Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

dans l'eau-dans le Saint Esprit. I am sorry to observe that the Popish translators from the Vulgate have shewn greater veneration for the style of that version than the generality of the Protestant translators have shown for that of the original. For in this the Latin is not more explicit than the Greek. Yet so inconsistent are the interpreters last mentioned, that none of them have scrupled to render en to Iordane, in the sixth verse, in Jordan, though nothing can be plainer than that, if there be any incongruity in the expression in water, this in Jordan must be equally incongruous. But they have seen that the preposition in could not be avoided there without adopting a circumlocution, and saying, with the water of Jordan, which would have made their deviation from the text too glaring. The word baptizein, both in sacred authors and in classical, signifies to dip, to plunge, to immerse, and was rendered by Tertullian, the oldest of the Latin Fathers, tingere, the term used for dyeing cloth, which was by immersion. It is always construed suitably to this meaning. Thus it is en hudati, en to Iordane. But I should not lay much stress on the preposition en, which, answering to the Hebrew Beth, may denote with, as well as in, did not the whole phraseology, in regard to this ceremony, concur in evincing the same thing. Accordingly, the baptized are said, anabainein, to arise, or emerge, ascend (ver. 16), apo tou hudatos, and Acts viii. 39, ek tou hudatos, from, or out of the water. When, therefore, the Greek word is adopted, I may say, rather than translated into modern languages, the mode of construction ought to be preserved so far as may conduce to suggest its original import. It is to be regretted that we have so much evidence that even good and learned men allow their judgments to be warped by the sentiments and customs of the sect which they prefer. The true partizan, of whatever denomination, always inclines to correct the diction of the Spirit by that of the party."

What a contrast betwixt the philology and candour of Dr. C., and the bigotry and blundering of Mr. R. Watson, who, on Matt. iii. 11, speaks of "the absurdity of translating the preposition en 'in'"! Instead of immersing in the Holy Spirit and fire being departed from in translations, it is the rendering both of latest and earliest translators and scholars. (See Dr. Conant, pp. 145-148.) The assertion of Dr. Hodge, "that baptizesthai en pneumati cannot mean to be immersed in the Spirit, any more than baptizesthai hudati, Luke iii. 16, Acts i. 5, can by possibility mean to be immersed in water" (On 1 Cor. xii. 13), does not require in reply that we may say, with Dr. W. L. Alexander, that a passage not "decidedly apparent by itself, may be confirmed and settled by others that can be shewn to be parallel" (Cong. Lec., p. 143). The reader of the English Hexapla will perceive that Wicliff translates en in, before water and before the Holy Ghost, with undeviating consistency. Tyndale and Cranmer give in water, and with the Holy Ghost. The Rheims translation has, in Matt. iii. 11, in water, and in the Holy Ghost, but is not ever afterwards consistent with this. The Geneva, like the authorized, has with. Dr. Conquest follows the authorized version, saying with water, and in the river. S. Sharpe's translation of Griesbach's text invariably gives in as the translation of en, before water or before the Holy Spirit. Also, as does Dr. G. Campbell, he translates Luke iii. 16, where hudati is without a preposition, "in water." He gives the same rendering in the parallel passages, Acts i. 5, xi. 16. "In water" is also given by Wakefield in these three passages; although we strongly dissent from some of his renderings.

We have no hesitation in saying that if the English in and out of are not synonymous with the Greek en and ek, no words in the English language are; and that no man of learning would risk his reputation by denying that into is the primary meaning of eis. We admit that these

Greek words (especially en and eis) are sometimes properly rendered by other words than those just given; but we maintain that an unnecessary departure from the meanings we have given is as unjust to the Greek as it would be to the English if a foreigner should say, because we speak of going into a mountain, the English word into does not include the idea of entering within, but merely of touching the surface, of coming upon it, and that, consequently, the English phrases, going into water, into a river, into the sea, into trouble, mean coming to or upon water, upon a river, upon the sea, upon trouble, but not entering within these.

