Qass T W SO b Book . L 5 BAPTISM TAUGHT IN THE SCRIPTURES RHYS R. LLOYD, A.M. Professor of New Testament Greek and Exegesis in the Pacific Theological Seminary BOSTON AND CHICAGO Congregational ^untJao^&rijool anfc ^ufrltsijmg Society Copyright, 1895, By Congregational Sunday-School and Publishing Society. ^Ore^ Theol Hera. tnes T>**1£ -^ UP* » TO MY FATHER RHYS W. LLOYD THIS BOOK IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED PREFACE. The author of the following treatise never heard a sermon or a lecture on baptism from any member of the denominations which do not practice immer- sion. Before studying the subject of baptism for the first time, he vowed that he would follow the facts of the Bible whithersoever they should lead. After making an inductive study of the subject as taught in the Bible, the authorities to whom he has given the most careful, candid, and prolonged study belong to the Baptist denomination. As I under- took the study at the urgent solicitation of the members of a Chicago Congregational church, so I publish the results of that study at the earnest and repeated entreaties of those who have read, heard, and studied these results. My aim is to guide the student in the study rather than to furnish results. Yet enough of these, I trust, have been given to make clear my position. If this will help any one to knowledge, I shall be satisfied. R. R. L. INTRODUCTION. To understand the use of the verb " baptizein," we must study the passages where it occurs, their contexts, the prepositions used with the verb, and the objects with or into which men are baptized. We need not necessarily study the use of the verb in the classics, for frequently there exists between the classic and the Biblical meanings a great gulf. In the present instance, however, we shall find that the Biblical and classic uses have many resemblances. Furthermore, there is no necessity whatever for discussing, in connection with our topic, the mean- ing of the Greek verb " baptein,'"' inasmuch as this verb is never used in Scripture of dipping men. Baptism as Taught in the Scriptures- CHAPTER I. THE USE OF "BAPTIZEIN " IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. At the outset, let it be clearly under- stood that in the Old Testament no man is mentioned as baptizing another. No man is ever said to baptize himself as a strictly religious act, unless we choose to regard all the ablutions of the Hebrews as distinctly religious. They may be re- garded as such. The baptism of Naaman was perhaps a clinic process. It was not intended to establish a religious precedent. No one, so far as we know, imitated him. He only is spoken of as baptizing in the Jordan. 8 Baptism in the Scriptures. Judith " baptized herself " or "was bap- tized " (for the verb may be passive) " in the camp at (Gr., epi with the genitive case, upon) the fountain of water " (Judith 12 : 7 ; cf. Ex. 2 : 5). This " baptiz- ing," as verse 9 shows, was a purifying process (" and she entered clean "). This is further confirmed by the fact that this " baptizing " was performed on three suc- cessive nights. The method of purifying among the Jews and its bearing upon this verse will be considered later. The "baptism from the dead " (Sir. 31 : 30 ; Eng. Ver. 34 : 25) deserves careful and patient attention, for it throws great light upon the use of the word " baptizein " among the Jews before the time of Jesus. This verb is translated by Dr. Conant, a Baptist scholar, " immersing himself f rom a dead body, and touching it again, what is he profited by his bathing ? " But Dr. 1 The references are to Swete's Septuagint, The Use of " Baptizein." 9 E. B. Fairfield, in his learned " Letters on Baptism/' published by the Congrega- tional Sunday-School and Publishing So- ciety, renders it : " He that is purified (Gr., baptizomenos) from a dead body, and touches it again, what does his cleansing profit him ?" (p. 71). Between these translations there is a great difference. Which is correct ? Be- fore attempting to answer this question, let me give a closer rendering : " Baptizing himself (or ' Having been baptized ') from a dead (body), and touching it again, what profiteth his laver (literally, bath ; hence, bathing, washing, cf. Tit. 3:5; Eph. 5 : 26) ? " The correctness of the translations previously given can be easily decided after a little Biblical study by means of the Septuagint. We first notice that the Greek verb " baptizomenos " may be in the passive or io Baptism in the Scriptures. middle voice. If it is in the middle, it should be read " baptizing himself." In favor of the passive voice the following evidence seems conclusive : — The person who defiled himself by touching a dead body did not become clean by "baptizing himself." The laws about his cleansing are recorded in Num. 19: 11-20; Dr. Alvah Hovey admits this. 1 These laws, as given in the Septuagint, read : " Every one who toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days. He shall be purifi,ed (passive voice, ' hagnisthasetai ') on the third and on the seventh day, and he shall be clean. But if he shall not be purified (' apagnistha/ passive voice) on the third day and on the seventh day, he shall not be clean. Every one who toucheth the dead body of a man that hath died, if he die and is not puri- fied (passive voice, 'apagnistha), defileth 1 Baptist Quarterly, April, 1875. The Use of " Baptizein" u the tent of the Lord. That person (Gr., soul, life) shall be cut off from Israel, because the water of sprinkling was not sprinkled (passive voice, i perierantistha ') upon him. He is unclean. His uncleanness is still in (or on) him " (vs. n-13). . . . " And whosoever toucheth upon the field (plain) one that is slain with the sword, or a dead body, or the bone of a man, or a tomb, shall be unclean seven days. And they shall take for the unclean from the ashes of that which is burnt for purification ; and pour forth upon it living water (' ekcheousin ep' autan hudor zon/ 1 Living water ' is water in motion as in a brook, or that which is poured or sprinkled) into a vessel} And a clean man shall take hyssop and dip it into the water, and shall sprinkle upon the house, and upon the furniture, and upon every person (Gr., soul, 1 Cf. Josephus, Ant. Bk. IV, chap. 4, sect. 6: " Having bap- tized some of this ashes into a spring, they sprinkled it the third day and the seventh." 12 Baptism in the Scriptures. life) of the family, as many as are there and upon him who touched the bone of a man, or the slain body, or the dead body, or the tomb. And the clean man shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day and on the seventh day, and he shall be purified (passive voice, ' apagnisthasetai ') on the seventh day. And he (that is, ' the clean person ' ; cf. vs. 7, 8, 10) shall wash his garments and bathe with water (' lousetai hudati ') and he shall be un- clean until evening. And the man who- soever is defiled (passive voice) and is not purified (passive voice), that person shall be destroyed from the midst of the con- gregation, because he defiled the sanctuary of the Lord, because the water of sprink- ling was not sprinkled (' perierantistha/ passive voice) upon him y is unclean. And it shall be to you an eternal custom. And he who sprinkle th the water of sprinkling shall wash his garments, and he The Use of " Baptizein" 13 who touches the water of sprinkling shall be unclean until evening " (vs. 16-21). The use of the passive voice of the unclean man, coupled with the express statements of verses 17, 18, 19, 21, which teach us that " the water of sprinkling " was sprinkled upon the unclean by clean persons, proves indisputably that the "bap- tizing from the dead " was not done by the unclean person himself. This being true, it follows inevitably that the verse in Sirach, which refers to this process, must be rendered, " He that is baptized," or " Having been baptized." We know that this is correct from the fact that the Orientals never bathe themselves. The bathing is done by relatives, friends, at- tendants, or by the professional bathers (the balaneus and his helpers — the para- chutaiy pourers). The Eastern people, however, use both the middle and passive voices of the verbs in speaking of this 14 Baptism in the Scriptures. passive process, because what you permit, or command, to be done is commonly- said to be done by you (cf. John 4: 1, 2; Acts 2:38 with 5:31). But the actual method is accurately described only by the service of a passive verb. But Dr. Hovey maintains * that " the context " of the passage in Sirach " shows that the participle, * baptizomenos/ is prob- ably in the middle voice, and, therefore, refers to the final bathing " (Gr., lotitro autou, by the laver, bathing of him), "spoken of in Num. 19:19, by which the purification was completed, rather than to the sprinkling of the water of purifica- tion by a clean person. There is no par- ticle of evidence that this final bathing was not accomplished by immersing the body in water." In respect to the middle voice nothing more need be said. In answer to the 1 Bapt. Quar., April, 1875. The Use of " Baptize in" 15 assertion that the participle " baptizome- nos " is employed of the final self -bathing, we offer, in addition to the evidence already offered (p. 9), the following : — 1. The context of Num. 19 : 19 states in unmistakable terms that the purification of the person who had touched a dead body depended, not upon his self-bathing, but solely upon the sprinkling upon him of the water of purification by a clean person (vs. 13, 17, 18, 19, 20). The use of the verbs in the passive voice confirms my statement. 2. The subject of the verbs, "wash" and "bathe," in verse 19, is the clean person, who is the subject of the preced- ing active verb, "sprinkle" (Num. 19: 19). Only of the clean person (cf. vs. 18, 19, 21) and persons (v. 17) is the active voice used in this context. Since, then, this context uses only passive verbs of the unclean, and only active of the clean, it follows 1 6 Baptism in the Scriptures. that the verbs, "wash" and "bathe," of verse 19, are used of the clean person. No indication is given of any change in the subjects of these active verbs. 