« EelmineJätka »
and actually called baptisms. For, HEB. ix. 10. it is said the Jewish dispensation stood in meats, and drinks, and DIVERSE BAPTISMS, dow@opous Bætlus • moss. All, who understand the original, know, that the words do and must mean diverse sorts of baptisms, or baptisms of different species or kinds. It is not said πολλοις πιany, nor ποικιλους σαrious, but diapoço diverse, or different sorts. The only place, in the New Testament, where the word (diapop@) is used, besides this, is Rom. xii. 6. Where, by Sice popa xaço para differing, or diverse gifts, is indisputably meant several differing kinds of gifts; as the words following demonstrate, viz. prophecy, teaching, ruling, &c. The word Bawloomos baptisms, in the one place, like the word xapsoucle gifts, in the other, is use as a genus, or general term, under which are comprehended several species or kinds; and, when here joined with due papas diverse, must necessarily signify several different manners, or modes, of applying water, for ceremonial purification, under the Jewish law. Some of these were by dipping, some by sprinkling or pouring, Should, then, a person now say-That there is no baptism but by dipping,—he would most plainly and undeniably contradict the apostle; for he would hereby affirm, that there is but one kind of baptism ; whereas the apostle declares there are more kinds than one.*
As, in the forecited passage, Rom. xii, 6. by calling the several powers in the christian church, viz. prophecy, ruling, teaching, die Popa xaprouales
Concerning the sense of the word diepog diverse, see also Wisdom, vii. 1o. diepogres putus diversities, or diverse sorts, of plants. Dan. vii. 19. Angxay decopagov raza qay Ongeon a beast of a kind or species different from all other beasts. So the word dicapazutego is twice used, in this same epistle. Heb. i. 4. and viji. 6. in both which places, it signifies of a very different kind. A name of a very different kind; and a ministry, of a very different kind from theirs,
differing gifts, the apostle does, undoubtedly, pronounce each to be a gift; so, by calling the several ways of Jewish purification, viz. sprinkling pouring, äipping, diapopo Barlas pos differing baptisms, he does, as certainly and undoubtedly, pronounce each to be a baptism. Yea, that the apostle has, in this place, a inore particular regard to the Jewish sprinklings, than dippings, seems highly probable (to say the least) from his express mention of the sprinklings, verse 13. as some of the principal of those legal purifications, or different baptisms, concerning which he had spoken. Verse 10. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a heifer, (with which the water of purification was made) SPRINKLING the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh; how much more, &c.
If any shall imagine that the baptizing of cups, pots, tables, human bodies, &c. is meant by these diverse baptisms, the reply is obvious. These, if they must be all dipt, in order to their being baptised, can with no truth or propriety be called diverse or differing kinds of baptisms; for they are then but one and the same baptism of differing things.
Here, then, is full proof that the scripture uses the word Barlopos, baptism, in so general and large a sense, as evidently to comprehend sprinkling, if not chiefly to intend it. Sprinkling then, in the judgment of an inspired writer, is an authentic and divinely instituted manner of baptizing. I proceed,
2. To shew, that the word Barl3w, to baptise, is frequently used, in scripture, where the act of pouring or sprinkling, not dipping, is intended : and that a person is said to be baptised, when not his whole body was plunged under water, but when water was applied only to a part.
LUKE xi. 38. The pharisee, who invited our Lord to dine with him, marvelled that he had not first been BAPTISED before dinner, oft 8 apertor Carln. Did he expect that our Lord should have plunged his whole body under water before dinner? Undoubtedly not. But what his expectations were may be learnt from those of his brother-pharisees, in the very same case, as to the disciples ; they found fault with them for eating with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen hands.* So Grotius explains it -- Ecarlatin baptised; that is, says he, soufcio teus xogas, had not first washed his hands.† And “ Dr. Pocock observes, and
quotes Beza as saying, that Banubiodensy to be “ baptised (Luke xi. 38.) means the same as “ asgatan and xigramy to wash, and to wash the “ hands. And since that washing the bands might a be done, either by putting them into the water, oor hy pouring water on them; here is a word “used, samloding
, which comprehends both the one " and the other of these ways.”[
MARK vii. 3, 4. The pharisees and all the Jews, when they come the market, Carlowplay except they are BAPTISED, eat not. Did they think themselves obliged, on every such occasion, to be dipt wholly under water? Absurd to imagine! For it is said, not only the pharisees, but ALL the Jews—If the pharisaic severity might, possibly, subject those very precise persons to such a total immersion, at all times, even in the depth
Mark vji. 2. † Note, Aaron and his sons, even when they went into the tabernacle, and officiated in the most solemn manner, to offer up the burnt-offering upon the aliar unto God, are directed (Êxodus xxx. 18-21.) to wash their hands and their feet at the laver, verse 19—(not to bathe the whole body) and again, verse 21. So shall they wash their hands and their feet, that they die nut.
Dr. Wall's Defence, &c. page 10.
of winter, whenever they came from market ; it
Others aware of the force of this text, eridea-
Others object,—That, not to suppose the evangelist, here to mean a total immersion, by Carlezwulas, is to make him guilty of an insipid tautology. For after having said, verse 3. The pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not. He would not iinmediately have added, verse 4. And when they come from the market, ercept they wash they eat not-had not this latter washing been something different from the former,
* Vid. Wall. p. 111. Dr. Gale's Reflections, &c. page 167,
But, why not? Is it not quite proper to say, The pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft (suapn sedulò, crebrò, sæpissime, so the Syriac. Casaub. Vulg. Erasm. Arab. i. e. frequently and carefully) eat not. And (particularly, one occasion, in which they are wont thus carefully to wash, is) when they come from the market; for then, ercept they wash they eat not.
In the same MARK vii. 4. we read of the washing (Gr. Barlours the baptisms) of cups, and pots, and know of beds. Did they wash their couches and beds by putting them wholly under water ? No; this words Bariuomes baptisms, says Dr. Lightfoot,* does not always signify dipping or putting under water; but sometimes washing only, or even sprinkling.
1 Cor. x. 1, 2. The apostle says— All our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all BAPTISED into Moses, εξαπλισανίο εν τη νεφελη και εν τη θαλασση by the cloud and by the sea. But how were they baptised in, or by, the cloud, and by the sea ? By being immersed into, or totally overwhelmed with thein? Most certainly, not. The Egyptians were thus baptised; the Israelites were not. For it is said, Exod. xiv. 21, 22. The Lord caused the sea to go back, by a strong east wind, all that night, and made the sea dry land ; and the waters were divided; and the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea, upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. Note: though they might possibly be said to be covered or overwhelmed by the cloud; yet so were they not, nor could they be, by the sea. The sea, it is undeniable, never overwhelmed, or covered, them at
* Vid. Poli. Syn. in Loc,