...

Our translators say, in Matt. 6, "were baptized of him in Jordan," and at the 11th verse, "I indeed baptize with water." In Mark i. 4, 5, 9, they say, "did baptize in the wilderness;" "were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan;" 66 was baptized of John in Jordan;" and yet in the 8th verse they say, "I indeed have baptized you with water, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." Nothing but freedom from prejudice is needed to see the injustice of the translation with water, and with the Holy Ghost, whilst the preposition en is the preposition in every one of these instances. Even prepossession cannot blind to the absurdity of saying-although it would not be more unjust to the original than is our translation, so much approved in this instance by some of the Pædobaptists-" were baptized of him with Jordan" (Matt. iii. 6); "did baptize with the wilderness (Mark i. 4); "were all baptized of him with the river of Jordan" (ver. 5); "was baptized of John with Jordan" (ver. 9). In vindication of our assertions respecting prepositions, we may subsequently speak. The error of other meanings than immerse for baptizo is ascertainable, as we think, by everyone who will candidly read over all the occurrences of the word in the New Testament.

SECTION XII.

HISTORIC EVIDENCE OF A CHANGE FROM IMMERSION TO POURING AND SPRINKLING.

Prof. WILSON."The baptism referred to or administered during the early ages, we regard as a valuable auxiliary in ascertaining the character of apostolic baptism; beyond this point it has no valid claim on our acceptance" (p. 525).

Archb. WHATELY If men apparently pious, and of far greater knowledge and ability than ours, find so many difficulties in agreeing as to the sense of Scripture, . what is to them a difficulty must be to us an impossibility, and Scripture therefore can contain no Revelation properly so called, or, at least, no revelation to the mass of mankind.. It is doubly important, therefore, to point out-where this can be done with truth-how far difficulties and disputes may have been created, or aggravated, by theologians themselves."-Essays, pp. 273, 274. 7th Edi.

W. THORN.—“His (Christ's] laws are not to be abridged nor enlarged; nor can they be improved by any human sagacity or care. What is written we are to receive as from God, in order to become perfect in every good word and work. Fearful penalties are denounced on those presumptuous mortals, of whatever political or ecclesiastical position, who attempt to mend the institutions of Jehovah, or who disregard His infallible and imperious declarations. It would not be more preposterous to attempt to re-arrange the movements of nature, re-gild the orbs of light, or remodel the perfect structure of human beings, than to labour to improve the laws of God.”— Inf. Bap., p. 374.

Dr. F. WAYLAND.-"We want Christianity, not Christian antiquities; and the latter only as they may subserve the illustration of the former." "Who will dare to change the constitution which Christ has given to His church? If we may do it in this case, we may do it in all cases, and we assume the very worst badge of the Papacy."-Prin. of the Bap., pp. 250, 38, 39.

Dr. J. BENNETT.-"With the apostles, we inquire, What saith the Scripture, which is able to make the man of God perfect?'" "God has placed a great gulf between inspired and uninspired writers." "Look around, or look back, where we may, we find no era, but the short one of virgin innocence, in which we can acquiesce; and even the apostles saw the apostacy commence." -Cong. Lec., pp. 271, 272, 290, 299.

J. C. RYLE."No tradition or man-made institution can ever... justify disobedience to any plain commandment of God's Word."-Expos. on Matt. xv. 1-9.