3. In this context, the duty of purifying is laid upon the clean persons (vs. 1-10, 17-19, 21). The unclean is regarded as unfit to serve God until he has been cleansed. 4. The persons, in this context, who "wash their garments " and "bathe their bodies with water " are the clean (vs. 7, 8, 10, 21), who have been making prepara- tions for the purification of the unclean, or who have been purifying him ; conse- quently they are the persons enjoined, in verse 19, to perform these duties. 5. The unclean person and all that per- tains to him (furniture, house, etc.) are purified by the water of purification which is sprinkled upon them (v. 18) on the third and seventh days. Not a particle of The Use of " Baptizein." 17 evidence has been adduced to show that the cleansing process was completed by the self-bathing of the unclean. Self-bathing, as I have shown, was never practiced among the Jews of Scripture times. 6. The unclean person is unclean for seven days and is purified (not purifies himself, v. 19) on the seventh day ; but the clean person who accomplishes the purification becomes unclean only during portions of the third and seventh days — the days when he sprinkles the unclean, or prepares for it (vs. 7, 8, 10, 21, 22, " unclean until evening"). This being true, the phrase "unclean until evening" (v. 19) shows that the words "wash" and "bathe" (v. 19) apply to the clean. These facts, with all those in the context, combine to prove that the phrase of Sirach, "His bathing" (Gr., laver; cf. Eph. 5 : 26), does not refer to any act of the unclean person. He is the object, not 1 8 Baptism in the Scriptures. the subject, of the bathing (cf. Tit. 3 : 5). In these New Testament passages the noun "laver" is used of the work of the bather. CHAPTER II. BAPTISM FROM THE DEAD. We are now prepared to consider the bold and unqualified statement, " There is no particle of evidence that this final bath- ing was not accomplished by immersing the body in water." In reply, it may be said that the evi- dence given in the preceding pages shows that this "final bathing" (Numbers) was the act, not of the unclean, but of the clean person ; hence the phrase, " baptized from the dead," must refer to the sprinkling of water upon the unclean, because by this only was he cleansed (Num. 19 : 13, 20). It may be now said, without fear of contradiction from facts, that not a particle of evidence is furnished by the Old Testa- 19 20 Baptism in the Scriptures. ment which shows that the Jews of the times of Moses or of Sirach bathed by im- mersing themselves, or by being immersed into water by others. All of the ritual bathing was performed by the application of water to persons. In proof of this we offer two lines of evidence, the linguistic and that of custom. I. THE LINGUISTIC. In the chapter on purification and bath- ing (Num. xix) the Septuagint renders the Hebrew by the phrase " bathe (with) water" (vs. 7, 19). There is no preposi- tion in the Greek ; hence the term " water " seems to designate the means or instrument, rather than the element in which the cleansing was accomplished. This construction is the one used through- out the Septuagint, except in two passages (Ex. 29 : 4; Lev. 14 : 8). The manner in which the ritual was carried out confirms Baptism from the Dead. 21 this interpretation. Other linguistic facts will be presented in the following discus- sion of the Jewish custom of bathing. 2. THE CUSTOM OF THE JEWS. A study of this subject in the Bible shows us that the bathing was performed as we have already taught (pp. 11, 16). The laver and its uses, or the act of bathing, are mentioned, not only in the passages previously discussed, but also in the fol- lowing 1 : — Ex. 2:5; 29 : 4 ; Lev. 14:8; 16:24 (" louo" to bathe; cf. Ex. 30:18; 38 : 26-32, " nipto" to wash a part) ; 3 Ki. 20: 19 ; 22 : 38 ; 4 Ki. 5 : 10, 12, 13 ; Ps. 6:6; Cant. 5:12; etc. In Ex. 2 : 5 we read that the daughter of Pharaoh "went down to bathe at (Gr., ' epi,' upon) the river.' ' A picture discovered at Thebes seems to represent a lady taking a bath, " where 1 References are to the Septuagint. 22 Baptism in the Scriptures. one servant holds a lotus bud to the nose of the bather, another pours perfumed water over the head, while yet another rubs her arms and body with the palms of her hands." 1 Pharaoh's daughter was doubtless bathed in this manner by her handmaids. In the Homeric and Roman baths the vessel " seems not to have contained water itself, but to have been used for the bather to sit in while water was poured over him." 2 In his Charicles, Becker writes of the Grecian public baths as follows : " In the vase paintings we never meet with any basin or tub, wherein bathers might stand or sit. There is always a round or oval basin, resting on one foot, beside which the bathers stand quite naked to wash them- selves." 3 The bathing was accomplished 1 Ancient Egypt in the Light of Modern Discoveries, by Davis and Cobern, p. 367. Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians. 2 American Cyclopedia; cf. Becker's Gallus. 8 Charicles, pp. 148-150. The italics are mine. Baptism from the Dead. 23 by the application of water to the person. In some of these Grecian pictures, the water descends upon the bathers in a shower; in others, persons are present who pour warm or cold water upon the bather. 1 The public bathing in Palestine of one of her sex is thus described by Miss M. E. Rogers : " She is placed on a marble plat- form near a jet of hot water. Fuller's earth is rubbed on her head, she is lathered with soap, and brushed with a handful of tow. Hot water is poured over her freely" etc. 2 Bathing in Asia Minor to-day is always by pouring water upon persons. Owing to the different interpretations of the pictures in the Roman catacombs, I will simply claim that they seem to be in accord with the bathing customs of the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. 1 Becker's Charicles, p. 151 ; cf., also, Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. 2 Domestic Life in Palestine, p. 113. 24 Baptism in the Scriptures. Aaron and his son were bathed (Gr., louseis autous) with water taken from the laver (Ex. 29 : 4 ; cf. 40 : 10 ; Lev. 8:6; Heb. 10 : 22). This bathing was per- formed at the door of the tent. The use of the Greek verb in the Septuagint shows that the mode was not immersion. In Psalm 6 : 6 we read : " Every night will I bathe my bed." Here the bathing is done by the falling tears. The bed is not dipped into the tears. Canticles 5:12 speaks of "eyes bathed with (Gr., 'en,' in) milk," which evidently indicates the application of milk to the eyes. 1 Kings 20 : 19 teaches that the harlots shall bathe with (Gr., " in ") the blood of Ahab. This bathing could not refer to immersion. The use made of the temple baths, namely, to hold water for the washing ("nipto y " wash a part) of the hands and feet of the priests, shows that the bathing was not by immersion (Gr.," wash from, or Baptism from the Dead. 25 out of it," Ex. 30: 19, 20, 21 ; 38 : 27). Cleansing by means of the bath is bath- ing. Josephus confirms the preceding statements, for he writes of these baths : " From which the priests might wash their hands and pour (katacheo) copiously upon the feet" x He writes in another place : " Having purified (cf. Num. xix) them with spring water and ointment, they became God's priests. ,,2 In this sentence he refers to the double process of " bathing with water " and " anoint- ing with oil" (Ex. 29:4, 7). And as the latter was accomplished by pouring, so the former ; hence " en hudati " means " with water." The laws of purification (Num. xix) require in every case the process of sprinkling or pouring. In harmony with this are John 2:6; Heb. 9:13, which describe this purification. Compare also Psalm 51: 7, 3 "Sprinkle me with hyssop 1 Antiq. Bk. Ill, chap. 6:2. » Antiq. Bk. Ill, chap. 8 : 6. 8 Sept. 50: 9. 26 Baptism in the Scriptures, and I shall be clean " (the same verbs as in Num. xix). This verse shows the mode and also the fact that only the sprinkling was necessary for cleansing. Compare, also, " I will sprinkle upon you clean water and ye shall be clean from all your unright- eousness and from all your idols " (Ezek. 36:25). In view then of all the preceding Biblical and extra-Biblical facts, we clearly see that the bold statement made by Professor Hovey respecting the mode of bathing is contrary to the teaching of historical facts. It is favored only by the erroneous inter- pretation of a part of Num. 19 : 19. Even if we admit that the baptizing refers to the bathing, we see that we have no evi- dence whatever for believing that this was performed by immersion. But from the evidence which has been presented, we see that "baptizein" is a synonym of the verb "louo," to bathe. Baptism from the Dead. 27 This is evident from the fact that, in the verse in Sirach, "baptized" and "his laver," or "bathing" denote the same act of purification. The teaching of Judith 12:7 ("She was baptized . . . and came clean/' cf. v. 9 and 10:17; 12:15) sup- ports the same thought. Additional sup- port is derived from the narrative concern- ing the cleansing of Naaman (2 Kings 5 : 10-14). The prophet bade him: "Bathe seven times in the Jordan and thou shalt be clean" (vs. 10, 13). Naaman went u and was baptized, or baptized him- self, and was cleansed" (v. 14). The cleansing of lepers was done by sprinkling (Lev. 14:7). The prophet had this in mind. The process was a purifying, bath- ing (cf. John 13:5-10; Eph. 5:25-27; Tit. 3 : 5, "laver of restoration ") process ; hence it was performed, as we have seen, by the pouring of living water upon him by his servants. Maimonides tells us 28 Baptism in the Scriptures. that "living water is water taken from a font, or from a rapidly flowing stream." This pouring of water upon one is there- fore called " baptizing." In harmony with this is the expression of Isaiah, " Lawless- ness baptizes me" (Is. 21 -.4, LXX). Dr. Conant translates this, " Iniquity whelms me." To whelm is to 4 cover over by coming upon. CHAPTER III. THE BEARING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT UPON THE NEW TESTAMENT USAGE. The facts already furnished show us clearly that "to pour forth " is not a figurative, but the ritualistic meaning of the verb "baptize" in the Old Testament. This is its only meaning in both the canonical and apocryphal books. In full accord with this is the use of the noun "baptism," in i Pet. 3:21, which makes it evident that the noun usually meant "the putting away of the filth of the flesh" (cf. Heb. 9:13, 14). Josephus teaches us that John the Baptist bade the Jews "to practice virtue, exercising both righteousness one toward another, and reverence toward God, and to come to 29 30 Baptism in the Scriptures. baptism ; for the baptism received by him appeared to be used not for the pardon of some sins, but for the purification of the body, inasmuch as the soul has been purified beforehand by righteousness." 