. 
 This edition was printed within the first century 
 after the discovery of printing. There must 
 
Gemiinencss of QiLolaiioit from Josephiis. 95 
 
 have bct-n copies of the manuscript of Josephus, 
 if not printed editions, which contained the pas- 
 sage as it stands in this edition, and whicii came 
 down from earlier periods and centuries. On the 
 title-page we read : 
 
 " FLAVII JOSEPHI OPERA, 
 HIERONYMUS FROBENUS ET NICOLAUS EPISCOPIUS. 
 BASILEiE, MDXLIIII." 
 
 The Greek text of the passage of Josephus 
 under consideration is given in this edition as 
 follows. A single sentence from the preceding 
 
 period is for a special reason prefixed : 
 
 '^vkov jitdpivov eii jxeaov €ju/3(xXXova'i to nvp, 
 Hai vffffcjTrov, noii cpoivinrov i'piov. . . . Tov? ovv 
 art 6 vejipov j-is/xiaff/ievov?, r?/? ricppa? oXiyov ei^ 
 7[7]y7)v evievrei uai vGGcoTtov, (SaTttiGavrei rs 7iai 
 rff? t£cppa? Tavr?}? £iS Ttrjyip^, ippaivov tpirjj iial 
 i(3dofXJ] rc5r ypiepc^v • uai nadapoi' to Xoircov i/ffav. 
 Tovro de ?iai nareXdovcji ei^rd^ uXijpovxioci Ttpofflt- 
 a^e Ttouiv. 
 
 The entire text as given above is the same, 
 without the change of a single word, in both 
 Hudson's edition of 1720 and the Basle edition of 
 1544. The sole difference is that the comma after 
 ^^ 7T7]yi'}v^^ is the punctuation of Hudson; there is 
 no mark of punctuation after this word in the 
 " Basilese " edition. The Greek colon after 
 '■'■i]}.ifpc^v''^ is also that of Hudson; the punctuat- 
 ing mark in the " Basilecc " is a comma. The 
 
g6 T/ij M:anlng and Pow:r of Baptism. 
 
 difference is very minute, and has no effect upon 
 I lie meaning". 
 
 5. And now what reason is ofiven for omittino- 
 a part of this text? It is found in all the manu- 
 scripts and in all the printed editions of Jose- 
 phus, except that of Bekker. The erasure of 
 v/ords from an ancient writer cannot be justi- 
 fied by any light reason. Jacques Bonfrere, a 
 Jesuit, in his Latin "Commentary on the Pen- 
 tateuch," A.D. 1625, failing to interpret Num. 
 xix. 19 so as to elicit a meaning tliat seemed to 
 harmonize with the common reading of the pas- 
 sage in Josephus, suggested the omission of the 
 phrase ra ua\ r?/? rt(ppa<; ravTij^ ei; mjyj'jv. Two 
 hundred years later Immanucl Bekker, in his 
 edition of Josephus, too hastily adopted the sug- 
 gestion of Bonfrere. Instead of such mutilation 
 of an ancient author, the more scholarly method 
 would have been to seek a better understanding- 
 of the real meaning of both Moses and Josephus. 
 But, Ave ask, what is the reason given for this 
 erasure? "Some words," it is said, "are re- 
 peated." The common text reads: " Putting a 
 little of the ashes and a hyssop-branch into a 
 spring, and baptizing of this ashes [put] into the 
 spring." 
 
 The reason given is not a good one. There is 
 
Gejvuineness of Quotation from Joscphus. 97 
 
 no repetition in the thought. The clause in 
 which the words "ashes" and "into the spring" 
 are repeated, expresses an additional thought, and 
 this additional thought is rj-j-r/^/M/ to the descrip- 
 tion of the process of purification. Josephus first 
 tells us how the ashes were prepared for use, and 
 then he tells us how. they were used. First they 
 prepare the ashes for use by mixing them with 
 spring-water. When thus prepared, the}' make 
 use of them for purifjnng the persons defiled. 
 There was a good and sufficient reason for the 
 repetition of the words, and Josephus employs 
 the expression of design. Only four Greek words 
 are repeated, and between them is a new word 
 which shows that Josephus liad a reason for using 
 this expression. Common ashos would not be 
 suitable for the work of purification. Therefore 
 Josephus says : " They sprinkle the defiled with 
 this ashes " — i.e., the ashes which had been mixed 
 with the spring-water. Thus, when we look be- 
 yond the mere words to the thought, and per- 
 ceive the facts of the narration, the objection 
 wholly disappears. Such a shallow reason as this 
 for the erasure of words from the works of an 
 ancient author cannot find acceptance with con« 
 sideratc scholars. It would make havoc with 
 ancient and modern writings. In the very next 
 
98 The JMeaning and Pozvcr of Baptism. 
 
 chapter of Joscphus, tlic expression, "tlie He- 
 brews," occurs four times in one sentence. If 
 words are to be struck out for such a reason, 
 authors would be mutilated without mercy at the 
 arbitrary will of any one who cither does not un- 
 derstand a passage, or who v/islies to get rid of 
 words which he does not like to accept. 
 
 6. There are other internal reasons in the 
 Greek ot Josephus which scholars give for re- 
 jecting the change in the common reading which 
 Bontrcre proposes, and for rejecting the punctua- 
 tion introduced to sustain it. One reason is 
 found in the change which it makes in the style 
 of Josephus as shown in the immediately preced- 
 ing passage: "They cast cedar wood into the 
 midst of the fire, and hyssop and scarlet wool." 
 Here, in the Greek sentence (the Greek idiom 
 being unlike tlie English, as Greek scholars will 
 perceive), one accusative precedes and another 
 follows the Greek verb. The same Greek idiom 
 appears, as we should naturally expect, in the 
 succeeding passage (although it cannot be shov/n 
 in the translation) : " Introducing a little of the 
 ashes into the spring [water], and hyssop." But 
 Bonfr^re breaks up this harmony by liis erasure 
 and by connecting " hyssop " with " ftcxTtriGavTeg." 
 Other reasons in the Greek style of Josephus 
 
Genuineness of Quotation from fosephns. 99 
 
 are given, but it is not needful liere to discuss 
 them. 
 
 7. Hudson found in one edition or manuscript 
 whicli he examined a preposition supplied b}' the 
 editor or cop3'ist, which shows that that editor 
 did not accept the judgment of Bonfrcrc. Hud- 
 son says: "Est qui legit ftcxTXTiaixvTE? fiard 6h 
 rvb ricppa?,'' etc. This editor or copyist, by in- 
 serting this Greek preposition, indicates that he 
 regarded the ashes to be under the control of 
 §a7txiaavrEi, " baptizing ivitJi this ashes." But 
 there is no need of a preposition to convey the 
 meaning of Josephus. In conformity with a 
 common ride of Greek grammar, he employs the 
 genitive case without the preposition to denote 
 the material by means of which the purification 
 was effected. " The origin, source, and material 
 are put in the genitive " (Crosby, Greek Grammar, 
 sec. 412). The ashes are the material for accom- 
 plishing the purification. The translation of 
 Dale gives the true meaning: " Baptizing by this 
 ashes, . . . they sprinkle on the third and 
 seventh day" (p. 387). 
 
 WILLIAM WIIISTON'S TRANSLATION OF JOSEPHUS. 
 
 " When, therefore, any persons were defiled by 
 a dead bodA', they put a little of these ashes into 
 
lOO The Aleanhig a7id Power of Baptism. 
 
 spring- water with hyssop, and, dipping part of 
 these ashes in it, they sprinkled them with it, 
 both on the third day and on the seventh, and 
 after that they were clean. This he enjoined 
 tliem to do also when the tribes should come into 
 their own land." This version is not quoted by 
 genuine scholars in tlic baptismal controversy ; 
 but as it has been quoted against Dale, and is 
 liable to be quoted so again by those who have 
 onl)' a supcrhcial knowledge of the subject, the 
 following reasons for rejecting it are here repub- 
 lished from " The Reviewer Reviewed." 
 
 1. The ashes, even in Whiston's translation, 
 were already put into the spring, mixing with 
 water, and therefore ready for use, before he came 
 to what he calls " dipping part of these ashes in 
 it." Why, then, does he speak of dipping part 
 of these ashes in it when they were already 
 in ? 
 
 2. The w^ord "part" in the phrase "dipping 
 part of these ashes " is not in the original. It is 
 an interpolation made by the translator without 
 the knowledge or consent of Josephus. 
 
 3. The idea of "dipping ashes" is absurd. 
 Moses speaks of dipping the hyssop-branch into 
 tlie water of separation preparatory to sprinkling 
 the defiled; but the idea of " dipping ashes " is 
 
Gemtineness of Quotation from yoscphus. loi 
 
 one for which neither IMoses nor Josephus is re- 
 sponsible. 
 
 4. Hard pressed by this absurdity, Dr. Carson 
 (p. 289) says: "The ashes must have been put 
 into the water in a bag, as in cookery." And 
 how much better does this make it ? The whole 
 idea of dipping ashes, and doing it by putting 
 them into a bag, is a fiction invented to prop a 
 modern theory which conflicts with the descrip- 
 tion given of this rite in the original language of 
 Josephus. 
 
 A translation encumbered by such difficulties I 
 reject, and adopt the translation of Dale, which 
 is true to every word of the Greek, and gives a 
 meaning free from absurdity. . . . 
 
 As Whiston was mistaken, in his philosophy 
 when he maintained that the deluge of Noah was 
 caused by the tail of a comet, and as he was mis- 
 taken in his interpretation of prophecy when he 
 predicted that the millennium would commence 
 in 1766 ("New Am. Cyc," XVT. 394), so, in his 
 translation of this passage, he has been untrue 
 to the Greek of Josephus, and misled the mere 
 English reader by a translation which is absurd. 
 
 The quotation from Josephus is genuine, and is 
 rightly translated b}^ Dr. Dale. It gives a two- 
 fold testimony to the current use of the Greek 
 
102 The I\[cajiing and Pozver of Baptisj7i. 
 
 woi'd baptizo among- the Jewish people t(D denote 
 ceremonial purification b}^ the sprinkling of 
 heifer-ashes. The complete description which it 
 gives, even in the reading of Immanuel Bekker, 
 of the purification which Sirach calls a baptism, 
 furnishes absolute demonstration that this bap- 
 tism is effected by the sole agency of the heifer- 
 ashes. It also gives the direct testimony of Jo- 
 sephus to the same truth; for the whole passage 
 is genuine, according to the universal testimony 
 of the manuscripts of Josephus, and all the criti- 
 cal editions of Josephus, except that of Bekker ; 
 and the reason which Bekker gives for the era- 
 sure is so unsubstantial that it is rejected b}'' the 
 most competent and impartial scholars, like 
 Hudson, as wholly invalid, and the original and 
 common readinof is retained. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 BAPTISMS IN THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 In the third century before Christ the Hebrew 
 Scriptures were translated into the Greek lan- 
 guage, and in this Greek Version the Apocryphal 
 books of the Old Testament were incorporated. 
 It is called the Septuagint because its translation 
 was attributed to severity Jewish elders. It is 
 written in IiellcniL,tic Greek, or, as it is some- 
 times called, Jewish Greek, and is the oldest 
 monument of that kind of Greek extant. " The 
 basis of the Hellenistic language of the New 
 Testament," says Alexander Buttmann, " is the 
 so-called Macedo-Alexandrian dialect, which be- 
 came current in the time of the Ptolemies, es- 
 pecially at Alexandria, then the scat of culture." 
 This became the vernacular language of the Greek- 
 speaking Jews after they lost the popular use of 
 the Hebrew in tl:e time of the Babylonish cap- 
 tivity, and after the conquest of Alexander the 
 Great had brought them under Grecian swa}'. 
 The pecuhajitics of Hellenistic Greek as SToken 
 
1 04 The Meajting and Power of Baptism, 
 
 by the Jews arose from the expression of Hebrew 
 ideas and Hebrew modes of thought in the Greek 
 language. This gave a Hebrew coloring and a He- 
 brew signification to a multitude of Greek words. 
 This Hellenic dialect was known and spoken 
 throughout the Roman Empire by the Hellen- 
 istic Jews who adopted the Greek civilization. 
 
 As the New Testament was v/ritten in Hellen- 
 istic and not in classic Greek, and as a large 
 number of classic Greek words underwent an 
 essential modification in their use by the Jews 
 and the Christian fathers, who received the Scrip- 
 tures from the Jews, the special usage of words 
 like baptizo in Hellenistic Greek requires especial 
 attention. It has been a great error to look ex- 
 clusively to the ciassic usage of this word, and 
 almost wholly overlook its Hellenistic usage. 
 By fastening the attention on one single meanitig 
 of the word in its primary classic use, and by 
 faihng to give due consideration to those numer- 
 ous passages which, with equal clearness, teach a 
 secondary use, the truth is kept out of sight. 
 
 The historic origin of the signification to purify ' 
 in the Greek word baptizo is found in the employ- 
 ment of this word by the Jews to express the 
 purificatory rites enjoined in the Hebrew Scrip- 
 tures. The usage of this word by the Patrists 
 
Baptisms in the Scptuagint. 105 
 
 has been illustrated in the second chapter. It is 
 used a few times in the Scptuagint, and, as the 
 Scptuagint was in the hands of the Greek-speak- 
 ing Jews, and is frequent!}'- quoted in the New 
 Testament, the usage of the word in that Version 
 calls for attention. 
 
 The Greek words bapto and baptizo in the 
 Scptuagint have the same general characteristics 
 as in the classics, while baptizo has its special 
 secondar}^ meaning, purification. The differences 
 and resemblances of these words are the same as 
 in classic usage. Bapto has its primary and some 
 of its secondary significations, but in both its pri- 
 mary and in its secondar}' meanings it is clearly 
 distinguished from baptizo. From the failure to 
 observe this distinction, it has- often been treated 
 as if it were employed to denote the rite of bap- 
 tism. But it is never thus used in the Scptuagint 
 or in the New Testament. It is never used as a 
 synon3^m of baptizo, nor is it ever applied to the 
 ordinance of baptism. It occurs in the following 
 passages: Ex. xii'. 22; Lev. iv. 6, 17, ix. 9, xi. 32, 
 xiv. 6, 16, 51; Num. xix. 18; Deut. xxxiii. 24; 
 Josh. iii. 15; Ruth ii. 14; i Sam. xiv. 27; 2 Kings 
 viii. 15 ; Job ix. 31 ; Ps. Ixviii. 23 ; Ezek. xxiii. 15 ; 
 Dan. iv. 33, V. 21 ; also, Nev/ Testament, Luke xvi. 
 24; John xiii. 26; Rev. xix. 13, 
 
1 06 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 In its primary meaning it expresses a specific 
 and definite act, to dip. " The priest shall dip his 
 finger in the blood, and sprinkle" (Lev. iv. 0). 
 
 " A clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in 
 the water, and sprinkle" (Num. xix. iS). 
 
 It is also used in a secondary sense, as it is in 
 the classics, to express condition. In Ezek. xxiii. 
 15 it signifies "dyed attire," or, as Prof. Stuart 
 translates it, " colored turbans " (p. 307). This is 
 the same as its classic signification, to dye. 
 
 Dan. iv. 33, v. 21 : " His bod}' was ivct with 
 the dew of heaven " ; or, as Stuart translates it, 
 moistened — a meaning which it has in the classics. 
 Dr. Carson (p. 35) contends for the literal mean- 
 ing. Prof. Stuart translates it " smear or moisten " 
 in Ex. xii. 22 and Lev. iv. 17, xiv. 16, where the 
 Seventy, by using the Greek preposition ano with 
 the genitive case, evidently " meant to give an- 
 other shade of meaning to the expression" from 
 what the}' would have done if they. had translated 
 by the preposition iU — into — with the accusative 
 case, as in Lev. iv. 6, ix. 9, xi. 32, xiv. 6, and 
 other places. 
 
 As the word bapto in its primary signification 
 is the Greek word employed in actual usage, both 
 in the classics and in the Scriptures, to express the 
 act denoted h\; dip ; and as this Greek word is 
 
Baptisms in the SeptiLagint. 107 
 
 never applied to the ordinance of baptism ; and as 
 the two Greek words bapto and baptizo are never 
 interchanged with each other; and as there is no 
 need of two words to express exactly the same 
 thing, it is wholly without reason, as well as de- 
 void of examples of usage, to make baptizo have 
 the same identical signification with bapto. The 
 distinction which Greek usage makes between 
 these two words in their respective significations 
 should be kept clear. 
 
 SIRACH XXXIV. 30. 
 
 Baptizo is not often found in the Septuagint ; 
 but its use in Sirach xxxiv. 30 is of eminent va!uc, 
 as it relates, not to a single occurrence, but to a 
 national custom of daily occurrence during the v.diole 
 fifteen hundred years of the life of the Jewish peo- 
 ple. By the Law of INIoses an}- person contracted 
 ceremonial defilement by touciiing a dead body, 
 and he received ceremonial purification by having 
 the water of separation sprinkled upon him on 
 the third day and on the seventh day. This pu- 
 rification Sirach calls a baptism, and millions of 
 these baptisms were performed as generation after 
 generation died and passed away. 
 
 The translation of this important passage by 
 
io8 The Meaning and Power of Baptls77i. 
 
 Dr. Dale has already been given. Prof. Stuart 
 gives it the same meaning. He translates the 
 word " cleansed " .• " He who is CLEANSED from a 
 dead [body] and toucheth it again, what does he 
 profit by his washing?" ("Bib. Rep.," Vol. HI. 
 p. 308). 
 
 As this important passage has given rise to 
 much discussion in respect to some related words, 
 and as these related words have a varied bearing 
 on the subject, I will give a list of them. The 
 Greek word ioiitron, at the close of the quotation, 
 comes from the Greek word I0210, wdiich the Sev- 
 enty often use to translate the Hebrew word 
 rahats. These words do not denote a specific act, 
 as to dip, but they express the generic idea to zoash, 
 to bathe, to cleanse. The use of the word " wash " 
 and " bathe " in the English Version also requires 
 attention. 
 
 I. The Hebrew word rahats occurs in the fol- 
 lowing places : Gen. xviii. 4, xix, 2, xxiv. 32, 
 xliii. 24, 31 ; Ex. ii. 5, xxix. 4, 17, xxx. iS, 19, 20, 
 21, xl. 12, 30, 31, 32; Lev. i. 9, viii. 6, xiv. 8,9, 
 XV. 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, II, 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, 27, xvi. 4,' 
 24, 26, 28, xvii. 15, 16, xxii. 6; Num. xix. 7, 8, 19; 
 Dcut. xxi. 6, xxiii. 1 1 ; Judges xix. 21 ; Ruth iii. 3 ; 
 I Sam. XXV. 41 ; 2 Sam. xi. 2, 8, xii. 20; i Kings 
 xxii. 38; 2 Kings v. 10, 12, 13 ; 2 Chron. iv. 6 bis ^ 
 
Baplisjus in the Scptitagint. 109 
 
 Ps. xxvi. 6, Iviii. 10, Ixxiii. 13; Prov. xxx. 12; 
 Cant. V. 3, 12 ; Isa. i. 16, iv. 4 ; Ezck. xvi. 4, 9 = 65. 
 This Hebrew word is translated by three Greek 
 words in the Septuagint — louo, nipto, and pliino. 
 These Greek words are also used occasionally to 
 ti'anslate other Hebrew words. 
 
 2. The Greek word loiio occurs in the Septuagint 
 in the following places : Ex. ii. 5, xxix. 4, xl. 12; 
 Lev. viii. 6, xiv. 8, 9, xv. 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 16, 
 18, 21, 22, 27, xvi. 4, 24, 16, 28, xvii. 15, 16, xxii. 6; 
 Num. xix. 7, 8, 19; Deut. xxiii. ii ; Ruth iii. 3; 
 2 Sam. xi. 2, xii. 20 ; i Kings xxii. 38 ; 2 Kings 
 V. 10, 12, 13 ; Ps. vi. 6; Isa. i. 16 = 38. 
 
 3. The Greek word nipto is used in Gen. xviii. 
 4, xix. 2, xxiv. 32, xliii. 24, 31 ; Ex. xxx. 18, 19, 20, 
 21 ; Lev. XV. 11, 12; Deut. xxL 6; Judges xix. 21 ; 
 I Sam. xxv. 41 ; 2 Sam. xi. 8 ; 2 Chron. iv. 6 ; Ps. 
 xxvi. 6, Iviii. 10, Ixxiii. 13 = 19. 
 
 4. The Greek word pliuio is used in Ex. xxix. 
 17; Lev. i. 9, xiv. 8, 9, xv. 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 17, 
 22, 27; Num. xix, 7, 8, 10, 19, 21 ; 2 Chron. iv. 6; 
 Isa. iv. 4 =: 21. 
 
 In the English Version the Hebrew word is 
 sometimes translated zvasJi and sometimes batiic. 
 
 5. It is translated ivasJi in Gen. xviii. 4, xix. 2, 
 xxiv. 32, xliii. 24, 31 ; Ex. ii. 5, xxix. 4, 17, xxx. 
 18, 19, 20, 2T, xl. 12. 30, 31, 32 ; Lev. i. 9, viii. 6, 
 
I lo The Meaning and Pozve?' of Baptism. 
 
 xiv. 8, 9, XV. i6, XVI. 4, 24, xxii, 6; Deut. xxi. 6 
 xxiii. 11; Judges xix. 21; Ruth iii. 3; i Sam. 
 XXV. 41 ; 2 Sam. xi. 2, 8, xii. 20; i Kings xxii. 3S ; 2 
 Kings V. 10, 12, 13; 2 Cliron. iv. 6 bis ; Ps. xxvi. 
 6, Iviii. 10, Ixxiii. 13 ; Pro v. xxx. 12 ; Cant. v. 3, 
 12; Isa. i. 16, iv. 4; Ezek. xvi. 4, 9 = 48. 
 
 6. It is translated bathe in Lev. xv. 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 
 II, 13, 18, 21, 22, 27, xvi. 26, 23, xvii. 15, 16; Num. 
 xix. 7, 8, 19 = 18. 
 
 The Hebrew word is translated ivasJi nearly 
 three times as often as it is translated bathe. 
 " Why our translators have rendered the word 
 ivasJi in one case, and batJie in another," says 
 Stuart, " it is difficult to see." He adds: "Nei- 
 ther ivastiiug wor battling appears to be the same as 
 plunging ov immersing''' (p. 340). The word is ap- 
 plied to washing the face, the hands, the feet, and 
 sometimes the whole body. It docs not express 
 modal action. Nothing depends on the manner of 
 using the Vv'ater. It does not express a specific 
 act, to dip, but the general idea of washing. It 
 is applied to washing the face in Gen. xliii. 31 ; 
 the hands in Deut. xxi. 6, Ps. xxvi. 6, Ixxiii. 13; 
 the feet in Gen. xviii. 4, xix. 2, xxiv. 32, xliii. 
 24, Judges xix. 21,1 Sam. xxv. 41 ; and the hands 
 and feet in Ex. xxx. 19, 20, 21. Prof. Stuart says : 
 *' We fmd no example among all the Levitical 
 
Baptisms in the Scptnagint. 1 1 1 
 
 washings or ablutions where immersion of the 
 person is required " (p. 341). Dr. Dale says : 
 " There is no evidence of Jewish ritual purifica- 
 tion through all the period of the Law — fifteen 
 hundred years — by dipping the entire person in 
 water" (" Jud. Bap.," p. 366). 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF JUDITH. 
 
 Judith xii. 7 : " And baptized herself in the camp 
 at the fountain of water." 
 
 This patriotic lady, the heroine of the stor}', 
 noted for her beaut}', her piety, and her courage, 
 had undertaken the deliverance of her native city, 
 Bethulia, in the north of Palestine, from the siege 
 of the Assyrian army. Making due preparation, 
 she went, accompanied by her maid, to the camp 
 of the enemy. She obtained an introduction to 
 Holofernes, the Assyrian general, and, to cover 
 her design, offered to give him such information 
 that he could easily capture the cit}'. She scrupu- 
 lously declined to eat at his table, and partook 
 only of her own provisions. She also obtained 
 permission to go out at night into the valley for 
 prayer.' As a preparation for pra3'er, she purified 
 herself by the use of spring-water. This puri- 
 fication was her baptism. The passage is thus 
 
1 1 2 The Meaning and Pcnver of Baptism. 
 
 translated by Prof. Stuart: '' She zvent ont by m'ght 
 into the valley of Bcthittia, rt;.v^ WASHED HERSELF in 
 the canip at the foujitain of iua:'er'' (p. 30S), Tiiis 
 gives the true meaning. But Dr. Carson trans- 
 lates, ''She dipped herself (p. yy). Dr. Conant 
 translates it "immersed herself," and he says: 
 " There was evidentl}' no lack of water for the im- 
 mersion of the body after the Jewish manner — 
 namely, by v/alking into the water to the proper 
 depth, and then sinking down till the whole body 
 was immersed" (p. 85). 
 
 The signification which these writers claim has 
 not a single circumstance in its favor in the narra- 
 tive, and it is excluded by the very language of 
 the narrator, and b}' all the circumstances under 
 which the baptism took place. 
 
 1. No act IS expressed in the narrative, but 
 the condition of purification is expressed. " She 
 came in clean" (v. 9). As proof has been given 
 from usage, clear, direct, decisive, and abundant, 
 that the word was in current use to denote puri- 
 fication, it will naturally have its usual significa- 
 tion here. 
 
 2. The idea of immersion is cxeluded by t!ie 
 very language of the narrator. She baptized her- 
 self/// tJie camp AT tlie fountain. She did not bap- 
 tize herself in the fountain, but at the fouiitain. 
 
Bapiis77ts in the Septnagint. 1 13 
 
 The same identical expression in the Gicck is 
 used in chap. vii. 3: " The army camped in the 
 t valley near Bethulia, by the fountain," In both 
 ])laces the narrator employs the same Greek ex- 
 pi-ession, ini rfj; 7r?jy?)? — at tJie fountain. As tlie 
 army, 170,000 Ibotmen and 12,000 horsemen, did 
 not camp in the fountain, but at or by the foun- 
 tain, so this Jewish lady did not baptize herself 
 in the fountain, but, as the narrator says, <?/ the 
 fountain. 
 
 3. As the writer does not say that Judith dipped 
 herself in the spring, but baptized herself in the 
 camp at the spring, so the presence of the sol- 
 diers in the camp by the spring precludes the idea 
 of " the immersion of the body " of this Jewish 
 lady in the fountain. We are informed that 
 Holofernes, a short time previous, " came to the 
 fountains . . . and took them, and set garri- 
 sons of men cf zvar over them'' (vii. 7). With great 
 appropriateness, as well as force, does Prof. 
 Stuart say : "Into the fountain in the midst of 
 the camp it is not probable that she plunged " (p. 
 308). Dr. Fairbairn sa3's : " Immersion is ex- 
 cluded by the publicity of the scene, as well as b}" 
 the relation indicated to the fountain " (p. 298). 
 
 4. The water of the fountain was used for the 
 purpose of drinking (vii. 13, 20, 21, 22). This in- 
 
Ill The T\lea}i{riO and Pozvcr of B a N ism. 
 
 creases the incredibility of the i-Jea that the foun- 
 tain would also be used for " the immersion of 
 the bodw ' The two ideas are incompatible by 
 their vei'y rcpulsiveness. 
 
 5. The water of the fountain was ptire water, 
 and this gave it the quality requisite for ceremo- 
 nial purification. Dr. Conant sa3-s : " She went 
 to the spring, because she had there the means of 
 immersing- herself. An}^ other use of water for 
 purification could have been made in tlie tent." 
 
 The reply to this is twofold: First, if immer- 
 sion were the object, she could have had enough 
 for that purpose in the tent. Second, it was pure 
 spring-w^xtQT that she needed. The quality of the 
 spring- water was the reason why she went to the 
 spring. If she would not even eat the provisions 
 ol the Gentiles, neither could the water furnished 
 in Gentile vessels by imclean hands answer the 
 pui-pose of ceremonial purification. It was a re- 
 quirement of the Jewish Law that the water for 
 litual purification should be "living water" (Lev. 
 xi\\5o, 52; Num. xix. 17). Joscphus employs 
 the same word spring or fountain to denote the 
 water required for a ceremonial purification. 
 Tlicre is a cleansing quality in pure water by 
 which it lias a power to baptize ceremonially or 
 symbolically in whatever wa}' applied. 
 
Bap/ ! 3 VIS in tJie Sepiiiagint. 1 1 5 
 
 6. Tlicie was a [general custom in Oriental coun- 
 tries to wash the hands before prayer, whicli b}' Cle- 
 ment is called a baptism. Clement calls the hand- 
 washing- of Te'.emachusa baptism, referring to Ho- 
 mer's statemenL that " Telemachus, having washed 
 his hands of the hoar_y sea, prayed to INlinerva." 
 
 Hesiod admonishes "never with unwashed 
 hands" to worship "Zeus or the other immor- 
 tals." lie also forbids to pass "a stream on foot 
 before washing the hands in it, with prayer " 
 (Smith, " Die. Christ. Ant.," Vol. I. p. 758). 
 
 Ovid teaches " the washing of hands, and the 
 sprinkling of the head with water, before 
 prayer " (" Jud. Bap.," p. 374). 
 
 Aristeas says : " It is customar}^ for all the Jews 
 to wash their hands with sea-water when they 
 would pray to God" (p. 374). 
 
 Philo sa3-s : " It is the custom of nearly all oth- 
 ers to sprinkle themselves with pure watei", many 
 with that of the sea, some with that of rivers, and 
 some v.'ith that which, in vessels, they have drawn 
 up from wells" (p. 374). 
 
 Chrysostom says: " It is the custom for fountains 
 to be placed in the courts of houses of prayer, 
 that they who arc going to pray to God may first 
 wash their hands, and so life them up in prayer" 
 (" Die. Christ. Ant.," I. p. 759). 
 
1 1 6 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. \ 
 
 i 
 
 There is no "Jewish custom of walking- into \ 
 
 the water to the proper depth, and then sinking ' 
 down till the whole body is immersed " ; but the 
 
 custom of washing the hands before prayer was ; 
 
 an Oriental custom of wide and general preva- , 
 
 lence, of which more examples are given in i 
 
 Smith's " Dictionary of Christian Antiquities." j 
 
 ISA. XXI. 4: i 
 " Iniquity baptizes me." j 
 This is an exainple of the secondai-y use of the 
 word, expressing a specific condition, correspond- 
 ing to the nature of the baptizing power. The 1 
 specific influence of wine drunk is to intoxicate. 
 The specific influence of an opiate drug is to ! 
 stupefy. The specific influence of pure water is \ 
 to purify. The specific influence of iniquity over ' 
 a person waked up to a consciousness of guilt is 
 to terrify. The Hebrew word which the Septua- \ 
 gint translates "baptiae" means to affriglit. The ' 
 English Version of the Hebrew is, " Fearful ness I 
 affrights me." This condition of terror the Sep- : 
 tuagint expresses by the word baptize : " Iniquity i 
 baptizes me "—i.e., brings me into a condition of ' 
 terror. We cannot translate the word by a verb ; 
 of modal action. We cannot say, " Iniquity i 
 pours me" (Williams), or "Iniquity dips me," ! 
 
