* 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 k 
 
 /, 
 
 {./ 
 
 ^>. 
 
 **^ 
 
 ''>>^ 
 ^>V 
 
 ^ ^ 
 ^^^ 
 
 ^o 
 
 11.25 
 
 1^ 
 
 us 
 lit 
 
 ni 
 
 u 
 
 |2£ 
 
 2.2 
 
 14,0 
 
 
 Hiotographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. U5S0 
 
 (716)a72-4S03 
 
 ^ 
 
 qV 
 
 4 
 
 •s? 
 
 4s 
 
 
 N> 
 
 ^. 
 
 
 ^>^ 
 
 '^ 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical IVIicroreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Tachnical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquas 
 
 Tha Inatituta haa attairptad to obtain th« baat 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia 
 copy which may ba bibiiographicaliy uniqua. 
 which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha 
 raproduction, or which may aignificantiy changa 
 tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. 
 
 la 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 
 □ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Colourad covara/ 
 Couvartura da coulaur 
 
 I I Covara damagad/ 
 
 Couvartura andommagia 
 
 Covara raatorad and/or iaminatad/ 
 Couvartura raataur6a at/ou pallicul6a 
 
 I I Covar titia mlaaing/ 
 
 La titra da couvartura manqua 
 
 □ Colourad maps/ 
 Cartes gAographiques an coulaur 
 
 Colourad init (i.a. othar than blua or blarsk)/ 
 Encra da coulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noira) 
 
 I I Colourad platas and/or illuatrationa/ 
 
 Planchas at/ou lliustrationa an coulaur 
 
 Bound with othar matarial/ 
 ReilA avac d'autras documants 
 
 Tight binding may causa ahadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion la long de la marge IntArieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during reatoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches a|out6ea 
 lors d'une restauration apparaiaaant dans la taxte, 
 mals, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pagea n'ont 
 pas 6t6 fiim^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires; 
 
 The 
 tothi 
 
 L'inatitut a microfilm* la mailleur exemplaire 
 qu'ii lul a 4t6 poaaible de se procurer. Les details 
 da cat exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 Ui 9 image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dana la mithoda normale de filmage 
 aont IndiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 r~| Coloured pagea/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdkas 
 
 □ Pagea restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurAes at/ou paillculAes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tacheties ou piqu^as 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ditachdes 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Tranaparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quaiiti in^gaia de I'lmpression 
 
 includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du matiriai supplAmentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seuie Edition disponlble 
 
 The I 
 possi 
 of thi 
 filmii 
 
 Origi 
 begir 
 the li 
 sion, 
 othei 
 first 
 sion, 
 or Mil 
 
 r~~| Pages detached/ 
 
 Pyl Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I I Only edition available/ 
 
 The I 
 ahaii 
 TINU 
 whic 
 
 IMapi 
 diffei 
 entin 
 begir 
 right 
 requi 
 meth 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc.. ont 6t6 film6es A nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 y • 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Th« copy filmed h«r« has b««n r«produo«d thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Dim Portw Arti Library 
 UnivtnityofWstsrtoo 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 L'exemplaire fiimA f ut reproduit grice h la 
 ginArositA de: 
 
 Dana Portar Artt Library 
 Univartity of Watarloo 
 
 Les images sulvantes ont At4 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetA de Texempiaire film6. et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriaf*. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimte sent film6s en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration. soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont f ilmte en commenpant par la 
 premlAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par 
 la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la 
 dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", ie 
 symbols V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, plenches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre 
 filmte A des taux de rMuction dlff6rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA A partir 
 de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant ie nombre 
 d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammos suivants 
 illustrent la mAthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
I 
 
 '■M 
 
 ■i J" 
 
 ■1 '." '^ " 
 
 
 '€'':^ 
 
 X 
 
 ,* 
 
1% -'i- 
 
 
 J* ..J 
 
 .u, 
 
 
 1 > 
 
 ri ::- 
 
 It • r - 
 
 hi -•; , ... 
 
 t lA*^ til 
 
 ITS MODE IHD MEAKNO AT THE TMI Iff 
 
 Otm LOBR 
 
 , HI$TOftICALLV ANB PHILOLOGICALLY 
 
 INVESTrCATED. 
 
 BY 
 
 REV. W. A. McKAY. BA, 
 
 I • h'' V 
 
 •*.• ' 
 
 K^ 
 
 '-•'''*' € 
 
 t ' 
 
 
 -*j*t 3 
 
 .• 
 
 
 ■v?/^ ^jri 
 
 . 
 
 " ' " 
 
 ■•5^^1-1 
 
 i'' 
 
 ■s- ■■',.. 
 
 '^'*-JI 
 
 * jf.^ 
 
 • 
 
 V "''^ji 
 
 V 
 
 
 *'*■ '''-■ll 
 
 T' 
 
 
 ""'X'3 
 
 ^ *— 
 
 
 *-"^ 
 
 i^ 
 
 
 iMld &at tbatwIiich.irgood/'-i Thwis. v. at. 
 
 ?&• 
 
 '.» f',-' 
 
 TORONTO: % : 
 
 
 
 '"I 1 
 
 
 
 . ' lK^^i^'i_4i|: 
 
 
 iti3AlS'^^A»«6LJik^ a 
 
BAPTISM: 
 
 ITS MODE AND MEANING AT THE TIME 
 
 OF OUR LORD 
 
 HISTORICALLY AND PHILOLOGIC ALLY 
 INVESTIGATED. 
 
 BY 
 
 REV. W. A. McKAY, B.A., 
 
 Woodstock, Ont. 
 
 ^uthor of "Immersion, a Romish Invention;" "Baptism Improved;" 
 "Salvation of Infants;" "Outpourings of the Spirit;" etc., etc. 
 
 " Prove all things, hold fast that which is good."— i Tmess. v. 21. 
 
 TORONTO: 
 
 WILI^IAIVl BRIOGS, 
 
 WESLEY BUILDINGS. 
 
 W. COAXES, Montreal, Que. | S. F. HUESTIS, Haiifax, N.S. 
 
<^ > 
 
 M «• 
 
 / 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This pamphlet is mainly designed for classical readers, 
 and is not intended to take the place of the author's 
 former work, " Immersion, a Romish Invention." The 
 same conclusion is reached in both, but by an entirely 
 different line of argument. The question is: What was the 
 import of the word baptizo in our Lord's time ? To settle 
 this question, the case is here carried to the highest court 
 of appeal, the U8V>8 loquendi of the word up to that time. 
 We overlook no known instance. We carefully examine 
 *each case, and we find that before the time of Christ, and 
 for two hundred years after, the word was never used in 
 the modem Baptist sense of dipping. Our argument is 
 inductive, and our conclusion is co- extensive with our 
 premises That conclusion is therefore presented, not 
 defiantly or arrogantly, but with the calm confidence of 
 a demonstration. To the Baptist appealing to human 
 opinions and traditions, our ^eply is, all you say goes for 
 nothing so long as you are unable to maintain your 
 position from the sacred or secular use of the word. 
 
 The late Dominion census shews that with the increas- 
 ing light of our day, Pedo-Baptists are more than hold- 
 ing their own, while the proportion of Immersionists is 
 steadily and rapidly decreasing. All that is necessary 
 to the destruction of the dipping theory is a candid in- 
 vestigation of the historical development of the word 
 baptizo. The author ventures humbly to hope that the 
 day is not far distant when the intelligent mechanic will 
 be more familiar with the meaning and power of baptism 
 than are many of the clergy of the present time. When 
 that day comes, " immersio delenda eat'* A house built 
 upon water cannot stand. 
 