1 The Es- senic bathing with cold water was practiced for the purification of the body ("Bathing frequently day and night with cold water for purification "). 2 The testimony of Josephus agrees with the teaching of Matt. 3 : 1-12 ; 21 : 32 ; Mark 1 : 2-8 ; Luke 1:15-17; 3 : 1-20; John 1 : 19-31 ; 3 : 22-26 ; 4:1,2; Acts 15:9. It shows clearly to us that the baptizing by John gave rise to the discussion about purification (John 3 : 22-26). The preceding facts make it evident to me that the verb "baptize" when used of the Baptist denotes, in accordance with the universal Jewish custom, the ritualistic lAntiq. Bk. XVIII, chap. 5: 2. 2 Life of Josephus, 3 ; The Jewish Wars, Bk. II, chap. 8 : 5, 9, 10. Bearing on the New Testament. 31 purification of men by the application of water to them. The mode must have been the Jewish mode, otherwise it would have provoked both astonishment and op- position. Instead of causing these effects, it is regarded as the mode which the prophets or the Messiah would employ (John 1 : 25), and which would certainly be the Jewish mode. But Jewish priests and prophets had never immersed men ; they purified their people in the present East- ern mode of cleansing congregations, by sprinkling water upon them with a hyssop. It seems that no other mode would be acceptable to the ascetic Jewish baptizer and his hearers. From the point now gained, the signifi- cance of the phrase, " fulfill all righteous- ness," when used of baptizing, is evident. Jesus, like Aaron and his sons, is to be purified before beginning his official career. He needs to be baptized because he is by 32 Baptism in the Scriptures. this act made manifest to Israel as the one who has been officially appointed by God to cleanse his people from all unclean- ness (cf. Lev. xiii, xiv ; Numb, xix with John i : 31 ; 15:3; Eph. 5 : 26 ; Heb. 9 : 10; Tit. 2 : 14; 3:5). The ritualistic use of " baptizein " in the Old Testament prepares the student for the use of it by Jesus and his apostles. These use it as the equivalent of the verbs " to come upon " (Acts 1 : 8, cf. v. 5), " to pour forth " (cf. Acts 1 : 5 with 2:17, 18, 33, etc.), "to fall upon" (Acts 10:44; 11 : 15, 16), and "to clothe" (cf. Luke 24: 49 with Acts 1 : 5, 8 and Gal. 3 : 27). This ritualistic meaning of this verb, I must repeat, is not "tropical or figurative," but it is the only Old Testament religious signification the verb has. It may, indeed, be called "its literal meaning," for out of the thirty-nine examples from Greek litera- ture, previous to a.d. 50, where the literal Bearing on the New Testament. 33 meaning, according to Dr. Conant, is used, fifteen denote the process of " submerg- ing, overwhelming." Not one of the thirty-nine refers to the performance of a religious rite ; several of them do not imply the use of water ; two or three refer to bathing, and only eleven speak of " bap- tizing " men. These examples, as thus classified, show us the usage of the pre- Christian classical literature. Throughout this period, in heathen Greek literature, the verb " baptizein," with or without the preposition "in" or "into" (eis), is never used to describe the performance of a reli- gious rite by immersion of men by man} This statement is true of even Josephus. This fact itself is sufficient to show that this verb, when used of the Jewish re- ligious ceremony performed by John upon men, must describe the act of purifying 2 1 Cf. Conant's Baptizein: its Meaning and Uses. 2 Cf. Josephus as above (p. 30) . 34 Baptism in the Scriptures. by sprinkling or pouring ; because only in this way were men purified, baptized. The baptizing of men with water in the New Testament might naturally be expected to conform to this Jewish ritualistic method ; and must be regarded as thus performed until evidence is presented which proves the opposite. CHAPTER IV. THE SIGNIFICATION OF " BAPTIZEIN " IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. We are now prepared to investigate in detail the meaning of the verb in the New Testament. Its Biblical meaning may or may not differ widely from its classical, as is the case with many other words com- mon to these two sources. Since this is so, the only sure way to ascertain the usage of the New Testament is by an exhaustive examination of the same. No appeal need be made to classical usage, except when it is impossible to discover clearly the significance of a passage. Even then the Old Testament usage should be first consulted, and heeded, rather than the classical, providing it ren- 35 $6 Baptism in the Scriptures. ders the light needed to illumine the pas- sage and the context under consideration. Beginning with the prediction of the Baptist, " I baptize you with water ; but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit " (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 8), let us apply our- selves to our task. In these passages we see the verb " baptizein " used by John, in precisely similar constructions of the acts of two different persons (himself and Jesus). The acts are performed at different times and places. Evidently the verb bears the same signification in both parts of the verse. The language of John certainly gives no evidence that the verb signifies in the one clause " immersion/' in the other, "affusion." The Holy Spirit is un- questionably depicted in these verses, not as a person, but as a liquid element (cf. Joel 2 : 28-32 ; Acts ii). The use of the epithet with "baptizein " and " ekchein " "Baptizein" in the New Testament. 37 (Acts 2 : 17, 18), "to pour forth," proves this (cf. also "fell," Acts 10:44, 45)- Since the foregoing statements are true, then the mastery of the meaning of the verb with either of the phrases which denote the liquid element ("Holy Spirit," "water"), will be the mastery of its sig- nification with the other. The doubtful phrase is "baptize with water." If we can ascertain the force of the verb in the expression "baptize with the Holy Spirit," then its significance in the other phrase will be apparent. The whole matter thus resolves itself into a question of historical fact which can be positively answered. How, then, is the question, were men baptized with the Holy Spirit ? The words of the Baptist were fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (cf. Acts 1 : 5-8 with 2:16-39; 11:15-17, etc.). This " baptiziiig with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1 : 5-8) denotes the same act as that 38 Baptism in the Scriptures, denoted by the words " pouring forth of the Spirit upon" (Acts 2:17, 18, 33), "fell upon " (Acts 10 : 44 ; 1 1 : 15), "send upon " (Luke 24 : 49 ; cf . Acts 1 : 5, 8), " come upon " (Acts 1 :5, 8), "put on" as a gar- ment (Gal. 3:27; cf. Luke 24 : 49 ; Acts. 1 • 5) J " gi ve the Holy Spirit to " a person (Acts 5 : 32; 11 : 17; 8 : 18 ; 15 :8). Now, then, if to be "baptized" with the Holy Spirit is to have the Holy Spirit " poured upon," " come upon " a person ; then to be " baptized with (Gr., 'en? in) water" is to have the water "poured upon" or "come upon" the baptized. This seems indisputa- ble; for the Baptist (Matt. 3:11, etc.), Jesus (Acts 1 : 5), and Peter (Acts 11 : 16) are unquestionably using the verb in the same sense. But Peter is the one who identifies the baptizing with the out-pour- ing, "falling upon" (Acts 2 : 17, 18, etc.). No one can doubt that Jesus, in Acts 1:5,8, denotes the same act by " baptize " "Baptizein" in the New Testament, 39 and " come upon " (cf. also " endue/' " be clothed," Luke 24 : 49). Compare also the "clothed " of Luke 24:49 with the "put on " of Gal. 3 : 27, for they represent the same Greek word. In both passages the "endue," "put on," are equivalent to "baptize with or in." These facts prove that the verb " baptize " denotes the same as " pour upon," etc. To prove that it does not, is consequently the task which Scripture lays upon the immersionist. It has been said that the clause "Bap- tize with the Holy Spirit " contains the figurative use of the verb ; then the figurative sense, if this assertion be true, is the only sense with which we have to do ; for this " baptism with the Holy Spirit," according to the testimony of the Baptist, of Jesus, of Peter, and of Luke, is the only baptism which Jesus was going to give to his followers. We have, how- ever, proven already that "to pour upon," 40 Baptism in the Scriptures. "come upon " (cf. submerge, overwhelm, " bathe " in Sirach 34 : 25 1 ; Judith 12 : 6-9 ; and 2 Kings 5 : 10-14; Is. 21 :4 2 ) are the literal (pp. 19-23) and ritualistic meanings of this verb. The former (the literal) is classical ; the latter (the ritualistic) is Biblical. The New Testament usage ac- cords therefore with both usages. The ritualistic signification is synony- mous with " cleansing by sprinkling " (pp. 7-23). This signification will satisfy every passage where baptism with water is mentioned in the New Testament. It may be well to recall that the cleansing, baptizing, of men with water was, and is, performed by the Jewish and Greek churches by sprinkling water upon them with hyssop, not by immersion. Apply this to Matt. 3 :6, "They" ("all the people") "were purified, cleansed by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins." He doubt- 1 Sept. 31 : 30. 