Page images
PDF
EPUB

I take this to be sufficiently plain and certain, to the well-instructed philologist; and I apprehend it may now appear plain to others, from the evidence placed before them. Is there then, in the word ẞantico itself, a meaning sufficiently definite and exclusive to imply of necessity, that the rite of baptism was performed only by plunging? And does the solitary example in Mark 1: 9, add confirmation to the supposition of such a meaning?

It will be remembered, that I am now making the inquiry, how much we may justly conclude ex vi termini, i. e. merely from the force of the words concerned, independently of any historical facts that may stand connected with them, and be explanatory of them. For in this case, as in all others, more or less of modification may be admitted in respect to the sense of particular words, as the circumstances, i. e. the facts connected with the case, may require.

The answer to the above questions which I feel philologically compelled to give, is, that the probability that ßantiso implies immersion, is very considerable, and on the whole a predominant one; but it does not still amount to certainty. Both the classic use and that of the Septuagint shew, that washing and copious affusion are sometimes signified by this word. Consequently, the rite of baptism may have been performed in one of these ways, although it is designated by the word ßantico. Whether in fact it was so, then, seems to be left for inquiry, from other evidence than that which the word itself necessarily affords.

In respect to Mark 1: 9, ἐβαπτίσθη ... εἰς τὸν Ιορδάνην, after what has been said above, and in consideration that this is the only instance of the kind in the New Testament, it cannot be deemed, as it appears to me, quite safe to build with confidence. upon it. The expressions, vivai eis zohvμßýðqav, in John 9: 7, and λουσαμένου εἰς τὸ βαλανεῖον (washed in a bath) in Alciph ron III. 43, shew that the Greek verbs which designate the washing of the hands, face, or feet, and also of the body, may and do take the same construction, viz. the Accusative with is after them. In either of these two last cases, plunging is not essential to the idea conveyed by the verb, although it is admissible.

On the whole, however, the probability seems to be in favour of the idea of immersion, when we argue simply ex vi termini, i.e. merely from the force of the words or expressions in themselves considered.

I know not that I can cast any further light on this part of my subject, by pursuing simply philological investigation. However, as this seems to leave us somewhat in a state of uncertainty still, we must have recourse to the other means of inquiry suggested above.

§ 6. Circumstances attending Baptism.

II. Do the circumstances which attend the administration of the rite of baptism, as related in the New Testament, cast any light upon the MANNER of the rite itself?

1. The Baptism of John.

(a) John is called pantions in the following passages; viz, Matt. 3: 1. 11: 11, 12. 14: 2, 8. 16: 14. 17: 13. Mark 6: 24, 25. 8:28. Luke 7:20, 28, 33. 9: 19. But as this appellation determines merely his office, and not the manner in which he performed the rite of baptism, it would serve no purpose to pursue an investigation relative to this word; which of course must take its hue from βαπτίζω.

(b) I have already remarked, that Bretschneider considers Matt. 3: 6, All Jerusalem etc. ... were baptized iv tổ ❜loodávy, in the Jordan, as designating the place where they were baptized. This he seems to justify by an appeal to Mark 1:4, John was baptizing iv r sonu, in the desert. But the difference between the two cases is, that the river Jordan may naturally signify the element with which the rite was performed.

I find nothing else in the accounts of the several Evangelists, or in the Acts of the Apostles, respecting the baptism of John, which has not already been discussed under our first inquiry in § 5, excepting the phraseology in Matt. 3: 16, and in Mark 1: 10. It is here related, that Jesus being baptized by John, ávéßn (ávaBaivov) and rov üdaros, went up from the water, viz. from the river Jordan. The question has been raised, whether this means 'Went up out of the water of the river,' i. e. rose up after being plunged into the river, and came out of the water. It becomes necessary therefore to investigate this question.

Several considerations may serve to determine it. (1) The rite of baptism was completed, before John went up from the water. So says Matthew, Bantioveis o 'Inoous; and, Mark also says, that Jesus was baptized by John in the Jordan, and then

went up from the water. Both Evangelists say, that the action of going up took place immediately or straightway (evðús, εúð¿ws) after the baptism. Now if the rite of baptism was completed, before John emerged from the water, (in case he was immerged,) i. e. if it was completed merely by the act of plunging him under the water, then indeed avaßaivov might possibly be supposed to apply to his emerging from the water. But who will venture to introduce such a conceit as this? (2) Yet if any one should wish to do so, the verb avaßaivo will hardly permit such an interpretation. This verb means to ascend, mount, go up, viz. a ship, a hill, an eminence, a chariot, a tree, a horse, a rostrum, to go up to the capital of a country, to heaven, etc. and as applied to trees and vegetables, to spring up, shoot up, grow up. But as to emerging from the water, I can find no such meaning attached to it. The Greeks have a proper word for this, and one continually employed by the ecclesiastical fathers, in order to designate emerging from the water; and this is avadów, which means to come up out of the water, the ground, etc. or to emerge from below the horizon, as do the sun, stars, etc. But this verb is never commuted, to my knowledge, with ávaßaivo. The usage of each seems to be perfectly distinct; yet I do not deny the possibility of employing avaßaivo in the sense of emerging. I know the want of accuracy in some writers too well to hazard the assertion, that no example of such usage can be found. But if there are such examples they must be very rare. The New Testament surely does not afford them. (3) The preposition and will not allow such a construction. I have found no example where it is applied to indicate a movement out of liquid, into the air. Ex would of course be the proper word to indicate such a relation as this. And denotes either the relation of origin, as sprung from, descended from, etc. or removal in regard to distance, or the relation of cause to effect, the instrument, etc. To designate emerging from any thing that is liquid, I have not found it ever applied.