 W. A. M. 
 
 Woodstock, Dee. ISth, 1892. 
 

 ■2. 
 
 '^j \ 
 
 ji." 
 
 IMj 
 
 w. 
 
 ji 
 
 'M ' 
 
 H^ 
 
 1? i ■ 
 
 INI- 
 
 ■ff^^S^^^^^^ 
 
BAPTISM. 
 
 WHAT is the Scriptural mode and meaning of 
 baptism ? Around this question the ^orm 
 of theological controversy has raged for a period of more 
 than two hundred years, and the end is not yet. 
 Immersionists contend that there is only one mode, dip- 
 ping, or immersion in the sense of dipping. Dr. Carson, 
 perhaps the ablest of all Baptist writers, says, on page 55 
 of his book, "My position is that it (baptizo) always signi- 
 fies ' to dip,' never expressing anything but mode." He 
 frankly admits, however, th^ct in this opinion " all the 
 lexicographers are against him." Dr. T. J. Conant, 
 chairman of the American (Baptist) Bible Revision Com- 
 mittee, and a scholar of ilfnquestioned eminence, does not 
 find it so easy to translatle this word. On the first page 
 of his book, " JBaptizeii /■ he gives us seven different 
 words whereby to rencleT haptizo into EngHsh, and then 
 throughout his book he translates by no less than four- 
 teen werds ! His seven words are, "immerse," "immerge," 
 " submerge," " dip," " plunge," " imbathe," " whelm." He 
 informs us that none of these is the exact equivalent of 
 the Greek word, but only what he caWs the " ground 
 meaning " common to them all. But what that ground 
 meaning is he cannot find in the English language a 
 word to express. This is rather a remarkable confession 
 coming from the chief man in a denomination that re- 
 gards it as an evidence of " want of common Christian 
 honesty " not to translate but simply transfer the Greek 
 word to the English Bible. A careful examination will 
 
6 
 
 4 
 
 
 also convince the student that the words given us hy Dr. 
 Conant, as the eauivalonts of baptizo, are quite inconsist- 
 ent with each other as to mode of actiQn. " Dip " and 
 "plunge" indicate the subject moved and put into the 
 element ; " immerse/' " immerge " and " submerge " are 
 equivocal as to mode of action, and may indicate condi- 
 tion as well as act ; while " whelm " and " overwhelm " 
 express the baptizing element coming upon the subject. 
 " Immerse " does not imply totality, that is the province 
 of " auhmerse" The immersion of the Greek church, 
 ancient and modern, means no more than " the standing 
 or placing in the water," not under it, while the priest 
 pours the baptismal waters upon the head. The " bap- 
 tismal tokens " represent this, and modern missionaries 
 among the Greeks testify to it* Such are the immer- 
 sions which Calvin, SchafT, Stanley, and indeed all 
 scholars, find in the ancient ("veteri ecclesiae"), not 
 Apostolic church. They would not be recognized as 
 baptisms at all by modern Baptists. Where then is 
 the sense or honesty of quoting them in support of the 
 " dipping-aubmeraions " practised only since 1633 ? 
 
 Tne ambiguity of the Baptist usage of the word 
 ** immerse " is seen in the variations and contradictions 
 of Baptist writers. Some, like Cox, Morell, and Fuller, 
 tell us that "immersion may be by pouring," while 
 others, like Dr. Carson (p. 36), declare that " if all the 
 water in the ocean should fall on a man it would not be 
 a literal immersion. The mode would still be wanting." 
 The word in this way becomes a very Proteus under 
 Baptist .management. Sometimes it is partial, sometimes 
 total ; sometimes it means the act of putting into the 
 water, and sometimes the act of standing in the water ; 
 and sometimes no act at all but only a condition which 
 may be produced by pouring. It is evident that in a 
 discussion like this, a word cannot be used in any one of 
 half-a-dozen different senses according to the exigency 
 
 • * See "Immersion, a Romish Invention," pp. 113-115. 
 
 I .'■. ,1,. ^, . 
 
of the occasion. There must be a clear, well-defined, 
 uniform sense. We, therefore, demand of Baptists that 
 they hold to the sense of this word which they illustrate 
 in their practice. In their practice all Baptists agree 
 with Dr. Carijon that haptizo is a word of specific mode, 
 always meaning "dip and nothing but dip through all 
 Greek literature." " The command to baptize," we are 
 told, " is a command to dip." " Baptizing is dipping, 
 and dipping is baptizing." " To dip " is to take up, put 
 into ana under the element, and then immediately with- 
 draw. Thus I dip the point of my pen in the ink. This 
 U the precise action of the Baptist when he baptizes. 
 And this and nothing else, he claims, is baptism, so that 
 all undipped persons are unbaptized and unworthy to 
 come to the Lord's table. 
 
 Baptist theory and practice demand not merely " dip ** 
 as a meaning of haptizo, but as its only meaning. 
 " Nothing but dipping is baptizing," they tell us, and they 
 hesitate not to debar from the Lord's table all undipped 
 persons as unbaptized, and consequently unworthy com- 
 municants. It is, therefore, not enough for Baptists to 
 show that there are instances where, as they think, the 
 word means " dip ; " they must show that there are no 
 instances where it does not mean " dip." The careful 
 philologist will perceive that such is the exclusive nature 
 of the Baptist claim that it does not admit one solitary 
 adverse instance. If, in these pageS; we are able to point 
 out one example in the whole range of Greek literature 
 where the word cannot possibly mean "dip," then we 
 have proved that dip is not the only mode of baptism, 
 and the whole exclusive Baptist theory perishes. Let 
 this point be carefully noted, a failure on our part to 
 prove affusion in some of the instances wiF i,vail nothing 
 for the Baptist theory, so long as there a:'e other clear 
 undoubted instances adverse to that theory — logically, 
 one instance is sufficient. Our claim is, not that one 
 instance merely, but all the instances, without one excep- 
 tion, are irreconcilably opposed to the dipping theory. 
 
IM&..&. 
 
 -.;■.(■ 
 
 
 Over against the Baptist claim, 
 
 " Dipy and nothing hut dip, through all Greek 
 literature,* 
 I place this proposition : 
 
 In the whole range of Greek literature prior to 
 the time of Christ, baptizo never, so far as the 
 record tells us, had such a meaning as " dip " 
 or " immerse " in the sense of " dip." 
 In every one of these ancient baptisms, secular and 
 sacred, we find the baptizing element or instrumentality 
 moved and brought upon the person or thing baptized ; 
 never once do we find the person or thing baptized 
 moved, and put into and under water or any other ele- 
 ment, and then immediately withdrawn, after the manner 
 of the Baptists. The actual meaning of baptizo can be 
 determined only from the usage. Lexicons are not a 
 final authority; their definitions are worthless unless 
 sustained by the instances. Too frequently, as Robert 
 Young, LL.D., tersely observes, " Lexicographers follow 
 each other like a flock of sheep," and Dr. Carson him- 
 self declares that "the meaning of a word must ulti- 
 mately be determined by an actual inspection of the 
 passages in which it occurs.'* 
 
 There are twenty-seven undoubted instances of the 
 use of baptizo before the time of Christ. These we shall 
 place, one by one, in chronological order, and in the 
 original language, before the reader. Each instance we 
 shall fairly translate, and examine with this crucial test, 
 What was moved in this baptism : the baptizing element 
 or the subject baptized ? In every instance the answer 
 is adverse to the dipping theory. The baptizing element 
 is always moved, the subject never. 
 