2 Sept. text. "Baptizein M in the New Testament. 41 less sprinkled them with water by means of a hyssop ; for this was the customary method of purifying (cf. Ezek 36 : 2s 1 ). Try it in Matt. 3:7: " But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his purification" (cleansing; Gr., baptism, cf. Josephus as given on p. 25). This signification, if applied to Mark 7 : 2-5, satisfies the demands of the passage, "Some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled (Gr., ' common '), that is, unwashen hands. For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands with the fist (cf. Ex. 21:18; Is. 58:4, the only places where the Greek term is used), eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. And when they come from the market, except they cleanse (purify, Gr., ' baptize ' ) themselves, they eat not. And there are many other things, which they have received to hold, (Gr., ' baptisms ') IPs. 51: 7. 42 Baptism in the Scriptures. cleansing of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels. And the Pharisees and the scribes ask him, Why do not thy disciples walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with defiled hands?" There can be no doubt, it seems to me, that the thought of this whole passage turns upon the idea of purification. And this was performed, as we have seen, by the application of water to the person. We have already shown that the noun " baptism " was used of this application by Josephus, and that the verb " baptizein " was employed to denote " pouring forth." These significations fully satisfy the de- mands of this passage. Jewish custom teaches us that only this signification is applicable and tenable (cf. John 2 : 6). As to the force of the expression " wash their hands with the fist," consult the views of Dr. M. C. Hazard in The Con- gregationalism who, in a conversation with "Baptizein" in the New Testament. 43 a Jewish rabbi, ascertained that the Jews baptize their hands by " pouring from some vessel by main strength from one hand upon the other" This, or that suggested by Dr. Fairfield's " Letters on Baptism," or both, is unquestionably the correct ex- planation. Dr. Fairfield, alluding to a practice among modern Orientals, says : " Sometimes there is no vessel which the man can lift even ' by main strength/ and in that case he takes up a ' fist ' full of water — say in his right hand — and pours it or sprinkles it upon the left. The left is thus cleansed. But although the right has gone into the water, it is not yet cleansed ; for it went only into stagnant water. The left ' fist ' in like manner is used to cleanse the right hand by water set in motion." 2 This process is carried out daily. The further uses of the verb are discussed in other parts of this treatise. 1 Letters on Baptism, p. in. CHAPTER V. CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE VERB. Our study of the present subject would be very imperfect, unless we classified and discussed thoroughly the constructions of the verb. The following is a complete classification of these constructions : — i. Baptizein with the preposition "in" (Gr., en) of " Wilderness," Mk. i : 4. "Jordan," Mk. 1 : 5 (cf. Mk. 1 : 9, below, 20). " Aenon," Jn. 3 : 23. 1. " Water," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Jn. 1 : 26, 31, 33. 2. " Sea," 1 Cor. 10 : 2. 3. " Cloud," 1 Cor. 10 : 2. 4. " Fire," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Lk. 3 : 16. 5. " Holy Spirit," Matt. 3 : 11 ; Mk. 1:8; Lk. 3 : 16 ; Jn. 1 : 33 ; Acts 1 : 5 ; 11 : 16. c, Baptizein with " in " and the word " Name " (represent- ing a person), Acts 10: 48; 2: 38 (Westcott and Hort's text). 44 a. Places 6. The element Classifications of Constructions. 45 2. Baptizein with "into" (Gr., eis) of a. Place, " Jordan," Mk. 1 : 9 (cf. Mk. 1 : 5). ' Water . b. Element. Holy Spirit - Fire , Cloud Sea . c. With the term " Name" Matt. 28 : 19 ; Acts 8 : 16 ; 19 : 5 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 13, 15. d. Persons. e. Things. " Christ," Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27. " Moses," 1 Cor. 10: 2. " Repentance," Matt. 3 : 11. " What," Acts 19 : 3. " The death " of Jesus Christ, Rom. 6: 3. 11 One body," 1 Cor. 12: 13. I " The baptism of John," Acts 19 : 3. 3. Baptizein with "upon" (Gr., epi). a. " The name," Acts 2 : 38. This class has been formed out of deference to Professors Hackett and Hovey, who prefer this reading to that of West- cott and Hort, Weymouth and others (cf. above 1. c), 4. Baptizein with "into" and "in." I in {en) the cloud and in the sea." 1 Cor. 10: 2, 46 Baptism in the Scriptures. 5. With "in" (en) and "into" (eis). a. " In water into repentance/' Matt. 3 : 11. b. " In one Spirit into one body." 1 Cor. 12 : 13. 6. With " by " (hupo) of the agent. a. By the Baptist, Matt. 3 : 13, 14 ; Mk. 1:9; Lk. 3:7; 7: 30. 7. With " in behalf of," "for" (huper). a. " In behalf of the dead." 1 Cor. 15 : 29. 8. "Baptizein" with the word "bap- tism/' but without a preposition. a . " The baptism " of suffering, Mark 10 : 38, 39. b. " The baptism of John," Luke 7 : 29. c. " The baptism of repentance," Acts 19 : 4. The former is translated by the Ameri- can Bible Union, a Baptist translation, " Endure the immersion which I endure." The Greek verb never signifies "endure" This rendition is a tacit confession that the verb "baptizein" does not always in the New Testament denote "immersion." More pronounced confessions may be found in Dr. T. J. Conant's book. Classifications of Constructions. 47 9. We find the verb frequently used with a noun, but without a preposition in the same sense as with the preposition. a. "Baptize (with or in) water," Mark i: 8; Luke 3: 16; Acts 1 : 5 ; n : 16 ; cf. Matt. 3:11; John 1 : 31. b. " Baptize (with or in) Holy Spirit," Mark 1 : 8 (W. H.), cf. Matt. 3 : 11. 10. Of the baptism of self Mark 7 : 4, where, however, Westcott and Hort adopt a different reading, namely, "sprinkle themselves." CHAPTER VI. DISCUSSION OF THE FOREGOING DATA. I. A comparison of Acts IO : 48 (cf. 2 : 38 Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament) with Matt. 28 : 19 ; Acts 8 : 16 ; 19:5; 1 Cor. 1 : 13, 15 shows that "baptize in the name" is synonymous with " baptize into the name." The American Bible Union translates both " into (Gr., eis) the name/' Acts 8 : 16, and "in (Gr., en) the name," Acts 10 : 48, by the same phrase — " in the name" (cf. Luke 8: 8 "fell into good ground" with Luke 8: 15 "in good ground " ; Mark 4:7" into the thorns " with Luke 8:7" fell in the midst of the thorns," etc.). The Septuagint usage gives abundant evidence of this. II. A comparison of Acts 2 : 38 (" upon, 48 Discussion of Data. 49 epi, the name ") with Acts 10 148 u in the name " shows that the two phrases are synonymous. Compare also " casting out demons in thy name " Mark 9 : 38 with "casting out demons upon thy name," Luke 9 : 49 ; also Mark 4:8" into good ground with Mark 4 : 20 " upon good ground "; Matt. 13 : 7 "upon the thorns " with Matt. 13 : 22 " into the thorns " ; Matt. 13 : 7 "fell upon the thorns " with Mark 4:7" fell into the thorns " and Luke 8 : 7 "fell *'« /^ midst of the thorns " ; Matt. 13:8 "fell upon good ground " with Mark 4 : 8, Luke 8:8" fell into good ground " ; Matt. 13 : 22 "sown into the thorns " with Mark 4 : 18 "sown upon the thorns" and Luke 8:14 " fell into the thorns " ; Matt. 13 : 23, Mark 4 : 20 " sown upon the good ground " with Luke 8 : 15. These and other passages which might be ad- duced, show that "into," "upon," and " in " are often used by some, if not by all 50 Baptism in the Scriptures. of the New Testament writers as synony- mous. In the Septuagint each of these prepositions is used to translate the Hebrew word for "in." Evidence of this may be found by reading the Septuagint of Genesis and Hosea, etc., and comparing them with the Hebrew text. III. Matt. 3 : li ; John i : 26, "Bap- tize in (Gr., en) water," when com- pared with Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 16; Acts 1:5; 11 : 16 ("baptize with, or in, water "), we shall see that these expres- sions were used to convey the same thought (cf. Sept., "bathe in water" with "bathe with water." Both render the same Hebrew). Which of these expressions shall be regarded as the normal one ? The Rev. G. W. Clarke, d.d., a Baptist writer of eminence, and the American Bible Union insist that we should read both, "in water." To do this is to make the Greek Discussion of Data. 5 1 phrase, "in water," the standard in accord- ance with which the rendering of the other phrase "(with) water" (Mark 1 :8, etc.) must be given. The Revised Ver- sion, on the other hand, insists that the latter should be the standard ; hence it translates both phrases by the words "with water." In this rendition " water " denotes the instrument used in baptizing ; in that, the element in which the baptizing is done. Winer and Buttmann, the best authorities on New Testament grammar, render these phrases by "with water." Their testimony is not, of course, decisive, but it is worthy of great respect. The Septuagint usage favors " with water." No one will question that the translation, " with water," represents the usual force of the Greek construction found in Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 16 (a dative without a preposition). The Greek preposition "in" (en) is frequently used of the instrument 52 Baptism in the Scriptures. with which an act is performed. The American Bible Union itself translates the Greek word by "with" in the follow- ing places : — Mark I : 23 ; 4 : 24 ; 5:2; 9:1, 50 (" wherewith ") ; Mark 3 : 22 (" through ") ; Mark 9 : 29, 33, 34 ; 11: 28, 29, 33> etc., "by." The following similar constructions and their translations, for they are in every respect like that of Mark 1:8; Luke 3 : 16, etc. (" Baptize with the waves of the sea " ; " Baptize as with successive waves " ; "Baptize with whole seas of wailings " ; "Baptized by" — hupo y same Greek as in Matt. 3:13, 14; Mark 1:9, etc. — "that great wave") show clearly that "Baptize with water" is the proper ren- dering of the Greek phrase when used of men without a preposition. The previ- ous quotations are taken from Dr. Conant's great book. In each of them the baptiz-. ing is accomplished by the overflowing Discussion of Data. 53 of the waves rather than by the dipping of the person into the waves. The use of the verb in the Old Testament agrees with this. The "baptism in the Holy- Spirit " was an " outpouring " of the Spirit upon the disciples. The manner in which the baptism with the Holy Spirit was accomplished, namely, by the coming of the Spirit upon men, rather than by their being put into the Spirit, proves conclusively that the " water " is the means of baptism ; con- sequently John baptized with water. The Holy Spirit is the movable element, in one clause, and the water in the other clause of the Baptist's words (cf. Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8); the Spirit is conceived as a liquid with which the baptizing is done. And this pouring forth of a liquid object is called " baptizing " by the Baptist and Peter and Jesus. All of the apostles give their sanction to this usage. And this, as 54 Baptism in the Scriptures. we have seen, is the ritualistic Old Testa- ment signification of the verb. Indeed, it is the only Old Testament meaning. The people are never spoken of in Scripture as the movable element or object, when con- nected with the expression, " baptize with the Holy Spirit/' From this fact we see that we never should translate the Greek by " baptize in the Holy Spirit/' And since the " baptism with the Holy Spirit," represented as a liquid element, is the "pouring forth " of the same upon the persons baptized, then the " baptism with water" must, therefore, denote the applica- tion of water to men ; hence the Greek phrase ought to be rendered as we have done. This interpretation agrees with the fact that the Jews had never before im- mersed men into water. IV. With the preposition "into," "unto," or "in" (eis) the element is not used once, unless we regard the word Discussion of Data. 5 5 " Jordan " as the name of the water of the river, John usually baptizing near the river rather than in it (cf . Mark 1:9; Matt. 3:6; John 3 123; 1 : 28 ; Mark 1 14). He baptized in Aenon, Bethania beyond the Jordan, the wilderness. Some, if not all, of these are the names of districts. The word Jordan may also have been used as a designation of the bed of the river as well as the water itself. A comparison of Mark 1 :g and Matt. 3:13 leads me to think that in the former verse we have an instance of the Greek " constructio pregnans," (condensed construction). The full thought is given thus, " Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee unto (eis) the Jordan, and was baptized by him in the Jordan/' Or we may render the Greek, after the analogy of Mark 1 : 39 ; Luke 21 • 37 i John 9:7: " Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee unto (eis) the Jordan and was baptized there by John." This $6 Baptism in the Scriptures. rendering would harmonize best with the statements usually made that John bap- tized (purified) in "Aenon," "Bethania," "the wilderness " ; for each of these was in the Jordan district. The precise force of the preposition in Mark i : 9 depends upon the meaning of the verb "baptize." Its use when used with this verb has already been explained under I and II (pp. 48, 49). V. The range of objects into which, or the elements with which, the baptizing is done shows that the verb is used very loosely (cf. classes 2-7, pp. 45, 46). CHAPTER VII. DISCUSSION OF DATA CONTINUED. VI. In classes 4 and 5 we find together the use of the two prepositions — " in " and " into." Here they are distinguished from each other. The context shows clearly that we should not translate the Greek of either verse as follows : " Im- merse in, or into." The latter preposition may be rendered in these phrases by "unto," e.g., " Baptized unto Moses in," etc. This rendering was adopted by the American Bible Union, a Baptist transla- tion, in several verses besides this (1 Cor. 10 : 2 ; Matt. 3:11; cf. also the examples on pp. 44-46, and Acts 19:3). But the Baptist authorities are inconsistent in their translation of this Greek preposition, even 57 58 Baptism in the Scriptures. in similar constructions (cf. '" Immersed into [eis] Jesus Christ " ; Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27 with "unto Moses " ; also Rom. 6 14 " into \eis~\ death," " into \eis~\ one body," 1 Cor. 12: 13 ; with "unto \eis~\ repentance" Matt. 3:11," unto what " ; " unto John's immer- sion," Acts 19:3; also Matt. 28 : 19 ; 1 Cor. 1 : 13, 15 ; Acts 8:16; 19:5; " Immersed in [m]-fname" with Acts 10:48 " Im- mersed in [V/z]-|-name"). Prof. A. Hovey, a Baptist, prefers to read Acts 19:5 thus, "into or unto the name." Dr. Conant, in his book, translates Tertullian's phrase ("in patrem," Matt. 28:19), "Immersed into the Father, and the Son," etc. No adequate reason, it seems to me, can be given for the varying usage of the Bible Union and of Dr. Conant. If we read "unto Moses," why not read "unto Christ" ? for both phrases have the same author, verb, preposition, and they have similar objects — persons. If we read " unto Discussion of Data. 59 repentance," "unto John's immersion," why not read "unto one body," " unto his death " ? The " unto repentance " denotes " that they might repent " ; the latter "that they might die to sin." Such stress is laid upon these prepositions by our Baptist brethren as would indicate that they believed that the New Testament writers used these words with scientific precision. Such a belief is, as we have seen (cf. I, II), contrary to fact. These prepositions are used very loosely in the Septuagint and in the New Testament. VII. Our data teach also that the verb " baptizein " does not imply tJie application of zvater to the baptized ; or that the person is baptized into water, or even into a liquid element (Mark 1:8; Matt. 3:11; Luke 3:16; John 1 : 33 ; 1 Cor. 10 : 2 ; 12:13; Mark 10:38, 39; cf. Is. 21:4, LXX " Lawlessness baptizes me " ). In support of this statement several passages might 60 Baptism in the Scriptures. be adduced from the book of Dr. Conant. The following may be taken as samples : "Baptized the whole sword into his own neck" (p. 33); " Death to her, while yet baptized in the body" (p. 35); " Steel baptized in fire" (p. 38). The element is always expressed in the context, not in the verb. These facts should be remembered, for they may have important bearing upon the whole question of bap- tism as taught, on the one hand, by Jesus, and as practiced, on the other, by the Church. In view of these facts, it must be proven in each instance that the verb implies the use of water (e. g., Matt. 28 : 19; Mark 16: 16). VIII. The noun "baptisma " (baptism) is not used as a synonym of water in the New Testament (Mark 10:38, 39; Luke 12:50; 7:29; Matt. 3:7; Acts 19:3, 4 ; Eph. 4:5); neither does it always imply the idea, "water" (Mark 10 : 38, 39; Discussion of Data. 61 Luke 12 : 50; i Peter 3 : 21 ; cf. 1 Cor. 10: 2). I leave the disputed passages, Rom. 6 : 3, 4 ; Col. 2:12; Eph. 4 : 5, out of the question at present. IX. The New Testament speaks of several baptisms (cf. Heb. 9:10). Be- sides those referred to in the passage here quoted, we read of the baptism "into Moses," the baptism of John, the baptism of Jesus (Mark 10 : 38), and the baptisms (" in spirit and fire ") by Jesus (Matt. 3 : 11 ; Acts 1 : 5). Whenever, therefore, we come to a passage containing the word "baptism," we must ascertain, as far as possible, the particular baptism to which reference is made. In general, the context will make this clear. In no case must we assume that it refers to the Johannine or other baptism with water (cf. Mark 16 : 16). Radical differences exist between the baptism of John and those of Jesus, especially that "with the Holy Spirit." 62 Baptism in the Scriptures. a. Whenever the Johannine and Christ- ine baptisms are mentioned in the same context, they are always contrasted, John baptized with water, but Jesus with (the) Holy Spirit and fire. John never " bap- tized with (the) Spirit and fire " ; and Jesus never, as far as we know, baptized with water (cf. John 4:1, 2). b. The baptism of John was a prepara- tory rite intended to prepare the Jews to believe on Jesus (John 1:31; Acts 19 14; cf. Mai. 3:1; 4 : 5, 6 ; Is. 40 : 3-7). c. The baptism of John was intended for the Jews only, while that of Jesus was for both Jews and Gentiles. In proof of the former statement, we have the prophe- cies respecting John (Is. 40 : 3 ; Mai. 3:1; 4:5, 6 ; Luke 1 : 14-17, 67-79) 5 anc * the historic fact that he baptized only Jews. The work aimed at and accomplished by John throws the best light upon his pur- pose. Besides the forenamed evidences, Discussion of Data. 63 we have the explicit statement of the Baptist himself (John 1:31), of Jesus (Matt. 11:12, 13; 17:10-13; Luke 7: 24-30, etc.), and of Paul (Acts 13 : 24, 25 ; l 9 : 3> 4)- The Jews received the baptism with the Holy Spirit only after being bap- tized with water ; but the first Gentile Christians received the baptism of the Holy Spirit before and independent of the baptism with water (Acts 10 :44 ; 11:15). Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was not authorized to baptize with water (1 Cor. 1 : 17). And yet there is no evidence that his authority was any less than that of the Twelve (2 Cor. 1 1 : 5). CHAPTER VIII. DISCUSSION OF THE NOUN " BAPTISM " AND ITS USES. We come now to the data connected with the use of the noun " baptism " (baptisma). i. " One baptism," Eph. 4 : 5. 2. "Baptisms of cups, and pots, and brazen vessels," Mark 7:4. 3. "Divers baptisms," Heb. 9: 10. 4. "The teaching of baptisms," Heb. 6:2. 5. " Which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh ; but the interrogation of a good conscience towards God," 1 Pet. 3 :2i. 6. " We were buried therefore with him 64 The Noun "Baptism" 6$ through (the) baptism into the (his) death," etc., Rom. 6 : 3, 4. "Buried with him in the (his) baptism," Col. 2:12. 