Baptisms in the Septiiagint. 1 1 7 
 
 as the theory of Dr. Carson requires. lie him- 
 self is here obliged to abandon his modal word 
 and say : " His sin . . . sunk him in misery," 
 and "would sink him eternall}', ... if not 
 delivered by that which is represented in the 
 baptism of Christians " (p. 86). Even so. The 
 word baptizo does not itself withdraw that which 
 it places under the power of the baptizing' cle- 
 ment. The condition of baptism has no self-ter- 
 mination. It may continue " eternally." The 
 word does not mean dip — putting an object into 
 a fluid or any element for a moment, and then 
 taking it out ; it leaves its object under the 
 power of the element, where it would remain 
 without limit of duration, unless some other influ- 
 ence should take it out of that condition. 
 
 In this instance the prophet is describing the 
 scene at the feast of Belshazzar in Bab3'lon, at 
 the time of the capture of the city by Cyrus. As 
 the king gazed upon the handwriting on the wall 
 and read his doom, a consciousness of his guilt 
 sent terror to his heart. '^Iniquity baptizes vie'' 
 " brings me into a complete condition of terror^ 
 The passage is easy of explanation on Dale's 
 theory, that baptizo expresses condition, the nature 
 of the condition being determined by tiie nature 
 cf the baptizing power. 
 
1 18 The Meaning and Power of Baptism, 
 
 2 KINGS V. 14 : 
 
 " Then went lie down, and baptized hiinself 
 seven times in Jordan." 
 
 The Hebrew word in tins passage is tabal, 
 whose primary and most frequent meaning is to 
 dip, and so the English Version translates the word. 
 But the Septuagint employs the word baptizo, 
 and the question is whether they used the word 
 in this place to denote the definite act to dip, or 
 in the secondary signification to purify. There 
 are reasons for believing that they used it in the 
 secondary meaning. 
 
 I. In all other places where the Hebrew word 
 tabal is used in its primary signification, to dip, the 
 Seventy use the Greek word bapto. They employ 
 bapto to translate tabal in Ex. xii. 22; Lev. iv. 
 6, 17, ix. 9, xiv. 6, 16, 51; Num. xix. 18; Deut. 
 xxxiii. 24; Josh. iii. 15; Ruth ii. 14; i Sam. xiv. 
 27; 2 Kings viii. 15; Job ix. 31 — fourteen times. 
 Bapto, then, is their uniform word elsewhere to 
 express the primary signification ot the Elebrew 
 word. The use of a different word in this place 
 indicates a difference in their understanding of 
 the idea to be conveyed. They must have had 
 some reason for choosing this word rather than 
 the other. They rejected the word bapto, to dip, 
 and selected baptizo; and for the rejection of the 
 
Baptisms in the Septuagint. 1 1 9 
 
 usual word and the selection of a different word 
 they must have had a reason in the view they 
 took of the different significations of th.c two 
 words. 
 
 2. This is confirmed by the fact that in other 
 passages they recognized a secondary meaning 
 to the Hebrew word tabal, and selected a Greek 
 word that Avould express tlie change in the mean- 
 ing. We have an example of this secondary use 
 of tabal in Gen. xxxvii. 31, where, in the judg- 
 ment of the Seventy, the Hebrew word tabal has 
 the secondary meaning to stain. In that passage 
 they reject the word bapto and select the Greek 
 word moluno, to stain : " And the}' took Joseph's 
 coat, and killed a kid of the goats, and stained the 
 coat with the blood." 
 
 There are two facts in their translation which 
 show that they did not understand that the coat 
 was " dipped in the blood," as the English Ver- 
 sion gives it, but "stained with the blood." First, 
 they employ the Greek word inoluno, whose mean- 
 ing is to stain (Liddcll and Scott) ; second, they use 
 the Greek word translated blood in the dative case 
 without the preposition — the instrumental dative 
 — to denote the instrument or means by wdiich 
 the coat was stained. In Ezek. xxiii. 15 they use 
 the v/ord parabapto in the sense to dye, where 
 
1 20 The ]\I caning and Power of Dap I ism, 
 
 also ihc Hebrew word has the same secondai"y 
 meanuig'. la i Chron. xxvi. ii,the Seventy em- 
 body the Hebrew word tabal in a proper name. 
 Gesenius translates it, " Whom Jehovah has im- 
 mersed — i.e., Jias purified"' (" Heb, and Eng. Lex.," 
 p. 385). A tendency in the Hebrew word to the 
 meaning to p2irify is thus recognized. The only 
 remaining example is in the passage before us; 
 and the fact that the Seventy employ a change 
 of word elsewhere to express a change from 
 the primary to a secondary meaning confirms 
 the opinion that the reason which induced 
 them here to make a change in the translat- 
 ing word was their understandin.'r of a chansre 
 in the meaning of the Hebrew word in this 
 place. 
 
 3. The prophet Elisha did not employ tlie word 
 tabal in his direction to Naaman (2 Kings v. 10), 
 but the word raJiats, He did not command him 
 to dip, but to zvash. The Septuagint also trans- 
 lates the command in v. 10 by louo, to ivash. The 
 same words were used by both Naaman and his 
 servants in v. 12, 13. Dr. Carson at last recog- 
 nizes the generic meaning of louo: "That the 
 word does not necessarily express mode, I readily 
 admit " (p. 486). 
 
 4. It ii in proof that the v/ord bapLizo means 
 
Baptisms in the Septuagitit. 121 
 
 purify. For all these reasons it ma}' have this 
 meaning here. 
 
 In " Thcodosia Ernest," American Baptist Pub- 
 lication Society, p. 130, it is said that " tabal is in 
 this Jew Greek uniformly rendered by ' bapto ' or 
 ' baptizo,' and these words are never used in any 
 other than their common classical signification." 
 
 These statements are both of them erroneous, 
 and indicate the need of more accurate and 
 thorough investigation. First, the word tabal is 
 translated moliuio in Gen. xxxvii. 31, with the 
 secondary meaning to stain. It is translated /<^r«- 
 Ijapto in Ezek. xxiii. 15, with the secondary mean- 
 ing to dye. Second, the word baptizo is used in the 
 secondar}^ signification to purify in unnumbered 
 examples in Hellenistic Greek usage, some of 
 which are cited in the second chapter of this 
 book. The reasons in favor of this secondary 
 meaning in 2 Kings v. 14 are : 
 
 1. This is the correct signification of the word 
 in its religious usage, as unnumbered examples 
 demonstrate. 
 
 2. This is the meaning of the words employed 
 by the prophet Elisha in his command to Naa- 
 man, in Hebrew, Greek, and English, and the 
 same words are repeated b}^ Naaraan and by his 
 servant. 
 
1 2 2 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 3. The Seventy give the Hebrew word tubal 
 secondary significations in their transhition of it 
 in other places. 
 
 4. When the Seventy understand tahal to have 
 its primary signification, to dip., elsewhere, they 
 uniformly translate it b_v the Greek word bapto ; 
 and if they had so understood it here, bapto 
 would have been their word to express it. 
 
 5. The selection of baptizo in this place in prefer- 
 ence to bapto shows that they understand tubal to 
 have a meaning here which bapto would not 
 express, but which baptizo does express — viz., 
 purificatio7i. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 SECONDARY MEANING IN THE LEXICONS. 
 
 A S the lexicons give the meaning of words, 
 •^^*" great efforts have been made to make it 
 appear that the lexicons give to the Greek word 
 baptizo only one meaning. The mystification re- 
 specting the meaning which tlie lexicons give to 
 this word is remarkable. A secondary meaning 
 is given in the lexicons ; but this, in various 
 ways, is either denied or kept out of view. A 
 brief consideration is, therefore, given to this 
 topic in this chapter. 
 
 The secondary meaning of baptizo cannot be 
 precluded b}^ the theory that words have only a 
 single meaning. Some contend with great ear- 
 nestness for such a theory. The theory does not 
 accord with the reality. Sir William Hamilton 
 says: " Either the words of a language must each 
 denote only a single notion . . . or a plurality 
 of concepts. Of these alternatives, the latter is 
 the one which has been universally preferred ; 
 and accordingly all languages by the same word 
 express a multitude of thoughts, more or less 
 
 123 • 
 
1 24 The Afeaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 differing from each other." President N. Porter, 
 editor of Webster's Dictionary, says: "Without 
 discussing- the metaph3-sical question whether 
 there is or can be more than a single meaning 
 to a word, . . , we accept the commonly-re- 
 ceived notion that one word has several senses" 
 ("Bib. Sacra," Vol. XX. p. 119). 
 
 Neither can the secondary meaning be pre- 
 cluded by the tlieory that bapto and baptizo are 
 synonj-mous in meaning. This theory has been 
 often assumed, but it has never been proved. As 
 an assumption it is very unlikely. If one word 
 has but a short lifetime, another will come in its 
 place ; but two words expressing one single idea, 
 existing side b}' side for several thousand years, 
 are not needed. The best recent lexicographers, 
 whose mature judgment has been formed by the 
 studies of a lifetime, do not favor such a theory. 
 Dr. William Freund, author of the "Latin-German 
 Lexicon," in his very able preface says: " Every 
 word has its own distinct and peculiar meaning. 
 Man}' words have in their meanings so much re- 
 semblance to one another that a superficial exami- 
 nation can hardly distinguish them. It is the 
 duty, therefore, of the internal histor}- of words 
 to hold up the meaning of such words over 
 against one another — to compare and to dis- 
 
Secondary Meaning in the Lexicons. 125 
 
 tinguish them. This is the synonymous element of 
 lexicography " (Translation by Pres. T. D. Wool- 
 sey, "Bib, Sac," Vol. II. p. 81). President 
 Porter says: "If no two words have precisely 
 the same meaning — and that they have not is 
 well-nigh demonstrated b}^ the circumstance that 
 two m fact exist — then to define one by the other 
 is to confuse rather than to enlighten the mind " 
 (XX. 87). Dr. Dale has thoroughly refuted the 
 opinion that the two words bapto and baptizo 
 are equivalent in meaning. 
 
 Neither is the secondary meaning of baptizo 
 precluded by its derivation from bapto. D\\ Dale 
 gives very cogent reasons for deriving it from 
 the secondary meaning of bapto ("Johannic Bap- 
 tism," p. 64 seq.) Bapto primary denotes a spe- 
 cific act, to dip ; bapto secondary means to dye. 
 This secondary meaning does not express a de- 
 finite act, but a condition — a condition of color 
 caused by an}' one of an}' number of acts that are 
 competent to effect the condition. As the secon- 
 dary meaning of bapto, so unlike the primary 
 meaning, was determined by examples of usage, so 
 the secondary meaning of baptizo is determined 
 by usage, and no mere a priori theory can have 
 any force to nullify the testimony of examples 
 of usasre 
 
1 26 The Meaning and Poiuer of Baptism. 
 
 The testimony of the lexicons to the secon- 
 dary meaning of baptizo cannot be silenced by 
 merely quoting their testimony to its primary 
 meaning. It is a frequent practice of those who 
 say the word has only one meaning to quote the 
 words that denote the original meaning, and omit 
 those that express the secondary. Dr. Carson is 
 not one of those who take this objectionable 
 course. He wrote a book to prove that the word 
 " has but one signification. . . . It ahvays signifies 
 to dip ; never expressing anytJiing but viodey But 
 he says: " I have all the lexicographers and com- 
 mentators against me in this opinion" (p. 55). 
 Prof. Stuart, also, sa3'S that this opinion "in re- 
 spect to one meaning, and one only," is a position 
 " which every lexicon on earth contradicts, and 
 always must contradict" ("Bib. Rep.," Vol. III. 
 p. 384). Dr. Dale says : " Lexicographers give 
 ' wash ' and ' cleanse,' by more than twentj' var}^- 
 ing or repeated defining terms, as the secondary 
 meaning of this verb " (" Johannic Baptism," p. 
 62). Dr. Carson, knowing that the lexicons were- 
 against him, made his appeal to usage. He says: 
 " It is ahvays lawful to appeal from lexicons to 
 the language itself" (p. 56). This is true, for the 
 meanings of words in the lexicons are obtained 
 from their use in the language ; and when for any 
 
Sr(o:uLiry I\ [caning in tJie Lexicons. 127 
 
 cause there is a difference of opinion in respect to 
 the meaning- given in the lexicons, as in the word 
 baptizo, an appeal to the use of the word in the 
 language to determine its meaning is needful, and, 
 when fairly and fulh^ made, is decisive. How far 
 Dr. Carson succeeded and how far he failed is not 
 here the question. But of the authority of the 
 lexicons he says: "I admit that lexicons are an 
 authorit}^ but they are not an ultimate authority. 
 Lexicographers have been guided by their own 
 judgment in examining the various passages in 
 which a word occui-s; ruid it is still competent 
 for every man -to have recourse to the same 
 sources, T/ie meaning of a word vmst nltiuiately 
 be determined by an actual ins,pcction of the passages 
 in tvJiicli it occurs^ as of left as any one chooses to dis- 
 p2ite tJie J2idgment of the lexicographers'' (p. 56). 
 
 Lexicography is still imperfect. Great im- 
 provements have been made in recent years, but 
 the ideal of a perfect lexicon has not yet been 
 reached in any language. The most intelligent 
 and appreciative admirers of the best and latest 
 lexicons of the Greek, Latin, and English lan- 
 guages do not claim perfection for any one of 
 them, but acknowledge existing defects, and point 
 them out with a view to improvements yet to be 
 made. The most important element in a lexicon 
 
128 The Meani7ig and Power of Baptism. 
 
 is the definition. In this element has been one of 
 the deficiencies of the past, and in it is one of the 
 great improvements which the makers of dic- 
 tionaries are exerting their best efforts to attain. 
 The very ideal of a good definition is one of the 
 ripe results of a recent period. In treating of 
 this subject President Porter says: "It is the 
 duty of the definer, first, to be well assured that 
 he has collected all the senses of his words; then 
 that he has expressed them in well-thought and 
 adequate phrases ; and then that he has arranged 
 them in the order of their development and his- 
 toric growth." He insists that a definition " in or- 
 dinary cases cannot be given by a single word,'' 
 but must be given "in well-chosen language, 
 by a compact and clearly-uttered proposition " 
 (" Bib. Sac," Vol. XX. pp. 92, 1 19). The defects 
 in the lexical definitions of the Greek word bap- 
 tizo have been often felt, but the attempts to rem- 
 edy them have not been very successful. Dr. 
 Carson selected the single word "dip" to express 
 the meaning, but was often obliged to abandon it 
 for words that differ essentially in signification, as 
 " sink " and the equivocal word " immerse." Dr. 
 Conant, in his definition, employs seven different 
 words which are far from being exact equivalents. 
 Dr. Dale has discussed the subject with great 
 
Secondary Meaning in the Lexicons. 129 
 
 ability, and has done what has never before been 
 done for a revision of the definition. He has 
 fully explored the original sources, and gathered 
 all the passages, not only in classic but in Judaic 
 and Patristic Greek, in which the word occurs, 
 and with philosophic insight has discerned and de- 
 veloped the several meanings of the word, the 
 primary and the secondar}', in the natural order 
 of their growth. (See " Johan. Bap.," pp. 59-68; 
 -Jud. Bap.," p. 57; "C. B.,"p.354). 
 
 President Porter says : " The definitions should 
 be illustrated by quotations. . . . Woi'ds are 
 made for sentences ; they have their life and 
 meaning from their connection ; and it is only as 
 seen in living and connected discourse that their 
 import or use can be fully understood. By all 
 means, then, let us have illustrative quotations, 
 given freely and variously " (" Bib. Sac," XX. 
 121). In the second chapter of this book nearly 
 a hundred quotations are given from the works of 
 Dale, in which the word baptizo occurs more than 
 a hundred times in the secondary meaning — puri- 
 fication — besides other quotations in other chap- 
 ters, and the number could easily be doubled. 
 Most of these quotations are so clear and decisive 
 that they must carry conviction to ever}^ mind 
 that gives them fair consideration. They put it 
 
130 The Meaning and Pozver of Baptism. 
 
 ill the power of each one to form an independent 
 judgment of his own. The quotations are the 
 primar}^ source of knowledge on wliich the lexi- 
 cons are founded. But the lexicons, though 
 secondary in authority, possess a value which 
 will justify a few citations from such as are held 
 in high estimation. It is said that sixty lexicons 
 were quoted in a recent debate on baptism. 
 Whether more enlightenment or more bewilder- 
 ment ensued does not appear. A selection of 
 original quotations from the works of Dale, with 
 the testimony ot a few of the best lexicons fairly 
 considered and duly weighed, would be sufficient 
 to determine and settle the secondary meaning. 
 The testimony of a few of the numerous lexicons 
 which give this meaning is here presented. 
 
 I. Robinson, in his "Greek and English Lexi- 
 con of the New Testament," the standard lexi- 
 con in use in this country and in other parts of 
 Christendom, after referring to its classic use, 
 gives as its meaning in the New Testament to 
 zvasJi, to lave, to cleanse by zvashiiig, to administer the 
 rite of baptism ; and he gives four reasons to 
 show that " in Hellenistic usage, and especially 
 in reference to the rite of baptism, it would seem 
 to have expressed not always simply iinmersiony 
 but tlic more general idea of ablution or affusion!' 
 
Secondary Meaning in the Lexicons. 1 3 1 
 
 2. Scapula, in his " Greek and Latin Lexicon,' 
 having given the primary meaning inergo, etc., 
 also gives the secondary meaning, abluo, lavo. 
 What does abhto mean ? We turn to the " Latin- 
 English Lexicon" of F. P. Leverett, *' compiled 
 from the lexicons of Facciolati and Forcellini, 
 Scheller, Luenemann, and Freund," and observe 
 that it gives as the definition of abluo, to wash, to 
 wash off, to make clean, to purify. The definitions 
 given of lavo are to ivash, to bat he ^ to besprinkle, to 
 bedezu. 
 
 3. Wahl gives as its second meaning vititco, lavo. 
 What does vItitoo mean ? Liddell and Scott de- 
 fine it to zvash, to purge, to cleanse, to piirify. 
 
 4. Bretschneider, who draAvs his illustrations 
 more from Hellenistic Greek than some lexico- 
 graphers, who draw more from classic Greek, 
 gives as its first meaning lavo, abluo, to purify. 
 
 5. Schleusner gives as its second meaning abluoy 
 lavo, aqua piirgo. We will turn this time to the 
 " Latin-English Lexicon " of E. A.Andrews, found- 
 ed on the " Larger Latin-German Lexicon of Dr. 
 William Freund." This lexicon defines abluo, to 
 remove filth by zvasJiing, to zoash aivay, to cleanse or 
 purify. It defines lavo, to zvash^ bathe, lave ; to 
 zvct, moisten, bedezv ; to zuash azvay. And it defines 
 pur go, to male clean or pure, to clean, cleanse, purify. 
 
1 3 2 The Mean hig and Power of Baptism, 
 
 6. Suidas gives . . . lavo, abluo, pitrgo, inimdo. 
 Andrews defines nnindo, to make clean, to clean, to 
 cleanse. 
 
 7. Parkhurst gives as one of its secondary 
 meanings, to baptize, to luash in or ivith water in 
 token of purification from sin. 
 
 8. Hermann Cramer, professor in the Univer- 
 sity of Greifswalde, in his " Biblico-Theological 
 Lexicon," the latest which has appeared in Ger- 
 many, translated in Edinburgh, and introduced 
 into this country (bearing date 1872), p. 418, says 
 that " paTtri^eiv was used for the New Testa- 
 ment washing in order to publication, " and that 
 "Xovsiv serves in some passages to give promi- 
 nence to the full import of ^aTrri^eiv, which had 
 become a technical term, or (as in Rev. i. 5) to 
 denote purification generall}-." 
 
 9. Other lexicons give the definition ablno, to 
 purify, among which are the eminent names of 
 Schrevelius, Hedericus, Stockius, Schoetgen, 
 Suicer, and others. 
 
CHAPTER VIT. 
 
 BIBLICAL SCHOLARS. 
 
 The opinions of eminent Biblical scholars are 
 entitled to respectful and thoughtful considera- 
 tion. Sometimes, however, an undue reliance is 
 placed upon the authority of great names. When 
 good and learned men differ in opinion, we must 
 exercise the primal right and dut}' of every man 
 to consider the reasons of adjust opinion, if v/e 
 would arrive at the essential truth. 
 
 Immersionists have often put forth the claim 
 that they have all the learning and scholarship 
 that is worthy of respect in favor of the opinion 
 that the Greek word baptizo has only one mean- 
 ing, to iuwiersc. This claim has no foundation, 
 and has no weight Avith those who are well in- 
 formed, and who look beyond mere opinions to 
 the evidence. Nor would it here be noticed 
 were it not for the misrepresentation which 
 is often made of the views of eminent scholars 
 who do not believe in the theory of "one mean- 
 ing, and one only," to this word. The use which 
 
T 34 TJie Meajting and Poiucr of Baptism. 
 
 is raade of the name of Prof. Stuart is especially 
 surprising-. 
 
 Moses Stuart has been called "the father of 
 sacred literature in this country." As the leader 
 in that revival of Biblical study whose influence 
 is now felt in every land, he will be held in im- 
 mortal honor. As he made the Word of God the 
 supreme authority for his own religious belief, so 
 he sought to arouse the minds of his pupils to the 
 earnest and independent study of the inspired 
 volume, in the free exercise of their powers, ac- 
 countable only to its Author. His chief excel- 
 lence as an instructor consisted in awakening an 
 enthusiasm in the interpretation of the Scriptures 
 by the best methods and for the highest and 
 most sacred purposes. He did not teach his 
 pupils to rely merely on his opinions, but to test 
 all opinions by the Word of God, making use of 
 all the helps which can aid in the understanding 
 of its meaning. He expected there would be 
 progress and improvement in the knowledge of 
 Biblical subjects after his time. Yet his name 
 adds weight to the views which he published to 
 the world. This has been a temptation, which 
 some immersionists have not been able to resist, 
 to claim him on their side of the baptismal ques- 
 tion. In his treatise on the " Mode of Baptism " 
 
Biblical Scholars. 135 
 
 he went to the bottom of the subject, and gave 
 first the original signification of the word, and 
 then gave the secondary meanings. But in nu- 
 merous instances they have quoted what he says 
 on the original meaning of the word, and have 
 suppressed what he says of the other meanings, 
 representing him as teaching that the word has 
 only one meaning. 
 
 Prof. Stuart's article on the " Mode of Bap- 
 tism " was published in the third volume of the 
 Biblical Repository in 1833, and republished the 
 same year in a pamphlet. In giving some of 
 his testimony to the secondary meaning of bap- 
 tize, references will be made to the pages of 
 both. In each reference the first number will 
 refer to the page in the Repository, the second 
 to the page in the pamphlet. 
 
 I. Prof Stuart teaches that baptizo has more 
 than one meaning. 
 
 Under "Classical Usage" he discusses the 
 meanings of both words, bapto and baptizo, and, 
 having given their first meanings, dip, plunge, im- 
 nicrge, sink, he says: "But there are variations 
 from this usual and prevailing signification"; 
 and, after giving illustrations, he says: "In all 
 the derived or secondary meanings of both bapto 
 and baptizo . . . the Greek writers made a 
 
136 TJie Jlfca n iug and Power cf Baptism . 
 
 diverse and distinct use of the words, never con- 
 founding them " (p. 306; p. 22). 
 
 Under " Septuagint Usage" he says: "Some 
 of the classical meanings of these words are not 
 to be found in the books aforesaid; while otJicr 
 meanings — viz., to ivasli, to bcdcxv or moisten — are 
 more clearly and fully exhibited " (p. 308 ; p. 24). 
 
 As he says of the first meaning : " All lexico- 
 graphers and critics of any note are agreed in 
 this," so of the theory that the word has "one 
 meaning, and one only," he says it is a position 
 " which every lexicon on earth contradicts, and 
 always must contradict" (p. 384; p. 100). 
 
 2. Prof. Stuart teaches that the meaning of 
 baptizo in its religious usage is purification. 
 
 Among the several meanings in the Septuagint 
 he gives: "5. To zvash, cleanse by zuater, where 
 baptizo is used " (p. 308 ; p. 24). 
 
 He gives the same meaning in his translations: 
 
 Judith xii. 7 : " SJiezvent cut by night, into the val- 
 ley of Bethulia, and WASHED herself in the camp at 
 the fountain of ivatcr'' 
 
 Sirach xxxiv. 30: ''He zvho is CLEANSED /r<?;// a 
 dead \body\ and toucheth it again, what does he 
 profit by his washing? " 
 
 In Judith he translates baptizo zcashed, in Si- 
 rach cleansed. 
 
Biblical Scholars. 137 
 
 Tit. iii. 5 : '' He saved us ^j/ //r^ WASHING [loutron] 
 cf regeneration — i.e., by that purification which re- 
 generation confers " (p. ^^fj \ p. 53). 
 
 The word loutron, which Stuart translates wash- 
 ing in Sirach and Titus, and explains in Titus as 
 signifying purification, is the word which Sirach 
 emplo3S to denote the meaning of his expression, 
 " He who is baptized from a dead body." 
 
 Eph. V. 26: "-Having cleansed it by the WASHING 
 [loutron] of luater by the ivord.* 
 
 Acts X. 47 : "Can any man forbid water, that 
 these should not be baptized ? " This Stuait ex- 
 plains: "Can any one forbid that water should be 
 brought in ? . . . They were to be baptized 
 on the spot, and water was to be brought in for 
 this purpose " (p. 334; p. 50). 
 
 In summing up tiie result of an extended dis- 
 cussion he says : " Let us return to the rite of 
 baptism. What is it that it signifies? Pnrifica- 
 tion is the answer ; and this is the only Scriptural 
 and consistent answer that we can give " (p. 367; 
 
 P- 83). 
 
 3. Prof. Stuart does not believe that baptism 
 consists in the mode. 
 
 " The mere mode cannot possibly make any 
 difference in the case " (p. 388 ; p. 104). 
 
 '■^ No injunction is anyzvhere given in the New Tes- 
 
1 3 8 The Meaning and Power of Baptism 
 
 tanient respecting the manner in wJiieJi this rite 
 shotdd be performed. If there be such a passage, 
 let it be produced. This cannot be done " (p. 
 365; P- 81). 
 
 The opinion that " the manner of the rite is in- 
 volved in the word itself" Prof. Stuart rejects, 
 and shows that the mode is not involved in the 
 meaning of the word. lie devotes twenty pages 
 to the argument in proof that the mode of bap- 
 tism is not essential. 
 
 4. Prof. Stuart believes that baptism with 
 water is a symbol of the purification of the soul 
 by the Spirit of God. 
 
 He saj's there is a " twofold division of the ex- 
 ternal ritual under the ancient dispensation and 
 under the Christian one — viz., into rites cmblem- 
 atie of parity, and rites emblematic of atonement 
 for sin' (p. 370; p. 86). On p. 369, p. 85, he 
 sa3-s : " Under the ancient dispensation, the rites 
 were divided into two great classes — viz., those 
 significant of purity or purification, and those sig- 
 nificant of atonement for sin. . . . Are not 
 the significant symbols, then, inider the new dis- 
 pensation, a summary of those which existed 
 under the old? The belief of this spontaneously 
 forces itself upon my mind. The work of the 
 Spirit is still symbolized imder the Gospel; and 
 
Biblical Scholars. 139 
 
 a Saviour's blood is still represented. The one 
 baptism signifies ; the other is as plainly indicated 
 b}' the Lord's Supper." 
 
 5. Prof. Stuart rejects the error "that baptism 
 is a symbol of the death and burial of Christ." 
 
 It represents the purification of the soul by the 
 Spirit of God. " It is a d3-ing to sin and being 
 raised to a new spiritual life. . . . Why should 
 baptism be made symbolical of the death of 
 Christ? All Jewish analogy is against it. What 
 were all the ablutions and sprinklings of the ritual 
 law designed to prefigure and to signify? Most 
 obviously we must answer, purification. 
 Water, as exhibited in washing, sprinkling, etc., 
 is never an emblem of death and the grave " (p. 
 368; p. 84). 
 
 Of Rom. vi. 4, 5 and Col. ii. 12 he says: " It is 
 only moral or spiritual baptism into the death of 
 Christ of which the apostle speaks in these two 
 passages " (p. 370; p. 86). 
 
 " It is perfectly clear that baptism is considered 
 as the sj^nbol of purification. . , . It is sig- 
 nificant of that sanctifying influence of the Spirit 
 of God which a Savior.r's death has procured " 
 p. 368 ; p. 84). 
 
 6. Prof. Stuart maintains that immersion is not 
 essential as a mode of baptism, but that sprinkling 
 
140 The Meariing and Power of Baptism. 
 
 is a valid and the most significant and appropri- 
 ate mode. 
 
 "Is it essential, in order that baptism slioiild 
 symhoWzQ purificatioji or purity, that it should be 
 performed by immersion? Plainly not; for in 
 ancient times it was the water which was sprin- 
 kled upon the offending Jew that was the grand 
 emblem of purification " (p. 370; p. 86). 
 
 " It is, then, a perfectly clear case that the 
 sprinkling of water or of blood was altogether 
 the most significant mode of purification under 
 the ancient dispensation. And so the prophet 
 Ezekiel speaks of water to be sprinkled, under 
 the new dispensation — Ezek. xxxvi. 25, 26" (p. 
 371 ; P- 87). 
 
 "After the examples which have been adduced 
 of the significancy of -sprinkling, both from the 
 Old Testament and the New, ... I consider 
 this significancy as a point made out" (p. 372; 
 p. 88). 
 
 Of certain passages in the New Testament 
 which he discusses he says : " I cannot read 
 these examples without the distinct conviction 
 that immersion was not practised on these occa- 
 sions, but ivashing or affusion " (p. 362 ; p. 78). 
 
 He concedes the " probability " that the rite 
 was sometimes performed by immersion, but 
 
Biblical Sc/iolars. 141 
 
 Ihc main drift of his argument is in favor of 
 sprinkling-, of the validity of which he has no 
 doubt, and the greater appropriateness and sig- 
 nificancy of which he conclusively evinces. Near 
 the conclusion he says: " My belief is that we do 
 obey the command to baptize when we do it by 
 affusion or sprinkling " (p. 3S8 ; p. 104). 
 