 A word lest we may be misunderstood. We do not 
 claim any specific mode for baptizo. It is not a modal 
 word. It does not mean " to sprinkle " or " to pour " any 
 more than it means " to dip" or "to immerse." The word 
 itself determines nothing as to mode, but it expresses 
 effect, state or condition, no matter how produced. Simi- 
 
 LO- 
 
9 
 
 / 
 
 h all Greek 
 
 larly such English words as move, hurt, kill, destroy, 
 please, displease, build, bury, anoint, purify, cleanse, wash, 
 etc., indicate not the mode of inducing the state, but 
 the state induced. A hurt B. But the question is 
 always in place. How ? for the word " hurt " does not 
 indicate mode. So also A anointed B. We ask the 
 question. How did he anoint him ? ,for the word "anoint" 
 does not indicate mode. And even the Baptist will 
 answer that he was anointed by pouring. But still " to 
 anoint " does not mean " to pour." So also A baptized B. 
 The question may be asked. How did he baptize him ? 
 for the word " baptize " does not indicate mode any more 
 than the words " hurt," " anoint," " cleanse," etc. Baptizo 
 expresses any complete change of state or condition in 
 whatsoever way effected. It has nothing to do with 
 modes of action. " A blind man," says Dr. Dale, " could 
 more readily select any demanded color from tho spec- 
 trum, or a child could more readily thread the Cretan 
 labyrinth, than could the seven wise men of Greece 
 declare the nature or mode of any given baptism by the 
 naked help of haptizo." (Classic Baptism, p. 353.) 
 Similar are the words of the great Dr. Charles Hodge. 
 In " Systematic Theology," Vol. III., p. 533, he says : " The 
 fact is, baptizein does not express any particular mode of 
 action. As to dye expresses any kind of action by 
 which an object is colored ; to bury, any kind of action 
 by which an object is hidden and protected ; so lo bap- 
 tize expresses any act by which a person or thing is 
 brought into a state of being wet, purified, or even stupi- 
 fied, as by opium or wine." So also the words of Robert 
 Young, LL.D. : " From all this I gather that the word 
 has no real specific reference to mode at all, but to the 
 object, effect, or result contemplated." Even Dr. Conant 
 in one place stumbles upon the truth, for on page 158 of 
 "Baptizein" he says with italic emphasis, that "by 
 analogy " the word " expressed the coming into a new 
 state of life or experience." What a pity that he was so 
 frightened of his own discovery that he never again 
 
10 
 
 li«l 
 
 mentions it. In all his explorations among classic and 
 patristic baptisms, he seems never to have found one 
 instance illustrating his own definition of a " new state," 
 etc It is always with him "mode, and nothing but 
 mode." 
 
 But while baptizo is thus non-modal, the effect, state 
 or condition expressed must have been produced in some 
 mode or form of act. This mode can usually be deter- 
 mined from the context and the surrounding circum- 
 stances. And our position is that the mode, as thus 
 determined, is always by the baptizing element being 
 moved and brought upon the person or thing baptized. 
 In no single instance is there a dip, that is, the person or 
 thing baptized moved, put into the baptizing element, 
 and then immediately withdrawn. 
 
 The material for our inquiry is at hand. It will be 
 found scattered throughout the works of the two authors 
 just referred to. Dr. Dale has, in four large volumes, 
 gone over the whole baptismal controversy with a thor- 
 oughness never before even attempted, and has done 
 more than any other man to bring this matter to a final 
 settlement. Dr. Conant's researches on this subject were 
 undertaken at the request of the American (Baptist) 
 Bible Union, and were undertaken for the purpose of 
 justifying and defending the Baptists in their work of 
 revising the New Testament, and substituting the words 
 " immerse," " immersion," etc., in place of the words 
 "baptize," "baptism," etc. His Greek quotations are 
 numerous, and very fully given ; we shall make free use 
 of them. Both these authors, however, exhibit a great 
 lack of method. They give us instances of the use of 
 the word centuries before Christ ; and side by side with 
 these, other instances from doggerel Greek centuries 
 after Christ, and apparently attach the same importance 
 to all in ascertaining the meaning of the word at the time 
 of Christ. This is confusing and utterly unscientific. 
 Books written after the New Testament era could have 
 had no possible influence on the import of words used 
 
11 
 
 by New Testament writers. Such instances, if used at 
 all, can only be used in a sub'^rdinate sense as illustrating 
 and confirming the meaning already established. The 
 only proper scientific method of ascertaining the mean- 
 m<' of any ancient word at a particular date, is to 4Sollate 
 as far as possible, all the examples of the word up to 
 that date. Then arranging these in chronological order, 
 the careful student can determine without diflSculty the 
 import of the word in each case. While making a free 
 use of the labors of others, the present writer claims the 
 privilege of thinking for himself, and he enters upon this 
 inquiry untrammeted by anything said before by friend 
 or foe. 
 
 One more word introductory. We do not claim that 
 baptizo has the same specific meaning in the New Testa- 
 ment that it has in the Greek of profane authors. It 
 would be contrary to all principles of philology to argue 
 that a word must be understood in a particular sense in 
 tho writings of Matthew or Paul, simply because that 
 had been proved to be its accredited meaning in the 
 writings of Pindar, Plato or Aristotle. It would, how- 
 ever, be equally unwarranted and unreasonable to discard 
 the U8U8 loquendi of the word prior to the New Testa- 
 ment era. Baptizo occurs in the heathen classics, and 
 in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament includ- 
 ing the Apocrypha. And the most eminent writers on 
 both sides of the controversy maintain that the word, 
 when introduced into sacred literature, does not lose its 
 essential meaning, though it acquires a new and sacred 
 signification. The mode and radical import are retained 
 throughout all Greek literature. 
 
 We open Dr. Cofiant's " Baptizein,*' and knowing the 
 purpase for which it was written, and the position and 
 character of the writer, we may safely conclude that the 
 best possible case for the dipping theory will be made 
 out. - And yet, what do we find ? Why, this great Bap- 
 tist scholar, specially employed by the Baptist Revision 
 Committee to defend their teaching and practice, 
 
 '-.ft 
 
 •>m 
 
■V ■i\ 
 
 12 
 
 *■!':■ 
 
 
 
 "I ';"• 
 
 
 ■i 
 
 ,1 
 
 
 examines 175 sentences where haptizo is used, and only 
 ten of these instances does he translate by " dip," and 
 every one of the ten is incorrectly rendered, for " dip " 
 always takes out of the water what it puts in ; but Dr. 
 Conax^ himself confesses on p. 88 that there is no " emev' 
 aion " (that is, a taking out of the water) " in the Greek 
 word." There is therefore no dip in the Greek word. 
 Out of the 175 instances Dr. Conant translates 64, more 
 than one-third of the whole, by our English words 
 " whelm " and " overwhelm,'* — words which any one can 
 see imply that the baptizing element comes upon the 
 subject, while the subject remains passive. This is a 
 bad shewing for the Baptists at the outset. 
 
 But we must eliminate. Our inquiry is : How ougjht 
 haptizo to be rendered in the New Testament. The 
 author must therefore confine himself to instances of the 
 use of the word prior to that time. Dr. Conant thinks 
 he finds, perhaps, thirty occurrences of the word before 
 the. birth of Christ, and only one out of the thirty does 
 he translate by " dip." That the chief Baptist scholar 
 of America should be unable to introduce the word on 
 which his theory hangs, only in one passage out of thirty, 
 is a fact which may well suggest the gravest doubt as 
 to the correctness of the theory. In reality, however, 
 there are only twenty-seven instances, the other three 
 being of uncertain authorship and date. These twenty- 
 seven instances we shall carefully examine, and we shall 
 see that there is no dip or immerse in any of them. The 
 subject is not put into the baptizing element, but the 
 element is moved and brought upon the subject. 
 