7. " When they come from the market place, except they sprinkle (W. H.), bap- tize (R. V.) themselves, they eat not," Mark 7 : 4. " They marvelled that he had not first baptized before dinner," Luke 11 138. 8. " Baptized for (huper, in behalf of) the dead," 1 Cor. 15 : 29. 9. Compare also Acts 8 : 36-39 ; Matt. 3 : 13-17 ; Mark 1 : 1-8 ; Luke 3 : 1-5. Upon some of the foregoing we remark : I. The sprinkling or baptizing of self before eating (Mark 7 : 4) is not commanded by the Old Testament or by the New. A comparison of this with John 2 : 6, where we read of the "stone waterpots according to the purification of the Jews " favors the thought that this washing of 66 Baptism in the Scriptures. the hands was performed by the applica- tion of water to the hands. The Jewish custom required the pouring of the water upon the hands (cf. Luke 7 : 44, etc.). The hands were not washed by dipping; the dipping, if ever performed, was simply to secure water to pour upon the hands, for only with flowing or moving water was the cleansing effected. 1 II. The " baptism of cups," etc. (Mark 7 : 4), was a custom which sprang, doubt- less, from the laws of purification. These applied to the dwellings and furniture of the unclean men. All of such objects were cleansed by sprinkling water upon them (Lev. 14:48-53; 15:13; Num. 19: 14-22) ; consequently this word baptism signifies purification by sprinkling. This, we have seen, is the ritualistic meaning of the noun in Josephus. iCf. pp. 42, 43, also Wilkinson's Egyptian Manners and Customs, pp. 76, 77. The Noun "Baptism" 6y III. Heb. 6:1,259: 10 need no particu- lar attention. The expression " baptizing for the dead " (1 Cor. 15:29) gives us no light upon our subject. The mode was doubtless sprinkling. This verse may- signify that some persons were purified not only for themselves, but also in behalf of Jewish or heathen relatives who died without the gospel, but whom these purified persons desired should be saved. IV. " One baptism " (Eph. 4 : 5). In studying this verse we should recall the fact that the noun "baptism'' does not imply the use of water ; hence we must prove that the term implies here the use of water. Paul, who was not authorized to baptize with water (1 Cor. 1:17), doubt- less refers here to the " baptism into Christ " (cf. Rom. 6 : 4-6 ; Gal. 3 : 27; Col. 2:12), or to the baptism with the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as these are the only essential Christian baptisms. He 68 Baptism in the Scriptures. certainly would not speak of the baptism with water in this connection, as though it were the only Christian baptism ; for it was not considered by the Baptist (Mark i : 8) ; by his disciples (Acts 19 : 3, 4) ; by Jesus (Acts 1:5)1 or by Paul (Acts 19: 3-5) as the Christian baptism. Even though we make it refer (as most of the best exegetes do) to the Johannine rite, the verse makes no reference to the mode of this baptism ; consequently the verse has little bearing upon our subject. V. "Baptized into one body" (1 Cor. 12:13). Before entering upon the con- sideration of this verse, recall the fact that "baptizein" (to baptize) does not necessarily imply the use of water. The context seems to favor the idea that Paul is referring to the baptism with the Holy Spirit ("For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body "). Christ is the body. It cannot signify "one body of The Noun "Baptism" 69 water"; for verses 12, 27 show that the body is Christ; hence to be " baptized into one body " is to be baptized into Christ Jesus (cf. Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3 : 27). Observe that "all were baptized with (in) one Spirit." The only spirit with which all believers in Jesus were baptized is the Holy Spirit, or, what is less likely, the spirit of faith. Paul believed that every Christian had received, or ought to receive this baptism with the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 19 : 3-6 with 1 Cor. 12:13). Paul, it is true, does not use the phrase, "Baptize with the Holy Spirit" (cf. Beet, 1 Cor.), in his epistles ; but he clearly im- plies that his readers have received the Spirit (1 Cor. 13:3-11; 12:28; 14:33, etc. 1 ) ; for only after and in the reception of the Holy Spirit did men receive the gifts mentioned in these passages. To say, therefore, with Beet, that the absence 1 Cf. Galatians 3 : 2. 70 Baptism in the Scriptures. of the above phrase is evidence that Paul did not employ the words, "one baptism," of the " baptism with the Holy Spirit," is to make a baseless affirmation. If Beet's objection be valid, then Paul could not use " one baptism " of " baptism with water " (Professor Beet's conception) ; inasmuch as Paul never uses the expres- sion, " Baptize with water " (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8). This argument from silence must be used with greater caution than Professor Beet has done in the present instance. The parallel Pauline expression strongly favors my interpretation (cf. " Baptized into Moses "). VI. Evidently the words of Peter (1 Peter 3:21) teach that he designated by the term " baptism " the rite of purify- ing the body from filth, and also "the interrogation of a good conscience toward God." CHAPTER IX. "BURIED with him in his baptism." Our next duty is the study of Col. 2:12, which may be translated, " Buried with him in his (Gr., 'the') baptism, wherein also we were raised through faith in the work- ing of God, who raised him from the dead." * In the context of this passage, the apostle makes no reference to the " bap- tism with water." Indeed, he nowhere in this epistle refers to the subject un- less in this verse. The burden of proof therefore rests upon those who affirm that this verse contains such a reference. The presence of the noun " baptism" is no evidence of it, for that, as we have shown, does not necessarily imply the use of water. To what baptism does the apostle 72 Baptism in the Scriptures. refer ? — to the baptism a with water/ 1 "with the Holy Spirit," "into Christ," or of suffering? Which was Christ's bap- tism ? Does he make a reference to the baptism of his readers " into the name of the Father," etc., or to the baptism of Jesus on their behalf? The article "the," which is in Greek before "baptism" may- be properly rendered "his" (baptism) as in Matt. 3 : 7 (Revised Version). The American Bible Union translates the article thus, "With him in the immer- sion." Which immersion ? Is there any reference here to some actual, external form of baptism ? The verb " buried with " does not prove this. The context shows that this verse cannot refer to any external rite. In verse eleven we are taught that Christ is " the head of every principality and power ; in whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands in the putting off of Buried in Baptism. 73 the body (cf. 1 Peter 3 : 21) of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ." This circum- cision is definitely differentiated from the external act, and yet it seems to be as objective as " the burial " and " the bap- tism " of the following verse, which we are considering. The resurrection which follows "the burial" is not an external, actual resurrection of the body from either the grave or from water; hence the "burial" cannot have been used in a literal sense in either of these verses. This highly figurative passage cannot be shown, in accordance with the laws of hermeneutics, to refer to either the Johan- nine or the apostolic water-baptism. As the circumcision here mentioned is the mystical one realized for us in the cir- cumcision of Christ, so the baptism is most probably the baptism of Christ ; hence we should read, "Buried with him in his baptism." 74 Baptism in the Scriptures. Shall we say that " his baptism " signifies the " baptism " which he received from the hands of the Baptist, or the baptism of suffering to which he alluded, or the bap- tism with the Holy Spirit, which he administers ? In view of the indefinite character of this figurative verse, it is unscholarly to assume that " baptism " denotes the water- baptism, and that " buried with " was in- tended to picture the mode of baptism with water. Most of the discussions of this verse have assumed these two thoughts, instead of proving that they were in the mind of Paul. The context and the au- thority of Paul, etc., lead me to believe that "His baptism " refers to the baptism of suffering. The reference to the resur- rection which follows favors this belief. Analogous with this verse is Rom. 6 : 3, 4 : "Or are ye ignorant, brethren, that as many as were baptized into Christ were Buried in Baptism. 7$ baptized into his death ? We were buried therefore with him through the (or his) baptism into the (or his) death in order that as Christ was raised from the dead, so we also might walk in newness of life. ,, This is another of the highly figurative passages in which Paul is expressing his favorite thought — the union of the be- liever with Jesus Christ in both His death and resurrection. The expressions, as has been said in another place, are purely Pauline ; consequently they must be interpreted in the light of their con- text and in harmony with the rest of Paul's teaching. The " crucifixion with Christ " (v. 6) should be taken as literally as the " burial with" him (v. 4). Indeed, it is the only phrase in the context which indicates how the believers died so as to necessitate a burial with Jesus. If the burial denotes a literal, external act, — immersion in water, y6 Baptism in the Scriptures. — then the crucifixion denotes a literal, external act — the impaling upon a tree. But this is contrary to fact ; hence the crucifixion and burial cannot, in reference to the believers, refer to external actions. The " dying with Christ " (v. 8), " the becoming united with him by the likeness of his death " (v. 5) show that the " burial with " cannot denote any external action or experience of the believer; therefore it cannot refer to immersion in water. In connection with this passage the following thoughts should be considered : 1. The verb and the noun, "baptizein" and "baptisma," do not necessarily imply the use of water. The noun is not a synonym of the word "water." 