 7. In treating of the mode of baptism in the 
 early ages of Christianity after the times of the 
 apostles, Prof. Stuart says that immersion was 
 the general practice, but that sprinkling was also 
 considered valid. Fie quotes a long passage 
 from C3"prian, and says: " Here, then, sprinkling, 
 so early as the former half of the third century, 
 is pronounced to be legitimate and valid by one 
 of the noblest men among all the Christian fa- 
 thers. . . . This noble and liberal decision of 
 Cyprian was confirmed and proclaimed by seve- 
 ral ecclesiastical councils not long afterwards " 
 
 (P- 379 ; P- 95). 
 
 Prof. Stuart thinks undue stress is laid by im- 
 mersionists on the practice of the early churches. 
 " If this be authoritative, then wh}- not be consis- 
 tent and carry it through?" (p. 382; p. 98). " It 
 is notorious, and admits of no contradiction, that 
 baptism in those days of immersion was admin- 
 istered to men, women, and children, /// puris 
 
142 The Afeafiing and Power of Baptism. 
 
 naturalibus, naked as Adam and Eve before their 
 fall" (p. 3S1 : p. 97). Numerous other supersti- 
 tious obseivances, he also shows, would be obli- 
 gatory on that view. 
 
 There is much false reasoning- about the testi- 
 mony of church history on the subject of bap- 
 tism. R. Robinson's " History of the Baptists " 
 is still quoted by a certain grade of writers. Of 
 this book Prof. Stuart says : " I have examined it 
 on various topics, and confess myself to be great- 
 ly disappointed and not a little disgusted. There 
 is ever}^ where in it an air of 2\m.ost prof aiie levity, 
 which at times breaks forth into the most gross 
 and palpable indecency. . . . There is such a 
 gross and palpable unfairness in Robinson's ex- 
 amination of the testimony of the Christian fa- 
 thers, and such a shallow criticism both on them 
 and on the New Testament, that one may well 
 wonder that this book should meet with encour- 
 agement among men of sobriety and good sense. 
 There is, indeed, an appearance of a kind of 
 learning in the author; but it is merely that of a. 
 literary gojirmand. who has read everything curi- 
 ous and entertaining, and but ver}' little that is 
 solid, and has reasoned and reflected still less on 
 ivJiat he furs read" (quoted in " Woods on Infant 
 Baptism," 2d cd., p. 140). Some recent critics 
 
I 
 
 Biblical ScJiolars. 143 
 
 would become wiser if, instead of depending ou 
 such discredited authorities as R. Robinson, they 
 would resort to genuine and trustworthy sources 
 of information on this subject. 
 
 Alexander Carson, the ablest defender of the 
 theory of "one meaning, and one onl}-," to the 
 Greek word baptizo, was a contemporai-y of Moses 
 Stuart, but inferior to him in some of the essential 
 qualities of a successful interpreter. Ills defini- 
 tion of baptizo is a lucid statement of the meaning 
 given to it by the theor}- : "// ahvays signifies dip, 
 never expressing anything but mode," This de- 
 finition expresses exactly the meaning of bapto 
 primary, but it does not express the meaning of 
 baptizo. The first fallacy in Dr. Carson's reason- 
 ing consists in transferring to the word baptizo, 
 without evidence, the primary meaning of bapto, 
 to dip, assuming that they are equivalent in signi- 
 fication. Underlying this assumption, and con- 
 nected with it, is the further assumption that bap- 
 tizo must express some definite act, to sprinkle, to 
 ponr, or to dip ; and therefore, like bapto, it must 
 mean dip. This is the original fallacy which 
 warps and vitiates all the subsequent reasoning in 
 favor of the theor}-. The first two examples 
 which Dr. Carson gives furnish illustration of 
 this fundamental error in his conception of the 
 
144 '^■^^^ I\ leaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 meaning of the word. Of the quotation from 
 Polybius, " They marched through with diffi- 
 culty, the infantry being baptized up to the 
 breasts," he sa3'S, p. 57: " Here surel}^ the word 
 cannot mean pouring or sprinkling^ Therefore 
 he infers that as the word must denote sonic defi- 
 nite act, and as the act is not that of pouring or 
 sprinkHng, it must be the act of dipping. But 
 there is no action expressed by the word baptizo 
 in this quotation. The action, and the (?;//y action, 
 which Polybius expresses, is the act of marchings 
 and this action is expressed b}' another and a 
 different word. Wading throng] l a river is quite a 
 different thing from the act of dipping an object in 
 the river. The word baptizo docs not express the 
 action, but it expresses the condition of the soldiers 
 i)i iJic uatcr while marching through the river. 
 The word dip expresses an entirely different idea. 
 In the next example, where Strabo says: "The 
 army marched through the entire day, baptized 
 up to the waist," Dr. Carson says: "Surely this 
 baptism was immersion," Here comes another 
 fallac}'. Why does he shift the word, and substi- 
 tute "immersion" for "dipping"? The word 
 di[) denotes a definite act, " to put for a moment 
 ill an\' liquid." But a whole dav is too long for 
 I he nujmcntary act. to dip. Besides, the only act 
 
Biblical ScJiolai^s. 145 
 
 of which Strabo speaks is the act of marching, 
 and this is expressed .by a different word. There 
 is no action in the word baptizo in either of these 
 examples. The baptism was an immersion, but 
 the immersion was not an act, but the condition of 
 the soldici's in tJic zvatcr. Dr. Carson had not con- 
 sidered the dilTerence in the meaning; of the two 
 words. When he comes to the baptism of ships, 
 he substitutes the word "sink" for "dip." The 
 ships have been in a condition of baptism for more 
 than a thousand years, but that is too long a 
 period for the duration of the act which is ex- 
 pressed by the word dip, which Dr. Carson has 
 put into his definition, and he employs another 
 word of different meaning. 
 
 The baptism in Isa. xxi. 4, "Iniquity baptizes 
 me," he also expresses by the word "sink," and 
 says it might continue "eternally" (p. 86). The 
 word " immerse " in Euiilish, like the correspond- 
 ing word in Latin, sometimes denotes an act, but, 
 apart from the baptismal question, it more fre- 
 quently expresses condition without limit of time. 
 The following examples will illustrate this: 
 
 "After sixty years immersion, the gold looks as 
 fresh as if taken out of the bank." 
 
 "The lamp extinguished, he was immersed in 
 total darkness." 
 
1 4 6 Th e JMea n ing and Pow r of Baptism . 
 
 "Iiujucrscd dacp in the Hood, he tound the death 
 he had deserved." 
 
 To substitute the word " immerse" for the word 
 "dip," as if they were equivalent iu significatifjn, 
 serves only to mislead. The word "dip" ex- 
 presses a momentary act — " entrance into a fluid, 
 Avitli immediate return." The word "immerse" 
 expresses condition which continues for a long 
 period of time. 
 
 Dr. Carson conducts his argument on the prin- 
 ciple that no second meaning of the word shall be 
 admitted until some example is adduced in which 
 the first meaning is impossible. lie often encoun- 
 ters passages which tax his critical powers to the 
 utmost to find some possible way of explaining 
 them i;:! accordance witli his theory. He ex- 
 pends a vast amount of ingenuity to reduce in- 
 tractable passages to " one meaning, and one 
 only." Of one notable example he says: " I have 
 found that baptiso in other instances signifies to 
 immerse, and there is a certainty that it has this 
 meaning here, except it is proved that it has an- 
 other signification somewhere else. If another 
 signification is found, I will not insist that immer- 
 sion must of course be the signification here " (p. 
 452). But he never allows that "it has another 
 signification soincwhcre elsi "; therefore in no case 
 
B'ibli.al Scholars, 147 
 
 is the secondary meaning to be admitted. For he 
 adds: ^^ Now, there is not in all Greek literature a 
 single instanee ever alleged in ivhieh this word MUST 
 have a secondary meaning^ This is Dr. Carson's 
 potent weapon of defence when he meets with 
 passages which give him special difficulty in their 
 conflict with his theory. It often leads him into 
 as great extravagance of interpretation as that 
 which he himself exposed when he rejected the 
 notion, which had been maintained during many 
 generations, that the Homeric lake was literally 
 dipped in the blood of a mouse. Since Dr. Car- 
 son's day a great number of passages have been 
 adduced by Dr. Dale which to Dr. Carson were 
 wholly unknown. Some of these are given in the 
 second chapter of this book. It is wholly unne- 
 cessary here to repeat the argument there given 
 from examples of usage. They fully meet the 
 demand of Dr. Carson's principle. In the great- 
 er part of these examples it is impossible to give 
 the word its primary meaning, but from the very 
 nature of the case the zvord MUST Jiave the secondary 
 meaning — purification. The lexicographers are 
 right. They. have substantiated this secondary 
 meaning, and no attempt to suppress or deny or 
 reverse their judgment can succeed. The appeal 
 which Dr. Carson made Irom the lexicons to the 
 
148 7"//t' Meaning and Powo' 0/ Baptism. 
 
 lis.ige ■>{ the word has Jailed to disprove the se- 
 condary meaning, while subsequent and more 
 cmplete investigation has established that mean- 
 ing on a stronger and broader foundation. 
 
 Dr. Carson, like most immersionists, failed to 
 (iistinguish between the classical and the Hellen- 
 istic significations of the word. In its secular 
 use in the classics, while it has both primary and 
 secondary meanings, the secondary meaning, pu- 
 rification, is rare. But in its religious usage, 
 as appropriated by the Greek-speaking Jews to 
 denote ceremonial purification, and also the spi- 
 ritual purification of the soul by the Spirit of 
 God, and the symbol baptism with water by 
 whicli the spiritual is ritually represented, this 
 is the prevailing signification in Judaic, Johan- 
 nic, Christie, and Patristic baptisms. 
 
 Dr. T. J. Conant, BAPTIZEIN, ed. 1868, has | 
 published for the American Bible Union the re- I 
 suit of his investigation of this word. He era- 1 
 ploys seven words to express its meaning : to im- \ 
 mcrse, iuimergc, siibjncrgc, to dip, to plunge, to im~ 
 bathe, to zvhelin (p. 87). These words differ much j 
 from each other in meaning, )^et they unite in the 
 common idea " that the object was wholly cov- \ 
 ered by the enclosing element" (p. 159). He se- I 
 lects the word iininerse for use in his Revision ■ 
 
Biblical Scholars. 149 
 
 of the translation of the New Testament. On 
 p. loi he sa3^s : " The Greek word baptizein ex- 
 presses nothing more than the act of immersion'' ; 
 and on p, 88 he says: " The word /wz/^^rj-^ . . . 
 expresses the full import of the Greek word BAP- 
 TIZEIN. The idea of emersion is not included in 
 the meaning- of the Greek word. It means 
 simply to put into or under water (or other sub- 
 stance), without determining whether the object 
 immersed sinks to the bottom, or floats in the 
 liquid, or is immediately taken out." So far as 
 the simple meaning of the Greek word extends, 
 it leaves its object in the enclosing element, and 
 does not of itself determine that it shall be 
 "taken out." The idea of "taking out" of the 
 water the object which is "put into or under 
 water," by the Greek word baptizo, is an idea 
 which is not contained in the meaning of this 
 word, and is not expressed by it. If there be not 
 some other cause to withdraw the object from the 
 watery element, how is it ever to be " taken 
 out"? What shall determine the taking of the 
 object out of the water in any case ? " This is 
 determined not by the word itself." But if " the 
 word itself" does not determine the withdrawal 
 of its object; if in its own intrinsic meaning, and 
 by its own proper agency, it does not withdraw 
 
1 50 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 its object from the water; if this word does not it- 
 self, in its actual, current Greek usage, express 
 the taking out ?i% well as the putting in; \^ we must 
 resort to motives and reasons extrinsic to " the 
 word itself," then " the act" on which Dr. Conant 
 insists as essential to Christian baptism is not de- 
 noted by this Greek w^ord. The word itself does 
 not determine whether the object which is "put 
 into or under water " is to be " taken out." He 
 says : " This is determined, not by the word it- 
 self, but by the nature of the case, and by the 
 design of the act in each particular case. A liv- 
 ing being, put under water without intending to 
 drown him, is of course to be immediately with- 
 drawn from it." Tne potent motive involved in 
 the natural desire to avoid drowning, to which 
 the phrase '"of course" adroitly points, will 
 doubtless incite to take a living being out of the 
 water, if he has been "put under the water." 
 But the Greek word baptizo, in its classic usage, 
 does not take out of the water what it puts in. 
 " The idea of emersion is not included in tht3 
 meaning of the Greek word." In the New Tes- 
 tament the Greek word baptizo never puts a liv- 
 ing being under the water. 
 
 Dr. Conant is a distinguished scholar, and 
 holds an honorable position as the leading trans- 
 
Biblical Scholars. 151 
 
 iator of the Baptist Revision of the English Ver- 
 sion of the New Testament. He has collected a 
 goodly number of quotations from Greek wiiters 
 in Bx\PTIZElN, and says that these " exhaust the 
 use of this word in Greek literature " (p. vi.) Jn 
 this he was greatly mistaken, as hundreds of new 
 examples in the works of Dj-. Dale attest. The 
 Greek text of Dr. Conant is careful! v and accu- 
 rately edited, but his translations and explana- 
 tions are often unsatisfactory. His punctuation 
 of the Greek text in his example 221 differs from 
 that of the best autlioriticr,, like the Abbe Mignc 
 of Paris, and is cviiienti\- erroneous, and his 
 translation still moie so. 
 
 Dr. James W. Dale, of Media, Pennsylvania, in 
 his " Inquirj-," has given the Greek word baptize 
 a more complete and scientific investigation, with 
 a result more luminous and satisfactory, than any 
 other scholar. When Prof. Stuart wrote his 
 treatise in 1833, the amount of material accessible 
 to scholars in this country was very limited. A 
 half-century of discussion, of research, of intense 
 mental activity, has given a vantagc-gn^und to 
 those wh.o have the enterprise to seize the op- 
 portunity. The incessant and fruitless debate of 
 the baptismal question has revealed its weak 
 point. Dr. Dale has had the sagacity to discover 
 
152 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 that weak point, and, grasping- the great prin- 
 ciple that " Use is of supreme authority and the 
 rule in tlie language," he has explored the whole 
 realm of Greek literature, and has found " the 
 key which opens every passage " and discloses 
 its meaning. He has collected, classified, and 
 expounded all the examples in which the word 
 occurs in classic Greek, all known examples in 
 Judaic Greek, and a mullitudc in Patristic Greek, 
 hundreds of which were never seen by Dr. Car- 
 son or by Dr. Conant. He has had the enter- 
 prise to procure from Europe the original works 
 in the best and most approved editions, and has 
 made his quotations with a fairness and an accu- 
 racy which have commanded the commendation 
 of the intelligent among those who differ most 
 widely from him in opinion. His four splendid 
 volumes. Classic, Judaic, Johannic, Christie and 
 Patristic Baptism, have received the encomiums 
 of the most eminent Greek scholars in the United 
 States, and awakened respectful attention from 
 the most intelligent advocates of immersion. - 
 His views have received endorsement from forty 
 universities, colleges, and theological seminaries, 
 through more than sixty of their professors and 
 presidents, and his works are hailed by Christian 
 scholars as a full, thorough, complete, and satis- 
 
Biblical ScJiolars. 153 
 
 factory treatment of the Greek word baptizo. 
 His works are a thesaurus of information on the 
 subject, and his discussion of it cannot fail to 
 exert a potent influence for the elimination of 
 error and the establishment of the truth. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 JEWISH BAPTISMS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 I COR. X. 2 : " BAPTIZED INTO MOSES." 
 Wpien the Isrnelites stood trembling with the 
 Red Sea before them, the impassable mountains 
 on either side, and the hostile array of Pharaoh 
 fiercely menacing them behind, in their terror and 
 unbelief they poured their reproaches upon Moses 
 for leading them out of Egypt, as they said, " to 
 die in the wilderness " ; and they declared that 
 they would rather "serve the Egyptians" than go 
 on thus to inevitable destruction. But when, the 
 next morning, they stood safe on the other shore, 
 and beheld the destruction of the Egyptians and 
 the great deliverance which God had given to 
 them by the hand of jNIoses, their state of mind 
 was entirely changed. Now " the people feared 
 the Lord, and believed the Lord and his servant 
 Moses." There was in them a thorough change. 
 They w^ere baptized into Moses. The day before, 
 appalled by the terrors that encompassed them, 
 they were almost in a state of rebellion. But 
 
yC7i'is/i Baptisms in the New Testanuut. 155 
 
 now there was a complete change. The whole 
 nation had been baptized into Moses — changed 
 iVom a state of unbelief into a state of confidence 
 in Moses and devotion to him as their leader. 
 This baptism had been accomplished by the di- 
 vine interposition through the instrumentalit}^ of 
 the cloud and the sea. " The pillar of the cloud 
 went from before their face, and stood behind 
 them : and it came between the camp of the 
 Egyptians and the camp of Israel ; and it was a 
 cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by 
 night to these : so that the one came not near the 
 other all the night" (Ex. xiv. 19, 20). Thus the 
 pillar of the cloud was a terror to the Egyptians 
 and an illumination and protection to the Israel- 
 ites, so that the}^ passed over between the divided 
 waters of the sea to the opposite shore on dry 
 ground. The effect of this great deliverance 
 upon their minds, bringing them into subjection 
 to the leadership of Moses, was what the apostle 
 calls their baptism : " The}^ were all baptized 
 into Moses by the cloud and by the sea." 
 
 The efforts to explain this passage on the 
 theor}' that the word denotes some specific 
 modal act — to dip, to sprinkle, or to pour — have 
 not been successful. They do not conform to the 
 historical facts that pertain to this baptism. The 
 
1 56 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 theory that the word denotes a thorough change 
 of condition is the one which explains the facts, 
 and is sustained by them. The modal theory 
 does not conform to the historical facts. 
 
 The advocates of each of the three forms of the 
 modal theory seem to think that the word must 
 mean either one or another of these acts, to dip^ 
 or to sprinkle, or to pour ; and, on this theory, the 
 enquiry is, In which of these three acts does the 
 baptism consist ? Is it dipping, or pouring, or 
 sprinkling? R. S. Poole, in his article on the 
 passage of the Red Sea, in Smitii's " Dictionary 
 of the Bible," edited by H. B. Hackett, Vol. III. 
 p. 2692, says : " At the time of the passage of the 
 sea there was a storm of rain w^ith thunder and 
 lightning (Ps. Ixxvii. 15-20). To this St. Paul 
 may allude (i Cor. x. 2) ; for the idea of baptism 
 seems to involve either immersion or sprinkling, 
 and the latter could have here occurred ; the 
 reference is evidently to the pillar of the cloud." 
 Others also, as Fairchild (p. 27), Peters (p. 63), 
 Beckwith (p. 16), give the same view: "Water 
 was sprinkled upon them from the cloud. It 
 passed over them, and, in passing, rained upon 
 them, and thus baptized them." Dr. Gill, who 
 held that the word means to dip, says tliat the 
 cloud, as it passed from the front to the rear of 
 
Jczvish Bapthms in the New Testament. 1 5 7 
 
 the camp, " let down a plentiful rain upon them, 
 whereby they were in such a condition as if they 
 had been all over dipped in water" (Barnes in 
 loco, p. 196). Hall (p. 73) says : " If there is 
 any mode of baptism here, it is a sprinklings or 
 such ?i ponring out of water as falls in drops. A 
 baptism there was ; an immersion there was not." 
 There are two decisive objections to the theory 
 that water was poured or sprinkled upon the Is- 
 raelites from the cloudy pillar. First, the pillar 
 was not a rain-cloud. It was the Shekinah, the 
 pillar of cloud by day and of tire by night, which 
 sometimes stood above them, sometimes went be- 
 fore them, sometimes behind them, for their guid- 
 ance and protection. Secondly, the pillar had al- 
 ready passed over them and taken its position be- 
 hind Xh^va before they entered the Red Sea, and it 
 remained behind them and between them and the 
 Egyptians during the whole night. An appeal is 
 made to Ps. Ixxvii. 17: " The clouds poured out 
 water." But here it was the clouds, not the pillar 
 of the cloud ; and the tempest was sent, not upon 
 the Israelites, but upon the Egyptians, against 
 whom the " arrows " — i.e., the lightnings — were 
 shot from the thunder-cloud. The Israelites 
 were under divine protection. " Thou leadest 
 tby people like a flock by the hand of Moses 
 
1 58 The Mea7iing and Power of Baptism. 
 
 and Aaron " (v. 20). The expression in Judges 
 V. 4, " The clouds also dropped water," to which 
 Dr. Peters refers, relates to the region of Seir 
 and Edom, a different locality. The " plentiful 
 rain," Ps. Ixviii. 9, to which he also appeals, was 
 at Sinai. 
 
 Beckwith, Peters, and Fairchild also say that 
 the baptism "in the sea" was by sprinkling. 
 The " strong east wind " blew the spra}' from the 
 waters foaming around them, and dashed it upon 
 them. But the record says nothing of this, 
 and the wind was blowing the waters away from 
 them. Dr. Carson says: " It was a real immer- 
 sion. The sea stood on each side of them, and 
 the cloud covered them" (p. 119). When re- 
 minded that the Israelites went through on dry 
 ground he replies : " They got a dry dip " (p. 413). 
 But the Israelites were not covered by the cloud 
 when they passed through the sea. It had gone 
 behind them before they commenced their march, 
 an-d remained behind them all the night. Thei-e 
 was nothing above them but the open sky. This, 
 iact, that before they started on their nightly 
 march, and during the whole night, the pillar of 
 the cloud was behind them, and not over them, is 
 fatal to the modal theory in every form. It un- 
 roofs Dr. Carson's nicely-constructed baptistery. 
 
yeiuish Baptisms in the New Testament. 159 
 
 which at best was but a tunnel open at both ends, 
 and leaves nothing but the march of the people in 
 open space over dry ground. The only " action " 
 was the tramp, tramp, tramp of the moving hosts. 
 The idea of immersion, and of sprinkling by the 
 dashing of the spray, is eacli a mere fancy. 
 There were two millions of men, women, and 
 children, with all their flocks, and herds, and 
 tents, and household goods. Even in the com- 
 pact form of Robinson ('' Biblical Researches," 
 Vol. I. p. 84), in columns of a thousand persons 
 abreast and two thousand in depth, the body 
 must have been half a mile in breadth and not 
 less than two miles in extent, occupying at least 
 four hours in the passage. The larger estimate 
 is more probable, that they spread out a mile in 
 wid'Ji and live miles in depth. Any estimate is 
 fatal to the dipping theor}^ and to the theory 
 that the spray of the sea was sprinkled over all 
 that vast host of people. The " dry dip " of Dr. 
 Carson is the culmination of the fancies of the 
 rnodal theory. 
 
 Dr. Carson further says that the baptism " re- 
 5»embled the baptism of believers," and "served a 
 like purpose as attesting their faith in IMoses as 
 a temporal saviour." But this statement is in 
 direct opposition to the historical fact as related 
 
1 60 TJie Rleanijig and Power of Baptism. 
 
 by Moses. The passing through the sea was not 
 appointed for the purpose of attesting their faith 
 in iNIoses, but for the ver}'- opposite purpose oi in- 
 ducing faith in Moses. Before the passage, they 
 were sadly lacking in faith and were ahnost in 
 despair. Their safe passage, secured by such 
 remarkable instrumentalities as the pillar of the 
 cloud and the divided waters of the sea, was the 
 cause by which their unbelief was removed and 
 their faith in Moses established. 
 
 One thing by which Dr. Carson and others 
 have been misled is the failure to consider the 
 chronological order of the events. Paul enume- 
 rates five of the events in the order of their oc- 
 currence. First, " All our fathers were under 
 the cloud." This was before they entered the 
 Red Sea (Ex. xiv. 19, 20). After that, Moses 
 stretched out his hand over the sea and the 
 waters were divided, and then, in the words of 
 Paul, they " all passed through the sea." But 
 before they started the cloud had passed to their 
 rear, and remained there to protect them from- 
 the Egyptians while on the passage. As the re- 
 sidt of their passage through the sea. tliey " were 
 all baptized into Moses by the cloud and by the 
 sea." The effect of their safe passage was to pro- 
 duce confidence in Moses, and devotion to him 
 
jrewisk Baptisms in the New Testament. i6i 
 
 as their leader. The next event in order which 
 Paul enumeraies is the gift of the manna for food 
 ill the wilderness : " And did all eat of the same 
 spiritual meat." The event next mentioned was 
 still later in the order of time : " And did all 
 drink of that same spiritual drink : for they drank 
 of that spiritual Rock that followed them : and 
 that Rock was Christ." These events are nar- 
 rated in the order of time. If the theorists had 
 noticed the chronological order of the events, 
 they would not have placed the cloudy pillar over 
 the people as a covering while on the passage 
 through the sea, when it was beJiind t\\Q.\^ to pro- 
 tect them from the Egyptians. 
 
 There was no immersion of the Israelites. The 
 Egyptians were immersed, and, if their immersion 
 be called a baptism, it was a destructive baptism. 
 By the cloud they were baptized into terror, and 
 by the sea they were baptized into destruction. 
 But the Israelites were baptized into Moses by 
 the safe passage of the sea, as they " went over 
 dr}' shod." Thus " they were all baptized into 
 Moses by the cloud and b}' the sea." 
 
 The English Version translates " in the cloud 
 and in the sea." But the translation " by the 
 cloud and by the sea," as Dale renders it, is the 
 true one. It is supported, first, by the fact that 
 
I (i2 The Meanino^ and Power of Baptism. 
 
 the cloud and sea were instrumental ag-encies in 
 securing- the safe passage of the Israelites ; second- 
 ly, by the fact that the cloud and the sea were not 
 the elements into which they were baptized, but 
 they were baptized into Moses ; thirdly, the trans- 
 lation "in the cloud " does not convey tiie mean- 
 ing of the apostle; he does not mean to locate 
 them in the cloud; they were not enveloped 
 in the cloud ; the cloud never did envelop the 
 people, but it always either stood above them or 
 went before them or behind them ; they were 
 not immersed in the cloud, nor were they im- 
 mersed in the sea, but the cloud and sea w^ere 
 the instrumentalities by which their safet}^ was 
 secured ; fourthly, the Greek preposition is fre- 
 quently used in the New Testament to denote in- 
 strumentality, and is often translated b}^ words 
 that signify instrumentality; fifthly, the preposi- 
 tion is translated "by" in passages that refer di- 
 rectly to the pillar of the cloud, as in Nehe- 
 niiah ix. 12: "Thou leddest them in the day by 7i 
 cloudy pillar, and in the night by a pillar of lire" ;• 
 Ps. Ixxviii. 14: "In the daytime, also, he led 
 them ^vith a cloud, and all the night zvith a light 
 of lire " ; also in Ps. Ixxvii. 20: " Thou leddest thy 
 people like a flock by the hand of Moses and 
 Aaron." 
 
yciuish }3aptisms in the Neiv Testament. 163 
 
 In the same way tlie Patrists understand and 
 represent this baptism ("Jud. Bap.," pp. 292, 
 
 304). 
 
 Hilary says: " Per mare et per nubem purifi- 
 cati " — They were purified (baptized) ^/ tlie cloud 
 and by the sea. 
 
 John of Damascus calls it, " That baptism 
 which is by (dia) the cloud and the sea." 
 
 Basil, in direct terms, says : " But the sea and 
 the cloud, at that time, induced faith through 
 amazement; but, as a type, it signified, for the 
 future, the grace that should be after." 
 
 Thus Basil ascribes to the cloud and the sea 
 the instrumental agency of producing faith in 
 the people. 
 
 Didymus Alexandrinus : "The waters, securing 
 safet}^ for the people, signify baptism." 
 
 It was by the instrumentality of the waters in 
 "securing safety for the people" that they signif)'- 
 baptism. 
 
 Didymus also says: "The whole material of 
 their journe}' from Egypt was a type of the sal- 
 vation by, baptism." 
 
 Baptism, as he represents its type, has nothing 
 in it of modal action, but was the permanent con- 
 dition of the people. 
 
164 The Meaiii>2g and Powej- of Baptism. 
 
 DAILY BAPTISM BEFORE MEALS, 
 Luke xi. 37, 38: "And as he spake, a certain 
 Pharisee besought him to dine with him : and 
 he went in, and sat down to meat. 
 
 "And when the Pliarisee saw it, he marvelled 
 that he was not first baptized before dinner." 
 
 The word baptized, as here used by Luke, was 
 so well iniderstood by his readers that they need- 
 ed no explanation of its meaning. It related to 
 a practice of constant, daily occurrence. It was 
 not a mere physical washing, but a customary 
 ritual cleansing which the Jews observed at the 
 time of their daily meals. What this custom was 
 we learn in Mark vii. 3: "The Pharisees, and all 
 the Jews, except the}- wash their hands oft, eat 
 not"; and in Matt. xv. 2: " Thy disciples . . . 
 wash not their hands when they eat bread." The 
 time in the last two passages was a io-w months 
 later, but the custom referred to is the same as 
 in Luke — the customary ablution at meals. This 
 baptism before eating was not enjoined in the law 
 of Moses, but in the tradition of the elders; and 
 it was omitted by Jesus on this occasion, and by 
 his disciples on the subsequent occasion. " Why 
 do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the 
 elders? for they wash not their hands when they 
 eat bread." 
 
yeivish Baptisms in the New Testament. 1 65 
 
 The ablution was pertormed by washing t.he 
 hands. The Pharisee noticed the neglect of this 
 customary baptism on the part of Jesus, and mani- 
 fested his surprise at tiie omission. This gave 
 occasion for the reproof which Jesus adminis- 
 tered to him for such an observance of a mere 
 external ceremony, and for his neglect of internal 
 purity. " Ye Pharisees make clean the outside, 
 . . . but your inward part is full of . . . 
 wickedness." 
 
 Theophylact, in his comment on this passage, 
 says of Jesus : " Deriding their foolish custom — 
 I mean their purifying themselves before eating — 
 he teaches that they ought to purify their souls 
 by good works. For washing the hands purifies 
 the body only, not the soul " (" Johannic Bap- 
 tism," p. 117). 
 
 Robinson, in his " New Testament Lexicon," 
 article " Baptizo," gives four reasons in proof that 
 the word in Hellenistic usage expressed "the 
 more general idea of ablution or affusion." The 
 first of these reasons is drawn from this Jewish 
 baptism thus : " This appears from the following 
 consideration: {a) The circumstances narrated in 
 Luke xi. 38, compared with those in Mark vii. 2-4, 
 where nipto is employed, implying, according to 
 Oriental custom, "a. pouring of water on the hands." 
 