 The authors who use the word haptizo before the 
 Christian era are Pindar (B.C. 500) ; Plato (B.C. 400) ; 
 Alcibiades (B.C. 400) ; Eubulus (B.C. 380); Aristotle (B.C. 
 360); Septuagint (B.C. 280); Evenus of Paros (B.C. 
 250); Polybius (B.C. 180); Nicandar (B.C. 150); Strabo 
 (B.C. 60) ; and Diodorus Siculus (B.C. 30). 
 
 Pindar uses the word once, Plato twice, Alcibiades 
 once, Eubulus once, Aristotle once, Septuagint four times, 
 
IS no " emev 
 
 - 18 
 
 Evenus once, Polybius six times, Nicandar once, Strabo 
 five times, and Diodorus Siculus four times. These 
 twenty-seven instances are the only undoubted examples 
 of the use of bajnizo before the birth of Christ ; and 
 they are therefore the only known examples that could 
 possibly have exercised any influence on the minds of the 
 writers of the New Testament. We shall begin our 
 examination with the first recorded use of the word, and 
 proceed from instance to instance, in chronological order, 
 and we shall see that instead of " every case of haptizo 
 being a case of dipping " as the Baptist position demands, 
 there is actually not a solitary instance where the word 
 necessarily implies dipping, while in nearly all the cases 
 that meaning is entirely inadmissible. 
 
 Example 1. 
 
 Pindari Pyth. II. 144-147 (79, 80, ed. Boeckh), • 
 
 AtB yap eiva\iov novov €xoi(Ta5 /3adv 
 ffuevas sripaSf afiaTtrwros eijjiiy (peWos Ss VTCtp 
 spuo^y aX/xas. 
 
 Pindar, B.C. 600 : 
 
 " For, as when the rest of the net is toiling deep in the 
 sea, I as a cork above the net, am unbaptized by (the waves) 
 of the sea." / 
 
 Pindar, the Greek poet, here gives us the first recorded 
 instance of haptizo. He is describing the impotent 
 malice and abuse* of his enemies who aspersed his fair 
 fame, and he says in substance, I am as serene, un- 
 harmed by your raging malice and abusive epithets as a 
 cork is above the stormy and foaming billows. The 
 waves of malice — i.e., your abusive epithets — fall harm- 
 lessly upon me, do not overwhelm me. The first Greek 
 baptism, then, expresses the condition of a man exposed 
 to the foul abuse of enemies. Their haughty words be- 
 spattered him, but he was unharmed as the cork rising 
 

 
 '■:B:r : I 
 
 py- 
 
 ifc- 
 
 [U- y-j , . ■ ■ 
 
 
 h" !• ' •■ 
 
 
 " the abuse/' and it comes upon the subject. 
 
 Example 2. 
 
 Platonis Euthyd. c. VII. (ed. Stallbaum, Vol. VI. p. 90). 
 
 Kal eyco yvovs /3a7rtiZoju€vov to ^eipaxiovy ftov- 
 X6pi€ro5 avanavaai avto. 
 
 PlatOy EuthydemuSy or the Diaputer^ ch. Vll.y B.C. J^OO : 
 
 "And I, perceiving that the youth was baptized, wishing 
 to give him a respite." 
 
 The word baptizo occurs twice in the writings of Plato, 
 and each time' it is translated "overwhelm" by such Bap- 
 tist writers as Conant, A. Campbell, Gale, etc. But why 
 render the word " overwhelm " if it means " dip, and 
 nothing but dip in all Greek literature ? " " Overwhelm" 
 implies the baptizing element moved and brought upon 
 the subject, while " dip " moves the subject and puts it 
 into the baptizing element, and immediately withdraws. 
 In the case before us the baptism expresses a condition 
 of mental perplexity. How was this baptism effected ? 
 The boy was not poured on to the questions, but the 
 questions were poured on to him so fast that he was con- 
 fused, overwhelmed by them. 
 
 * 
 
 * Example 3. 
 
 Platonis Sympos. c. IV. (ed. Stallb. Vol. I. p. 25), 
 
 Kal yap avtos eifxl rcov x^^^ ps/SaTrnajiiivcov. 
 
 PlatOy Banquet, ch. IV.y B.C. JfiO : 
 
 " For I myself am one of those who yesterday were baptized " 
 — alluding to the drinking of wine. 
 
 Plato here uses the word baptizo, without any figure, 
 to express the state or condition to which wine had re- 
 
15 
 
 duced the man. It was a state of intoxication, and pro- 
 duced not by the man being put into the wine, but by 
 the wine being put into the man. The baptizing element, 
 not the baptized subject, was moved. 
 
 Example 4. 
 
 Epigramma in Eupolin (Meineke, Hist. crit. Comic. Grcec. 
 
 p. 119). 
 
 ftaTrrss fj* ev OvjaeXr^aiVy eyca Si ae xt^aai novrov 
 PanriQoov oXiffoo rd/AacTt TttHporipois. 
 
 Epigram on the comic poet Eupolis. Alcihiades, B.C. JfiO : • 
 
 "You bespattered me in your plays (i.e., with words of 
 abuse), but I, baptizing thee with waves of the sea, will des- 
 troy thee with streams more bitter." 
 
 Dr. Conant translates "Baptes,'* "dippers," but the dip- 
 pers don't go so far back in history. The Baptae were 
 a leud set, so-called because they stained or painted 
 their cheeks and parts around their eyes. Metaphori- 
 cally the word meant to bespatter with billingsgate. 
 Alcibiades was enraged because Eupolis, a comic poet, had 
 in a play called Baptae, foully aspersed his character. 
 He threatens to baptize hira with waves of the sea, and 
 destroy him with streams more bitter. " You have," he 
 says, " aspersed me with foul words, but I will pour upon 
 you a torrent of invective ; I will pour bitterer streams 
 of abuse upon you ; as with the waves of a sea I will 
 overwhelm you." Dr. Conant translates " immersing in 
 waves of the sea." But the reader will observe that 
 the Greek words " Kumasi" and "namaai " are m the 
 dative without a preposition — the instrumental dative 
 — which forbids such a construction. Any schoolboy 
 knows that it must be rendered, " baptizing thee with 
 waves of the sea," — " will destroy thee with streams 
 more bitter." The waves and the streams are the 
 baptizing instrumentality, not the receptive element. 
 

 '.:.-■'■'{':■■■■ 
 
 
 
 v-^'lv 
 
 ;:• 
 
 i 
 
 •,»:, 
 
 i 
 
 
 f^li 
 
 ,1:1 
 
 lih-- 
 
 16 
 
 I 
 
 Example 5. 
 
 Euliuli Nausicaa (Meineke, Fragm. Comic. Grcee., Vol. Ill, 
 
 p. 238). 
 
 "Off vvv rerapTTfv ^^ipav panrlQitai, 
 vrjariv TtovTfpov KSfftpicos rpi/Scov fiiov, 
 
 Eubulua (fragment of an ancient comedy )y B.C. 380 : 
 
 " Who now the fourth day is baptized leading the famished 
 life of a wretched mullet." 
 