2. It must therefore be proved from these contexts — preceding and following — that "baptism" refers to the baptism with water. Nowhere else in this epistle is there any reference to this subject (bap- Buried in Baptism. 77 tism with water). Is it likely then that the writer, who had no authority to baptize with water (1 Cor. 1 : 17), expresses the mode of baptism with water in this highly figurative passage ? Indeed, we have only a probability to justify our believing that the Roman believers were baptized with water. 3. Shall we read in verse 4, " through (for this is the literal sense of the Greek) the baptism," or "his baptism"? The American Bible Union translates the Greek for "the death" by "his death." In dis- cussing Col. 2:12 evidence has been given to show that the rendering "his baptism " is as justifiable as a his death." Which is the better for this place ? Proof, not assumptions, must answer. If we read "the baptism," then which of the many baptisms is designated ? If we read "his baptism," then to which of the baptisms of Jesus does the apostle refer (cf. note on 78 Baptism in the Scriptures. Col. 2:12, p. 74, for the several baptisms which may be in mind) ? 4. The " burial " here does not take place in water, but "through his baptism into (or, unto) his death " (cf. vs. 4, 5, 8, 9). The burial therefore was into the death of Jesus. If " death " be taken, as it must be, of the historic death of the Saviour, then these believers were not literally baptized into his death. Since this is true it follows that the phrase, " buried with him through his baptism," cannot have any reference to the water- baptism of these believers, or to the mode of that baptism. But this "baptism into" the death of Jesus is here identified with " the baptism into Christ " (v. 3). The latter unques- tionably cannot signify " immersed (liter- ally) into Christ Jesus " ; for such an immersion is impossible. The meaning of the phrase must be ascertained by a Buried in Baptism. 79 study of the context, and of the use of similar Pauline phrases elsewhere (cf. 1 Cor. 10: 2-4; 12 : 13). In these last passages the sense is toler- ably evident. The former, we are sure, can have no reference to an immersion into water, because we are explicitly in- formed that water did not come into con- tact with any of the Israelites in their passage through the Red Sea (cf. 1 Cor. 10:1-4 with Exod. 14:19-29, etc.). To "be baptized by (or, in) the sea" is therefore to walk on dry land between the two walls of water (Ex. 14:29; 15:8). And to " be baptized by (or, in) the cloud" is to have the cloud above them, moving from before them till it comes behind them (Ex. 14 : 19). Historically interpreted, "baptism into Moses " denotes that the Israelites, by passing through the sea, were compelled to follow him. They were by these two events (the protection 80 Baptism in the Scriptures. of the cloud and the passage through the sea) separated forever from the Egyptians, their former masters, and united to Moses, their future master. They were united to him in fortune and were come under his power. Back to Egypt they could not go ; forward with him they must hence- forth advance. This separation from the unclean, the ungodly, and unifica- tion with the godly, the clean, are the two objects accomplished by the purifica- tion of men. This is true of the Essenic and of the Jewish purifications. The word baptism therefore may be applied to the acts described in i Cor. 10 : 1-4 as well as to those of Judith, Naaman, and others. With these thoughts in mind study afresh Matt. 28 : 19, 20. Dr. Conant him- self admits that the verb " baptizein " expressed " the coming into a new state of life or experience " (italics are his). This Buried in Baptism. 81 historic signification will satisfy the respective contexts of I Cor. 12: 13; Rom. 6:4; Gal. 3 : 27 (" Brought by one Spirit into one body." " Become united to Christ "). We might render " Purified by one Spirit (cf. Rom. 15:16; 1 Cor. 1 : 2) for one body," " Purified for Christ." Theophylact (1078 a.d.) translates 1 Cor. 10 : 2, " Shared with Moses!' 5. The resurrection of the believer, which follows his burial, is not a resurrec- tion from the water into which he was buried ( ? ), but from the death to sin into newness of life (cf. also Col. 2:12). 6. This resurrection is accomplished through the believer's faith, not in the muscle of the immerser, but in the work- ing of God (cf. Col. 2:12 with Rom. 6 : 4). The context of these and of the other Pauline passages show that separation from sin through the baptism and the con- sequent union to righteous living are the 82 Baptism in the Scriptures. dominant conceptions of the passages (cf. Heb. 10:22 with 1 Peter 3 :2i). Enough, I trust, has been written to convince the candid investigator that in Col. 2:12 and Rom. 6 : 3, 4 there are -no grounds for the belief that Paul is depict- ing by the verb " buried with " the mode of baptizing with water. CHAPTER X. " BAPTIZING THEM INTO THE NAME." We must now direct our attention to Matthew 28: 19, 20. "Make disciples of all nations by baptizing them into the name of the Father ... ; by teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you, etc." The reader has doubtless observed the unique character of this verse. It is the only place where we find Jesus using the phrase " baptized into the name." Only here does he command the disciples to baptize any one. In Mark 16:16 he makes only an affirmation. The thought and language of this verse differ greatly from that of Matthew. If we take both of these passages as referring to the 83 84 Baptism in the Scriptures. baptism with water, then in Matthew and Mark we have no evidence that Jesus ever referred to the " baptism with the Holy Spirit." Contrast this fact with the fol- lowing : In Luke and John we have no statement by Jesus respecting the " bap- tism with water." He speaks only of the " Spirit-baptism." With the preceding we must associate the fact that the Baptist always contrasted his " water-baptism " with the " Spirit- baptism " of Jesus. The Saviour and his disciples always, when speaking of both, contrast them. In view of these and other facts this command in Matthew should be fully understood before we claim that it refers to baptism with water. The phrase which I have rendered " into the name" may be translated " in the name" (Vulgate ; American Bible Union) j "to or for the name" (like the Hebrew " /*"). Some would construe it to mean Baptizing into the Name. 85 "with reference to the name"; others, " because for the sake of the name" ; while Professor J. A. Broadus prefers to give this Greek phrase, whenever it appears, the following force : " Baptized unto." This translation would weaken greatly the value of the phrase upon which the im- mersion ists lay great stress, namely, " bap- tized into ('unto/ Broadus) the Jordan" (cf. the use of eis, into, as a loose synonym of epi, upon, at, unto). The relation of the verb " disciple" to the verb " baptize" is brought out in the rendering which I have given. The cor- rectness of it may be proven by a com- parison of this with that precisely parallel construction found in 1 Cor. 8:12. To this rendering Dr. J. A. Broadus advanced an objection, namely: "The general teach- ings of Scripture do not allow us to think that discipling can be effected [italics his] by a ceremony and a subsequent course of 86 Baptism in the Scriptures. instruction in Christ's precepts/' x The facts, and I believe the teachings, of the New Testament favor the rendering which I have adopted. The Twelve became dis- ciples of Jesus without a baptismal cere- mony. They had been made disciples of John through a ceremony and instruction to keep, i. e., to practice the precepts of John. Keeping his (Jesus') commandments is the test of discipleship, friendship, and relationship. A disciple is one who learns both the precepts of Jesus and the way to practice these acceptably (cf. John 4:1; Matt. 13:52; Acts 14:22). In view of these and other facts the subjective objec- tion of Professor Broadus is void of force. 2 This verse sheds no light whatever upon the mode of baptism. Its teaching is in full accord with the teaching of the passages which we have already studied. 1 An American Com. on Matthew, p. 594. 2 This subject is treated at length in my book, soon to be pub- lished, on The Spiritual Birth as Taught in the New Testament. Compare the statement quoted from Pr, Conant on page 80. Baptizing into the Name. 8? Those who claim that the verb in this command implies the use of water must substantiate their claim with evidence from the teaching of Jesus. If an appeal is made to the practice of the disciples, then the advocates of this view should prove that the apostles were taught by Jesus to do as they did. If we admit that this verb implies here the use of water, then it does not follow that the command meant, "Immerse in water 'into the name." The ritualistic use of the verb forbids this. If we read it, " Purifying them in the name (or ' for the name ') of the Father," etc., the context is satisfied. If we read it, " Bringing them into union with (or ' into subjection to') the name of the Father," the context is satisfied. This would accord with the teaching of Jesus in John (" Keep in thy name," etc., 17: n, 12). "In the name " they get " life eternal " and all tem- poral blessings (John 15: 16, etc.). CHAPTER XL "BORN of water and spirit." Does Jesus in this verse (John 3 : 5), " Except a person be born of water and spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God," teach the necessity of baptism with water ? No. In support of this negation the following facts are offered : — 1. The verb "born" was never used, either before the time of Jesus or during the apostolic age, as equivalent to " bap- tize." The first one to use the compound verb {anagennan) in this sense was Justin Martyr. In doing this he blundered. He gives no evidence in support of his use of the compound verb. 2. The preposition en, "in," is never equal to ek, "out of, from," i. e., "in water " never equals "out of water." 