We have already adduced, as we think, abundant evidence that the meaning of baptizo in the days of the apostles, also before and after their time, was to immerse. If doubts in the mind of any reader are not wholly removed, it is conceived that historic evidence of a change from immersion to pouring and sprinkling is at hand, evidence adapted to confirm our position, and to cause in all who will candidly examine it, a removal of any remaining doubt. We wish it to be distinctly understood that we do not admit the necessity of being acquainted with ecclesiastical history, any more than of being acquainted with the Jewish Talmuds, in order to know the mind of God relative to an ordinance of His appointment. We believe God's will to be clearly revealed in His own Word, and that nothing but prepossessions or other imperfections prevent ourselves or our opponents from discovering the Divine mind on this subject. That the study of uninspired ecclesiastical history, although the study of the progress of error, is not instructive and profitable, we do not maintain; but its testimong that Christian baptism is immersion, we accept only as confirmatory of the truth sufficiently revealed in the Sacred Oracles. So great is the importance which we attach to the sufficiency of Divine revelation, and so appropriate does it appear in connexion with historic evidence relative to immersion, that we shall, first, adduce a portion of the testimony of the Divine Spirit in regard to baptism in the days of our Saviour and His apostles. Secondly, we shall narrate a number of allusions to this ordinance by apostolic contemporaries or those immediately succeeding them, to prove that with them baptism was immersion. Thirdly, we shall remind the reader of the unvarying practice of the Greeks and the Greek church. Fourthly, we shall adduce the character of Ancient Baptisteries, Ritual Regulations and Confessions, in proof of a change having subsequently taken place from immersion to pouring and sprinkling. Fifthly, we shall record the clearest acknowledgments of a host of the most distinguished Pædobaptists that have adorned the Church of Christ in our own country and in other countries, during the present generation and some that have preceded. If they testify simply that immersion was the primitive practice, it is equal testimony that a change has taken place from immersion to pouring or sprinkling. Sixthly, we shall adduce the explicit testimony of historians, mostly Pædobaptist historians-and when this is not the case, it will be noted-to the fact and to the progress of a change from immersion to pouring and sprinkling.

1. We record a few portions of the Divine Word which in our judgment evince that baptizo had the sense of immerse when used by the inspired penmen, and, consequently, that immersion certainly is enjoined, and was the apostolic practice. Remembering what has been asserted and conceded respecting the import of the word, let the following be read : "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God... John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. And there went out to him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins. . . . And it came to pass in those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens

opened," &c. (Mark i. 1-10.) The last particular record respecting John's baptism is in John iii. 23, 24: "And John also was baptizing in Enon, near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came and were baptized. For John was not yet cast into prison." After the ascension of Christ, we read first of the baptism of the Spirit in these words: "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting" (Acts ii. 1, 2). The next record is of a baptism, not by Christ himself, but by Christians. As the simple fact is recorded, we know nothing respecting it but what is taught us by the import of the word Divinely chosen to describe it, the definite and certain meaning of which we have already endeavoured to show. But we shortly read what is more particular. "Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water. . . And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water," &c. (Acts viii. 35–39.) We subsequently read what refers to all the baptized: "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection" (Rom. vi. 3-5). In the spirit and after the example of apostolic teaching we would say, Let us believe all men to be erring on the ordinance of baptism, rather than reflect on the wisdom, goodness, or justice of Christ, by believing that He has given an obscure, unintelligible, or contradictory record.

2. We shall now narrate a number of allusions to this ordinance by Christian writers who were contemporary with the apostles, or who lived in the immediately succeeding period. As the writings of some of the Fathers were at an early period mutilated, interpolated, or otherwise corrupted, it would be hazardous, and otherwise improper, to maintain in every instance more than that we quote from the writings attributed to them.

The term Fathers is applied to eminent personages in ecclesiastical history, especially to those who lived prior to the sixth century. "About fifty individuals are honoured with this title. Five of them, Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, are alleged to have been contemporary with the apostles, and are therefore called apostolic Fathers. Twenty more lived prior to Christianity becoming a State religion in the days of Constantine, and the remainder subsequently to that period." Excepting to the apostolic Fathers, we shall give to those who are cited the dates of their flourishing, to enable the reader to determine how near to apostolic times each lived. The works attributed to Barnabas and Hermas are certainly of very early origin.*

*Not possessing the originals of these Fathers, the learned reader may perceive that in some instances, as elsewhere, we extract from more than one who has given translated quotations.