 The mullet was a iish, notedly hungry, and fabled to 
 be always found empty when caught. There is a dif- 
 ference of opinion as to the meaning of this pa.ssage. 
 Some think it is spoken of one whose vessel was 
 wrecked and who was himself for the fourth day cling- 
 ing to some part of the wrecked vessel, undergoing a 
 slow process of starvation, and frequently baptized by 
 the waves dashing upon him. Most scholars, including 
 the Baptist, Dr. Fuller, think that Eubulus is here 
 speaking of one who had been on a " drunken spree " 
 for the four days mentioned. Then, as in Ex. 3, we 
 know that the baptism expresses the state of intoxica- 
 tion, and that the liquor was the baptizing instrumen- 
 tality, and that it was moved and put into the man, not 
 the man into it. Neither interpretation lends any 
 countenance to the dipping theory. " Four dayg " are 
 too long for a Baptist dipping. 
 
 Example 6. 
 
 Aristot. de mirabilibus A.uscultat. 136 i^ed. Bekker, Vol. VI. 
 
 p. 136). 
 
 Aiyovfft rovs ^oivixas rovs HatotxovvtaS ra Fa- 
 dsipa xaXovjaeva^ i'^oo TtXiovras ^HpaxXsicov ffrrfXwv 
 ccTtrfKiGotr^ avifxcp tffxipa^ rettapas, TtapayivBGdai 
 €is tivas toTtovs iprfpLovs, Qpvov xal <pvxovs TtXtfpets, 
 ovs orav fikv ajjiTroj ris tf ytf fiantit^BiJdaty otav 6k 
 TtXrffifivpay xaraxXvQsffdai, 
 
17 
 
 Frtm Aristotle's " Wonderful Reports," 136, B.C. 860: 
 
 **They say that the Phoenicians, inhabiting the region 
 called Gadira (Oadiz), sailing beyond the pillars of Hercules 
 (the Straits of Gibraltar), with an easterly wind, four days, 
 reach to certain desert places full of rushes and sea-weed ; 
 which, when it is ebb-tide, are not baptized ; but when it is 
 full-tide, are flooded." 
 
 This is Aristotle's famous " sea-coast baptism," and it 
 is quite sufBcicit of itself to annihilate forever the 
 "nothing but dip" theory. This greatest of Greek 
 scholars, in the golden age of Grecian intellect, uses the 
 word haptizo to express the changed condition of the 
 sea-coast by the waves coming upon it. Here was a 
 baptism. How was it effected ? What was the mode ? 
 Was the sea-coast taken up and moved till it was put 
 into and under the water of the sea, or did the tidal 
 wave move and roll out upon and over the coast ? Aris- 
 totle tells us that the baptizing element (the waves) 
 came upon the baptized object (the land). The land was 
 " baptized," but it was not dipped into, but overflowed 
 by the rising water. Some of the ablest Baptist scholars 
 virtually give up this case, and in so doing surrender 
 the fort. The Baptist, Dr. Gale, for instance, was so 
 much staggered by this passage that he says : " Besides, 
 the word baptizo, perhaps, does not so necessarily express 
 the action of putting under as, in general, a thing's being 
 in that condition, no matter how it comes so, whether it 
 is put into the water, or the water comes over it." 
 What then, we ask, becomes of the time-worn Baptist 
 standard, '^ dipping is baptizing, and baptizing is dip- 
 ping," " a definite act," " mode and nothing but mode ? " 
 It is wholly swept away by the baptizing billows. Dr. 
 Gale says haptizo expresses "condition;" so also the 
 Baptist, Dr. Fuller. Dr. Carson, of course, does not 
 yield an inch, but valiantly undertakes to prove that 
 "flowing over" means "dipping into." Perhaps since 
 sin entered into tbe world no man ever had a 
 2 
 

 'ft''- 
 
 ill-.' K. : . 
 
 i 
 
 1 -"i.-- ;v rt 
 
 hi 
 
 
 18 
 
 stronger confidence in his own opinions than the " giant 
 of Tubbermore." Dr. Conant, on page 4, falsely trans- 
 lates haptizo of this passage by *' immerse," but on pa^/e 
 88 he correctly renders it " overflow." It avails nothing 
 for the Baptist to say that the " sea-coast " was " covered " 
 with the tide. The question in dispute is not the quan- 
 tity of water used, but the mode of the baptism. 
 Whether every part of the land was overflowed by the 
 water we cannot know. The probability is that, like all 
 other similar districts of country, the lower parts were 
 overflowed while the higher parts were not. Yet the 
 whole is baptized. For pungent and destructive criti- 
 cism on the Baptist system, founded on this passage, the 
 reader is referred to Dr. Dale's Classic Baptism, pp. 
 236-244. 
 
 These are all the occurrences of haptizo in the pure 
 classics, beginning with Pindar (B.C. 500), and ending 
 with Aristotle (B.C. 360), covering a period of one hun- 
 dred and forty years. During all these years it always 
 expresses state or condition as its import, while the con- 
 text clearly shews aflusion as the mode, the baptizing 
 element always coming upon the subject, never the 
 application or dipping of the mbject into the baptizing 
 element. 
 
 We now proceed to consider the four instances of hai> 
 tizo in the Septuagint. These come next in chronological 
 order. The Septuagint is a Greek version of the canon- 
 ical books of the Old Testament, together with the 
 Apocryphal writings of that period. It was made by 
 seventy learned Jews in Egypt, by order of the king, 
 about 280 B.C. Our Lord and His apostles usually 
 quoted from it, rather than from the original Hebrew. 
 It is therefore to be regarded as of the highest authority 
 on all questions of New Testament language, and it 
 throws a flood of light on the subject of our present in- 
 vestigation. In the Septuagint we shall find that while 
 now, for the first timo, haptizo is used in a religious 
 sensCj it still, as in the classics, expresses condition— 
 
19 
 
 here a condition of ceremonial purification ; and effected, 
 as in the classics, by the baptizing element being moved 
 and brought upon the subject, never the subject moved 
 and put into the element after the manner of modem 
 Baptista 
 
 Example 7. 
 
 Our next case is that of Naaman, and as it is one of 
 considerable importance, and claimed by the Baptists as 
 their exclusive possession, we will examine it with some 
 degree of care. Dr. Carson says : " If there was not 
 another passage of Scripture to throw light on the insti- 
 tution, as far as respects mode, is not this to every teach- 
 able mind sufficient ? " But a strong statement is not 
 always a strong argument. We give the original 
 Hebrew of the passage as well as the Greek of the LXX. 
 
 2 Kings 6: 10, 14. 
 Hebrew, ver. 10 : 
 
 -rnijD si:?nnT ?|ibn ii^&^b tj^jb^a 3?tf "^b^ vb^ nb-qji^i 
 
 : nntD^ ^b ^-'.iua nffi'^i n^i^a Q'^)53?5 
 
 Ver.U: 
 
 A* »j •» J* V- • . T « " i* I •• I - - < : • - v»» - 
 
 = """^^i i?R ^?3 'm'^- T^®^ a»n 
 
 Greek, ver. 10: 
 
 xal a7ti<Ttei\€v 'EXtffate ayysXov Ttpos avtoVy 
 Xeyaov. TtopsvS^els Xovcfai iTtrocKiS iv rcS lopddvr^y 
 xal eTtifftpiipsi t} (Jap^ <sovjUo\ nal ua^apia^riarj. 
 
 Ver, U: 
 
 Hal Kari/Srf Naijuidv xal ifia7tri(Jaro iv rep lopdavr^ 
 eTttdxis xard to ptjjda ^E\i(Tat€. xal iTti^tpetj^av tf 
 adp^ avTov cos ffdp^ naiSapiov fxixpov^ xal ixa^api- 
 
20 
 
 Septuaqint, B.O. 280 : 
 Englishf ver. 10: 
 
 '* And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, go and 
 wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to 
 thee, and thou shalt be clean." 
 
