HISTORY OF BAPTISM.

CHAPTER I.

IMPORT OF THE TERM BAPTIZO.

SECTION I.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES RELATING TO THE MEANING OF WORDS.

THE inquirer after historic truth will readily perceive, that, to attain a correct idea of any fact, he must possess a clear apprehension of the terms in which the occurrence of that fact is stated. The first historic record on the subject of baptism as a moral institute, is by the evangelist Matthew: "Then went out to him [John] all Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." (Matt. iii. 5, 6.) With respect to the character of the persons referred to in this brief narrative no dispute has arisen; but it is denied by some that the action performed is defined, further than that water was in some method applied to the persons spoken of. On the other hand it is maintained, that the term baptize, from the Greek baptizo, specifically designates and requires the act of immersion, and admits of no other. It is important that this question should first be decided; and therefore, although the course of the history will throw additional light on this 17

2*

point, it will be desirable at once to adduce those arguments which are philological rather than historical, that the inquirer may have his mind cleared from all difficulty, or at least be better prepared to judge of the bearing of history in this respect.

That language, as hitherto constituted, has in all ages proved but an imperfect medium for the communication of ideas, will not be denied. This arises mainly from the employment of one word in various senses. Yet it is rare that the connexion or other circumstances leave any material difficulty in determining in what sense the word is to be used. It is also to be observed, that some words have been subjected to a great variety of meanings, while others have retained in all circumstances their original signification.

Of the varied meanings of words the following are the most important, and more than sufficient for the present investigation. 1. Primitive, or original. 2. Ordinary. 3. Metaphorical, or figurative. 4. Technical.

The primitive signification is the earliest to which any word can be traced, whether it be native to the language of the author, or of foreign origin. In some instances the primary and ordinary meanings are identical, in others they widely differ. Of the former kind immerse, from the Latin immergo, affords an instance; of the latter, prevent, from prevenio, the primary meaning of which is to go before, but the ordinary to hinder. It is manifest, however, that the meaning of a word in any given case is not to be determined by its original sense, but by its actual ordinary meaning in the language in which the author wrote, and at the time of his writing; unless the circumstances in which the word occurs require a figurative or technical signification (which may also include the ordinary) to be attached.

Figurative meanings arise from a variety of causes. Sometimes the figure involves but a slight change from the original

or ordinary meaning, in other cases it bears but little resemblance to the original; as in the verb to contract (from the Latin contraho), the original meaning is simply to draw together; the ordinary, to abridge or make less; the figurative or technical, to make a bargain. By far the most frequent occasion of the figurative use of words, is when terms purely physical in their origin are applied to intellectual or moral purposes; for instance, firmness refers originally to the hardness and solidity of matter, but figuratively to decision of mental character; levity originally refers to the small proportion which the quantity of matter in any given body bears to its bulk, but figuratively to the absence of proper steadiness, intellectual or moral. As a general principle, little assistance can be derived in defining the physical and original meaning of a term, by referring to the figurative or metaphorical sense in which it has been used. Take the verb to bridle: how can any disquisition on the proper regulation of our conversational powers help the young equestrian to understand how he is to put the bit in his horse's mouth? In some instances, however, the figure can only accord with a definite literal meaning.

Technical meanings (requisite for purposes of law, physic, or the arts and sciences) are usually selected, as occasion may arise, from some foreign language; but, in some instances, terms already in use receive a technical sense. A conveyance (from the Latin conveho) is originally the act of conveying from one place to another; ordinarily, the carriage in which transportation takes place; technically, a deed transferring property from one person to another. Yet, with all these varieties, it is scarcely possible any intelligent reader could doubt whether an author meant to designate a stage coach or a parchment deed, unless his mind were warped by the question affecting some important interest with which he was connected. There are cases, however, in which no possible

difficulty can occur, because the ordinary meaning is included in the technical, and the original external act constitutes an essential part of its newly appropriated or technical sense.

One more general observation on the meaning of words will suffice. In all languages there are words of a more specific, and others of a more vague signification. It will be reasonable to presume, therefore, that, where an author designs to represent an action without defining the mode, he uses a general term; but, where he intends specifically to designate the precise mode of action, he will be found to use a word corresponding to his object.

Let these plain principles be applied to the term baptizo as used by the New Testament writers, and even by the Greek classics, and I apprehend the result will leave no doubt on the mind of the candid inquirer. I will not, however, anticipate his convictions by making that application before the facts as to the usc of the term, both in sacred and profane writers, have been fully laid before him.

SECTION II.

MEANING OF BAPTIZO IN THE WRITINGS OF THE GREEK CLASSICS.

It is a happy circumstance that but one Greek term has been employed with reference to the ordinance of baptism. The word hapto is never found in this connexion; yet much time has been needlessly expended in this controversy respecting it. While, indeed, it was contended that the termination zo was a diminutive, and therefore that baptizo must designate something less than bapto, it might have been of some consequence; but, since this position has been

*

abandoned as untenable, the question simply is, what is the act the term baptizo designates? It may, however, be proper to observe, that, while bapto was used frequently for dyeing and coloring in various methods, this is never the case with baptizo.†

That the primitive meaning of baptizo is to immerse or dip, is conceded by all the advocates of sprinkling of any pretension to philological knowledge; and the fact that all lexicographers, ancient and modern, concur in this opinion, precludes discussion.

*I should incline to give the word the meaning, to cause to come into that state, and this idea is favoured by the termination zo.-President Beecher's import of the term Baptizo. Bib. Repos. Jan. 1840, p. 48.

"Bapto is never used to denote the ordinance of baptism, and baptizo never signifies to dye. The primitive word bapto has two significations, the primary to dip, the secondary to dye. But the derivative is formed to modify the primary only; and in all the Greek language I assert that an instance is not to be found in which it has the secondary meaning of the primitive word. If this assertion is not correct, it will be easy for learned men to produce an example in contradiction. That bapto is never applied to the ordinance of baptism, any one can verify who is able to look into the passages of the Greek Testament where the ordinance is spoken of. Now, if this observation is just, it overturns all those speculations that explain the word, as applied to baptism, by an allusion to dyeing; for the primitive word that has this secondary meaning is not applied to the ordinance; and the derivative word which is appointed to express it has not the secondary signification of dyeing. Bapto has two meanings; baptizo, in the whole history of the Greek language, has but one. It not only signifies to dip or immerse, but it never has any other meaning. Each of these words has its specific province, into which the other cannot enter; while there is a common province in which either of them may serve. Either of them may signify to dip generally; but the primitive cannot specifically express that ordinance to which the derivative has been appropriated; and the derivative cannot signify to dye, which is a part of the province of the primitive. The difference is precise and important. Most of the confusion of ideas on both sides of the question, with respect to the definite meaning of the word baptism, has arisen from overlooking this difference."-Baptism in its Mode and Subjects considered. By ALEXANDER CARSON, LL. D., p. 19.