88 Born of Water and Spirit. 89 3. The word " water" has no article; hence it is used of water in general (cf. Meyer and Weiss). 4. If " born of water " equals " baptize with (or in) water," then " born of spirit" equals " baptize with spirit." This being true, we have lost our doctrine of the new birth and have left only " baptism." If "born of spirit " equals " baptize with spirit," is not then " born of flesh " by parity of reasoning equal to " baptize with flesh " ? This absurd conclusion follows inevitably from the false premise, which assumes that "born of water" equals "baptize with water." If we substitute the word equivalent instead of " equal," the logical result will be the same. 5. Those who interpret "born of water" of " baptize with water " base their whole conception upon the unsupported assump- tion that the word " spirit " denotes " the Holy Spirit" This assumption is contrary 90 Baptism in the Scriptures, to the interpretation of the earliest Fathers and Versions (cf. Ignatius' Letter to the Philadelphians 7:1; Lewis' Gospel; Old Syriac and Old Latin Versions). No one has ever attempted to show why the Church should blindly follow, as it has done, the Vulgate. Jesus nowhere else uses this word "spirit," without the article or the adjective "holy" of the Holy Spirit. Be it remembered that there is no article in John 3 : 5 before the word "spirit," and no one has furnished any reason for its insertion or for the capitalization of the noun. Why should we manipulate the text in this manner in the absence of any commanding evidence ? 6. The context and the grammatical structure of the phrase "of water and spirit" 1 repudiate the interpretation which 1 A study of the relations of two nouns joined by a coordinate con- junction (kai, and) and governed by a common preposition forbids our accepting any of the prevalent interpretations. The only par- allel grammatical structure to John 3 : 5, 6 is 1 John 5 : 6. This is therefore the key to that. Born of Water and Spirit. 91 finds in this verse any reference to bap- tism. " Water and spirit" are here co- ordinated ; but in the phrase of the Baptist (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1 : 8, etc.) they are contrasted. 7. Not a single, tenable argument has ever been advanced for the opinion which I have rejected. The term " water" here was suggested by the term ("koilia") " abdomen" not " womb," and signifies the same as "flesh," man. This view I have advo- cated in public lectures delivered every summer since 1888, in Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kansas, etc. I am pleased to see it adopted, though not for the same reasons, by Dr. E. B. Fairfield (cf. Homiletic Review). 8. The term "spirit" is here used to denote God, for God is "spirit" (John 4: 24) ; hence " God breatheth (or bloweth) where he willeth, thou hearest his voice " 92 Baptism in the Scriptures. (John 3 : 8). This interpretation accounts for the usual Johannine phrase " born of God" (i: 13). CHAPTER XII. BAPTISM OF THE EUNUCH. The narrative concerning the baptism of the eunuch (Acts 8 : 38, 39) has been called, by Dr. Conant, " The most circum- stantial account given in the New Testa- ment of the administration of the rite. ,, It reads : " What hindereth me to be bap- tized ? And they both went down unto (or ' into ') the water, both Philip and the eunuch/' In studying this passage it may be well to remember that the preposition (ezs, "into, unto," and ek, "out of, from ") used in this verse must not be pressed too much ; because they are not used with these verbs (" descending " and " ascending ") in a very precise manner. The verb "to 93 94 Baptism in the Scriptures. descend" (katabainein) is used with the preposition eis in nine other places in the New Testament. In seven of these it is rendered in the Baptist translation (American Bible Union) by the phrase "went down to" (Luke 10:30; 18:14; Acts 8:26; 14:25; 16:8; 18:22; 25: 6) ; in one, " came down on " (Luke 8 : 23) ; and in one, "go down into" (Acts 7: 15). But in this it ought to have been rendered " down to " as well as in most of the first passages. The action described in Acts 8 : 38 is that of going down from the chariot "unto" not necessarily into the water (cf. Acts 8 : 38 with Luke 18 : 14 ; Gen. 24: 16, 45, LXX, etc.). The use of the preposition epi (upon, towards) with this verb in connections similar to those of the above seven passages shows that the preposition eis does not always, even with this verb, signify " into " (cf. Josh. 15:7, etc.). This agrees with the Baptism of the Eunuch. 95 use of these prepositions elsewhere in the New Testament (cf. chap. v). An examination of the use of the verb " ascend " (anabainein) with the preposi- tion ek shows that it does not neces- sarily signify " out of." In Mark 1:10 we have them to describe the action, which, in Matt. 3 : 16, is pictured by the verb with apo (away from, from). 1 This and the instances given in a preced- ing chapter ought to be enough to show that this preposition and verb are not always used in Biblical Greek with such precision as would warrant us in laying much emphasis upon them (cf. Matt. 7 : 16 with Luke 6 : 44). The action here de- scribed may have been that of ascending from the stream or fountain to the road. We ought to remember at this p<5int that the pictures in the catacombs "all repre- 1 Professor A. Hovey, in his Commentary on John, writes: " The best interpreters now agree that the two Greek prepositions {apo and ek) . . . denote the same relation " (cf. John n : i). 96 Baptism in the Scriptures. sent the baptized as standing in a stream, and the baptizer on dry ground!' 2 I am willing, however, for the sake of looking at this passage from the Baptist view point, to admit that the prepositions in question may have the meanings which the Baptists give them in these verses. But I must then ask, how much water was there ? How deep was it ? The Greek only says, " A certain (or ' some ') water." Until we have definite information respect- ing the depth of the water, and until we know positively that the ritualistic mean- ing of the verb " baptizein " is " to im- merse/' nothing should be said about immersing the eunuch into the water. This was unquestionably a ritualistic act in accordance with Jewish customs. Observe that we are not told how far down into the water they went. Did they go to a depth of two, twelve, or thirty-six 1 Schaff's Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, p. 36. Baptism of the Eunuch. 97 inches? Nothing is said. The " going down into " is fulfilled as really when one descends to the depth of one inch as when he enters a depth of forty inches. The " going up out of" is just as real in the former as in the latter case. How was the baptism performed ? In nude form ? Nothing is said about the disrobing, or of the putting on again of the garments ; noth- ing about their getting wet, the method of drying them, or the discomforts of wear- ing the wet, loose garments on their re- spective journeys. But Orientals never wet their garments, except when they cannot avoid doing so. They never bathe with them on. Why this silence, if the garments were taken off ; or if kept on the baptized and the baptizer in case of immersion ? If the baptism was by affusion, as the meaning of the verb demands, or by sprink- ling water from the hand, or hyssop, which was the customary form, the silence is 98 Baptism in the Scriptures, accounted for easily. These remarks apply equally well to every instance of baptism recorded in the New Testament. What was done with the garments in each case ? What did Philip do to the eunuch ? He "baptized him." How was this accom- plished ? According to the pre-Christian, Jewish custom of purifying men ? We should expect this, not only from our knowledge of custom, and from the silence of the narrative respecting the garments, but also from the ritualistic and apparently the only meaning of the verb in Luke's writings (cf. Acts 1:5-8 with 2:17, 18, 33, etc.). Was the eunuch's head dipped in the water? (cf. Chrysostom, 350-407 a.d., who says, " We dip our heads in the water." " It is easy for us to dip and to lift our heads again " 1 ). This " most cir- cumstantial account " is very indefinite. 1 Homilies on John, 25: 2. Baptism of the Eunuch. 99 In it the mode of baptism depends upon the force of the verb which this passage leaves unexplained. I have already shown that there is nothing in any of these verses out of harmony with the ritualistic significa- tion of the verb — purify by sprinkling or pouring. The questions suggested by this account are also suggested by the narratives re- pecting the baptism of Jesus. In both the whole question about the mode of administering the rite hangs upon the ritualistic meaning of the verb. CHAPTER XIII. CONCLUSION. Before finishing this study, I must ex- press the firm conviction that the erratic, fanciful exposition of the early Church affords us no firm ground for believing that their various and varying opinions and customs represent accurately the teachings and customs of Jesus and of his apostles. The least said about them as standards in these matters the better for the Fathers and for modern scholars. In conclusion, we are forced by facts to affirm that the data on baptism in Scrip- ture teach us that affusion, or more probably sprinkling, was the Johannine and apos- tolic method of baptizing. The use of the verb in the Septuagint, in the New Conclusion. IOI Testament ; the ritualism of the Old Testa- ment, the bathing customs of the Egyp- tians, Greeks, Romans, and Jews — ancient and modern ; the use of the prepositions connected with the verb, coupled with a detailed examination of the chief pas- sages which speak of baptism, have united to lead us to this conclusion.