1 66 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 The word nipto, which Mark uses to describe 
 this rite, is nlso used by Theophylact in his com- 
 ment on the b.iptism in Luke xi. 38, and its mean- 
 ing is, " to wash, but only some part of the body, 
 as the face, hands, feet" (Rob. *'Lex.") 
 
 Alford says : " This use of the word shows 
 that it did not imply necessarily the immersion of t lie 
 whole body ; for it was only the hands which the 
 Pharisees washed before meat." 
 
 BAPTISM FROM THE MARKET. 
 
 Mark vii. 4: ''And except they baptize them, 
 selves from the market, they eat not." 
 
 This is a literal translation by Dr. Dale, who 
 compares it with similar forms of expression in 
 Sirach, Clement, Justin Martyr, and in the New 
 Testament, deducing, by a clear and critical ex- 
 position, the meaning, "purify themselves from 
 the market." The ceremonial defilement which 
 the Jews contracted in the market the}^ removed 
 before eating by the customar}^ ablution. The 
 previous verses show that this was done by wash- 
 ing the hands. If we take only the New Testa- 
 ment and its surroundings, the nature of this bap- 
 tism is sufficientlj' plain. It was a ceremonial 
 purification by washing the hands. 
 
 But Dr. Carson says: " It ought to have been 
 
Jewish Baptisms in the Nezv Testament. 167 
 
 translated, 'Except they dip themselves, they eat 
 not'" ("Baptism," p. 68). His argument is that 
 "the word signifies I0 <•///>, and only /^ dip''' (p. 
 67), and therefore it "must" have that meaning 
 here. On p. 452 he says: "I have found that 
 baplizo in other instances signifies to iunncrse " / 
 and he argues: " There is a certainty that it has 
 this meaning here, except it is proved that it has 
 another signification somewhere else." But what 
 if it be proved that it has another signification 
 somewhere else? "If another signification is 
 found, I will not insist that immersion must of 
 course be the signification here." Now, it Jias been 
 proved from passages without number that the 
 word has another and a ver}- different meaning. 
 It has the secondary meaning to purify. This 
 completely reverses the argument as urged by 
 Dr. Carson. As Dale would say : " It is in proof 
 that the word has the secondary signification to 
 cleanse " in religious Usage ; it therefore has this 
 signification here. Dr. Dale wields this argu- 
 ment in " Johannic Baptism " u'ith convincing 
 force. It is not needful here to amplify this ar- 
 gument. 
 
 The general prevalence of the custom of wash- 
 ing the hands for ceremonial purification confinns 
 the interpretation of this hand-washing baptism. 
 
1 68 llie Meaning and Poiccr of Baptism, 
 
 1. Ceremonial purirication by washing the 
 hands was an Oriental custom from generation to 
 generation. Dr. William Smith, in his " Diction- 
 arj' of Christian Antiquities," Vol. I., article 
 " Hands, washing of," gives numerous exam- 
 ples from the Old Testament, from Hesiod and 
 other classic writers, from Tertullian, Chrysostom, 
 Cyril, and other Patristic writers, in illustration 
 of this custom. 
 
 II. One of the most frequent methods of this 
 ceremonial purification was hy pouring Wcit^v on 
 the hands. 
 
 1. Robinson, " N. T. Lex.," p. 481. says: "The 
 usual mode of ablution in the East is b}^ pouring 
 water upon the hands; this is done by a ser- 
 vant " 
 
 2. In 2 Kings iii. ii : " Here is Elisha the son 
 of Shaphat, which poured water on the hands of 
 Elijah." 
 
 3. When Dr. E. Robinson was in Hebron, Pales- 
 tine, in May, 1838, in a house where ten persons 
 dined " in the true Oriental style," as he relates 
 in his " Biblical Researches," Vol. II. p. 451, one 
 of the persons " went and washed his hands by 
 having water poured upon them in an adjacent 
 room." Another "did not leave his place to 
 wash, but had the water brought to him where 
 
ycwish Baptisms iti the New Tesiaintnt. 169 
 
 he sat.*' Ill June, when Dr. Robinson and Rev. 
 Eii Smith were at Rair.leh, they accepted the 
 proposal of their host " that a servant should 
 wash our feet." The servant " brought water, 
 which she poured upon our feet over a large, 
 shallow basin of tinned copper; kneeling before 
 us, and rubbing our feet with her hands, and wip- 
 ing them with a napkin" (Vol. III. p. 26). 
 
 4. Dr. Thompson, describing an Oriental meal, 
 says: "Their pitcher and ewer are always 
 brought, and the servant, with a napkin over his 
 shoulder, pours water on your hands." 
 
 5. Hilary, A.D. 354, intimates of one place where 
 they did not " pour water on the priest's hands, 
 as we see in all the churches " (" Die. Christ. 
 Ant.," Vol. I. p. 759). 
 
 6. Rabbi Akiba, when the water which the 
 jailer brought to him in prison was not enough to 
 drink, said : " Pour the water on my hands; it is 
 better to die with thirst than transgress the tra- 
 dition of the elders " (Poole's " Synopsis," Fair- 
 child, p. 20; Dale, p. 104). 
 
 III. The ceremonial purification of the person 
 by washing the hands is called baptisiB by the 
 Patrists. 
 
 Ambrose, in his comment on the passage in 
 Mark vii. 2-4, says: "The Jews, in following 
 
I 70 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 the tradition of ineo, neglect that of God ; thr 
 disciples, in giving precedence to that of God, 
 neglected that of men, so that they would not 
 wash their hands when thev ate bread— since ' he 
 who is completely washed has no need that he 
 should wash his hands' (John xiii. 10). Jesus had 
 washed them : they sought no other baptism ; for 
 Christ by one baptism resolves all baptisms " 
 (" Johannic Baptism," p. 102). 
 
 They did not need that other baptism by wash- 
 ing the hands, for the one perfect baptism wdiich 
 they had received from Christ was sufficient. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, quoting the hand-wasli- 
 ing of Telemachus as a baptism, says: "This 
 [hand-washing baptism] was a custom of the 
 Jews, so as even to be baptized frequently upon 
 the couch " (p. 103). 
 
 The couch upon which Clement says the Jews 
 were frequently baptized according to custom, 
 was the couch on which they reclined at meals. 
 
 Theophylact also calls the washing of the 
 hands a baptism (p. 117). 
 
 IV. The Jews had in their houses the means of 
 ceremonial purification. " And there were set 
 there six ivater-pots of stone, after the manner of 
 the purifying of the Jczvs, containing two or three 
 firkins apiece" (John ii. 6). A log containing 
 
Jcwisk Baptisms in the New Testament, 1 7 1 
 
 less than one gallon was a sufficient quantity, 
 according to tlie Jewish estimate, for the legal 
 purification of a single person. Even a quarter 
 of a log was sufficient to wash the hands of one 
 or two persons (Smith's " Die. of the Bible,' Vol. 
 IV. p. 3507 ; Lightloot, in Dale, p. 104). 
 
 BAPTISM OF COUCHES. 
 
 Mai^ vii. 4: " And there are many other things 
 r which they have received to hold — the baptiz- 
 ings of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels, and 
 couches." 
 
 The couches which the Jews baptized were 
 the table couches, on which they reclined at 
 meals. The great size of these dining couches, 
 on a single one of which several persons could 
 recline, puts the dipping theory of Dr. Carson to 
 a severe strain. Yet he says: "Though it were 
 proved that the couches COULD NOT BE immersed, 
 I would not yield an inch of the ground I have 
 occupied " (Carson on " Baptism," p. 76). Among 
 the suggestions he makes to escape the difficult)'', 
 he thinks it possible that the beds which the 
 Pharisees baptized were " the beds on which they 
 slept." But the baptism of the couches is men- 
 tioned in connection with their meals, and the 
 word has its usual sisrnific.-tion of a dim er couch. 
 
172 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 But the doctor says: "Whatever might have 
 been their size, they might easily be immersed in 
 a pond. ... I have contrived to take them 
 to pieces " (p. 400). So we might take a house to 
 pieces, and dip it, piece by piece. But such airy 
 fancies arc not worth the chase. The fact that 
 the word "has been proved" to have a secon- 
 dary^ meaning takes it wholly out of the region 
 of fanciful possibihties, and places it on historic 
 ground. The only method of purifying house- 
 hold goods spoken of in the Old Testament is by 
 sprinkling — Num. xix. 18: "A clean person shall 
 take hyssop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it 
 upon the tent, and upon all the vessels " ; and 
 although the dinner couch is not specified, and 
 therefore cannot be proved to be included among 
 the vessels, yet it is one of the articles of domes- 
 tic furniture, and belongs to a class that were 
 purified by sprinkling. We are sometimes re- 
 ferred to Num. xxxi. 23. But this relates to an 
 ordinance of war concerning articles obtained 
 from foreign sources, which, from their pre-emi- 
 nent uncleanness, required an unusual purifica- 
 tion. This is the only instance in the Bible where 
 even material objects were required to be purified 
 by immersion. This was never the ordinary 
 mode of purification. " Sprinkling," says Proi. 
 
Jewish Baptisms in the New Testament. 1 73 
 
 Stuart, " was used most frequently of all by way 
 of purification" ("Bib. Rep,," Vol. III. p. 339). 
 Alford says: "These baptisms as applied to 
 n\ivQov [meaning- probably here couches (trich- 
 nia) used at meals] were certainly not immersions, 
 but sprinklings, or affusions of water." 
 
 HEB. IX. 10: "DIVERSE BAPTISMS." 
 
 The word " washings," by which the Greek 
 word baptisms is translated in the English Ver- 
 sion, expresses the true meaning; for these bap- 
 tisms were cleajisings, washings, purifications. But 
 this version does not apprise the English reader 
 that those washings are baptisms. If the word 
 had been translated baptisms, it would have di- 
 rected the attention of the reader of the English 
 Version to the baptisms of the Old Testament. 
 
 The apostle teaches that there is a diversity of 
 these baptisms. He also speaks of baptisms in 
 the plural in Ileb. vi. i : " The doctrine of bap- 
 tisms"; but he does not there refer to Judaic 
 baptisms, as he does in Heb. ix. 10. These bap- 
 tisms are diverse in their nature', in the agencies 
 by which they are effected, and in the mode of 
 accomplishment. There were various baptismal 
 agencies, such as sacrificial blood, heifer-ashes, 
 and water, and these diverse agencies had a di 
 
1 74 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 verse power, and, in their operation, induced di- 
 vei'se conditions — i.e., diverse baptisms. 
 
 The Patrists often speak of a diversity of bap- 
 tisms. Hilar3^says: " Baptismata sunt diversa," 
 under which heading he speaks of the baptism of 
 John, the second baptism of Christ, the baptism 
 of the Spirit, the baptism of fire, of judgment, 
 and the baptism of martyrdom. Thus diverse, 
 botli in their agencies and modes of operation, 
 are the baptisms of which he makes enumeration. 
 Ambrose describes six kinds of baptisms. He 
 sa3-s : " Multa sunt genera baptismatum " — There 
 are many kinds of baptisms ; " Plurima baptisma- 
 tum genera " — Very many kinds of baptisms. Tlie 
 theory that there is- only one baptism — viz., a spe- 
 cific act, to dip — is an invention of later times. 
 
 Basil says: " We should learn, in brief, the di- 
 versity between the baphsm of iSIoscs and that 
 of John." 
 
 Chrysostom says: "John exhorted the Jews 
 not to cherish hopes of salvation through diverse 
 baptisms and purifications of waters." 
 
 Justin Martyr sa3's : "The law released from 
 blame, daily, transgressors by certain sprinklings 
 . . . and diverse kinds of baptisms, but grace 
 grants only one baptism." 
 
 Gregor}' Nazianzen : "Come, let us enquire 
 
yeTvish Baptis7??s in tin: Nciv Tesfamcni. 175 
 
 someLliing concerning the difference of baptisms, 
 that we may go hence purified." lie enumerates 
 and describes six different baptisms (''Jud. Bap.," 
 p. 3£o). 
 
 The baptisms of the Old Testament of which 
 Paul speaks included the purifications by sprin- 
 kling the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes 
 of a heifer. He specifies these on account of 
 their emblematic nature. He is making a com- 
 parison between the ^losaic and the Christian 
 dispensations, and especially between the puri- 
 fications of the Jewish iitu;il and the great puri- 
 fication which Jesus Christ made for men by his 
 death on the cross, t)f whicii those Jewish bap- 
 tisms were a type. 
 
 The " diverse baptisms " include the purifica- 
 tions by sprinkling the sacrificial blood and heifer- 
 ashes mentioned in v. 13. The "carnal ordinan- 
 ces " in V. 10 consist of the " meats and drinks 
 and diverse baptisms " ; and as those purifications 
 are not found in the " meats and drinks," they 
 must be included in the " baptisms." 
 
 I. The word " and " before " carnal ordinan-^ 
 ces " in the English Version is not in the origi- 
 nal. It is not in the Greek text of Robinson's 
 edition of the New Testament by Augustus 
 Hahn, 1842, nor in that of Tischendorf; 1873. 
 
1 76 The Mea7iing and Power of Baptisfu. 
 
 Both editions note it as a variation, but i-ejcct it 
 from the genuine text. It is not even recognized 
 b}' Stuart, Winer, and other scholars. 
 
 2. Consequently, the word " ordinances " is in 
 apposition with " meats and drinks and diverse 
 baptisms," explanatory of them, and therefore in- 
 cludes them. Stuart shows this in his transla- 
 tion : " Meats and drinks and diverse washings — 
 ordinances pertainitig to the flesh " (" Commentary," 
 p. 431). Winer also, in his " New Testament Gram- 
 mar," p. 635, says that the word " ordinances is in 
 apposition to meats and drinks and diverse bap- 
 tisms." In another i-emark he calls it " that apposi- 
 tive word." Prof Stuart says : " Meats and drinks 
 and diverse baptisms I understand as a cLiuse 
 qualifying ordinances— /.r., these words stand in 
 the place of an adjective designating wherein 
 the ordinances consisted." Prof. Wilson says: 
 •' The term ' carnal ordinances ' does not express 
 something additional to the meats and drinks and 
 baptizings, but is another name for the same ritual 
 observances" (" C. and P. B.," p. 332). Dr. Dale 
 says : " That ' the diverse baptizings ' are in- 
 cluded in the * carnal ordinances ' (ordinances 
 of the flesh) is a matter of universal acknow- 
 ledgment "(" Jud. Bap.," p. 385). 
 
 3. The description which Paul gives of the 
 
yeivish Baptisms in the New Testament. 177 
 
 ritual efficacy of "the. blood of bulls and of 
 goats, and the ashes of a heifer" — an efficacy 
 which merely consists in "purifying the flesh " — 
 places them among the ordinances of the flesh; 
 and as they do not belong to the " meats and 
 drinks," they must be found in the " diverse bap- 
 tisms." They are called " ordinances of the 
 flesh " because tliey only sanctify " to the puri- 
 fying of tlie flesh," as the Patrists say, " having 
 power, for the time, for the purification of the 
 body." They are external, ceremonial ordi- 
 nances, ritual purifications, t3pical of the greater 
 purification by the sprinkling of the blood of 
 Christ. "For if the blood of bulls and of 
 goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling 
 the unclean, sanctifieth to the- purifying of the 
 flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, 
 who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself 
 without spot to God, purge your conscience from 
 dead works to serve the living God ? " 
 
 In full harmony with this doctrine of the 
 apostle is the testimon)^ of the Patrists. 
 
 Ambrose says : " He who wished to be cleansed 
 by typical baptism was sprinkled with the blood 
 of the lamb by a bunch of hyssop " (" C. and P. 
 
 B.," p. 534). 
 
 Hilary : " But sprinkling according to the 
 
1 7 8 The Me a ?i ing a nd Po we r of Baptism . 
 
 Law is the cleansing from sin through faith 
 purif3'ing the people by the sprinkling of blood 
 (Ps. 1. 9) — a sacrament of the future sprinkling 
 of the blood of the Lord " (" The Cup and the 
 Cross," p. 34). 
 
 Ambrose: "For he who is baptized, whether 
 according to the Law or according to the Gospel, 
 is cleansed : according to the Law, because Moses 
 sprinkled the blood of the lamb with a bunch of 
 hyssop ; according to the Gospel, because the 
 garments of Christ were \yhite as snow " (p. 34). 
 The ashes of a blood-red heifer Paul also repre- 
 sents as typical of the blood of Christ. In this 
 view the testimony of Moses, Josephus, Philo, 
 Cj^ril, and Gregory Nazianzen, to the ceremonial 
 purification of the unclean by sprinkling the 
 ashes of a heifer, has great value. Gregory Na- 
 zianzen says : " Therefore let us be baptized, that 
 we may overcome ; let us partake of the puri- 
 fying waters . . . more sanctifjdng than the 
 ashes of a heifer sprinkling the unclean, and 
 having, for the time, power for the purification of 
 the bod}^, but not for the complete removal of 
 sin " (p. 34). The complete removal of sin is 
 effected only by the blood of Christ. " The type- 
 baptism of Judaism," sa3's Dale, "contemplates 
 the purification of the body from ceremonial dc- 
 
JcwisJi Baptisms in the New Testament, i 79 
 
 filement. This purification of the body, as a 
 ceremonial effect, was perfect. It was, therefore, 
 well adapted to be a type of the purification of 
 the soul by the blood of Christ. The blood of 
 bulls and goats, and the blood-red heifer-ashes, 
 are universally regarded as types of the blood 
 of Christ. . . . We have the clear and unanimous 
 interpretation of these early writers for the iden- 
 tification of- Jewish and Christian baptisms, as 
 type and antitype baptism, as well as the un- 
 erring authority of inspiration, through Paul, for 
 conjoining the diverse baptizings of the Old Tes- 
 tament (especially its sprinklings) with tliat one 
 wondrous and central baptism of the new dispen- 
 sation — THE BAPTISM OF CaLVARY " (p. 32). 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 BAPTISM WITH WATER. 
 
 John i. 26: "I baptize with water." 
 
 "pOUR centuries had passed since the latest of 
 -*- the Hebrew prophets had foretold the com- 
 ing of Elias. When the people heard the voice 
 crying- in the wilderness, they knew that he had 
 come. The whole Jewish nation was moved by 
 his ministry. This distinguished preacher receiv- 
 ed a commission from heaven to announce the 
 Messiah and prepare the people to receive him. 
 To give a fitting reception to the coming One, a 
 great change vvas requisite in the character of 
 the people. To promote this preparation was 
 the mission of John the Baptist. A thorough 
 reformation was needful, and this was set forth 
 by preaching the baptism of repentance into the 
 remission of sins. This repentance-baptism was- 
 symbolized by an external rite— the baptism with 
 water. 
 
 Pure water is the natural symbol of moral 
 purification. In all nations and in all ages it is 
 
 180 
 
Baptism with Water. i8l 
 
 the prima agent for cleansing, and the first and 
 main symbol of purity. The purifying quality 
 of water makes it a fit emblem of the purifica- 
 tion of the soul by the Spirit of God. Baptism 
 is twofold, spiritual and ritual ; the one real in 
 the soul, the other an emblem, a shadow of the 
 real. The baptism of John partook of this two- 
 fold nature. The baptism which he preached 
 was the baptism of repentance into the forgive- 
 ness of sins, a spiritual change in the condition 
 of the soul ; the baptism which he administered 
 was a baptism with water, emblematical of the 
 baptism of repentance. The baptism of repent- 
 ance was a change in the character and spiritual 
 condition of the people, and this inward change 
 was S3'mbolized by an external rite administered 
 to those who had become subjects of the spiritual 
 change. 
 
 This twofold baptism of John in its purifying 
 nature was understood and described by Jose- 
 phus : " For Herod slew him [John the Baptist], 
 a good man, exhorting the Jews to cultivate vir- 
 tue, and observing, uprightness toward one an- 
 other and piety toward God, to come for bap- 
 tizing [purification] ; for thus the baptizing would 
 appear acceptable to him, not using it for the 
 remission of sins, but for purity of the body 
 
1 82 The i\fca?iing and Power of Baptism. 
 
 provided tliat the soul has been previously 
 purg-ed by righteousness " (■' Johannic Baptism," 
 p. 125). 
 
 In this description of John's baptism Josephus 
 gives his knowledge of its nature and design, 
 and also "the current popular understanding" 
 respecting it. The soul must first be purified by 
 righteousness, and this condition of the soul is 
 fitly represented by the baptism of the bod}' ; and 
 both the one and the other Josephus describes as 
 a purification. 
 
 The secondary meaning of the Greek word 
 baptizo, denoting a condition of purification, was 
 in daily, current use in the time of John the Bap- 
 tist. The proof of this has already been given, 
 and need not be here repeated. The result of an 
 exhaustive investigation of the various baptisms 
 of Judaism is thus given in the conclusion of 
 Dale's "Judaic Baptism," p. 400; 
 
 " Judaic Baptism is a condition of ceremonial 
 PURIFICATION cffixtcdby ///^WASHING of tJie Jiands 
 or feet, by the SPRINKLING of sacrificial blood or 
 heifer-ashes, by the POURING tipon of zvater, by the 
 TOUCH of a coal of fire, by the WAVING of a flaming 
 sivord, and by divers other modes and agencies, de- 
 pendent in no "Jinse on any form of act or on the cover- 
 ing of the object." 
 
Baptism ivith Water. 183 
 
 During- the whole period of the Hebrew coin- 
 mon wealth, for fifteen hundred years from Moses 
 to John, those ritual purifications which the 
 Greek-speaking- Jews called baptisms were in 
 dail}-, constant practice. The principal baptismal 
 agencies were sacrificial blood, heifer-ashes, and 
 pure water; and these baptismal agencies were 
 usually applied by sprinkling or by pouring water 
 on the hands. With the nature of these various Jew- 
 ish baptisms John the Baptist was well acquainted. 
 The secondary meaning of baptizo, expressive of 
 purification, was its common, daily signification in 
 the popular language of the Jews, and had been 
 for several generations. . From the time- that 
 Jewish Greek became their vernacular tongue 
 this word had been applied to denote these 
 Hebrew purifications, just as other Greek words 
 had been appropriated to express their Hebrew 
 ideas. All the surroundings of the son of Zacha- 
 rias from his childhood had been pervaded by the 
 atmosphere of this religious usage. The word 
 was prepared for his use by its whole religious 
 history. The only modification of its meaning 
 which was needed was to turn it from its cere- 
 monial and typical application so as to adapt it to 
 its spiritual and symbolic use in his preaching as 
 'I'.e forerunner of Christ. This modification was 
 
1S4 The Mea7iing and Poivey of Baptism. 
 
 both needful and natural under the moulding in- 
 flirence of the new order of thins^s. 
 
 As the baptisms of Judaism were diverse, so 
 the baptism of John had its own distinctive 
 nature, in which it differed from Judaic baptism. 
 Judaic baptism puritied the body ceremonially; 
 John s baptism was a superior baptism. It was 
 the baptism of repentance into the remission of 
 sins, symboHzed by a ritual baptism with pure 
 water. The ritual baptism of John was a sym- 
 bol of the baptism of the soul by repentance. The 
 generic idea common to Judaic and Johannic bap- 
 tisms was <?: ^c;/^///<?;^ of purification resulting from 
 some baptizing power capable of prodiiciiig such a con- 
 dition. Tlie character of the baptism in either 
 case was determined by the characteristic of the 
 baptizing- agency. It was the characteristic of 
 sacrificial blood and heifer-ashes to produce cere- 
 monial purification. It was the characteristic of 
 pure water, in its ritual use by John, to produce 
 symbol purity, emblematical of the spiritual 
 purity of the soul resulting from the baptism of 
 repentance. But the essential idea common to 
 all these baptisms — purification — received a more 
 elevated and spiritual significance, and a new 
 and-fresh life, in the baptism of John. 
 
 As the baptism of John was, in its specialty. 
 
I 
 
 Baptism with Water. 185 
 
 different from Judaic baptism, he employed a 
 new word to express it. The word fioi7iriaf.ia, 
 the Greek noun which is used to express the bap- 
 tism of John, appears for the first time in connec- 
 tion with his ministry. It does not occur in any 
 previous writing. It is worthy of special notice, 
 because it belongs to a class of Greek words 
 which do not express act, but effect, a condition re- 
 sulting from the action of the verb. This princi- 
 ple is well understood by Greek scholars, but its 
 importance and value in relation to the true 
 meaning of baptism will justify the citation of 
 some proof. 
 
 Dr. Dale, "Johannic Baptism," p. 141, says: 
 " Substantives derived from verbs ending in ma 
 are used to express the effect, rcsnlt, product, state 
 induced by the verb. In this view all gramma- 
 rians concur." 
 
 Crosby, " Greek Grammar," sec. 364, says : 
 " Nouns foi^med by adding ma to the stem of the 
 verb denote the effect or object of the action." 
 
 Hadle3% "Greek Grammar," sec. 461, D, ^, 
 says: "The RESULT of an action is expressed by 
 the suffix ma.'' 
 
 Kiihner sa3'S : "Substantives with the ending 
 ma denote the effect or result of the transitive 
 action of the verb." 
 
1 86 TJie Meaniup- and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 Winer says : " The most numerous loimations 
 are those in via, . . . mostly in the sense of 
 product or state" ; and he gives this very word 
 ftanrwfxa as the first example (" N. T. Gr.," 
 Thayer's edition, p. 93). 
 
 Sophocles, Jelf, and Philip Buttmann lay down 
 the same principle. Dr. Dale has the most solid 
 reasons for saying: " Baptism {ftaTTTiafia) denotes 
 a result, an effect, a condition Irom the act of the 
 verb. . . . The use of this word originates in 
 the Scriptures. It is there used to express ex- 
 clusively a spiritual result, effect, or condition. 
 It never has water as its complement" ("The 
 Cup and the Cross," p. 5). 
 
 Baptism with water is a symbol of the baptism 
 oi repentance. It would be an error to interpret 
 the expression, " I baptize with water into re- 
 pentance " (Matt. iii. 11), as teaching that bap- 
 tism with water is "• the instrumental cause " of 
 repentance; for water has no power to cause 
 repentance. This interpretation is refuted by 
 the continued impenitence of numbers after re- 
 ceiving ritual baptism. The. ritual baptism is but 
 a symbol, an expressive symbol, and iisefid as 
 s ich, but without power to produce the change 
 ot spiritual condition which it symbolizes. This 
 is seen \n the contrast which John presents in 
 
Baptism zvith ]Vate7'. 187 
 
 this and parallel passages between baptism with 
 water and the baptism of the H0I3' Ghost. John 
 reg-arded the Pharisees and Sadducees as unfit 
 candidates for his baptism in their impenitent 
 condition. Others, " confessing their sins," he 
 baptized. As they had experienced the reality, 
 it was fit that thev should receive the symbol. 
 But the external rite would be vacated of its 
 meaning and become an empty form to those 
 who did not repent. He therefore said to them : 
 " I indeed baptize you with water into repent- 
 ance " — simple water, a mere symbol, having no 
 efficacy in itself, but expressive of the repentance 
 which is required — " but He that cometh after me 
 is mightier than I. . . . He shall baptize you 
 with the Holy Ghost and with fire." They must 
 become subjects of the baptism of repentance 
 which John preached, and "bring forth fruit 
 meet for repentance," or baptism with water 
 would be of no avail. 
 
 The emblematical character of John's baptism 
 appears in the answer which he gave to a ques- 
 tion i-espccting the nature of his baptism. The 
 enquir)- was riot, as in the English Version, " Wh}^ 
 bnptizest thou ?" but, as it was understood by the 
 Patrists and bv recent scholars, " What [baptism] 
 dost thou baptize?" (Dale, p. 145). John replies: 
 
1 88 The Meaning and Pozuer of Baptism. 
 
 " 1 baptize with water," a S3'mbol baptism. 
 There is One coming who "shall baptize you 
 with the Holy Ghost," The baptism of the 
 Mightier One is the real baptism, of which mine 
 is onl}^ an emblem. Ambrose, quoting John's 
 language, "I baptize with water," says: "For 
 the body is purified by water; the sins of the soul 
 are cleansed by the Holy Ghost" (Dale, p. 14S). 
 
 The design of John's baptism inv^olves its em- 
 blematic character. Pointing to "the Lamb of 
 God that taketh awa}' the sin of the world," 
 hesaj's: "But that he should be made manifest 
 to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with 
 water." John's baptism, both tiie spiritual and 
 the ritual, had its signification in its relation to 
 Him of wdiom John was the forerunner. " The 
 object of the rite was to direct the attention of 
 the people not only by words, but by the addi- 
 tional help of a visible symbol, to the Lamb of 
 God as in Jiimself most pure, as vindicating the 
 divine purity by his w^ork, and as demanding and 
 securing purification in all \\\\o should share in- 
 the fruits of that work. The rite was designed 
 by the use of symbol water to set forth purifi- 
 cation FROM SIN as the great and vital thought 
 connected with and effected by the coming Lamb 
 OF God " (p. 229). 
 
Baptism wiik Water. 189 
 
 There is a theorj^ very different from this — a 
 theory which denies that the word denotes purifi- 
 cation, and declares that it signifies a dipping 
 into water, and that this act of dipping into 
 water is designed to set forth the burial and 
 resurrection of Christ. 
 
 But of baptism in any i-elation to the burial of 
 Christ there is not a syllable in the four Gospels, 
 or in the Acts of the Apostles, or in any writer 
 for more than a quarter of a century after the 
 resurrection of Christ. The first allusion to it 
 is in a metaphorical passage in two of Paul's 
 Epistles, which will be considered in another 
 place. 
 
 But it is said the expression in the Greek is iv 
 vdari — in water — and that this presents the water 
 not as " the means by which," but as " the ele- 
 ment in which," the baptism takes place. In 
 " Theodosia Ernest," American Baptist Publica- 
 tion Society, p. 88, we are told : " So you will find 
 it in every place"; and on p. 96 we are told 
 that this is " the rrue rendering " in Acts i. 5. 
 But the Greek prcpositic^n docs not occur in 
 Acts i. 5, and where it does occur it is used in 
 the instrumental sense, " with water," as it is cor 
 rcctly translated in the English Version. 
 