 Ver, U ' 
 
 ** Then went he down and baptized himself seven times in 
 Jordan, according to the saying of the man of Ood, and his 
 flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he 
 was clean." 
 
 The question is, How did Naaman, in obedience to the 
 man of Qod, baptize himself at the Jordan ? T answer, 
 he sprinkled the water upon the part affected, as the 
 law of God required. Now for the proof. Naaman was 
 a leper, and tne prophet, being a man of Qod, would 
 command him to do what the law of God required for 
 the cleansing of the leprosy. What was that ? Turn up 
 Lev. 14:7: ''He shall sprinkle upon him that is to be 
 cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pro- 
 nounce him clean." Mark carefully the important bear- 
 ing on the argument, of the expression " seven times." 
 Baptists tell us there was " a bathing " in connection 
 with cleansing from leprosy. That is true, but as we 
 shall show by and by, ceremonial bathing was never by 
 plunging into water, and it was done but qnce in connec- 
 tion with leprosy. Naaman baptized himself seven 
 times, and the law of God (Lev. 14) did not require 
 anything to be done seven times hut the sprinkling. 
 Therefore Naaman's baptizing himself seven times was 
 his sprinkling the part affected by the leprosy seven 
 times as the law of God required. And so the first Bible 
 baptism is clearly a baptism by sprinkling. But there 
 are other considerations putting the mode of Naamans 
 baptism beyond all doubt. 
 
21 
 
 In Luke 4 : 27, our Lord says Naaman was oleansed 
 {ekathariathe)^ the very word that is used in Leviticus 
 14 where sprinkling is distinctly mentioned as the 
 
 mode. 
 
 Naaman baptized (Heb. tabcd, Or. ebaptisato) himself 
 seven times. The scholar will ol^erve that tabal is here 
 used as the equivalent of rachata in verse 10 — "he bap- 
 tized himself seven times according to the saying of 
 the man of God." What was that saying? "Go wash 
 (rachata) in Jordan seven times," v. 10. An exam- 
 ination will shew that rachata never means "dip," 
 but "to perform ablutions with water applied to tne 
 person." I have counted fifty ^three instances of its 
 use in the Old Testament, ana after a careful exam- 
 ination of each, I make this statement. Take a few 
 instances. Joseph washed (rachata) his face to remove 
 the tear-marks after his weeping, Gen. 43 : 31. Did the 
 great ruler of Egypt dip his face into the water for this 
 purpose ? The " elders washed (rachata) their hands over 
 the heifer," Deut. 21 : 6. Here the Greek is nipto, which 
 even Dr. Carson says, " does not mean to dip." And we 
 know how the Jews washed their hands. "Elisha poured 
 water on the hands of Elijah," 2 Kings 3:11. In 1 Kings 
 22 : 38, the armor of Ahab, after battle, being stained 
 with blood, was washed (rachata). Must we suppose 
 that the armor was dipped in order to wash the blood- 
 stains from it ? In Gen. 43 : 24 ; 18:4; 19:2; 24 : 32 ; 
 Exod. 30 : 19. 21 ; 40 : 31 ; Judges 19 : 21 ; 1 Sam. 25 : 41 ; 
 2 Sam. 11 : 8, we find rachata in connection with feet- 
 washing. We know the mode was to put the water 
 upon the feet, not the feet into the water. Proof positive 
 of this is found in Luke 7 : 44, " Thou gavest me no 
 water upon my feet" (epi podaa). Such being the im- 
 port of the word rachata, we say without hesitation, that 
 if Naaman dipped himself or was dipped, it was not 
 "according to the saying of the man of God," but in ex- 
 press contravention of it. 
 
 Tahal, the word expressing the action of Naaman in 
 
m' a 
 
 ¥9' 
 
 ^Mv 
 
 m^X"", 
 
 22 
 
 baptizing himself, we are told by Baptists, means "dip." 
 And while it is not denied that it may sometimes be used 
 in that sense, it is most positively denied that it is re- 
 stricted to that narrow significance. It occurs fifteen 
 times in the Old Testament, and according to some of 
 the best lexicographers, such as Stokius, Schindler, Leigh, 
 and Furstianus, the meaning of the word is exhausted, 
 " if an object merely touches the liquid, or is touched by 
 it" The last named scholar defines the word to moisten, 
 to sprinkle as well as to "dip." Robert Young, LL.D., in 
 his " Greek and Hebrew Analytical Concordance to the 
 Bible," defines tahal to moisten, to besprinkle, and under 
 these definitions he ranges all the fifteen instances of its 
 occurrence. Tabal cannot mean "dip" in Gen. 37 : 31. It 
 would have been physically impossible to dip (in the 
 Baptist sense) Joseph's coat in the blood of a kid. The 
 coat was stained or smeared with the blood. The LXX. 
 has it " emolnnan ton kitona to haimati." Moluno 
 means " to soil, to stain, to smear." To haimati is the 
 instrumental dative, and must be rendered "with the 
 bloou." Nor can tabal mean a Baptist dipping in Lev. 
 14:15, 16, where the priest is directed to dip the finger 
 of his right hand in a few drops of oil held in the palm 
 of the left hand. 
 
 The case of Naaman was that of partial leprosy. 
 This is clear from v. 11. He expected that Elisha would 
 " wave his hand (R. V.) over the place " like the modern 
 animal-magnetizer. It was therefore enough to cere- 
 monially wash or baptize the part affected. 
 
 Naaman's baptism was not for a physical or medical 
 purpose. It was not intended to cure the leprosy. God 
 alone could cure the leprosy, just as He alone can cure 
 sin. It was a ceremonial cleansing, symbolic of the 
 cleansing of the leprosy, and pointing forward to the 
 " blood of sprinkling " which cleanseth from all sin. 
 
 But why wash in the Jordan, and nowhere else ? Be- 
 cause the cleansing of the leper, according to the law 
 
23 
 
 must be by sprinkling, with " running water," Lev. 14 : 
 5, 6, 50-52. Healing to the leper meant the rcn(iwing 
 ffrace of God, and for this none but the water of life that 
 Hows in the river of the heavenly Canaan will suffice. 
 As Palestine was a type of heaven, the one river of Pales- 
 tine became the proper type of that " river of God, which 
 is full of water." It is only in the hymns that " Jordan" 
 siojnifies death. 
 
 Baptists tell us that " washing " can only be by dip- 
 ping, not by sprinkling. Let us see. The word "wash" 
 simply signifies " to make clean." It is not a word of 
 mode. In Ezek. 36: 25, the Almighty says, "Then 
 will I sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be 
 clean ; from all your filthiness and from all your idols 
 will I cleanse you." Here, then, is a washing or cleans- 
 ing by sprinkling. In Luke 7 : 44, the Saviour says, 
 " She hath washed my feet with her tears." The Synac 
 says, " Baptized my feet with her tears." The Psalmist 
 in Psa. 51:7, "Purge (Greek, sprinkle) me with hyssop, 
 and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I shall be whiter 
 than snow." Here according to the Hebrew idiom, the 
 word " wash " is parallel and equivalent to " purge me 
 with hyssop." The mode is not a matter of doubt. The 
 religious washings were not for physical cleansing, but 
 for the purpose of symbolizing and shewing forth the 
 cleansing (washing) of the heart by the blood of Christ 
 (blood of sprinkling) applied by the Spirit of God. The 
 blood of Christ, thus applied, " cleanseth from all sin," 
 and this precious truth has ever been symbolized in the 
 Church of God by the sprinkling of pure water. We 
 may, therefore, safely conclude that this was the mode 
 of Naaman's baptism. 
 