These concurrent reasons, both of circumstances and usus loquendi, make it a clear case, that Jesus retired from the water of the river, by going up its banks. Nothing more can properly be deduced from it.

As there appears to be nothing more of a circumstantial nature, in all the examples cited above where the baptism of John is mentioned, which can cast any light upon the point in question, (ex

cepting one case that stands connected with the mention of Christian baptism,) I proceed to make inquiry respecting this latter subject.

2. Christian Baptism, as practised by the primitive disciples of Jesus.

This is mentioned or alluded to, in Matt. 3: 14. 28: 19. Mark 16: 11. John 3: 22. 4: 1, 2. Acts 2: 28, 41. 8: 12, 13, 16, 36, 38. 9: 18. 10: 47, 48. 16:15, 33. 18: 8. 19: 3, 5. 22: 16. Rom. 6: 3 bis. 1 Cor. 1: 14, 15, 16, 17. 12: 13. Gal. 3:27. The example in Acts 19: 3 may be doubtful. The passages in Eph. 5: 26. Tit. 3: 5, and Heb. 10: 22, also refer to Christian baptism.

The examples in Matthew and Mark afford nothing pertinent to our present object. But in John 3: 22-24, a narration just alluded to above, occurs in connexion with mentioning that Jesus abode in Judea and baptized there, which deserves our special attention. The writer, after narrating what has just been stated, goes on to say: Now John was baptizing in (or at) Enon, near Salim, öri üðara nolλà žv ¿xɛĩ, for there was MUCH WATER there, or (more literally), there were MANY WATERS there. The question is, Whether John baptized at Enon near Salim, because the waters were there abundant and deep, so as to afford convenient means of immersion; or whether the writer means merely to say, that John made choice of Enon, because there was an abundant supply of water there for the accommodation of those who visited him, for the sake of being baptized and of hearing the powerful addresses which he made to the Jews. The former statement makes the much water or many waters necessary, or at least convenient and desirable, for the purposes of the baptismal rite; the latter for supplying the wants of the multitudes who attended to the preaching of John.

It has always seemed to me a very singular mode of expression, if the sacred writer meant to designate the former idea, to say ὅτι ὕδατα πολλὰ ἦν ἐκεῖ. Why not say, because the water was deep, or abundant, simply? A single brook, of very small capacity, but still a living stream, might, with scooping out a small place in the sand, answer most abundantly all the purposes of baptism, in case it were performed by immersion; and answer them just as well as many waters could do. But on the other hand, a single brook would not suffice for the accommodation of the great multitudes who flocked to John. The sacred writer tells us, that "there went out to him, Jerusalem, and

all Judea, and all the neighbouring region of Jordan," Matt. 3:5; and that they were baptized by him. Of course there must have been a great multitude of people. Nothing could be more natural than for John to choose a place that was watered by many streams, where all could be accommodated.

The circumstances of the case, then, would seem to favour that interpretation, which refers the mention of many waters to the wants of the people who flocked to hear John.

But let us see, now, what the idiom of the language demands. The following passages serve to illustrate this idiom.

In Matt. 3: 16. Mark 1: 10, üdatos (water) designates the river Jordan; as we might very naturally suppose. In Acts 8: 36-39, it is left uncertain by the text, whether a stream or fountain of water is there meant; for doo may designate either. In Rev. 8: 11, zoitov tov vdátov, a third part of the waters, refers both to the rivers and fountains of water that had just been mentioned; and so ἐκ τῶν ὑδάτων again in the same verse. In Rev. 17: 1, the angel says to John: "I will shew thee the punishment of the great harlot, who sitteth on many waters," i. e. many streams or rivers of water, not merely a large quantity of water. In 17: 15 the same phrase and idea is repeated. In Rev. 22: 1, we find the expression ποταμὸν ὕδατος ζωῆς, river of the water of life, which in Rev. 22: 17 is referred to and called dwo sons, water of life. In Rev. 1: 15. 14: 2. 19: 6, we have the expression qový v dátov Tolkov, the voice of many waters; which, in two of the passages, is followed by the expression, as the voice of thunder, i. e. a noise exceedingly loud. Now it is the waves of the sea, probably, to which the writer here alludes; for there were no cataracts in Palestine that would have supplied him with an apposite idea. But these waves of the sea are successive, and (so to speak) different and broken masses of water; not one continuous mass, deep and abundant. The simple idea of depth and abundance would not give birth to the conception of roaring waters. It is the movement, the division, the succession, and the motion, which form the ground of this idea.

Of the Evangelists, only Matthew and Mark use dog in the plural. Matthew employs it four times; viz. 14: 28, 29. 8:32. 17: 15. In the three former instances it designates the waters (as we say) in the lake or sea of Tiberias; in the latter it probably means different or various streams or fountains of water. In this last sense, Mark employs it, in the only example in which the plural is used in his Gospel; viz. in 9: 22. No other example of the plural occurs until we come to the Apocalypse. Here, as we have seen, the waters or waves of the ocean are designated by the

« PreviousContinue »