 I. The Greek word vdaxi is used in the dative 
 
I90 The Meaning and Power 0/ Baptism. 
 
 case tvitiiont the preposition in Acts i. 5, and else- 
 where in the New Testament, as the instj-iiviental 
 means of baptism. In Acts i. 5, where our Sa- 
 viour says: "John truly baptized with water " — 
 a passage occupying a position of special promi- 
 nence in the teaching of Jesus — the simple dative 
 is used without the Greek preposition. It is 
 what the Greek grammarians call ''the instru- 
 mental dative.'" Prof. Hackett translates it " with 
 water," and in this case even Dr. Conant con- 
 sents (p. 100). No other translation is consistent 
 with usage. Winer, in his " New Testament 
 Grammar," p. 216, places Acts i. 5, xi, 16, with 
 other passages, under the '' dative of the instni- 
 uient (casus instrumentalis)," and translates 
 " with." On p. 412 he translates the expression 
 *^ baptize luith water.'' The word is used in the 
 dative without the preposition to denote the 
 means with which the baptism is performed in 
 Acts i. 5, Acts xi. 16, Luke iii. 16, and, in Tischen- 
 dorf's New Testament, in Mark i. 8. These ex- 
 amples are sufficient to establish the instrumental, 
 signification. 
 
 2. The word is sometimes used in the instrn- 
 nirnfat sense zaith the preposition. It is thus used 
 in Matt. iii. ii ; John i. 26, 31, 33; and. in Hahn's 
 New Testament, in Mark i. 8. 
 
Baptism with Water. 191 
 
 The use ot the preposition in the instniment.il 
 sense is very frequent in Hellenistic Greek. 
 Alexander Buttmann, in his " New Testament 
 Grammar," translated by J. H. Thayer, 1873, 
 under "Dative of the Instrument," p. 181, says: 
 " The preposition iv is prefixed to this dative with 
 uncommon frequency" in "the language of the 
 New Testament "; and on p. 329 he s;iys: " Kv in 
 the Old and New Testaments is very comifionly 
 used ... to designate the means."' We are 
 told in " Theodosia Ernest " that there are '■ only 
 about fort}^ places" in the New Testament in 
 which the Greek preposition must be translated 
 '^ with in the sense of the instrument or material 
 with which anything is done " (p. 89). But this, 
 like the statement respecting Acts i. 5, must be 
 numbered among the errors of that theological 
 romance. Even from the Baptist Version of the 
 Bible, which naturally gives only the minimum 
 of examples. Dr. Dale quotes, from the single 
 Gospel of Matthew, thirty-seven passages in 
 which that Version gives it the instrumental 
 sense, "■re////," " /y," '' throughi' He also quotes 
 more than thirty examples from the Book of Re- 
 vek.tion in which the Baptist Bible gives it the 
 instrumental sense; and in the whole New Testa 
 ment, from personal examination, he says tiie 
 
T 92 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 number "must be computed by hundreds" (p. 
 171). Dr. Dale also gives numerous quotations 
 from Hellenistic Greek writers in the Septuagint 
 and elsewhere of the use of the preposition in the 
 instrumental sense. His statement, like that of 
 Prof. Buttmann, rests upon the solid basis of facts 
 when he says, p. 213: *' //" is in proof ihixt ev is 
 used in the classics, and abundantly in the New 
 Testfiment, in the sense with, byi" While, there- 
 fore, the Greek preposition in the Septuagint and 
 in the New Testament often means in, it also 
 with equal frequency denotes the instrumental 
 means, and is rightly translated " with " in the 
 English Version. 
 
 3. Aspecialargument for the instrumental sense 
 is found in the tj-uc reason for the variable use of the 
 two forms of expression in the New Testament. 
 Luke invariably omits the preposition; Matthew 
 and John insert it. INIark omits it, according to 
 the Sinaitic manuscript and Tischendorf's New 
 Testament. Origen quotes both Mark and Luke 
 as omitting it, while he quotes Matthew and' 
 John as inserting it (Dale, p. 288). Alford ac- 
 cepts the reading of Tischendorf. Dr. Conant 
 (p. 100) acknowledges "the instrumental dative'^ 
 in Luke iii. 16, Acts i. 5. xi. 16; vet he trans- 
 lates " in the Holy Spirit," in the same passages, 
 
BaptisDi with Water. 193 
 
 •'as the element in which the baptism is per- 
 formed." The reason which he gives is that 
 "■ the Holy Spirit could less properl}' be- conceiv- 
 ed as the mere instrument of an act." But this 
 reason is not satisfactory. It would require uni- 
 formity in the expression relating to water in the 
 Greek in all the passages. It does not account 
 for the variation in the different writers. The 
 true reason is given b}' Prof. Buttmann. Luke 
 wrote more in tJie classic style, which generally 
 employs the simple dative to denote instrumen- 
 tality. JMatthew and John wrote in conformity 
 with the idiom of the Hcbretu, which very fre- 
 quently employs the preposition in the instru- 
 mental sense. Prof. Buttmann, "New Testa- 
 ment Grammar," p. 329, says: "The Greek' 
 preposition 4k in the Old and New Testaments is 
 very commonl}- used, like the preposition beth in 
 Hebrew, to designate the means'' ; and on p. 181 
 he says : " This New Testament peculiarity," the 
 uncommon frequency v/ith which the preposition 
 hv is prefixed to the instrumental dative, " is 
 manifestly a ]"esult of the frequent occurrence of 
 the preposition in the Septuagint, after the ex- 
 ample of the Hebrew beth, as is apparent from 
 countless examples from the Old Testament and 
 New." The same i)rincjplc is given by ^Viner, 
 
194 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 " New Testament Grammar," p. 388. In classic 
 Greek instrumental agency is expressed by the 
 dative without the preposition. Of twenty-six 
 such passages in classic Greek in which the word 
 baptizo IS used with the simple dative, Dr. Co- 
 nant translates by the use of the English pre- 
 positions " with,'" " by " in twent}' cases, and might 
 as well have done so in the other six. These 
 passages are quoted by Dale (p. 208). The 
 Greekly style of Luke is the true explanation 
 of his use of the dative of means without the 
 preposition. The Hebraistic style of ^latthew 
 and John equally accounts for their use of the 
 preposition in the instrumental sense in confor- 
 mity with the Hebrew idiom. Dr. Campbell, of 
 Aberdeen, recognizes this Hebraistic use of the 
 preposition, " which, answering to the Hebrew 
 bcth, may denote zuith as well as in " (Dale, p. 
 158). The variation in the omission or insertion 
 of the preposition before " water " in the Greek, 
 zi'heji truly accGuntcd for, gives a decisive argument 
 for the instrumental sense. Prof. Buttmann (p. 
 1S2) cites INIatt. iii. 11 among the examples of 
 " the addition of the preposition tv to the in- 
 strumental dative," and, in explaining, says " not 
 in water." The English Version gives the true 
 meaning by the translation " with " in each class 
 
Baptism zvith Water. 195 
 
 of cases. This iuterpretatioa also brings the 
 writers into harmon}^ with each other. 
 
 4. The comparison which the Patrists make 
 between baptism with water and baptism with 
 blood gives the instrumental sense : " Thou dost 
 baptize me with water, that I may baptize thee for 
 myself with thy blood " (Jerome). '' They were 
 baptized, not with water, but with their own 
 blood " (Bassillius). The Greek preposition is 
 used in the instrumental sense before both water 
 and blood. As one's own blood is not " the ele- 
 ment in which," but the agenc}^ " by which," his 
 baptism of blood is effected, so water in the cor- 
 responding phrase is the agency or " means by 
 v/hich " the baptism is performed. 
 
 5. Several other Greek prepositions which de- 
 note means, as dux, vrto, etc., are used by the 
 Patrists with the Greek words zvatcr, blood, tears, 
 fire, and other baptismal agencies, as instru- 
 mental in producing various baptisms. The use 
 of these prepositions excludes the signification 
 "dipping into." Dale gives the examples (pp. 
 209, 233, 241, et passim). 
 
 PLACES OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Malt. iii. 6 : " And were baptized of him in 
 Jordan." 
 
196 The Mea ning and Powei" of Baptism. 
 
 Mark i. 5 : " Were all baptized of him in the 
 river of Jordan." 
 
 The use of baplizo in connection with the place 
 of baptism, especially the river Jordan, is urged 
 as an argument for immersion. But this argu- 
 ment, like the preceding, fails to establish the 
 meaning claimed. 
 
 1. The preposition is used to denote simple 
 locality. It signifies ''■in any place, on, at, by" 
 (Robinson, '' New Testament Lexicon "). 
 
 2. It is used to denote locality in connection 
 with the word baptizo : "John did baptize in 
 the wilderness "(Mark i. 4). The wilderness was 
 not "the element in which" John baptized the 
 people, but the place where he baptized them. 
 It denotes simple localit3^ He also baptized in 
 other places — "in Bethabara beyond Jordan" 
 (John i. 28, X. 40), in zEnon (iii. 23), and else- 
 where. There were numerous localities where 
 baptism was performed, as Jerusalem, etc. No- 
 thing can be determined respecting the mode of 
 baptism from the local use of the preposition. 
 
 3. The river Jordan is a locality, and is spoken 
 of as a locality in connection with baptism : " Then 
 cometh Jesus from Galilee upon [_e7ti\ the Jordan 
 unto John, to be baptized of him " (Matt. iii. 13). 
 Justin Martyr speaks of Jordan as a locality : 
 
Baptism iviih Water. 197 
 
 " While John yet dwelt upon [j'ttz] the river Jor 
 dan, Christ came." . . . "And Jesus having 
 come upon [f^^'J tlie river Jordan, where John 
 baptized" (Dale, p. 376). Dr. Carson, p. 351, 
 says: ''When we wish merely to designate the 
 place of baptism, we always use 111^ Prof. Har- 
 rison gives this preposition the meaning at, on, 
 near, and illustrates by such examples as Herod., 
 i. 'j6'. "A city on [e'j'J the Euxine Sea"; Xen., 
 " Anab.," iv. 8, 22: "A Grecian city on [fV] the 
 Pontus Euxinus " (Dale, p. 352). Gesenius and 
 Rosenmuller give it the same local signification in 
 connection with rivers and streams. Di". Dale 
 gives several examples in which it is used to 
 denote locality in rivers and seas, yet not in the 
 water. Dr. Carson, discussing the passage in Ho- 
 mer's " Iliad," xviii. 520, which represents an am- 
 buscade of soldiers as lodging in the river, says: 
 " It was within the banks of the river that the am- 
 buscade lodged " (p. 338). The soldiers had a fine, 
 dr}^ camping-ground in the river between the 
 banks where the}' could lie in wait. Of Ul3'sses, 
 who, escaping from shipwreck, lodged all night in 
 the river under shelter of the bank. Dr. Carson 
 also says, p. 339: " He might be in the river, 
 yd not in the Vv\\TER ; all zvithin the banks is the 
 river.'' People, then, might be in the river, and 
 
198 The iMeaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 be baptized ia the river, and not go into the 
 water. There is ample room between the upper 
 bank of the river Jordan and the lower bank, a 
 distance of an eighth of a mile — forty rods — 
 where a multitude of people could stand and be 
 baptized without going into the water. The 
 testimony of travellers makes this plain. Maun- 
 drell says: "After having descended the outer- 
 most bank, you go about a furlong on a level 
 strand before you come to the immediate bank 
 of the river" (Dale, p. 373). Another sa3'S : " The 
 Jordan may be said to have two banks, of which 
 the inner marks the ordinary height of the stream, 
 and the outer its elevation during the rainy sea- 
 son " (p. 325). 
 
 4. When the word baptizo is used in \{.^ primary 
 classic signification with the Greek preposition 
 iv to denote a baptism, the baptized object RE- 
 MAINS in the clement, and is not taken out of it. 
 
 Josephus : "And there, according to command, 
 being baptized in a pool by the Galatians, he 
 dies." Whiston translates it "was drowned" 
 (" Wars of the Jews," i. 22, 2). 
 
 Polybius : " Baptized and sinking in the pools, 
 . . . many of them perished " (" Classic Bap- 
 tism," p. 258). 
 
 Plotinus : " Siie dies ; . . . and death to her. 
 
Baptism with Water. 199 
 
 while yet baptized in the body, is to sink in mat- 
 ter, and to be iilled with it " (" C. B.," p. 264). 
 
 The soul remains in the condition of baptism, 
 and is changed to corruption by the influence of 
 the bod}^ upon it. 
 
 Alexander xA.phrodisias: " Baptized in the depth 
 of the body" (" C. B.," p. 264). 
 
 This Greek writer thus expresses the death of 
 the perceptive power: 
 
 " In this class of baptisms, in every case, with- 
 out exception, the baptized object is not taken out 
 of the clement, but remains within it " ("Johannic 
 Baptism," p. 368). The word, therefore, is not 
 used in the New Testament in its primarj^ sig"nifi- 
 cation in connection with the Greek preposition. 
 It is not to its use in the classics that w^e must 
 look for its meaning, but to its secondary use in 
 the Jewish Greek spoken in Palestine. Dr. Car- 
 son and Dr. Campbell lay no stress on the prepo- 
 sition, for they well know that its use affords no 
 evidence of dipping the person into w^atcr. Dr. 
 Carson's argument is wholly different. His 
 argument is this: "There can be no adequate 
 cause alleged for going to the river," except for 
 the purpose of immersion (p. 126). 
 
 But there is no intimation of this reason, and 
 no fact supporting it, in the narrative. On the 
 
200 The ]\[caniiig a?id Po7vcr of Baptism. 
 
 other hand, a good reason lor baptizing- in this 
 locahly is found in the fact that "his peciihar 
 character as a v.'itness led him to make the wil- 
 derness bordering on the Jordan his place of 
 abode" (Olshausen, I. 259; Luke i. 80, iii. 2). 
 No reason can be assigned why he should go 
 elsewhere. Tiiis was his abode, and where he 
 lived there he preached, and where he preached 
 tlicrc he baptized. 
 
 An adequate and a most appropriate reason 
 was in "the cJiaractcr of the water. Both Gentile 
 and Jew attached a specially purifying value to 
 running water" (Dale, p. 332). The use of 
 running water was required in the Old Testa- 
 ment for purihcation. "And he shall dip them 
 . . . in the riainiitg water, and sprinkle the 
 house seven times: and he shall cleanse the 
 house v»'ith the blood of the bird, and with the 
 running v/ater" (Lev. xiv. 51, 52). Philo, the 
 Jew, says : " It is the custom of nearly all others 
 to sprinlclc themselves for purification with pure 
 water; man}' with that of the sea, some with that 
 of r/Vrrj- " (332). The Roman high-priest directs 
 the Sabine preparing to worship Diana: "Sprin- 
 kle 3'ourself first with the living stream. The Ti- 
 ber flows before you in the bottom of the val- 
 ley." Ovid: " The hanrls should be washed with 
 
Bapiisvi ijith Water. loi 
 
 living water." Viri^il : "Sprinkling' the body 
 with rivc)- water" (333). The general sentiment, 
 the • usual custom, and obvious propriety were 
 adequate to lead John to use pure running water 
 in his baptism, whose symbolic purity was in- 
 tended to represent emblematically the purifying 
 influence of the Holy Ghost on the soul, 
 
 JOHN III. 23 : 
 
 "Because there was much water there." 
 
 Dr. Carson, p. 476, says : " The reason alleged 
 for John's baptizing in ^non implies that bap- 
 tism w^as immersion"; otherwise "there would 
 have been no need of much water." But the 
 quantity of water surely could not have been the 
 reason for going to ^non to baptize. There 
 was a far greater quantity in the river Jordan, 
 only ten miles away. The true reason is given 
 by the Evangelist. Jesus and John were botJi 
 baptizing in the same vicinity. Both parties 
 were baptizing in the neighborliood of each other 
 — Jesus and his disciples, " and John also'^—ho,- 
 cause there were many places for baptizing, so 
 that both could baptize without interference. 
 The expression in the original is in the plural 
 number, vdara noWa — many zuatcrs — and it is 
 translated in the plural in all other places (Rev. i. 
 
202 The Mcani7ig and Power of Baptisjn. 
 
 15, xiv. 2, xvii. I, xix. 6; see also Ezek. xix, 10; 
 2 Kings V. 12; Judith vii. 17). The number of 
 places for baptizing, and not the quantity of 
 water, is the reason given ; and this reason is not 
 given solely to account for the fact that John was 
 baptizing in that place, but for the fact that both 
 parties were baptizing near each other — Jesus 
 and his disciples, "and John also^ The number 
 of fountains of water afforded facilities for the 
 accommodation of both for the purpose of bap- 
 tizing, and also for any other uses of the water 
 that need might require. Ambrose says " tvrelve 
 springs," and his remark that they " must be 
 besprinkled b}' these fountains" (Dale, p. 317) 
 shows that it was not quantity of water or dip- 
 ping in water that entered into his idea of this 
 baptism. 
 
 The abundance of water could not have been 
 the reason for leaving the Jordan and going to 
 -^non, for there was a greater abundance in the 
 river. The reason' is found in the season of the 
 year. It v.-as in the month of April, just after the 
 Jewish Passover, when the river Jordan is full to 
 overflowing, rising above its upper banks, and 
 " bearing on its swelling waters all th.e unclean 
 things which were the result of a year's accumu- 
 lation within its wide, extended outer banks," 
 
Baptism zvith Water. 203 
 
 and the waters become impure and unfit to sym- 
 bolize the spiritual purity in which the very 
 essence of baptism consists. At ^'Enon springs 
 of pure water abound. The waters of ^Enon are 
 described by Oriental travellers as "an assem- 
 blage of fountains and pools, . . . springs of the 
 purest water, six miles northeast of Jerusalem " 
 (Coleman, pp. 26S, 269). The secondary mean- 
 ing of baptizo, denoting purification, gives a 
 good and adequate reason why the baptism was at 
 one time at the Jordan and at another at ^Enon. 
 This signification harmonizes all the facts, and 
 gives a solution to all appropriate enquiries. 
 
 MATT. III. 16: 
 
 " Went up straightway out of the water." 
 
 An aro^ument for immersion is drawn from 
 the English translation of the Greek preposi- 
 tion in this verse by the phrase "out of." But 
 the correct translation of this Greek preposition 
 {ano) is from. It is translated from in the same 
 chapter only a few verses previous. " Who hath 
 warned you to flee from \a7to^^ the wrath to 
 come?" (v. 7). The Baptist Version of the New 
 Testament'translates it from. 
 
 It is also translated /ri?7/^ in Luke iv. i : " Jesus 
 
204 The Mean ill o- and Power of Baptism. 
 
 . . . returned /ro!/i [a'Tto] the Jordan." It is 
 translated from two hundred and thirty-five 
 times in the iirst four books of the New Testa- 
 ment, and out of on\y forty-two times. " It occurs 
 in the Gospel by Matthew one hundred and nine 
 times, and is rendered just sixty-five times froui, 
 and only ten times 07it of (Theodore, p. 262). 
 Dr. Carson says : " I admit the proper translation 
 of apo is from, and not out of (p. 126). Professor 
 Stuart says: "I have found no example where 
 t!ie preposition arro is applied to indicate a move- 
 ment out of a liquid into the air " (p. 320). 
 
 ACTS VIII. 38: 
 
 "Went down both into the water." 
 
 In tins passage also the preposition is thought 
 bv some to favor immersion. ])ut the Greek 
 preposition (fzs) might with equal propriet}- be 
 translated to. In this very chapter it occurs 
 eleven times, and is translated into only once. In 
 all the other places it is translated by some other 
 word. Elsewhere in the New Testament it is 
 translated to, toward, inito, by, at, on, and other 
 words. It is translated to, unto., two hundred and 
 eight\-five times in the tirst five books of the 
 New Testament. " The preposition (f/^) occurs 
 
Baptism tvith. Water. 205 
 
 single in the Acts of the Apostles tzvo hundred 
 and sixty-four times, and is rendered into only 
 sixty-one times ; and of tliese sixty-one times 
 there are twenty-six in which it might properly 
 be rendered to or toivard. . . , The evidence 
 from this single source is as seven or eight to one 
 against the supposition that the inspired writer 
 intended to saj' that Philip and the eunuch went 
 into the water" (Theodore, p. 281). I will give 
 a few examples of its use. Mark xiii. 3: " lie 
 sat upon [fzV] the Mount of Olives." John xxi. 
 4: "Jesus stood on [f/s] the shore." Acts xxvi. 
 14: " When we were all fallen to [f^s] the earth." 
 Matt. xxi. I : " When they drew nigh unto [f/s] 
 Jcrnsalem " (not into, for they were two miles 
 distant). John xx. i, 11: "Cometh early unto 
 [£z?] the sepulchre [not into], but stood without." 
 John XX. 3-5 : " Came to [^zV] the sepulchre, . . . 
 yet went he not in." John xi. 38 : " Jesus cometh 
 to [f/b] the grave." 2 Kings vi. 4 (Sept.) : " When 
 they came to [fz?] Jordan, they cut down wood." 
 They did not go into the water to cut wood. 
 The wood was on the level strand in the river 
 between the upper and lower banks. Matt. xv. 
 24: "I am not sent but unto [fz?] the lost sheep 
 (.f the house of Israel." We are amply justified 
 in saying of this preposition, as Dr. Carson snys 
 
2o6 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 of ocno : " It would have its ineauing iiiUy veri- 
 fied if the}" had only gone down to the edge ot 
 the water" (p. 126). He admits tliat " eii might 
 be used if the advance was only to the margin "' 
 (p. 132), and that it "sometimes denotes motion 
 to a place that ends on this side of the object" 
 (p. 135)- 
 
 ACTS VIII. 39: 
 
 " When they were come up out of the water." 
 
 On the preposition (f?^), translated out of in 
 this passage, Y^w Carson relies with more confi- 
 dence. He says: "It alwa3's supposes that the 
 point of departure is within the object" (p. 130). 
 " It never, in a single instance, designates merely 
 from; it is alwa^ys cut of" (p. 355). This, like 
 man}' other statements too hastily made, reveals 
 the need of a more thorough investigation of the 
 usage of the Greek prepositions. The statement 
 is not sustained by the facts. Winer, p. 366, 
 says: " It originally denotes issuing y>^w within''; 
 but he further says, p. 367: "Sometimes it de- 
 notes mere direction fromi" In his " N. T. Lex- 
 icon," Robinson gives the meaning from, as well 
 as out of : " After words implying motion of any 
 kind . . . from anyplace or object, . . . thus 
 marking the point from wliich the direction sets 
 
Baptisiii ivith Watc7\ 207 
 
 off." Alexander Buttmaun, " N. T. Gn," p. 322 : 
 " The fundamental signilication of ano — viz., de- 
 pi.rlure from the exterior of an object — is the p]"e- 
 valent one in the New Testament " ; and on p. 
 326 he says : " Owing to the affinity in significa- 
 tion between hi and ano, it is natural that both 
 should often serve to denote one and the same 
 relation." In John xii. 32 Jesus says: "If I be 
 lifted up from [f«] the earth." Here the prepo- 
 sition denotes an "exterior relation." The move- 
 ment' is not from a point zvithin the earth, but 
 from a point en the exterior surfaee of the earth ; 
 not out of, but from, the earth. Acts xii. 7 : " His 
 chains fell off from \_hi\ his hands." So Prof. 
 Hackett translates, and so the Baptist Version, as 
 also the English Version. Matthew, xxvii. 60, 
 says : " He rolled a great stone to the door of the 
 sepulchre"; and Mark, xv. 46: "Rolled a stone 
 unto [£;r/] the door." When, therefore, John, xx. 
 I, says: "Mary Magdalene . . . seeth the 
 stone taken awa}^ from \_sk'\ the sepulchre," the 
 meruiing is not that the stone was rolled out of X\\q 
 sepulchre — for it had not been rolled into the sepul- 
 chre — but unto the door to bar the entrance. Matt., 
 xxviii. 2, says : " The angel . . . rolled back 
 the sionc from [aTto in composition with the verb] 
 the door." This illustrates what Buttmann says 
 
2oS The Mean in i^ a?:d Poivcr of Baptism. 
 
 I 
 
 of the affinily of the preposit;ons lxtto and ^n to \ 
 
 denote " departure- from the exterior of an ob- | 
 
 ject." Mark xvi. 3: "Who shall roll us away | 
 
 the stone from \sk\ the door?" The subject is : 
 
 fully discussed by Dr. Dale (" C. and P. B., " p. \ 
 
 182 seq.) j 
 
 The word has received a diversity of transla- i 
 
 tion in the English Version. It is translated /;-<?;;/ | 
 
 one hundred and two times in the first five books ; 
 
 ot the New Testament, and out of only seventy- '• 
 nine. " The word occurs single in the Acts of the 
 
 Apostles sixty-four times, and it is translated out , 
 
 of onlv five times, and one of the five is where | 
 
 our Version has it, ' were come up out of the i 
 
 water'" (Theodore, p. 282). In addition to all | 
 
 this is the fact adduced by Fairchlld (" Baptism," < 
 p. 79) that " the Greek writers, when they 
 
 wished, by the force of the words, to express the \ 
 
 idea of going out of usually doubled the preposi- j 
 
 tion EK, placing it beiorc the noun and prefixing \ 
 
 it also to the verb." This is peculiarly noticeable ! 
 
 in the style of the author oi the Book of Acts.' { 
 
 No less than "twenty examples" of this double I 
 use of tK occur in the Acts. But in Acts viii. 39 
 
 the single he is used. If Luke had intended to ; 
 
 express the idea of out of, he would not- have de- \ 
 
 viated from his usual mode of expressing that idea. j 
 
Bap I ism ivith Water. 209 
 
 There is no decisive evidence in th.- language 
 ot the sacred writer in this passage in favor of 
 nnmersion. Prof. Stuart says : " The preposi- 
 tion in . . . by no means of necessity implies 
 it," and he translates, " TJicy zvent up from the 
 water''' (p. 326). 
 
 JOHN III. 25 : 
 
 " Then there arose a question between some 
 of John's disciples and the Jews about puri- 
 fying." 
 
 The question about " purifying" was a cfuestion 
 about " baptizing." Baptizing is the subject of 
 which the Evangelist is discoursing in the verses 
 preceding and following, and therefore includ- 
 ing, this passage. To treat this verse as if it were 
 not connected in the course of the narrative with 
 what stands related to it before and after is 
 wholl}- arbitrar}'. 
 
 Theophylact says: "There was a dispute con- 
 cerning baptism between the disciples of John, 
 moved with rivalr}', and a certain Jew. For 
 the Jew placed the claims of Christ before those 
 of John ; but the disciples of John gave the pre- 
 cedence to their master's baptism. Disputing 
 concerning purification — tliat is, baptism — they 
 came to their master" (Dr. E. Beecher, \). 214). 
 
2 lo The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 Chrysostom :" There was a dispute . . . con- 
 cerning piLrification. For tlic disciples of John, 
 being jealous of the disciples of Christ, and of 
 Christ himself, when they saw them bapiizing, 
 began to dispute with those who were baptized.^ as 
 if their own baptism was superior" (p. 214). 
 
 Hermann Cremcr ('' Bib.-Theo. Lex. of New 
 Testament Greek," p. 311) says: "The baptism 
 both of John and Jesus is designated piiripication 
 in John iii, 25, by which the connection between it 
 and the ritual process of purification (cf. Ezek. 
 xxxvi, 25) is made evident." 
 
 Dr. Dale (" C. and P. B.," p. 355) says that the 
 " purification in John iii. 25 is used in its generic 
 character, to include both the baptism of the Jew — 
 ceremonial purif)'ing ; and the baptism of repen- 
 tance — the spiritual purification of John." 
 
 Dr. J. J. Owen, in his comment on the passage, 
 says: "About purifying — i.e., about the nature 
 and efficacy of baptismal purification." 
 
 Alford (in loco) says : " John and our Lord were 
 baptizing near to one another," . . . and the- 
 "dispute" was "about the relative importance 
 of the two baptisms." Whether the dispute in- 
 volved a comparison between the baptism of John 
 and the baptism of Jesus, or between the symbol 
 baptism of John and the ceremonial baptism of 
 
Baptism with Water. 2 1 1 
 
 Judaism, it was, as nearly all Christian interpre- 
 ters explain it, and as the course of thought in the 
 fvangelist requires us to understand it, a dispute 
 about baptism, purification, 
 
 THE MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 The essence of baptism does not consist in the 
 mode in which the baptismal agency is applied, 
 but in the condition effected by the agency. The 
 word baptizo does not express any act, either 
 sprinkling, pouring, dipping, or any other act, but 
 in sacred use it expresses a condition of ritual 
 purit}' emblematical of the spiritual purity of the 
 soul. Sprinkling and pouring, and not dipping 
 the body into water, are the divinely-authorized 
 acts by which ritual baptism, whether ceremonial 
 or symbol, is effected. 
 
 1. The act of dipping, putting into water and 
 immediately taking out, is not expressed in Greek 
 by the word baptizo, but by BAPTO. Baptizo, in 
 classic use, does not take out wlrat it puts under 
 water. In the New Testament persons ai-e never 
 put under water for baptism. They are baptized 
 zvitli water. 
 
 2. Sprinkling was the act which, by command 
 of God, was employed during the whole period 
 of the Hebrew commonwealth, from jNIoses to 
 
2 1 2 llic Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 Christ, for applying the ashes of a heifer, sacrifi- 
 cial blood, and pure water to effect ceremonial 
 purification ; and this ceremonial purification, in 
 the times of John the Baptist and Christ, was 
 called baptism, and had been so called during all 
 the ages in which the Jews had spoken the Greek 
 language. This mode of baptism was in constant, 
 daily use among the people, and had the authority 
 of divine command and universal practice. To 
 this ever\'-day, current use of the word in the 
 common language of the Jewish people we are to 
 go to learn the meaning and mode of baptism 
 rathei- than to classic Greek. It was not classic 
 but Hellenistic Greek which was the vernacular 
 of the Jewish people. 
 
 3. Judaic baptism was a type of Christian bap- 
 tism ; Judaic baptism was the purification of the 
 body from ceremonial defilement, and the bap- 
 tismal agencies were applied by sprinkling. This 
 purification of the bod}', as a ceremonial effect, 
 was perfect, and was well suited to be, what Paul 
 and the Christian fathers represent it, a type of 
 the purification of the soul by the sprinkling of the 
 blood of Jesus. Christian baptism is the purifica- 
 tion of the soul by the Holy Ghost through faith 
 in the blood of Christ, represented in emblem by 
 the baptismal use of pure water. 
 