24 
 
 Example 8. 
 
 Septuag. interpret. Es. XXI. 4 (ed. Tischend.). 
 
 'H avo/xta pis /SaTtriQei. 
 
 Septuagint, B.C. 280, Is. 21 : 4, " Iniquity baptizes me." 
 
 The English version, adhering to the Hebrew, reads 
 " fearf ulness affrighted me." The Vulgate has " tenebrae 
 stupefecerunt me." It is hard then to understand how 
 this baptism can be made to express anything but con- 
 dition — the condition into which one is brought by 
 iniquity. 
 
 The only question to be settled is how was this con- 
 dition effected ? What was the mode of this baptism ? 
 Conant, page 84, renders " baptizes ' in this passage by 
 "whelms," a word which implies that the baptizing 
 element comes upon the person baptized. It is evident 
 we have here, by a figure of speech, the baptizing ele- 
 ment put for the agent. The meaning is, "I am baptized 
 with iniquity." What then is the mode ? In reply, let 
 it be noted that the Scriptures always speak of 
 "iniquity" coming upon the person. In Exod. 20:5; 
 34 : 7 ; Num. 14 : 18 ; Deut. 5 : 9, we read, " visiting the 
 iniquity of the fathers upon the children." In 1 Sam. 
 25 : 24 and 2 Sam. 14 : 9, we read, " upon me let this 
 iniquity be." In Psa. 55 : 3, we read, " they cast iniquity 
 upon me." In Isa. 53 : 6, it is said, " the Lord laid on 
 Him the iniquity of us all." In Ezek. 4 : 4, we read, 
 " lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it." In 
 Num. 15 : 31, we have, "his iniquity shall be upon 
 Him." And in Psa. 94 : 23, it is said, " He shall bring 
 upon them their iniquity." Surely this is enough to 
 convince even a Baptist that when the Greek says, 
 " Iniquity baptizes me," the baptizing element is con- 
 ceived of as moved and brought upon the person. And 
 if this is so, then delenda eat immeraio. 
 
25 
 
 Example 9.* 
 
 Septuag. interpret. Judith, ch. 12, 7-9. 
 
 Kal s^enopevero xara rvHta eis rrfv <papayya 
 BetvXova, xal e/SaTfriQeto iv rrj Traps/i/SoX^ inl trfS 
 TttfyrfS rov vdatos. 
 
 Kal Gos avi^rfy iSeeto rov Kvpiov Oeov Iffparjk. . . 
 Kal si<j7topevo}jiivrf Had a pa napi^sve tfj (Jh7jv^, , , . 
 
 Septuagint, B.C. 280, Judith, ch. 12, 7-9: 
 
 "And went out nightly into the valley of Bethulia, and 
 baptized herself in the camp at the fountain of water. 
 
 "And as she went up, she besought of the Lord God of 
 Israel to direct her way to the raising up of the children of 
 her people. 
 
 " And entering in pure, she remained in the tent." . . , 
 
 The story of Judith is easy of access, and it is too 
 long to be inserted here. The town of Bethulia is in a 
 state of siege. The inhabitants are in great distress. 
 The enemy had seized upon the fountain of waters upon 
 which the town depended for its supply. The Jews are 
 about to give up in despair, when Judith, a young and 
 beautiful widow, appears as the deliverer. She decks 
 herself and goes forth to the camp of the enemy to 
 beguile Holofemes, the chief captain. By and by, 
 when he was drunk with wine, she killed him with his 
 own sword; and so delivered her nation. In the midst 
 of this story we find the word baptizo. Judith " went 
 out nightly into the valley of Bethulia and baptized 
 herself in the camp at the fountain of water." Let us 
 see if we can learn something as to the mode of this 
 baptism. 
 
 1. The design. Why did Judith go to the fountain ? 
 
 * This and the following example are here introdjced although 
 a later date is assigned to them by many scholars. 
 
, lli'">. 
 
 1'^., 
 
 ■:i:l 
 
 
 ii 
 
 26 
 
 She went for the purpose of ceremonial purification. 
 Hence, after her baptism we are told, verse 9, she was 
 pure (kathara). This is the same word as is used in 
 Lev. 14:7, where sprinkling is expressly mentioned as 
 the mode. 2. The place. She baptized herself " epi tes 
 peges" at (not in) the fountain. Of the enemies we are 
 told, chapter vii. 3, " They encamped in the valley near 
 Bethulia, at the fountain — (epi tes peges), the very iden- 
 tical words that are used to express Judith's relation 
 to the fountain. And there is as much reason for saying 
 that the Assyrian enemies encamped in the fountain as 
 for saying that Judith dipped herself in the fountain, 
 3. All the circumstances are against the dipping theory. 
 The fountain was near the camp, en te parembole — some 
 say in the camp, v. 7. It was " guarded by soldiers " 
 (ch. vii. 7). It was the source of their supply of water 
 for drinking purposes, chapter viii. 9. Under these cir- 
 cumstances, common decency would have prevented 
 " dipping," " plunging," or " immersing " on the part of 
 this pious woman. I cannot refrain from giving the 
 following quotation from Dr. Dale's Judaic Baptism, page 
 358: "Dr. Carson knows that she dipped hersel:^, and Dr. 
 Fuller knows that she bathed herself, and Dr. Conant 
 knows that she immersed herself, — where ? Why, in 
 the fountain from which the Bethulians got their drink- 
 ing water, and from which * the garrison guarding that 
 fountain got their water. Well, this is certainly a little 
 remarkable, that a lady should go and ' wash her entire 
 person ' in a drinking fountain ! However, these learned 
 men say, that they know that she did it. We must, 
 then, set down this lady, Judith, as remarkably solicitous 
 for her own * purification/ and remarkably regardless of 
 the purification of the waters for those who drank after 
 her nightly washings ! " 
 
 Conant, page 85, says that she *' went to the fountain 
 in order to get water deep enough for immersion." But 
 unfortunately for that statement, the record, chapter xii. 
 6, tells us that she went out for prayer, not for baptism 
 
S7 
 
 of any kind. For the purpose of purification she re- 
 quired water free from heathenish pollution, chapter xii. 
 1, 2. And may it not be that her going * out of the 
 camp every night " was a part of her plan by whicjj she 
 was to escape after the assassination of Holofernes ? 
 
 Example 10. 
 
 Septuag. lib. Siracidse c. 34 : 27 {ed. Tischend.). 
 BaTtrtQojiisyos airo renpov ual TtaXiv amofxevo'S 
 avrov, ri ooq)6\rfffe tg3 Xovrpcp aurov^ 
 
 Septuagint, B.C. 280: 
 
 " He that is baptized from a dead body, and touching it 
 again, what is he benefited by his washing." 
 
 "Baptized from a dead body" means purified from t- e 
 uncleanness contracted by touching a dead body. From 
 Num. 19 : 11-13, we learn that this purification was 
 effected by sprinkling the ashes of a heifer. Verse 13 
 reads, " Whosoever touches the dead body of any one 
 that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tab- 
 ernacle of the Lord ; and that soul shall be cut off from 
 Israel, because the water of separation was not sprinkled 
 upon him, he shall be unclean, his uncleanness is yet 
 upon him." This baptism, then, was a condition of 
 purification, and there is no doubt as to the mode in 
 which it was effected. God's word says it was by 
 sprinkling. 
 