BARNABAS." Blessed are they who, putting their trust in the Cross (katabesan eis), have gone down into the water." Shortly after: "(Hemeis men katabainomen eis) We go down into the water full of sins and pollutions; but come up again bringing forth fruit; having in our hearts the fear and hope which is in Jesus, by the Spirit."-Epis., § 11; and Wake's Gen. Epis., pp. 180, 181.

HERMAS."The water [of baptism] into which men go down bound to death, but come up appointed unto life" (Pastor., Sim. ix., § 16). Also speaking of the church under the emblem of a tower, he says of the stones which were to compose the building: "Some fell near the water, and could not be rolled into the water" (Lib. 1, vis. 3, § 2). Again: "But what are the rest which fell by the water side, and could not be rolled into the water? They are such as have heard the word," &c. (§ 7.)

JUSTIN MARTYR, A. D. 140.—"Isaiah did not send you into the bath, that you might there wash away the murder and the other crimes which all the waters in the sea were insufficient to purge away; but as it was proper, anciently, the saving initiation was," &c. (Works, Paris Ed., p. 229). "Therefore by the laver of repentance, and the knowledge of God, which on account of the sins of the people of God hath been instituted, as Isaiah proclaims, we believe and declare that this, the very baptism," &c. (p. 231, C.) "But in what manner we, having been made anew through the Christ, devote ourselves to God, I will narrate, in order that I may not, by omitting this, seem to commit an error in the discourse. If such there be as believe that the things taught and spoken by us are true, obey them, and profess that they are able to live so (as these things require), these persons are instructed, fasting, to pray and beseech from God a pardon of all their former sins: we fasting and praying with them. After that they are led by us to where there is water, and are born again in that kind of new birth by which we ourselves were born again. For upon the name of God the Father and Lord of all, and of Jesus Christ our Saviour, and of the Holy Spirit, the immersion + in water is performed; because the Christ hath also said, Except a man be born again, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven'" (p. 93, D). "But this immersion is called an enlightening, since those who are learning these things are instructed as to the mind; and he who has been enlightened is immersed by the authority of Jesus Christ," &c. (p. 94, D). "And as we have before written, it is stated by Isaiah in what way we who have sinned and repented may escape from sin. But it is stated thus, Wash you, make you clean, put away the evil from your souls. . . . But from the apostles we have learnt a reason for this; since being altogether ignorant of our first nativity, we were produced and born by a necessity of nature, . . . and continued in vain conversation and corrupt habits; but in order that we might not remain children of this ignorance and corrupt necessity of nature, but by choice and knowledge obtain in the water a forgiveness of the sins we have committed, the name of the Father and Lord of all is pronounced on him who chooses to be born again and has repented of his sin. Those who lead to the laver the individual to be immersed pronouncing this the name of God only" (p. 94, A). See Stovel's Disci., p. 360.

[ocr errors]

THEOPHILUS, A.D. 180.-"As we are by baptism buried in water, so Christ was buried in the earth."-In Wallace, on Bap., p. 12.

CLEMENT, OF ALEXANDRIA, A.D. 194.-"A Christian is one who knows God, who believes in Christ, who possesses the grace of God, and who has been dipped in the sacred laver."-See Eusebius, b. 4, c. 62.

TERTULLIAN, who flourished in the former part of the third, and last part of the second century: "The person was brought down into the water without pomp, without any new ornament or sumptuous preparations, and dipped at the pronunciation of a few words. And there is no difference whether one is washed in the

Did we ever read of persons being led to a place where there was water for the purpose of sprinkling? Dr. Bennett says: "Justin merely says, 'We bring the candidate where there is water,' which shows that they did not bring the water to him" (Cong. Lec., p. 199). We admit the inference from Justin, but deny that he "merely says" this.

+ Since this extract from Mr. Stovel was printed, we have seen that this word in the original is loutron, which we should have rendered washing. We have no doubt that Justin meant immersion; but neither in this extract, nor in those that succeed, do we wish to translate by words more strong or more explicit than the original.

« AnteriorContinuar »