Baptism with Water. 2 1 3 
 
 4. Sprinkling and pouring are the divinely- 
 chosen forms by which the prophetic Scriptures 
 declare that the power of the blood of Christ and 
 the influence of the Holy Ghost in changing the 
 condition of the soul shall be represented in the 
 times of the Gospel dispensation. Thus Isa. lii. 
 15: "So shall he sprinkle many nations." Ezek. 
 xxxvi. 25: "Thus will I sprinkle clean water up- 
 on you, and ye shall be clean. . . . And I will 
 put m}' Spirit within you." Joel ii. 28: "I will 
 pour out my Spirit upon all flesh." The fulfilment 
 of this prophetic announcement by the POV'i^ING 
 OUT of the Spirit in the baptism of Pentecost re- 
 cognizes the literal act of " pouring out" to effect 
 ritual baptism as the physical basis of this meta- 
 phorical language to denote the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 5. The Christian fathers often speak of sprink- 
 ling and pouring as acts which effect the condition 
 which is expressed by baptism. Some quota- 
 tions in illustration are given in the second chap- 
 ter of this book. The practice of immersion 
 among them did not arise from a belief that bap- 
 tism consisted in the mere act of immersion, for 
 they did not so believe; but it arose from their 
 great error that water must receive a divine, 
 spiritual quality b}^ the agency of the Holy Ghost 
 
214 ^-^^ Meaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 to give it power to effect Christian baptism, and 
 tiiat this pozver could be more effectuall}' commu- 
 nicated to the baptized, the more completely the 
 water could come in contact with his person. 
 From this error arose the practice of baptizing 
 men, women, and children naked, and other ob- 
 jectionable observances. The agency of the Holy 
 Ghost, according to the Scriptures, is exerted 
 directly on the soul, not on the ivatcr. The Avater 
 not only has in itself no saving efficacy, but it re- 
 ceives no saving virtue from an}' action of the 
 Holy Ghost upon it. It is a symbol, and only a 
 symbol, of the real baptism of the soul by the Holy 
 Spirit of God. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF JESUS. 
 
 BAPTIS-M OF JESUS BY JOHN. 
 
 HIRTY years of the lite of Jesus had passed. 
 In his home at Nazareth among the green 
 hills of Galilee, far from the Temple and luider 
 influences more than human, " the child grczv, 
 and waxed strong- in spirit, filled with wisdom," 
 until, in the full maturity of his powers as the 
 Son of Man, he was ready to enter upon his 
 great mission. The time had come for him to 
 commence his public ministr}^ as the Messiah. 
 A mighty awakening had been produced by the 
 preaching of the Forerunner, and the valley of 
 the Jordan was alive with the multitudes who, 
 from all parts of Palestine, were flocking to his 
 baptism. The great design of John v/as to pre- 
 pare the people to receive One who was greater 
 than he. It was for this purpose that he preached 
 the baptism of repentance, and administered the 
 symbol baptism with water to those who accepted 
 his preaching. Jesus now came with the rest. 
 
2 1 6 The ]\Ieaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 and made application to John for baptism. The 
 Baptist felt the incongruity and declined, saying : 
 " I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest 
 thou to me ?" Jesus and John were cousins, and 
 it is not unlikely that they had often piet in 
 Jerusalem at the Passovers, and that John was 
 acquainted with the prophecies which his father, 
 Zacharias, had uttered concerning Jesus. Al- 
 though John did not know Jesus as the Messiah, 
 the sign from heaven indicating him and author- 
 izing John to proclaim him to the people as such 
 being not yet given, yet he recognized him as 
 superior to himself, and as one too pure to need 
 such a baptism as his. He may have known 
 what a sinless and holy life Jesus had led at 
 Nazareth, or he may have now received a super- 
 natural intimation of the character of this new 
 candidate for baptism. But Jesus removed his 
 scruples, saying: "Suffer it to be so now: for 
 thus it bccometh us to fulfil all riglUcousncss." 
 
 What was the baptism which Jesus received 
 from John? He did not receive " the baptism of 
 John" which "all the people" received. Neither 
 " the baptism of repentance " which John preach- 
 ed, nor the ritual baptism " with water into re- 
 pentance " whicli he administered, wa» appro- 
 priate to liie Sinless One. " It is one thing to be 
 
The Baptism of Jesus. 217 
 
 bapt-ized by John, and quite another to receive the 
 ' baptism of John.' " There is a div^ersity of 
 baptisms. " Baptism is not one," sa\'s Ambrose; 
 "there are many kinds of baptisms." Johannic 
 baptism differs from Judaic baptism, and Chris- 
 tian baptism differs from each of the other two. 
 Robert Hall, an open-communion Baptist, whose 
 memory will ever live, even to the latest age, 
 wrote on " The Essential Difference between 
 Christian Baptism and the Baptism of John." 
 
 The baptism of John was a " baptism of repen- 
 tance." This baptism was for sinners, but the 
 Lord Jesus Christ v/as not a sinner. It demanded 
 "repentance," but He who never sinned did not 
 need repentance. It required its subjects to 
 "bring forth fruits meet for repentance"; but 
 the perfect life of "the ITolv One and the Just" 
 could sustain no such relation. Others were 
 baptized "confessing their sins"; Jesus had no 
 sins to confess. The promise of " remission of 
 sins" was given in "the baptism of John." It 
 was a " baptism of repentance into the remission 
 of sins." But so far from receiving "remission 
 of sins," the pure and holy "Lamb of God" was 
 about to enter upon his Messianic work as the 
 sole means of procuring this blessing for those 
 who need it. " The essence of John's ritual bap- 
 
2 1 8 The Meaning and Power of Baplis7n, 
 
 tisiii is found in its S}-mbolization of puritication 
 in the soul thi'ough repentance and remission of 
 sin. But in the Lord Jesus there was no basis 
 for such symbolization, and consequently there 
 was no basis for the baptism of John " i^'* C. and 
 P. B.," p. 28). 
 
 It is not needful to discuss, or even enumerate, 
 the different views which luive been taken of the 
 object of Christ's baptism. No less than ten 
 different opinions are referred to by Meyer, as 
 quoted by Langc on JMatthew (p. 76). The true 
 significance of the personal baptism of Jesus by 
 John is seen in the words of Jesus, " Thus it be- 
 cometh us to fulfil all righteousness," and in the 
 import given to those words in the events of the 
 subsequent narrative. The baptism of Jesus v.as 
 his consecration to his peculiar work as the 
 Messiah. It was to prepare the nation to re- 
 ceive him in this capacity that his forerunner was 
 divinelv commissioned. This was the signifi- 
 cance of the sublime scene that followed his bap- 
 tism. This was the purport of the opening of the 
 heavens upon his gaze while he was praying on 
 the bank of the river. This was the significance 
 of the descent of the Holy Ghost, who came 
 down through the disparted firmament " in a 
 bodily shape like a dove," and rested upon his 
 
The Baptism of Jesus. 2 1 9 
 
 head. This, also, was the meaning of that divine 
 voice which came from the rent sky. sa3Mng: 
 " Tliis is my beloved Son, in whom I am well 
 pleased." God had "sent forth his Son" to 
 accomplish the work of human redemption. As 
 the house of Aaron were set apart to their typi- 
 cal priesthood before the Advent b}" appropriate 
 rites, so now, when " the fulness of the time was 
 come," Jesus, the " Great High-Priest," was in- 
 augurated into his office by a rite administered 
 by one chosen of God and fitted by his peculiar 
 training and mission to perform this service. 
 This baptism of Jesus by John was "a c(jvenant 
 baptism." It was a baptism i}ito his ivork as Mes- 
 siah. "In it there is an announcement of the 
 work of redemption, and a covenant engagement 
 by the Son of God to accomplish it. This an- 
 nouncement and assumption of covenant obliga- 
 tion the Father accepts and declares himself 
 ' well pleased.' The Holy Ghost makes like 
 declaration by descending upon and baptizing 
 the covenanting Son for his amazing work now 
 assumed at Jordan, but ' finished ' only on Cal- 
 vary " (Dale, p. 31). 
 
 When Jesus says, " Thus it becometh us to ful- 
 fil all righteousness," he does not refer to the 
 work of repentance required of the other subjects 
 
2 20 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 of John's baptism, but to Jiis own work in his 
 Messianic office. His baptism by John was an 
 appropriate rite, requisite as an induction into 
 the pecuHar work wliich he undertook on behalf 
 of mankind. As Rudolf Stier (" Words of the 
 Lord Jesus") says : " This baptism is the true 
 beginning point of that obedience the consum- 
 mation of which, in the death of the cross, it 
 pretypifies. . . . This baptism is his anoint- 
 ing to that sacrifice for sinners which now first 
 properly begins. He afterwards was baptized 
 with the baptism of death, in which he, as the 
 Lamb of God, bore our guilt." So, also, Bengal 
 says : " He not onl}^ undertook, when he came to 
 baptism, the task of fulfilling all righteousness 
 (^Latt. iii. 15), but he also completed it by pouring 
 out Jiis bloody 
 
 There is nothing in the narrative of the bap- 
 tism of Jesus by John that can determine its mode. 
 Neither the current use of the Greek word bap- 
 tizo in the days of John, nor the use of the Greek 
 preposition in its correct construction, affords any 
 evidence for the theory that the baptism was per- 
 formed by dipping the person into tlie water. 
 Undoubtedly it was performed in the usual mode. 
 The turn which Dr. Carson gives to IMark i. 9 is 
 fully considered by Dr. Dale in " Johannic Bap- 
 
TJic Baptism of Jesus. 221 
 
 tisra," pp. 375-405, and shown to be at variance 
 with the true construction of the Greek idiom. 
 (See also " C. and P. B.," p. 425.) The facts are 
 nan-ated by Matthew, iii. 13, thus : " Then cometh 
 Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be 
 baptized of him." To this the statement in Mark 
 i. 9, translated as the true construction requires, 
 corresponds: " Jesus came from Nazareth of Ga- 
 lilee to the Jordan, and was baptized b}' John " 
 (Dale, p. 377). The word Jordan merely denotes 
 the locality of the baptism. 
 
 Much is said by some of the baptism of Jesus 
 as an example to us. But the baptism of Jesus 
 was not designed as a model for us. It was his in- 
 duction into his Messianic office as our Redeemer. 
 It is in this light that we derive from it the in- 
 structi(3n which it was intended to convey 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF JESUS BY THE HOLY GHOST. 
 
 The baptismal rite by which Jesus was in- 
 ducted into his office at the river Jordan was 
 attended by a more divine baptism. " Jesus also 
 being baptized, and pra3'ing, the heaven was open- 
 ed, and the Holy Ghost descended . . . upon 
 him." The Spirit assumed a visible form like a 
 dove, and was seen by Jesus gliding with gentle 
 motion down from the skies, " And he saw the 
 
2 2 2 The Meaning and Ptnue?' of Baptism. 
 
 Spirit of God descending like a dove, and liglit- 
 ing upon hiin." John also was a witness of the 
 descent of the Spirit. " I saw the Spirit de- 
 scending from heaven, and it abode upon him." 
 This descent of the Spirit was the divinely-ap- 
 pointed sign by which the Baptist was to know 
 that Jesus was the Messiah. " He that sent me to 
 baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon 
 whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and 
 remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth 
 with the Hol}^ Ghost." Thus, as Lange says: 
 "At his baptism he was baptized with the Holy 
 Ghost." For although " tlie term baptism is not 
 immediately applied to this transaction," says 
 Dale, " it is ver}^ clearly involved in the words " 
 of John ; for the expression, " the same is he which 
 baptizeth with the Holy Ghost," denotes an 
 agency which " is predicated on the previous per- 
 sonal baptism of our Lord by the Holy Ghost " 
 
 (P- 30- 
 
 The need which Jesus had of the bnptism of 
 
 the Spirit arose from the human conditions under 
 
 which he must perform the work which he had 
 
 undertaken. In his own unique personality he 
 
 united the divine and human natures. There is 
 
 that in the Incarnation, as well as in the Trinity, 
 
 which bafiles every effort to understand. But 
 
The J3 apt ism cf Jcsjts. 223 
 
 among the things that arc clearly taught is (he 
 dependence of the human nature of Christ not 
 only on his divine nature and on the Father, but 
 on the Holy Spirit. It has not ahva3'S been ob- 
 served to what an extent the activity of his 
 earthly life is referred in the Scriptures to the 
 H0I3" Spirit as the guiding and controlling cause. 
 By his incarnation he became subject to all the 
 conditions of luimanity in its sinless state. An 
 essential part of his mission was "to present to 
 the world a peiiect model of man in his true re- 
 lations to God." As the model man, exemplify- 
 ing all that man is in his pure humanity, he was 
 dependent upon the Holy Spirit; and in his 
 whole earthly life '* he was inspired, directed, 
 controlled, in thought and i'ecling, and word and 
 action, by the Spirit of God " ('' Bib. Sac," Vol. 
 XXXI. p. 619). 
 
 This involves all the essential elements of a 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost. He lived and 
 acted under the controlling influence of the Holy 
 Spirit from the time of his baptism by John. 
 Thus Luke sa3's : " Jesus being fall of the Holy 
 Ghost, returned from Jordan, and was led b}- the 
 Spirit into the wilderness." The complete control 
 ot the H0I3' Spirit over him is seen in the strong 
 language of Mark ; " And immediately the Spirit 
 
2 24 ^^^^ Jllca n inq^ a nd Po'u r ;' of Baptism. 
 
 drivetli him into the wilderness." The Spirit 
 powerfully bore him along, yet with the tiill 
 consent of his will. After he had vanquished the 
 tempter, "Jesus returned in the power of the 
 Spirit into Galilee." The divine quality of his 
 teaching- is attributed to the same source: "For 
 he whom God hath sent speaketh the words ot 
 God ; for God giveth not the Spirit bv measure 
 unto him." 
 
 This baptism was unlimited in continuance as 
 well as in measure. It was a lifedong baptism. 
 The Spirit, lilce a dove, not only "lighted upon 
 him," but " it abode upon him," as John says, " de- 
 scending and remaining on him." It was a per- 
 manent influence. Jesus continued "in this con- 
 dition of baptism during all the period in which 
 he was engaged in accomplishing his covenant to 
 'fulfil all righteousness.'" B}' this influence he 
 was endued with power in his preaching. "The 
 Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath 
 anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor, 
 . . .to preach the acceptable year of the Lord" 
 (Luke iv. i8). This was promised in the prophe- 
 tic word : " And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest 
 upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, 
 the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of know- 
 ledge and the fear of the Lord, and shall make 
 
TJie Baptism of Jesus. 225 
 
 him quick' of understanding " (Isa. xi. 2, 3), The 
 r.iiracles of Jesus were wrought by the power of 
 the Spirit : " If I by the Spirit of God cast ()ut 
 devils." It was through the Spii'it that he offered 
 up himself as the Lamb of God to make atone- 
 ment : " Who, through the Eternal Spirit, offered 
 himself without spot to God" (Ileb. ix. 14). 
 " This offering was the conatimmation of that co- 
 venant assumed at iiis baptism by John, when he 
 engaged to fidfil all righteousness" (Dale, p. 32). 
 
 The Son of God, in his divine nature, had infi- 
 nite all-suflncienc}' in himself. But of his own will 
 as God he assumed human nature, and in his 
 human condition he came under the limitations of 
 humanity. The influence of the Holy Spirit upon 
 his human faculties was an essential condition of 
 the accomplishment of his great undertaking as 
 the Messiali. This endowment of Christ by the 
 Holy Ghost for his peculiar work is declared by 
 Peter : " God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the 
 Holy Ghost and with power : who went about 
 doing good, and healing all that were oppressed 
 of the devil ; for God was with him " (Acts x. 3S). 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF JESUS ON THE CROSS. 
 
 Luke xii. 50 : "I have a baptism to be baptized 
 with." 
 
2 26 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 Matthew xx. 22 : " Are 36 able to drink of the 
 cup that I shall drink of? " 
 
 jNIark x. 38 : " Can yc drink of the cup that I 
 drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I 
 am baptized with ?" 
 
 The announcement in Luke of this baptism of 
 Jesus was made just after the second Passover 
 following his baj^tism by John, The second allu- 
 sion to it, in the enquiry put to the two sons of 
 Zebedee which Matthew and Mark record, was 
 made a few days previous to the fourth Passover, 
 just before his crucihxion. The words in the 
 second part of the enquiry, and of the declara- 
 tion in reply to the response of the disciples, as 
 given by Mark, are omitted by Matthew in Tis- 
 chendorf's New Testament (1873). Lange also 
 (" Matthew," p. 362) says tiiat " the words" omit- 
 ted b}' Tischendorf " are wanting in the manu- 
 scripts B, D, L, Z, and in the Sinaitic manu- 
 script, and in many ancient versions, and in all 
 critical editions. They were in all probability in- 
 serted from the parallel passages in Mark x. 38, 
 39." According to the genuine original, Matthew 
 speaks only of the cup which Jesus must drink ; 
 Luke speaks only of the baptism which he must 
 receive ; Mark speaks of the cup and the bap- 
 tism, which sustain to each other the relation of 
 
The Baptism of Jesiis. 227 
 
 cause and effect. By drinking the cup of suffer- 
 ing Jesus was baptized into death. Tlie suffer- 
 ings which he endured are figuratively repre- 
 sented by the cup which he drank. The contents 
 of this cup of woe contained the baptizing agency 
 which had power to cause a baptism into death. 
 " The word," says Dale, " is used in its well-un- 
 derstood secondary meanirg, expressive of con- 
 trolling influence." The result upon Jesus of 
 drinking this cup was death. " As he drinks he 
 dies, . . . baptized into penal death, a ' ransom for 
 many ' " ('' The Cup and the Cross," p. 20). 
 
 A very different but unsatisfactory explanation 
 is given of this baptism b}' those who deny that 
 baptizo has a secondary meaning. Dr. Carson 
 (p. 117) makes an unsuccessful effort to separate 
 the cup from the baptism, making them both 
 " figures as independent and as distinct as if one 
 of them was found in Genesis and the other in 
 Revelation." He says they both represent " the 
 sufferings of Christ" — one as "a cup," the other 
 " as an immersion in water." But there is only 
 one metaphor — the cup ; and this is both a suitable 
 and a sufficient emblem of the sufferings of Jesus. 
 To represent the same idea under the additional 
 figure of immersing him in water is wholly incon- 
 gruous and superfluous. There is no reason for 
 
2 28 ■' The Mcani)i(^ and Pinver of Baptism. 
 
 so interpretir.g it, except in the exigency of iiu 
 erroneous theory/ of the signification of the word. 
 Dr. Carson thinks that he must interpret the word 
 in conformity with his theory " tJiat it always sig- 
 nifies to dip, neve?' expressing anytJiiiig Init mode."'' 
 But the mere act of dipping a person in water — a 
 momentar}- act of slight and trivial influence — is 
 incompetent to express intense suffering. Dr. 
 Carson shifts the word and substitutes the am- 
 biguous word immerse ; and passages of a highly 
 poetic nature are quoted by him and others which 
 speak of "floods," and " waves," and " billows," 
 and " water-spouts." But such outbursts of the 
 imagination do not harmonize with the sober his- 
 toric style of the record which we have in the 
 nan-ative of the Crucifixion, and they are especial- 
 ly incongruous by the side of the beautiful and 
 well-chosen metaphor b}^ which Jesus so often 
 represents the atoning sufferings of his approach- 
 ing death as " the cup " which his Father had 
 given him to drink. There is not a single circum- 
 stance in the narrative which suggests a water 
 scene, and the picture of an overwhelming flood 
 in tliis place is onlv an exercise of the human 
 fancy. The secondar}- meaning of baptizo, ex- 
 pressive of controlling influence, gives full signifi- 
 cance to the cup. A baptism alwavs corresponds 
 
The Baptis7it of yesus. 21c) 
 
 in its nature to the character of the baptizing 
 poiver. The cup which Jesus drank, Irom the 
 ver}^ nature of its contents, had power to cause 
 his death. It was a cup filled with atoning suf- 
 ferings. He drank the cup, and was baptized 
 into atoning death. 
 
 It is not the mode of baptism which gives im- 
 portance to the right interpretation of this passage. 
 The baptism of Calvary derives its importance 
 from its character and from its central position 
 among Bible baptisms. " The baptism of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ on the cross is tliat wondrous cen- 
 tral baptism in which all other baptisms of tlie 
 Bible, whether type or symbol or equivalent bap- 
 tisms, meet " (Dale, p. 42). 
 
 This baptism of Jesus was a death-baptism, 
 caused b}' drinking the cup of suffering which 
 was given to him. In prospect of this baptism 
 he uttered an exclamation of distress: " I have a 
 baptism to be baptized with ; and how am I strait- 
 ened till it be accomplished!" His question to 
 the two disciples: "Are ye able to drink of the 
 cup that I shall drink of?" plainly shows that it 
 was a cup of suffering. The suffering is involved 
 in both the cup and the baptism. The baptism 
 is the result of th.e drinking of the cup. Mark 
 conjoins the two as cause and effect: "Can ye 
 
230 The Afeanuig and Power of Baptism. 
 
 drink of the cup that I drink cm" ? and be baptized 
 with the baptism that I am baptized with?" The 
 one follows the other. In direct connection with 
 this baptism, both in Matthew and jNIadc, Jesus 
 speaks of his death: " Behold, we ^^o up to Jeru- 
 salem ; and the Son of Man shall be delivered 
 unto the chief j)riests, and unto the scribes; and 
 they shall condemn him to dcatJi, and shall deliver 
 him to the Gentiles: and they shall m.ock him, 
 and shall scourge him, arid shall spit upon him, 
 and shall kill /liin.'" So in the further context of 
 Matthew :" The Son of Man came . . , to give his 
 life a ransom for many." 
 
 The word baptizo by frequent usage is competent 
 to express the idea of putting to death. " The 
 dolphin baptizing killed him " (/Esop). " I, bap- 
 tizing 3-ou b}- sea-waves, v.'ill destroy )'ou " (Alcibi- 
 ades). " Baptizing others into the lake," DROWNED 
 them (Heliodorus). "Baptizing him," DROWNED 
 him (Lucian). " Whom it were better to baptize," 
 to DROWN (Tiiemistius). The word baptisiiia (bap- 
 tism) is a noun which, from its Greek formation, 
 expresses condition. As the action expressed by 
 the verb baptizo is capable of producing death, 
 so the noun baptisma is capable of expressing the 
 condition of death ; and this is the signification 
 which its connection in this place requires. 
 
The Baptism of Jesus. 231 
 
 This baptism is caused by drinking from a cup. 
 Cup-baptisms are among the most frequent bap- 
 tisms spoken of by Greek writers, " Baptisms 
 by drinking are various in cliaracter, yet all 
 marked by a thorough change of condition, pervaded 
 and controlled by the CHARACTERISTIC of the baptis- 
 ing liquid. No liquid which cannot thoroughly 
 change tlie condition of the drinker, and subject 
 him to its characteristic qualit}', is capable of 
 baptizing " (" C. and P. B.," p. 47), A cup filled 
 with an opiate baptizes into ^////^'r. " Whom, by 
 the same drug, havdng baptized," by drinking 
 from a cup (Achilles Tatiusj. A cup filled with 
 wine commimicates its intoxicating quality to 
 the drinker. " Baptized by unmixed wine," by 
 drinking from a cup (Athenasus). " Baptizing 
 powerfully," b}' drinking from a cup (Athen^us). 
 " Baptized Alexander," by drinking from a cup 
 (Conon). " Resembles one baptized," by drink- 
 ing from a cup (Lucian). " Baptized yesterday," 
 by drinking from a cup (Plato). " Baptizing, 
 drank to one another," by drinking from a cup 
 (Plutarch). " Baptized by yesterday's debauch," 
 by drinking from a cup (Plutarch). " A body 
 not baptized," by drinking from a cup (Plutarch). 
 " The body not yet baptized," by drinking from 
 a cup (Plutarch). " The character of these bap- 
 
232 The Meaning and Poiuer of Baptism. 
 
 tisms differs according to the distinctive cha- 
 racter of the contents of the cup. ... In every 
 case there is a powerful, penetrating-, pervading, 
 and assimilating influence controlling and tho- 
 roiighl}' changing the condition of the drinker. 
 // is this RESULT zi'hich makes the BAPTISM. The 
 specialt}' of the inlluence individualizes the bap- 
 tism. The cup which the Saviour drank was 
 filled with such contents as no other cup had 
 ever been filled with. It was not filled with the 
 woes of simple death, but with penal and atoning 
 death ; THEREFORE the baptism consequent upon 
 the drinking was such as never had been and 
 never shall be " (" The Cup and the Cross," p. 22). 
 Jesus had not yet drunk the cup while in the 
 garden of Gethsemane. His agon}' in the 
 garden was in view of the prospect that rose be- 
 foi'c him. " () ni}- Father! if it be possible, let 
 this cup pass from me : nevertheless not as I 
 will, but as thou wilt " (Matt. xxvi. 39). '' O my 
 Father ! if this cup raav not pass from me, except 
 I drink it, thy will be done " (v. 42). 
 
 " Abba, Father, all things are possible unto 
 thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless 
 not what I will, but what thou wilt" (Mark xiv. 
 36). "Father, if thou be willing, remove this 
 cup from mc : nevertheless not mv will, but 
 
The Baptism of Jesus. 233 
 
 thine, be done " (Luke xxii. 42). At a later hour, 
 after his visit by the ministering angxl, and after 
 his arrest by the band of Jews, the cup was yet 
 to be drunk. " The cup which my Father hath 
 given me, shall I not drink it? " (John xvaii. 11). 
 
 "This baptism of our Lord is the only baptism 
 of the New Testament which is represented as 
 eftected by drinking' from a cup. There is no 
 other baptism which could fitly be so represented. 
 This baptism stands all alone. It was no ordi- 
 nary death-baptism ; it was no martyr death-bap- 
 tism ; it was an atoning death-baptism " (" C. and 
 P. B.," p. 49). 
 
 The Patrists identify the cup which Jesus 
 drank with his baptism of blood in his death on 
 the cross. 
 
 1. Cyril of Jerusalem : " For the Saviour called 
 martyrdom baptism, saN-ing: 'Can ye drink the 
 cup that \ drink?' " (p. 39). 
 
 2. Origen : " The baptism of martyrdom is 
 given to us ; for so it is called, as is evident : ' Can 
 ye drink the cup which I drink? ' or ' Be baptized 
 with the baptism that I am baptized with ? ' " (p, 
 
 42). 
 
 3. Chrysostom : " Here calling his cross and 
 death a cup and a baptism " (Conant, p. 129). 
 
 4. Petilianus : "Ye make martyrs like unto 
 
2 34 ^^^^ Meaning and Powey of Baptism. 
 
 Christ whom baptizing biood sprinkles" (Dale, 
 p. 40). 
 
 The baptismal virtue is in the quality of the 
 baptizing agency, not in its mode of application. 
 
 5. John of Damascus, after describing six bap- 
 tisms, says: "Seventh, that which is by blood 
 and martyrdom, with which Christ himself was 
 for us baptized, as exceedingly august and 
 blessed " (Conant, p. 131). 
 
 6. Cyprian: " Baptized by that most illustrious 
 and greatest baptism of blood concerning which 
 the Lord said that he had another baptism to be 
 baptized with" (Dale, p. 39). 
 
 7. Origen : " Chrisr, whom we follow, shed his 
 blood for our redemption, that we may depart 
 washed by our own blood. For it is the baptism 
 ot blood only which can make us more pure than 
 the baptism of water has made us. And this I do 
 not assume, but the Scripture declares, the Lord 
 saying to his disciples : ' 1 have a baptism to be 
 baptized with that ye \\\o\\ not of. And how am 
 1 straitened until it be accomplished I ' Vou see, • 
 therefore, that he called the shedding of his 
 blood baptism " (p. 41). 
 
 8. Theophylact : " He calls liis death a baptism, 
 as being a purihcation for us all" (Crcraer, p. 
 105). 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 
 
 A CTS i. 5 : " For John truly baptized with 
 "^^ water; but yc shall be baptized with the 
 Holy Ghost not many days hence." 
 
 The baptism of Calvary was the consummation 
 of that redemptive work to which Jesus con- 
 secrated himsell in his covenant-baptism at the 
 Jordan. Baptized into atoning death, rising from 
 that death to a life immortal, and just ready to 
 ascend to the right hand of God above, he re- 
 newed the great promise of the new dispensation 
 as a baptism of the Holy Ghost. This word, by its 
 remarkable history and the significance which it 
 had attained by the laws of language development, 
 was fitted to be the chosen term to express the re- 
 sult of the various operations of the Holy Spiiit 
 on the human soul. In the whole range of its 
 varied usage it is a word of power ; and in its 
 spiritual import, selected as it is by inspiration to 
 denote the highest forms of blessedness which the 
 Redeemer confers upon man b}^ his own personal 
 work and by tlie work of his Spirit, it is suited to 
 
 '35 
 
236 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 convev instruction freighted with spiritu.il effi- 
 cacy. The baptism of the cross is the source 
 from wlience the baptism of the Holy Ghost 
 emanates. Jesus, having- accompHshed by his 
 death that atoning baptism which was essential 
 in order to procure the baptism of the Holy Ghost, 
 now makes the announcement that this baptism 
 shall soon be given to his waiting disciples. 
 
 Without making attempt to develop this sub- 
 ject in full, we will present the following points 
 for consideration : 
 
 I. The baptism of the Holy Ghost was tJie pro- 
 mise of the FatJicr which Jesus gave to his dis- 
 ciples. 
 
 Jesus thus identifies the baptism with the pro- 
 raise : " Wait for the promise of the Father, which, 
 saith he, 36 have heard of me. For John truly 
 hfiptized with water; but ye shall be baptized 
 with the Holy Ghost. . . . Vc shall receive 
 power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon 
 you " (Acts i. 4, 5, 8). Of this promise, which, as 
 Jesus reminds them, they had "heard" at a pre-' 
 vious interview, Luke (xxiv. 49) thus makes re- 
 cord : "And behold, I send the promise of my 
 Father upon you : but tarry vc in the city of 
 Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from 
 on high." Before the Crucifixion, our Lord had 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 237 
 
 promised that the Father would send the Holy 
 Ghost in his name (John xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26) ; and 
 the same pz'omise had been given in Messianic 
 prophecy, in which, as Peter declares, the baptism 
 of Pentecost had been foretold : " This is that 
 which was spoken by the prophet Joel: And it 
 shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I 
 will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh " (Acts ii. 
 16, 17), All the wealth of blessedness wliich there 
 is in the promise of the Spirit, as given in the 
 glowing language of the Hebrew prophets, in the 
 simple but expressive words of Jesus, and in the 
 allusions to it by the apostles, is embodied in the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost. It is the great pro- 
 mise of the Messianic dispensation. 
 
 2. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is under the 
 dispensation of the Lord Jesns Christ. The admin- 
 istration of the whole work of redemption is com- 
 mitted to him as the Mediator. An essential 
 part of that work is accomplished by the agency 
 of the Holy Ghost. Jesus sends the Holy Ghost 
 and baptizes by the Holy Ghost. Jesus never 
 administered ritual baptism. That work, which 
 was merely S3'mbolical, he committed to his dis- 
 ciples. But the great and essential work of 
 changing the spiritual condition of the soul he 
 himself accomplishes through the agency of the 
 
238 The Meaning A^id Power of Baptism. 
 
 Holy Ghost. Matt. iii. ii: "He that cometh 
 after me is mig-htier than I. . . . He shall baptize 
 you with the Holy Ghost." Mark i. 8: "He 
 shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." So in 
 Luke iii. 16: ''He shall baptize you wich the 
 Holy Ghost" ; and in John i. 33: " Upon whom 
 thou shalt see the Spirit descendiug-, and remain- 
 ing on him, the same is he which baptizeth with 
 the Holy Ghost." 
 
 This is the great declaration which Jesus re- 
 cognizes and appropriates to himself in his inter- 
 view with his disciples before the Ascension. He 
 himself, in giving the promise (John xiv. 26), 
 speaks of " the Holy Ghost, whom the Father 
 will send in my name"; and (xv. 26) "whom I 
 will send unto you from the Father, even the 
 Spirit of truth." When, after his ascension, he 
 began to' dispense the Spirit in the pentecostal 
 baptism, Peter says : " Being by the right hand 
 of God exalted, and having received of the Fa- 
 ther the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed 
 forth this, which ye now see and hear" (Acts ii.- 
 33), So Paul (Tit. iii. 5, 6) speaks of the " renew- 
 ing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us 
 abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." 
 Jesus Christ was qualified to administer this bap- 
 tism ; for he was himself baptized by the Holy 
 
The B dpi i sin of the Holy Ghost. 239 
 
 Ghost " descending, and remaining on hiin," and 
 was thus invested, " witlioiit measure," with those 
 spiritual endowments which qualified him for 
 every part of his mediatorial work. The work 
 ot dispensing- the H0I3' Ghost is one of transcen- 
 dent importance, and for this part of his work 
 Jesus was full}' endued. The declaration in John 
 i. 33 : " The same is he which baptizeth with the 
 Holy Ghost," in its true interpretation, repre- 
 sents Jesus as " the Baptizer who was himself in 
 the Holy Ghost, and, being- in the Holy Ghost, 
 was thereb}^ invested with power to baptize by 
 the Holy Ghost" (" C. and P. B.," p. 53). Am- 
 brose calls Jesus "the Great Baptizer." He is 
 the baptizer by the Holy Ghost. He is the dis- 
 penser of this gift. 
 
 3. In effecting this baptism the Holy Ghost is 
 the divine, personal agent. " Ye shall be baptized 
 /;/ the Holy Ghost" (Dale, p. 'ji). The Holy 
 Ghost is not the local sphere or passive medium 
 in which this baptism takes place, but the person 
 by tvhose agency the baptism is effected. In the 
 places that speak of the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost, the Greek preposition ey is used, and 
 some translate " in the Holy Ghost." But the 
 preposition in this relation is not used in its pri- 
 mary physical and local signiftcation, denoting 
 
240 The Meaning and Poiver of Baptism. 
 
 " an expanse zoitJi'ui the bjimds of zvhieh anything 
 exists" (Winer, p. 3S4). The Holy Ghost is not 
 " the element in or within which the act is per- 
 formed " (Conant, p. 100). The theor}^ which 
 demands the transUition " immersed in the Holy 
 Ghost " limits the Greek preposition to its local 
 signihcation, and denies that it can denote agen- 
 cy. Dr. Conant says the word baptizo in Acts i. 
 5 and elsewhere is "construed with the local pre- 
 position ill.'' Dr. Carson (p. 107) says: "The 
 disciples were immersed mto the H(jly Spirit." 
 This results from the error of making- the Holy 
 Spirit the receptive clement, thus excluding his 
 personal agency in the baptism. 
 
 That the Greek preposition has not only a 
 local but an instrumental signification was suffi- 
 ciently shown in a previous chapter. There is 
 also abundant evidence that it denotes agencv 
 and influence in its usage in conn.ection with the 
 Holy Spirit. 
 
 Micah iii. 8 : " 1 am full of power bj' the Spirit 
 of the Lord." 
 
 Zech. iv. 6 : " Not by might, nor b}' power, but 
 by my Spirit, saith the Lord." 
 
 Neh. ix. 30: "By thy Spirit in the prophets.' 
 
 Mark xii. 36: " David himself said by the Holy 
 Ghost " : which means, as Robinson ("N. T. Lex.," 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 241 
 
 p. 248) sa3-s, " Under the power and influence of 
 the Hoi}' Spirit." 
 
 Matthew xxii. 43 : " How then doth David in 
 spirit call him Lord?" Buttmann explains this, 
 ** Impelled by the Spirit." This eminent scholar 
 says that the Greek " preposition tv is very com- 
 monly used ... to designate the means; and 
 that not only with things (equiv. to the instru- 
 mental dative), but also with persons" ("Gram, 
 of the N. T.," p. 329). 
 
 Luke ii. 27: "And he came by the Spirit into 
 the Temple " — i.c.^ led by the Spirit. 
 
 Luke iv. i : " Jesus being full of the Holy 
 Ghost . . . was led by the Spirit into the wilder- 
 ness." 
 
 Matthew ix. 34 : " He casteth out devils through 
 the prince of the devils." Winer gives this as an 
 example of the instrumental use of this preposi- 
 tion with the dative, and says: " F,v is so used 
 with personal designations " (" N. T. Gr.," p. 388). 
 
 Matthew xii. 27 : " If I by Beelzebub cast out 
 devils " ; xii. 28, " But if I cast out devils by the 
 Spirit of God." 
 
 Rom, XV. 13: "That ye may abound in hope, 
 througJi the power of the Holy Ghost." 
 
 Rom. XV. 16: "Sanctified by the Holy 
 Ghost." 
 
242 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 I Cor. xii. 9 : " To another faith by the same 
 Spirit." 
 
 I Peter i. 12 : " Preached the Gospel unto you 
 with the H0I3' Ghost sent down from heaven." 
 
 These examples are but specimens selected 
 from a widely-extended usage in which the pre- 
 position denotes the Cj{!;cncy of the person or ob- 
 ject to which it stands related. This prepares us 
 for the direct evidence of the actual agency of 
 the Holy Spirit in the baptism under considera- 
 tion. Evidence of the active energy of the Spirit 
 is found both in the promise and in its fulfilment : 
 '' He shall teach you all things " (John xiv. 26). 
 " I send the promise of ray Father upon [fTri] 
 you : but tany ye in the city of Jerusalem until 
 }•€ be endued with power from on high " (Luke 
 xxiv. 49). " Ye shall receive power after that the 
 Holy Ghost is come upon 3^ou " (Acts i. 8). 
 " They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and 
 began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit 
 gave them utterance" (Acts ii. 4). So in the di- 
 verse baptisms of the Spirit : " There are diversi- 
 ties of gifts, buL the same Spirit. There are 
 diversities of operations, but it is the saxie God 
 which worketh all in all. To one is given by 
 the Spirit the word of wisdom. . , . All these 
 worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, divid- 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 243 
 
 ing to every man severally as he will. For by 
 one Spirit we are all baptized into one body '^ 
 (i Cor. xii.) 
 
 The Holy Ghost is an active AGENT, not a 
 receiving' element into which souls are put by 
 some baptizer. " The Baptist view, xvJdcJi as- 
 signs to Christ the tvork of putting t/ie souls of men 
 in the Holy Ghost as a quiescent receptacle, revolu- 
 tionizes the Gospel scheme. ... It is not the 
 work of Christ to bring the souls of men to the 
 Hol}^ Ghost, but it is the work of the Holy Ghost 
 to bring the souls of men to Christ" (" Johannic 
 Baptism," p. 178). 
 
 The use of the Greek preposition in connection 
 with the baptism of the Holy Ghost is invariable, 
 while its use is variable in connection with bap- 
 tism by symbol water. The reason given for 
 this by Dr. Conant, p. 100, is that " the Holy 
 Spirit could less properly be conceived as the 
 mere instrument of an act." This concedes that 
 w^ater is a " mere instrument," and that the Holy 
 Spirit is not. This is true, though not in har- 
 mony with the theory, but it gives no explanation 
 of the variable use of the preposition in connec- 
 tion with water (see chap. ix. p. 192). Dr. Dale 
 (" C. and P. B,," p. yj) gives a much better rea- 
 son. The qualification of Jesus to administer 
 
244 ^^^^ Meo.niiig ajid Power of Baptism. 
 
 the baptism of the H0I3' Ghost depends on, and 
 is derived from, the Spirit. Jesus, therefore, is 
 always in the Spirit and binder his influence. But 
 the qualification of John to baptize with water 
 did not depend on the water. The water, as the 
 mere instrumental means of ritual baptism, may, 
 therefore, either take or omit the preposition in 
 conformity with the Hebraistic or with the clas- 
 sical character of the style, each of which denotes 
 instrumentality. But the constant relation of 
 Christ to the Holy Spirit, as in and remaining 
 under the influence of the Spirit, requires expres- 
 sion in every reference to the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost. 
 
 This baptism is ascribed both to Jesus and 
 the Holy Ghost : to Jesus as the more remote 
 author, to the Holy Ghost as the more immedi- 
 ate a;:^ent. " Christ and the Holy Ghost are not 
 announced as two independent baptizers, but as 
 most intimately united." It is the intimate union 
 of these two Persons with each other, and their 
 mutual relation, from which the peculiar agency 
 of each in this baptism has its origin. 
 
 4. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is the effect 
 of his agency in changing the condition of the sotd. 
 There is no modal action in the baptism of the 
 Spirit. The modal expression, " I will pour out 
 
The Baptisjii of the Holy Ghost. 245 
 
 my Spirit," in the propliecy which Peter sa3-s 
 had its fulfihrient in this baptism, is used meta- 
 phorically. This metaphorical use had its physi- 
 cal basis ill a previous literal use of water by 
 pouring to effect a baptism. The resemblance 
 does not lie between the modal act of pouring, 
 in water-baptism, and the manner in which the 
 Spirit is given : first, because baptism does not 
 consist in modal action, but in condition resulting 
 from some competent act or influence ; second, be- 
 cause an attempt to trace such a resemblance 
 would tend to materialize our view of the influ- 
 ence of the Spirit. But the resemblance which 
 is the foundation of the metaphor consists in the 
 idea common to both — viz., resultant condition. 
 The baptism which resulted from pouring water 
 on the altar at Carmel was the cleansing of the 
 altar. The baptismal agency was water, the 
 mode of applying it was by pouring, but the bap- 
 tism did not consist in the act of pouring, but in 
 the changed condition of the altar. The baptism 
 of the H0I3' Ghost consists in the changed con- 
 dition of the soul. All baptisms correspond in 
 their character to the characteristics of the bap- 
 tismal agencies by which they are eflected. 
 Baptism is a change in the condition of its 
 object, the nature of the change being deter- 
 
246 The Meaning and Poivei' of Baptism. 
 
 mined by the nature of the baptizing- power. 
 The baptism of the HcjI}- Ghost is a complete and 
 thorough change in the condition of tJie soul effected 
 by his divine agency. A person baptized by the 
 Holy Ghost comes under his controlling influ- 
 ence, becomes assimilated to him in character, 
 endued with spiritual power, filled with heavenly 
 peace and joy, and qualified for the service of the 
 Master. 
 
 There is a diversity in the influences and oper- 
 ations of the Spirit, and the baptism of the Spirit 
 is characterized by a similar diversity. As there 
 is a variety of baptisms elsewhere — " very many 
 kinds of baptisms," Ambrose says — so there is a 
 variety of baptisms in the work of the Holy 
 Spirit in the soul. The baptism of Pentecost 
 was peculiar both in its special character and in 
 its emblem. The specialty of this baptism con- 
 sisted in qualifying the Apostles for their mis- 
 sion. All the qualifications which they needed 
 in their work of laying the foundations of Christ's 
 everlasting kingdom were communicated to them • 
 by the baptism of the Holy Ghost. The power 
 to speak in foreign languages was one of these 
 qualifications, and the symbol of this power was 
 the " cloven tongues," having a fire-like appear- 
 ance, which sat upon each of them. They also 
 
TJic Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 247 
 
 received new light, and strength, and courage, 
 and other elements of spiritual power. They 
 were baptized " into the POWER of the apostle- 
 ship,'' and this was the source of their eminent 
 success. 
 
 The baptism of Cornelius and others by the 
 Holy Ghost at C^sarea (Acts x. 44, xi. 16)- 
 belongs to the same class of baptisms as that 
 of Pentecost, including the power to speak with 
 tongues. But there was a great difference in these 
 two baptisms. " The baptism at Pentecost was 
 a baptism qualifying for the apostleship ; this 
 baptism was a baptism qualifying for Christian 
 life, with such special endowment as should con- 
 vince Peter and others that Gentiles were to be 
 received even as Jews into the Christian Church " 
 (Dale, p. 95). The miraculous powers conferred 
 in these and other baptisms recorded in the Acts 
 were not the whole nor the most important en- 
 dowments bestowed upon the primitive church. 
 The pov/er of working miracles was not peculiar 
 to the new dispensation, but had often been ex- 
 ercised under the ancient economy. This power 
 was not conferred upon all, and it was with- 
 drawn when its temporary purpose was accom- 
 plished. 
 
 5. The baptism of the Holy Ghost in all its 
 
248 The J\l€aniiig and Poivcr of Dap ti sin. 
 
 variet}^ of blessing, miracles excepted, zvas the 
 common privilcgj of all Christians. The baptism 
 of Pentecost was not limited to the apostles. 
 This baptism, as Peter teaches, was a fuliilment 
 of the prophecy in Joel: " It shall come to pass 
 in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of 
 my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your 
 daughters shall prophesy. . . . And on my ser- 
 vants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in 
 those days of m}' Spirit." All the membership 
 were to share in the promised blessing. Were 
 they "all filled with the Holy Ghost" by the 
 pentccostal baptism ? It is the duty and privi- 
 lege of ail Christians to " be filled with the Spi- 
 rit " (Eph. V. 18). 
 
 The promise was made to all who should com- 
 ply with the instructions of the apostle: "Ye 
 shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For 
 the promise is luito 3'ou, and to your children, 
 and to all that arc afar off, even as many as the 
 Lord our God shall call" (Acts ii. 3S, 39). Of 
 the disciples in Antioch of Pisidia the sacred 
 historian says : " And the disciples were filled 
 with joy and v/ith the Holy Ghost" (Acts xiii. 
 52). In the tvvclfth chapter of the First Epistle to 
 the Corinthians, in which the apostle treats of the 
 diversified opei^ations of the Spirit of God, he 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost, 249 
 
 says : " The manifestation of the Spirit is given 
 to every man to profit withal. . . . For by one 
 Spirit we are all baptized into one body " (i Cor. 
 xii. 7, 13). These statements include all regener- 
 ate persons, all \\\\o " by the Holy Ghost call 
 Jesus Lord " (v. 3). The promise of the Holy 
 Ghost is not civcn to the unregenerate : " Whom 
 the world cannot receive, because it secth him 
 not, neither knoweth him " (John xiv. 17). Onl)^ 
 those who have become Christians receive this 
 gift of promise. 
 
 The baptism of the Holy Ghost is sometimes 
 received immediately on conversion. A remark- 
 able and instructive example is that of the late 
 Rev. Charles G. Finney, described on p. 20 of 
 his "Autobiography." Sometimes there is an in- 
 terval after conversion before the gift is received. 
 The apostles were converted some time before 
 they received the baptism. The twelve disciples 
 whom Paul found at Ephcsus (Acts xix. 1-7) had 
 not received it. Paul's enquiry, " Have }-e re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost since ye believed.''" is 
 sometimes quoted in support of the theory that 
 the baptism of the Spirit is not to be expected 
 until after the duration of some interval of time 
 from the period of conversion. But this is a mis- 
 apprehension of Paul's meaning. Prof Hackctt, 
 
250 The Mean ing and Power of Baptism. 
 
 " Commentary," p. 309, gives the true meaning: 
 " Did ye receive [note tiie aorist] zvhcn ye believed? 
 The participle refers to the same time as the 
 verb." The enquiry implies that the}' might 
 have received the Holy Ghost ivJien they believed. 
 The passage in Eph. i. 13: " In whom also after 
 that ye believed, ye were sealed with that IIol}^ 
 Spirit of promise," is also quoted in support of 
 ':he same theory. In both these passages we 
 must " note the aorist" participle if we would get 
 the exact meaning. The use of the aorist parti- 
 ciple in the Greek shows that the gift of the Spirit 
 is conditioned on believing, but it does not require 
 suc'.i an interval of time as to lav the basis of the 
 theory of two distinct and unlike experiences, a 
 first and second conversion. The baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost is sometimes received immediately 
 on conversion, and the very question of Paul was, 
 " Did ye receive the Hoi}' Ghost when ye be- 
 lieved ?" Their reply shows one reason why they 
 did not: " We have not so much as heard whe- 
 ther there be any Holy Ghost." They had not 
 received the needful instruction. If suitable in- 
 struction were given and the conditions complied 
 with, the gift of the Spirit would more frequently 
 be received at the time of conversion. 
 
 6. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is promised 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 251 
 
 to believers in all generations to the end of time. 
 The distinguishing characteristic of the Gospel 
 dispensation in contrast with the one preceding 
 is that it is "the ministration of the Spirit" (2 
 Cor. iii. 8). This is "the glory that excelleth." 
 The promise is not limited to the primitive age. 
 "I will pray the Father, and he shall give you 
 another Comforter, that he may abide with you 
 for ever" (John xiv. 16). Jesus himself could 
 only remain on eartii for a temporary period. 
 But the Holy Ghost, whom Jesus promised to 
 send from the Father, will abide permanently 
 with his followers. "Neither pray I for these 
 alone, but for them also which shall believe on 
 me through their word " (xvii. 20). " The last 
 days," in which Peter says the promise, " I \\\\\ 
 pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh," shall be 
 fulfilled, covers the whole period of the new dis- 
 pensation from the beginning to the end. Joel 
 gave the prediction in the former days, eight 
 hundred years before " the last days " began. In 
 that former dispensation the prophet Isaiah, in 
 prophetic foresight of the permanence of this 
 great Gospel blessing, says (lix. 21): "As for me, 
 this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord : 
 My Spirit that is upon thee, and m}^ words which 
 I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of 
 
252 The Meaning and Pozucr of Baptism. 
 
 thy moLitli, nor out of the mouth of th}' seed, nor 
 out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the 
 Lord, from henceforth and for ever." The pro- 
 mise is to Christians of this generation, and will 
 be to those of every generation to come. 
 
 7. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is received by 
 faitJi. " Christ hath redeemed us . . . that we 
 might receive the promise of the Spirit through 
 faith. . . . That the promise by faith of Jesus 
 Christ might be given to them that believe " 
 (Gal. iii. 13, 14, 22). This corresponds with the 
 promise as given by the Lord Jesus in John vii. 
 37, 3S: '^ \\\ the last day, that great day of the 
 feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man 
 thirst, let him come unto me and drink. He that 
 bclieveth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out 
 of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." 
 The meaning of this John thus explains to his 
 readers: "But this spake he of the Spirit, which 
 they that believe on him should receive: for 
 the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that 
 Jesus was not 3'ct glorified." This, as Tholuck 
 remarks, "designates something more than the 
 comparative avioiint of activit}' and power, it 
 denotes a distinction in the cJiaracter of the out- 
 pouring " (Owen in loco). 
 
 The baptism of Calvary furnished the superior 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 2^3 
 
 conditions which were essential to the baptism 
 of the Holy Ghost in its fulness, v^arietv, and 
 power. The Redeemer, exalted, glorified, en- 
 throned in light and dominion on high, sends the 
 Spirit of truth into hearts prepared to receive 
 him ; and this glorious Spirit comes into the soul, 
 and to its admiring view reveals Christ in his 
 beauty, in his love, in his power to save, in 
 his all-sufficient grace. The Holy Ghost re- 
 veals Christ to the spiritual apprehension of the 
 believer— Christ in his wonderful person, in the 
 excellency of his character, in the amazing work 
 of atonement by which he secured the everlasting 
 redemption of all who come into a living union 
 with him. The baptism of the Spirit gives light, 
 and life, and jo}^, and strength to the soul. It 
 gives to the believer soul-trans f or juing views of 
 Gospel truth, and thus ejidues hint with divine and 
 spiritual poiver. 
 
 But no one can take in all Bible truth at one 
 view. The views of persons v/ill var}- according 
 to their capacities, their degrees of knowledge, 
 the special truths they contemplate, the vividness 
 of their attention, and the degrees of their faith. 
 ■'There are diversities of operations " also ; and 
 " all these workcth that one and the self-same 
 Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he 
 
2 54 'The Cleaning and Poiuer of Baptism, 
 
 will" (i Cor. xii. ii). The baptisms of the Spirit 
 are, therefore, diverse, both in degree and in the 
 special endowments by which different persons 
 are qualified for different purposes and services. 
 But each believer may receive in full the bap- 
 tism which he especially needs for his life-work 
 in his own appropriate sphere which an all-wise 
 Providence has assigned him. 
 
 8. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is a blessino 
 to be sought by all Christians. There is reason to 
 apprehend that the promise of the Spirit is not 
 prized b}' many according to its value ; by some 
 not eveji understood. The regeneration of the 
 soul by the Spirit of God is not the whole of his 
 ^vork:. There arc " exceeding great and precious 
 promises " to the believer which he is expected 
 to appreciate and seek for as taught in the Scrip- 
 tures. The work of the Holy Spirit has always 
 been held in high estimation by those who have 
 had much experience of his influence in the soul. 
 It is the privilege and the duty of all to advance 
 beyond the mere elements, and to seek and 
 receive the fulness of blessing which is compre- 
 hended in the promise. Those who would seek 
 and obtain this blessing must comply with the 
 conditions of its attainment. 
 
 One of these conditions is a desire for the 
 
TJie Baptism of iJie Holy Ghost. 255 
 
 promised blessing-. It would be most irrational 
 to suppose that God would confer such a gift on 
 those who have no desire for it and feel no need 
 of it. The desire for it must be r^vt/ and strong. 
 The gift is one of inestimable value, and has been 
 procured at an infinite expense. In order to 
 appreciate its worth we should study with great 
 diligence the teachings of the Scripture respect- 
 ing the person and work of the Holy Spirit, and 
 b}'^ tiiis divine and spiritual knowledge we shall 
 not onl}' attain a true understanding of the pro- 
 mise, but perceive its desirableness, its superla- 
 tive excellency, and the blessedness which it 
 confers upon those who receive it. 
 
 Another condition on which the fulfilment of 
 the promise depends is prayer. It was alter the 
 ten days of united and earnest prayer that the 
 primitive disciples received the pentecostal bap- 
 tism. Our Saviour gives both the condition and 
 the encouragement for prayer when he says 
 (Luke xi. 13): "How much more shall your 
 Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them 
 that ask him ?" 
 
 Another condition is faith. As God gives us 
 the fullest assuranc3 in the Bible that the bestow- 
 ment of the blessings of this promise is ''accord- 
 ing to his will," we arc to ask for it, expecting 
 
256 TJie Almning and Pozvcr of Baptism. 
 
 to receive that for which we j)ray. We are to 
 receive the promise with a confidence which 
 excludes all doubt. The time, the manner, and 
 the measure of the baptism which Christ by his 
 Spirit will confer, will depend upon his superior 
 wisdom. We must be in a right state of mind to 
 receive it. But of his w-illingness, and power, 
 arid purpose to bestow this blessing- upon any 
 Christian who seeks it with strongly-awakened 
 desire, genuine faith, and earnest, persevering 
 pra3'er, we arc to entertain no doubt. The 
 veracity of God is the ground of our confidence. 
 
 It is implied in what has already been said that 
 a disposition receptive of the Spirit is a part of that 
 condition of mind which invites his incoming and 
 indwelling in the soul. All that tends to " grieve 
 the Holy Spirit of God" must be avoided. He 
 is a personal agent, and comes to exert his purify- 
 ing energy as "the Spirit of holiness." If the 
 believer receives him in a spirit corresponding to 
 the object of his coming, and yields himself up 
 completely to his control, he will dwell with him 
 as his divine Friend, Comforter, and Guide, and 
 bestow upon him the fulness of blessing comprised 
 in the promise. 
 
 The most comprehensive expression of the 
 condition of receiving the promise which the 
 
The Baptism of the Holy Ghost. 157 
 
 Apostle Peter gives is in Acts v. 32, where lie 
 speaks of "the Holy Ghost, whom God hath 
 given to them that obey him." As the baptism 
 of the Spirit is given to the believer, not only to 
 fill his soul with purity, peace, jo}', hope, and all 
 spiritual affections and Christian graces, but to 
 qualify him also for his life-work in the service of 
 the Master ; and as this spiritual work is of emi- 
 nent importance in the Christian field, the Chris- 
 tian who seeks and receives in any measure the 
 promise of the Spirit should hold himself in readi- 
 ness for an}' Christian work which the Lord Jesus 
 may give him to do. This heavenly baptism in- 
 volves on his part a complete consecration of 
 himself to God, and in this new condition he be- 
 longs wholly to Jesus. The will of the Lord 
 Jesus is his supreme law, and obedience to him 
 will for evermore be his choice, his employment, 
 his honor and joy. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 BAPTISM INTO CHRIST. 
 
 /'~\NE of the improvements in translation which 
 ^^ Dr. Philip Schaff recommends in his intro- 
 duction to " The Revision of the English Version 
 of the New Testament " is in Matt, xxviii. 19, 
 v.-hich should read, " Baptizing them into the 
 name." He saj'S that the "false rendering, 'in 
 the name,' arose from the Vulgate {in nomine ; 
 Tertullian had it correctly in nonicn^.'' Alford 
 and others agree with Dr. Schaff that in all simi- 
 lar passages the Greek preposition fz? should be 
 translated into. 
 
 It is very unsatisfactory to find this Greek pre- 
 position, when it follows the Greek verb baptizo 
 in grammatical construction, sometimes trans- 
 lated " for," sometimes " in," then " into," and 
 again "unto." Neither do the commentators 
 give an}^ more satisfaction by their var)'ing ex- 
 planations, " Into the belief of," " Into the ac- 
 knowledgment of," " Into the profession of," " In 
 
 order to," "In reference to," " By the authority 
 
 358 
 
Baptism into Christ. 259 
 
 of," " In obligation unto," etc., especially as none 
 ot tlicse ideas are in the language of the original. 
 Neither is it b};- any means unimportant to ascer- 
 tain the exact and true meaning. Well docs the 
 Baptist Quarterly say: "^ doctrine of graee may 
 dwell in the right understanding of a single preposi- 
 tion. Who can measure the significance and 
 worth of this one expression of the New Testa- 
 ment, IN Christ?" Of equal significance and 
 worth is the expression, " BAPTIZED INTO 
 Christ." 
 
 Nor are we to despair of coming to a right un- 
 derstanding of its meaning. *' Truth is the 
 daughter of time." It must be sought by earnest, 
 patient, and persevering search. The method of 
 Dale, who develops the meaning of this preposi- 
 tion in its connection with baptizo (/5a'7rrz'5cj ei;) 
 by an exhaustive investigation of its usage, has 
 led to a r^esult that is rich in spiritual meaning, as 
 well as conformed to the great law of interpreta- 
 tion that " Use is the sole arbiter of language." 
 
 There is a physical basis for all the spiritual 
 language of the Bible. There is a literal, primary 
 meaning of words, from which the higher and 
 secondary meanings arise ; and this growth of 
 the secondary meanings from the primary can 
 generally be traced, although the difference be as 
 
26o The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 great as the difference between the two spheres, 
 the physical and the spiritual, in which tlie}^ are 
 found. The word baptizo in connection with the 
 preposition cis is a good illustration of this truth ; 
 and in tracing its growth by the laws of language 
 development we gain, an insight into its profound 
 and affluent significance which will well repay the 
 effort to understand it. 
 
 The baptism denoted by the expression, "bap- 
 tized into Christ," has the same form of words to 
 represent it as the baptism denoted by the ex- 
 pression, " baptized into water." The expres- 
 sion, " baptized into water,'' does not occur in the 
 New Testament, nor any other form of words 
 equivalent to it. But this expression often occurs 
 in classic Greek to denote tlie passage of an object 
 into zvafer zvithont return. This physical baptism 
 in the secular sphere carries its object into the 
 water and leaves it there. The higher and spirit- 
 ual baptism is a baptism into Christ. The differ- 
 ence between these two baptisms is as great as 
 the difference between Christ and water, between 
 the influence of Christ on the human soul and the 
 influence of water on the mortal bod}'. Yet there 
 are resemblances between these two baptisms. 
 There is a resemblance in the verbal expression, 
 " baptized into," In primary, secular baptism 
 
Baptism into Christ. 261 
 
 this form of words denotes a literal baptism into 
 zvatcr. The same form of words, by verbal 
 figure, is transferred from the phj^sical to the 
 spiritual sphere to denote baptism into Christ. 
 Similar are the forms of expression, " baptize 
 into repentance," " the baptism of repentance 
 into the remission of sins." Thus the two classes 
 of baptisms, the physical and the spiritual, greatly 
 as they differ from each other, have the same ver- 
 bal form of expression, " baptized into," to denote 
 them. In secular baptisms these words have 
 their literal meaning-. The receptive element 
 into which the object passes in its baptism is 
 zvatcr. In spiritual baptism water does not ap- 
 pear. There is no physical receptiv^e element. 
 But by verbal figure the same form of expression 
 is used, and is so used as to designate the special 
 character of diverse baptisms with exact dis- 
 crimination. 
 
 The resemblance between these two classes of 
 baptisms is not confined to the mere form of 
 words by which they are denoted. There is 
 also a resemblance in their interior signification. 
 TJicrc is an element common to both classes of bap- 
 tisms, and the tracing of this common element 
 from its origin in primary baptism to its develop- 
 ment in secondary baptism gives an instructive 
 
262 TJie Aleaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 and satisfactory view of its spiritual import. 
 This common element, which belongs alike to 
 physical baptisms and to those which are spirit- 
 ual, is that of INFLUENCE. It consists in the 
 influence which baptizing agencies have over the 
 objects which they baptize. The baptizing power 
 has an influence to change the condition and 
 character of its object. This is true in the 
 physical sphere. Ships, animals, human beings, 
 and other objects, remaining imder water for a 
 long period, as they do in the Greekl}^ baptisms 
 of classic writers, come under tlie eontrolling in- 
 fluence of the water, which in the course of time 
 completely changes their condition. 
 
 There arc Greekly baptir^ns, also, in which 
 there is no intusposition in water. The objects 
 of baptism are not enveloped in the watery 
 element. There are baptizing agencies Avhich 
 exert a powerful influence over the condition of 
 their objects in a mode totall}' different from that 
 of immersion. The baptismal agency is drunk 
 from a cup, and when drunk it penetrates the 
 S3"stem of the drinker, and exerts upon him a 
 powerful, and sometimes a controlling-, influence. 
 The baptizing agencies are numerous and various. 
 The modes by which these agencies are brought 
 to act upon their objects are also very diverse. 
 
Baptism into Christ. 263 
 
 Tlie baptisms, or the changes oi' conditioa whicli 
 result, are as diverse as the baptizing- agencies 
 are diverse in their nature and power. Sometimes 
 tlic same baptizing agency causes diverse results, 
 (^r baptisms, which, by the use of verbal figure, 
 can be distinguished from each other \vith pre- 
 cision. All baptismal agencies have iiijlucjicc, 
 and each has its ouni cJiaractcristic injhicucc, over 
 the respective objects which they baptize. 
 
 So it is in the spiritual sphere. K soul baptized 
 into Christ comes under THE CONTROLLING INFLU- 
 ENCE OF Christ, and by that influence is changed in 
 character. As, also, any object baptized into wa- 
 ter remains IN tlie zuater, so those who are baptized 
 into Christ remain IN Christ; and as objects re- 
 maining in the zvater are by this their physical 
 baptism changed in their state or condition by the 
 powerful action of the water over them, so in 
 the superior, spiritual baptism, remaining in 
 Christ and under the power of his influence, the 
 soul is changed in its spiritual condition, and be- 
 comes assimilated to him in its character. 
 
 A brief illustration of the original and primary 
 use of the expression, "baptized into," will aid 
 in the understanding of its secondar}^ use. 
 
 Heliodorus says : " Every form of war was en- 
 acted, . . . slaying some on land, and baptizing 
 
264 The Alcaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 others, with their boats and huts, into the lake " 
 (Conant, p. 39). 
 
 This is one of many examples which illustrate 
 what Dr. Conant saA'S (p. 89) — that " the Greek 
 word is also used where a living being is put un- 
 der water for the purpose of drowning, and of 
 course is left to perish in the immersing element." 
 
 Achilles Tatius says: "And there is a fountain 
 of gold there. The}', therefore, baptize into the 
 water a pole smeared with pitch. . . . And the 
 pole is to the gold what the hook is to the fish, 
 for it catches it " (p. 40). 
 
 The pole prepared with pitch is put into the 
 water in order to catch the particles of gold that 
 are floating in the stream. 
 
 Strabo says: "The water solidifies so readily 
 around everything that is baptized into it that 
 they draw. up salt crowns when they let down a 
 circle of rushes " (p. 29). 
 
 Hippocrates, in a medical work, says: "Again 
 baptize it iiito breast-milk " (p. 34). 
 
 The design of the prescription v^^as to secure 
 the emollient influence of the milk. 
 
 In these and similar examples the object passes 
 into a ph3'sical element, water or some other 
 fluid, by the agency of which it undergoes a 
 chancre. The nature of the chancfc in each case 
 
Baptism into Christ. 265 
 
 will depend upon the nature of the receptive cle- 
 ment under whose influence the object passes. 
 A living- being enveloped in water will perish by 
 suffocation, A g^old-bearing fountain gilds the 
 pole immersed in it. Intusposition ia milk makes 
 einollicnt ; in blood, makes the object ;r</. Intus- 
 position in water saturated with salt causes in- 
 crustation. Each baptismal agency imparts its 
 own cJiaracteristic quality to the object which 
 comes under its influence. 
 
 The transition from baptisms of this class to 
 those of the secondary class in wiiich the expres- 
 sion " baptized into " is used in verbal figure is 
 natural and easily traced. In tlie secondar_v 
 class of baptisms there is no physical receptive 
 element, no intusposition in water, no immersion; 
 but there is an ideal cknunt, and that ideal ele- 
 ment resembles the physical element in the com- 
 mon idea of, iiijliicnce. In primary baptisms the 
 object passes into, and comes under the control- 
 ling influence of, soine//yj-/r^/ elen^ient. In secon- 
 dary baptisms the object passes into an ideal ele- 
 ment, and comes under its controlling influence 
 In other respects the difference between (he two 
 classes of baptisms is total and absolute. Two 
 or three examples will be sufficient to illustrate 
 this class of baptisms. 
 
266 TJie Mea7iing and Pozcer of Baptis77i. 
 
 Josepluis, describing" the condition of Gedaliaii 
 at a drinking part}-, employs this expression: 
 " Baptized into insensibility and sleep by drunk- 
 enness " (" Jud. Bap.," p. 92). 
 
 The drunkenness of Gedaliah brought him into 
 an insensible condition — a condition of stupor 
 and sleep. There was no ph3'sical clement into 
 which Gedaliah passed and by which he was en- 
 closed in this baptism; but the condition of in- 
 sensibihtv and sleep into which he passed is ex- 
 pressed in a fcjrm ot language borrowed from 
 physical baptisms. As a man baptized into water 
 comes under the controlling influence of tlie 
 water as a receptive element, so a man baptized 
 into stupor arid sleep comes under the control- 
 ling influence of stup<^r and sleep as the ideal ele- 
 ment. The resemblance is in the common idea of 
 iujluencc which belongs to both the physical and 
 the ideal elements. In the one class of examples 
 the object passes into a physical, fluid element, 
 and comes under its control ; in the other class 
 the object passes into an ideal element, and comes 
 under its control. 
 
 Another example occui's in Clemens Alexan- 
 drinus: "Baptized by drunkenness into sleep 
 (" Johannic Baptism," p. 25i). 
 
 \\\ this, as in the preceding, example, " drimk- 
 
Baptism i':to CJirist. 267 
 
 enness " is the baptizing- power, and "sleep" is 
 the verbal element denoting' the condition into 
 which, and under the influence of which, the 
 object passes. 
 
 The nature of a baptism is always determined 
 by the nature of the baptizing power. Good 
 instruction can baptize into a condition of men- 
 tal purity. " Baptized by the word of doctrine " 
 (p. 201 j, says Basil. In like manner bad instruc- 
 tion can baptize into a condition of vice. Thus 
 Clemens Alexandrinus says of a certain class 
 of teachers: " Teaching the practice of pleasure 
 and passion, the}- baptize out of chastity into for- 
 nication " (p. 261). 
 
 These quotations are sufficient to illustrate 
 this usage. There is no literal, physical, fluid 
 element into which the object passes, but there 
 is an ideal element, denoting b}^ verbal figure 
 the condition into zvhich tJu object comes as the effect 
 of the baptizing power. 
 
 There is a special advantage in this use of 
 verbal figure to denote the ideal element in this 
 class of baptisms. It furnishes a form of words 
 by which the different baptisms caused by diffe- 
 rent baptismal agencies can be distinguished 
 from each other with exact discrimination. 
 Sometimes the same baptizing power is capable 
 
268 The Meaning and Poiucr of Baptism. 
 
 of producing different conditions, or baptisms. 
 In all these cases the nature of the baptism can 
 be known from tlie nature of the ideal element 
 which is represented, in verbal figure, bj the 
 words " baptized into." Thus, while wine pro- 
 duces only one specific effect on the drinker — 
 viz., a wine-baptism, or drunkenness — the effects 
 of drunkenness are greatly diversified. And 
 since drunkenness, according to Josephus and 
 Clement, is a baptizing power, the baptisms 
 caused by drunkenness may be diverse. But 
 this verbal figure furnishes an admirable form 
 of words to define and limit these diverse bap- 
 tisms. Drunkenness can not only baptize into 
 insensibility and sleep, but it can baptize into 
 povert}', into shame, into crime, into despair, into 
 destruction, and each of these diverse conditions 
 can be designated with precision b}' the use of 
 this verbal figure. Belshazzar, the King of 
 Babylon, by his iniquity was baptized into terror, 
 into miser}^ into destruction (Isa. xxi. 4, Sept.) 
 If these various specific results of a single baptiz- 
 ing agency can be thus distinguished from each 
 other by this verbal figure, with equal power 
 of discrimination the same verbal figure can 
 designate the different baptisms which result 
 from different asrencies. 
 
Baptism into Christ, 269 
 
 "BAPTIZED INTO MOSES." 
 
 This verbal figure is often used in llie New 
 Testament and by the Christian fathers, and 
 serves to give the most definite and complete ex- 
 pression to the thought. Paul says: "Our 
 fathers . . . were all baptized into Moses " 
 (i Cor. X. 2). The baptism was not into xvater, 
 but into liloscs. The expression exactly defines 
 and limits the baptism. They were baptized into 
 Moses, not into Pharaoh. By this baptism the 
 Israelites were delivered from the power and 
 dominion of the Egyptian king, and brought into 
 subjection to Moses. This baptism into Moses 
 brought them into complete subjection to his con- 
 trol. The nature of the baptism consisted in the 
 nature of the infiuence which Moses had over 
 the nation as their leader. The expression, " bap- 
 tized into Moses," denotes the fulness and com- 
 pleteness of the devotion of the Israelites to 
 Moses as their divinely-appointed leader to the 
 promised land. The whole nation were baptized 
 into Moses, and this baptism gave him a complete 
 and controlling influence over them, and they 
 were willing to follow him into the great and ter- 
 rible wilderness. Before this baptism they were 
 fearful, distrustful, insubmissivc, and almost ready 
 
2/0 The Meaning and Poiver of B apt ism. 
 
 to go back and " serve the Egyptians." But in 
 their baptism their whole condition and attitude 
 towards Moses were changed. There was no " de- 
 finite act" in this baptism, nor did the nation pass 
 into any physical receptive element. But they 
 did pass into a condition of subjection to the in- 
 fluence of Moses, and this is very happily ex- 
 pressed in the verbal form of an ideal element 
 which defines with precision the thought which 
 was meant to be conveyed, 
 
 "BAPTIZED INTO JOSHUA." 
 
 The Fatrists, in like manner, employ this form 
 of expression. Origen, referring to i Cor. x. 2, 
 "baptized into INIoses," saj's: "So, also, it may 
 be said of Joshua, that all were baptized into 
 Joshua by the Holy Spirit and water " " Jud. 
 Bap.," p. 321). 
 
 They were not baptized into the zvatcr. They 
 were baptized into Joshua /;/ the w^ater, or, 
 as Origen sa3's in other places, " by the Jor- 
 dan," '^ by the Spirit and the river.'' The Holy 
 Spirit and the water of the river were the 
 agencies by which the baptism into Joshua 
 was effected. There was no immersion in 
 this baptism. The water of the river below 
 
Bap I ism into Chvist. 271 
 
 the ci-()ssing flowed away to the Dead Sea, the 
 water above "rose- up upon an heap," and "all 
 the Israelites passed over on dry ground." The 
 very object of the miracle was to keep them out 
 of the water. The whole narrative absolutely 
 excludes the idea of '' a definite act " — dipping 
 a nation of people into the water. They were 
 made willing to follow Joshua as their leader by 
 the influence of the miracle and of the Holy Spi- 
 rit. They were baptized into JosJiua. It is impos- 
 sible to explain this as a literal baptism. The Isra- 
 elites were not put into Joshua as into a receptacle, 
 or into a physical element, like water. Two mil- 
 lions of people cannot be literally put into one 
 man. But by verbal figure this form of words 
 expresses the subjection of the Israelites to 
 Joshua as their leader. There is no resemblance 
 whatever between the mode of this baptism and 
 any mode of literal baptism. But there is an in- 
 structive resemblance in relation to tJie source of 
 the influence in the two classes of baptisms. In 
 one class of those physical baptisms which are 
 denoted b}- the expression " baptized into," the 
 design is to develop the characteristic quality of 
 the enveloping element over the object which it 
 encloses. "They baptize a pole into the water" 
 to develop the gold-bearing quality of the water, 
 
2'] 2 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 and cover the pole wiLh gold particles; "bap- 
 tizing- others into the lake " to subject them to 
 the suffocating influence of the water and drown 
 them; '"baptize it into milk" to develop the 
 emollient quality of the milk ; the salt quality 
 of the water, of which Strabo speaks, encrusts 
 with salt the circle of i^ushes "baptized into it," 
 so that they draw up salt crowns. In all these 
 and similar examples the intusposition in water 
 or other fluid is for the sake of securing the influ- 
 ence of the investing clement over the baptized 
 object. 
 
 So in the class of baptisms in which there is 
 no intusposition in a physical element, but where 
 the influence of an ideal element is secured, the 
 source of that influence is expressed b}' verbal 
 flgure in the same form of words. Thus Origen 
 says the Israelites " were all baptized into Joshua." 
 They v/ere devoted to him as their leader, and 
 came under his direction and control. Their 
 wdiole condition and character were modjhed and 
 changed by the kind of influence whicli Joshua 
 exerted over them. This subjection to the influ- 
 ence of Joshua as their leader was the baptism of 
 Israel at the river Jordan. 
 
Baptism into CJirist. 273 
 
 GAL. III. 27: 
 
 " For as man}' of you as have been baptized into 
 Christ have put on Christ." 
 
 The exposition of this and similar passages in 
 conformity with the principle that " usage gives 
 law to language " will develop its true meaning. 
 The meaning is clearly seen from the illustrations 
 which have already been given of the use of the 
 foi"m of verbal figure which appears in the im- 
 portant expression, " baptized unto Christ." 
 
 We have alread}- seen that a person may be in- 
 troduced, by verbal figure, as the ideal receptive 
 element in a baptism. We have also seen that 
 the nature of the receptive element determines 
 the nature of the baptism. The baptism of this 
 passage has in it nothing peculiar except the 
 character of the person, which determines the 
 character of the baptism. 
 
 As there was a baptism into Moses and into 
 JosJma, so there is a baptism into CJirist. JMoses 
 was a type of Christ, and Joshua another. As 
 the baptism of Israel into Moses was their subjec- 
 tion to the special authority and guidance of 
 Moses, and as their baptism into Joshua was 
 their subjection to the special control and leader- 
 ship of Joshua, so is baptism into Christ a subjec- 
 
2 74 The Meatihig ar.d Pozver of Ba pi ism. 
 
 tion to the special inilaciicc ol Christ as Savior.r 
 and Lord. The expression, rightly understood, 
 has a meaning weighty and profound. It denotes 
 the lull, peculiar, and controlling influence which 
 Christ exerts on those who by the Holy Ghost 
 are baptized into him. By their baptism into 
 Christ they come under the power which he 
 has to change their spiritual nature and to as- 
 similate their character to his own. All baptiz- 
 ing agencies have an assimilating power b}' 
 which the}' communicate each its own charac- 
 teristic quality to the baptized object. Those 
 who arc baptized into Christ receive from him 
 his own characteristic and transforming influence. 
 Christ enstamps upon the soul his own bright 
 image. Baptized into Christ, the soul becomes 
 like him in its spiritual dispositions and in its 
 new and heavenly virtues. It is a regenerative 
 baptism through the agency of the Hoh* Ghost 
 uniting the soul to Christ. 
 
 This is not ritual baptism. The very terms in 
 which the apostle describes it exclude the ex- 
 ternal and declare the internal and spiritual: 
 " As many of you as have been baptized into 
 Christ liave put on Christ^ This is something 
 more profound than an outward rite or an ex- 
 ternal [)rofession. To put on any one, by uni- 
 
Baptism into Christ. 
 
 -/D 
 
 versal usage, meant an assumption of liis cliarac- 
 ter. To put on Christ is to be clothed with the 
 gai-ment of his virtues as the dress of the soul. 
 He who is clothed with Christ is invested with 
 " //^e' r^/^f ^/RIGHTEOUSNESS." The Avhole chap- 
 ter treats of union with Christ by faith through 
 the Spirit of God. He who puts on Christ be- 
 comes Christ-like. His likeness to Christ in 
 character becomes such that what Christ is, is 
 seen in all his conduct. This investiture of the 
 soul with the character of Christ is the baptism 
 into Christ. 
 
 ACTS VIII. i6: 
 
 " The}' were baptized into [f/?] the name of the 
 Lord Jesus." 
 
 The use of a different formula of baptism by 
 the apostles from the one giv'^en in iSIatt. xxviii. 
 19 is ijemarkable, but no mode of accounting ior 
 it has ever proved satisfactory. The exposition 
 of Matt, xxviii. 19 by Dr. Dale makes the whole 
 subject clear and consistent, and will attract the 
 attention of Christian scholars. The meaning 
 which he develops is sustained by strong reasons 
 and is very interesting, but the subject lies be- 
 yond the scope of this book. But in the formula 
 which tlie apostles used the translation of the 
 
276 The Meaning and Pozver of Baptisiit, 
 
 preposition, into, is the one which gives the true 
 meaning-. It is al\vn3's translated "into" by Dr. 
 Conant in its classic usage, and most other recent 
 scholars so translate it in the New Testament. 
 In Acts X. 48, " Baptized in the name of the 
 Lord," the Greek preposition hv is used, and 
 signifies by the authority of the Lord. In Acts 
 ii. 38, " In the name of Jesus Christ," the Greek 
 preposition ETti is used, denoting the reliance icpon 
 Christ in which the nature of faith consists. 
 These three different forms of expression in the 
 Greek of the inspired writers have different 
 meanings, and these different meanings ought to 
 be kept clear and distinct. The Greek ex- 
 pression ^anTi8,co eii is an organic phrase, and 
 should alwa3's be translated baptize into. In all 
 cases, by universal consent of scholars, in physi- 
 cal baptism, where this expression occurs, the 
 object passes into the zuatcr or other clement. 
 And where there is no intusposition in water or 
 other physical element, but whei'e the element 
 into which the object (verbally), passes is ideal, 
 Dr. Conant, in his translations outside of the 
 Scriptures, is in accord with all other scholars in 
 ti"anslating the preposition " into." Usage gives 
 law to language ; and in the New Testament con- 
 formity to this law and consistency of interpreta- 
 
Baptism info Christ. 2 J J 
 
 t on both require the translation into when the 
 preposition follows baptizo in grammatical con- 
 struction. When it follows other words, the 
 usage is often different. 
 
 But what is the signification of the expression, 
 "baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus"? 
 The name of the Lord Jesus denotes his whole 
 person, character, and work as the Redee:\ier, 
 the Incarnate Son of God. The expression, " bap- 
 tized INTO the name," presents " the name of the 
 Lord Jesus," b\' verbal figure, as the ideal element 
 into which, and inider the influence of which, the 
 baptized person comes. The character of the 
 baptism is known from the character of the re- 
 ceptive element, which in this instance is not 
 ph3'sical but ideal. The baptism of the soul by 
 the Holy Ghost into the name of the Lord Jesus 
 introduces the soul into a oneness witJi, Christy and 
 secures his controlling influence over the soul, 
 thoroughly changing its spiritual condition into 
 a state of harmony with him. This internal and 
 spiritual baptism is symbolized by an external 
 rite. Christian baptism is twofold — real in the 
 soul, and ritual m the emblem. " The ritual bap- 
 tism of Christianity has no independent existence 
 as a baptism. It is solely the adumbration of the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost. They are not two 
 
2 78 The Mcani)ig a?:d Pozccr of Baptisvt. 
 
 baptisms, the one spiritual and the other physi- 
 cal, but ' o.iC baptism,' the former real, the latter 
 ritual, symbol of the real." The mere external 
 rite has in itself no cfficacv, and is but an empty 
 form. But in its true relation to the baptism of 
 tiie soul by the Holy Ghost it has the significance 
 and power of a symbol. This symbol power does 
 not consist in the mere act, but in the purifying 
 quality of the water, which renders it a suitable 
 emblem of the purification of the soul b}- the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 ACTS XIX. 5 : 
 
 " Tl^.e\' were baptized into the name of the Lord 
 Jesus." 
 
 This, like the preceding, is an example of I'itual 
 baptism. Paul found t\velve disciples of John 
 the Baptist at Ephcsus. Finding them lacking in 
 Christian knowledge and the gift of the Holy 
 Ghost, he enquired : " Into what [baptism] then 
 were ye baptized ? " They replied : " Into John's 
 baptism." The baptism which John administered 
 is expressed by the ritual formula, " I baptize, 
 with water, into repentance." The baptism which 
 he preached was " the baptism of repentance into 
 the remission of sins." The rite which he admin- 
 
Baptism into Christ. 279 
 
 istered was "a symbol of the puriticatiou of the 
 soul consequent upon repentance. . . . The bap- 
 tism * into repentance ' was not the sole or ultimate 
 baptism to be received, but was only antecedent 
 to another baptism inseparable from it, namely, 
 ' into the remission of sins' — the strongest possi- 
 ble expression declarative of a condition in which 
 there was complete pardon of sin " (Dale). 
 
 The baptism of John derived all its efficacy 
 from the Lamb of God, for whose coming- it pre- 
 pared the wav. The baptism of Christianity in- 
 cluded all that was valuable in John's baptism, 
 and it superadded blessings immeasurably supe- 
 rior. Tlic name of the Lord Jesus is the source 
 whence come the remissian of sins and all other 
 spiritual blessings. Into his name, therefore, the 
 twelve were baptized, and "the Holy Ghost came 
 on tiiem." 
 
 The ritual baptism of John and the ritual bap- 
 tism of Christianity was not a baptism into tvater, 
 but a baptism luit/i loater. Water never appears 
 in the New Testament as the receptive element, 
 but always as the instrumental agency. The two 
 examples of ritual baptism just noticed present 
 the name of the Lord Jesus as the ideal element, 
 but say nothing of the mode of using the water. 
 The sacred historian, in speaking of the use of 
 
2 So The Meaning and Pozvcr of Baptism. 
 
 S3Tnbol water in baptism, employs the dative 
 without the preposition — Luke iii. i6, Acts i, 5, 
 xi. 16 — denoting- the clement WITH zvhich the rite 
 was performed. This was doubtless its use in 
 these and all ether examples of ritual baptism, 
 
 ROMANS VI. 3: 
 
 " Know ye not that so many of us as were bap- 
 tized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his 
 
 death?" 
 
 Baptism into the death of Jesus Christ is bap- 
 tism into Christ in his special character as dving 
 on the cross for our redemption. The special 
 and definite nature of this baptism is expressed 
 with discrimination and precision by the use of 
 the verbal figure, " baptized into his death." 
 Like other baptisms of the same class, the char- 
 acter of this baptism is known from the character 
 of the ideal element. The ideal element in this 
 baptism is the death of Jesus Christ ; and as his 
 death has an atoning efficacy, those baptized into 
 his death receive the characteristic influence 
 which his atoning death has power to exert. The 
 death of Christ has a sin-remitting power and a 
 soul-purif)'ing- power, and those who, by baptism 
 into his death, come under its influence, are 
 
Baptism niio Christ. 281 
 
 thoroughly changed iii their spiritual condition. 
 This is the reason why they become, as Paul 
 says, "dead to sin," and "live therein no longer." 
 It is the power of this baptism which produces 
 this spiritual effect. No external rite can ac- 
 complish such a result. 
 
 This is not ritual baptism. There is nothing 
 in the lan^'uaire or in the thouglit that denotes 
 the external rite. There is no administration of 
 the rite, no description of the rite, no exposition 
 of the rite, no circumstance that i^elates to the 
 rite. There is nothing external in this baptism. 
 
 The whole theme of discourse relates to the 
 condition of the soul, the power of the Gospel 
 to change its character, so .that it shall become 
 dead to sin and continue therein no longer, but, 
 in spiritual union with Christ, live a new life. 
 
 The nature of this baptism is specified and de- 
 fined so^as to make it definite and distinct. The 
 form of expression which, b}^ verbal figure, repre- 
 sents the death of Jesus Christ as the ideal clement 
 in this baptism,' designates its special character, 
 and distinguishes it from every other baptism 
 with the most exact discrimination. The bap- 
 tism is not into ivatcr. This physical baptism is 
 not only not named by the apostle, but it is ex- 
 cluded by the totally different baptism which he 
 
282 The Mean ing a mi Power of Bapiism. 
 
 specifies and describes. The receptive element 
 is not water or any physical element, but the bap- 
 tism is itito tJw death of Jesus Christ, and THIS is 
 what marks its character and gives it its spiritual 
 import. 
 
 Tlie baptism is internal and spiritual in its 
 nature; and tliis internal and spiritual baptism 
 alone is capable of meeting the demand of the 
 apostle's ai-gument. Paul was a good reasoner ; 
 and when he undertakes to refute the objection 
 that his doctrine of grace leads men to continue 
 in sin, we have a right to expect a 7'^//c/ reason. 
 He adduces the fact that we are " baptized into 
 the death of Christ," as Augustine says, " to 
 PROVE that we are dead to sin." The external 
 rite, in whatever form administered, cannot 
 prove this, as millions of examples of the fail- 
 ure of the external rite to promote holiness 
 attest. No external profession can prove it. 
 The internal and spiritual baptism alone can 
 ensure that holy living which the cogency and 
 validity of the apostle's argument require. It is 
 the spiritual efficacy of this baptism that renders 
 the argument of the apostle conclusive, and 
 gives it its triumph. 
 
■' Baptism into Christ. 283 
 
 ROM. VI. 4: 
 
 " Therefore we are buried with him b}^ baptism 
 into death." 
 
 Into what death ? Not death in general, but 
 tiie death of Jesus Christ. The dehnite article 
 before the word '*^ death" in the Greek {rov 
 Bavarov) designates a particular death — the 
 death just spoken of, "his deaths The definite 
 article before the word " baptism ' in the Greek 
 also indicates a particular baptism — viz., the bap- 
 tism spoken of in the previous verse, " baptized 
 into his death." The preposition "into" marks 
 the relation of *' the death " to " the baptism," " the 
 baptism into his death." It. is not " buried into 
 death," as some, not observing the grammatical 
 construction, erroneously represent, but " by 
 baptism into Ids death we are buried ivitJi him.'" 
 Jesus was buried in a rock sepulchre. We are 
 buried WITH IIIM, not in water, but in the tomb 
 of Calvary. Christ was (literall}') crucified and 
 buried. We are crucified and buried with him 
 (figuratively) by union with Inm. Through faith 
 in his atoning death — " baptized into his death " — ■ 
 we receive the special influences and blessings 
 which that death lias power to impart. The 
 phrase, " buried with him," merely carries out 
 
284 The Meaning and Power of Baptism. 
 
 and intensifies tlie tliougiit. Tiic burial of Christ 
 was the fit sequel to his death. Tlicy who arc 
 crucified with Christ are, by the cong-ruily of 
 the metaphor, buried with him, as they are also 
 risen with him. 
 
 COL. II. 12 : 
 " Buried with him in baptism." 
 
 Translating the Greek article before " baptism," 
 and supplj'ing the ellipsis from Rom. vi. 4, it will 
 read, " Buried with him in the baptism " (into his 
 death). The sentiment is the same in both places. 
 
 The internal and spiritnal meaning of this pas- 
 sage is made clear and certain by its connection 
 with the previous verse. The burial with Christ 
 in baptism is the circumcision of Christ, which 
 is spiritual, " made without hands," a change of 
 spiritual condition, a renovation of character, 
 " putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by 
 the circumcision of Christ: buried with him in 
 baptism." The Patrists identify "the circum- 
 cision of Christ" and "the burial with him in 
 baptism " as one and the same thing, and spirit- 
 ual in signification. (See Chap. II., p. 61.) 
 
 The spiritual nature of the baptism is also in- 
 dicated in the English version of what follows. 
 
B a pi ism into CJirisf. 2*^5 
 
 which comprises /"^i///; as an essential constituent 
 in tiic baptism: '* Wherein also ye are risen with 
 him through the faith of the operation of Gocl." 
 Prof. Stuart translates: " Ye have risen with him 
 [Christ], b}' faith WROUGHT BY the power of 
 Gocl," and sa3S : " Here, there is a resurrection by 
 faitJi — i.e., a spiritual, moral one " (p. 329). The 
 translation of T3'ndale is the same. Olshausen 
 says that " all the later interpreters are unani- 
 mous on the point that the meaning is, 'faith 
 which the operation of God calls forth.' " 
 
 Some who see and admit that " the leading-, 
 underlying thought is death to sin, and spiritual 
 resurrection to newness of life," and that " the 
 apostle may have intended simply to intensify 
 the thought by adding ' buried with him in bap- 
 tism,'" yet think " that the thought in the figura- 
 tive or spiritual is drawn from the action of the 
 literal and material (" C. and P. B.," p. 263). To 
 this Dale replies: "There is no 'the action' be- 
 longing to baptizo. The acts which meet the de- 
 mand of this word are diverse and contrary, and 
 therefore cannot be expressed b}' it." His four 
 volumes are full of the evidence that the word 
 does not express a definite act, but condition re- 
 sulting from any act or influence competent to 
 effect the condition. 
 
286 The ]\Ieavi):g and Poiucr of Iniplisin. 
 
 The literal and material is the LASIS oi" the ligu- 
 rative and spiiitiial. But, as we have seen, this 
 literal and material basis is not found in the 
 Scriptures, but in classic Greek ; and there, not 
 in a momentary act, to dip, but in a condition of 
 intusposition of UNLIMITED CONTIXUANXE. This 
 is what gives to the receptive element in lite- 
 ral, primar}' baptism its controlling- influence 
 over the object which it encloses. To this the 
 vital thought in secondary, spiritual baptism cor- 
 responds. This is what gives special significance 
 to the baptism into the death of Jesus Christ. 
 This is v.diat gives to this baptism its meaning, 
 life, and power. Those who are baptized into the 
 death of Jesus Christ, buried ii>ith him by the bap- 
 tism into Ills DEATH, come under its full, special. 
 and soul-transforming POWER. They receive into 
 their souls its sin-remitting and its spiritually pu- 
 rifying influence. The death of Christ has an 
 atoning, life-giving, redeeming efficacy, and he 
 communicates this divine influence to those who 
 b)' the Holy Ghost are baptized into him. As in 
 primary baptism baptizo does not take out what 
 it puts in, so in this spiritual baptism '' t'ce SOUL 
 is not taken out of the baptism into- which it is bap- 
 tized." Being baptized into Christ, // remains in 
 Christ, and continues in sin no longer. There is 
 
Baptism into Christ. 28 7 
 
 a wealth ot profound and precious meaning in 
 that expression which we meet with so often in 
 t!ic New Testament, in Christ. Into this bhss- 
 ful and lasting condition we come by BAPTISM 
 INTO Christ. Out of this baptism the soul is 
 never taken, but continues in it for ever. 
 
1^) 
 
 i