 But does not the Bible say that the man must " bathe 
 himself in water?" Yes, our English version says that, 
 but the Greek says, " Kai tousetai hudati" " Hudati " 
 is the "dative instrumental," and should be rendered 
 " wash with water," not " bathe in water." This expres- 
 sion " lousetai hudati " occurs sixteen times in Lev. 
 15 and 16. The preposition "en" before ''hudati'* 
 is of rare occurreice. The self -washings are never 
 called purifyings, nor referred to by that name. The 
 purifyings (here called baptism) were all by sprinkling. 
 
28 
 
 Paul says (Heb. 9: 13, R.V.) that "the ashes of a 
 heifer, sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify 
 to the cleanness of the flesh." He says not a word 
 about the washing of clothes, or " cleansing with water 
 after the baptism." Josephus (Antiq. Bk. 4, ch. 4, sec. 6) 
 tells us that persons defiled by touching a dead body, 
 were sprinkled with water mixed with heifer ashes on 
 the third day and seventh day, and after that they 
 were clean. (See page 52.) This state of ceremonial 
 purification, effected by sprinkling, Paul (Heb. 9 : 10) 
 calls " diaforoi baptismoi " (diVers baptisms), and Sirach 
 here calls it a baptism. 
 
 We have now traced baptizo through the classic and 
 Hellenistic Greek, covering a period of about 220 years, 
 yet the word never occurs meaning " to dip " or " to im- 
 merse." The baptizing elements are varied — wine, ques- 
 tions, iniquity, water — but whatever the element, it is 
 always applied to the subject. Our next example is 
 from Evenus of Paros. 
 
 Mil •' !l 
 
 Example 11. 
 
 Eveni Parii et al. Epigr. XV. 
 
 BaTtriQsi 6' vitvcp ysitovi rov Oavarov. 
 
 Evenus of Paros^ Epigram XV. ^ B.C. 250: 
 " Baptizes with sleep, neighbor of death." 
 
 Evenus says of Bacchus (the use of wine), when too 
 freely indulged in, that he " baptizes with sleep, neighbor 
 of death." Dr. Conant, p. 58, translates, " plunges in 
 sleep, neighbor of death." But there is no " in sleep " 
 in the Greek. Evenus has " hupno" the dative instru- 
 mental without any preposition. We have a similar use 
 of the word in Luke 9 : 32, " But Peter and those with 
 him were heavy with sleep (hupno). Sleep is here the 
 baptizing element, and in all literature sleep is repre- 
 sented as coming upon the person. Here are a few 
 
29 
 
 Scripture examples : Gen. 2 : 21, "A deep sleep to fall 
 upon Adam;" Gen. 15: 12, "A deep sleep fell upon 
 Abram;" 1 Sam. 26 : 12, "A deep sleep from the Lord 
 was fallen upon them ; " Job 4 : 13, " When deep sleep 
 falleth on men ; " Isa. 29 : 10, " For the Lord hath poured 
 out upon you the spirit of deep sleep." These are 
 sufficient to show that in baptism by sleep, the baptizing 
 element is conceived as coming upon the person baptized. 
 Evenus does not depart from the uniform usage of the 
 word up to his time. 
 
 Following our chronological order, we now come to 
 the consideration of six instances of baptism in the writ- 
 ings of Poly bins (B.C. 180). Here we first meet with 
 "ship baptisms," and as there are several of them ahead 
 of us, a few words of a general character may be helpful 
 to a better understanding of them. Baptists contend 
 that the act of sinking is the baptism. But the action of a 
 vessel already in the water, sinking to the bottom of the 
 ocean and remaining there for all time, is an entirely 
 distinct act from the dipping of modern Baptists. Were 
 they to baptize their candidates as they say these ships 
 were baptized, they would drown all entrants into their 
 church. Our position is that the baptism expresses the 
 changed condition of the ship, and is effected by some 
 element or influence coming upon the thing baptized. 
 Besides, it cannot be shewn that any of the vessek bap- 
 tized were actually sunk ; while we are expressly told 
 that some of them were not sunk. Time and again we 
 have in Greek literature a sharp contrast between bap- 
 tism and sinking. Take a few illustrations. Here is 
 one from the " Life of Pythagoras," sec. 2. The Greek 
 reads, 
 
 To jxivrot ftanrit^ofjiiyrfv rrfv vavv naff iXnida 
 aoodrfvaiy TcpovoiaS deov, 
 
 " And that the baptized ship beyond all hope is saved, is of 
 the providence of God." 
 
;.,.v 
 
 '■■f" 
 
 !>*„ 
 
 *1W •?' ''■ 
 
 h m 
 
 30 
 
 Here the ship is ' baptized beyond all hope " by the 
 waves iashing over it, and still it was not under the water, 
 for if it had it could not have been saved. 
 
 -Another instance of ship baptism without sinking we 
 have in Heliodorus -^thiopics, Book 5. It is Conant, 39. 
 
 "HStj 6k ftaTtrit^oiJiivoov Hal Haradvvai ^ixpov 
 anoXeiTtovroov, 
 
 "And already becoming baptized and wanting little of 
 sinking." 
 
 Render this Baptist fashion, "And already becom- 
 ing dipped and wanting little of dipping ! " What 
 beautiful sense ! And yet we are told with the con- 
 fidence of assumed infallibility that baptizo always 
 means " to dip," and that dip and sink are synonymous 
 terms. If haptizo means a " covering with water," as 
 one Baptist writer says ; or " lying under water," as 
 another assures us, how, I ask, did not this ship go to 
 the bottom as all vessels do when they go clean under 
 the water ? 
 
 This reminds us of another baptism without " possi- 
 bility of sinking." It is not a ship baptism this time. 
 It is Conant, 24, and from Plutarch, A.D. 50 : 
 
 AffHOS /3a7rriZrj' dvvai de roi ov OSjxis iariv. 
 
 ** A bladder, thou mayest be baptized but it is not possible 
 for thee to sink." 
 
 Athens might be occasionally overwhelmed with 
 calamities but she would recover from them. In this 
 instance two things are affirmed : the inflated bladder, 
 buoyantly floating upon the water, coidd not possibly 
 sink. It was, however, baptized by the drenching spray 
 cast upon it by the waves. 
 
 Let us see if we can ascertain something of the mode 
 
 1^1 
 
31 
 
 of ship baptisms. Josephus, A.D. 70 (Jewish Wars, Bk. 
 3, ch. 9, sec. 3), says : 
 
 Meriojpos VTrepapOsis 6 uXvdov iftdntiisev, 
 
 "The billow rising high above baptized" (many of the 
 vessels and men). 
 
 Here the context shews that the vessels and men 
 baptized were not sunk. The baptism was the con- 
 dition into which they were brought, and the mode 
 was by the baptizing elements (the billows) coming 
 upon the subjects. Josephus wrote about A.D. 70, and 
 consequently his testimony should have some weight in 
 determining the usage of this word in the New Tes- 
 tament. 
 
 An illustration of the mode of Greek baptism we have 
 in Conant, Example 88. Libanius, Epistle 25, speaking 
 of an earthquake in which two of his friends had 
 perished, says : 
 
 Ka\ avtos eifxi tgov fte Pant iff ^xiv gov vno rov fisya- 
 \ov KVfxaro's shsivov. 
 
 (( 
 
 I myself am one of those baptized by that great wave." 
 
 The wave came upon him. He was not put into it, nor 
 did he sink. It is evident that among the Greeks, ships 
 lashed by the waves were " baptized ; " and it is just as 
 evident that these ships were not necessarily sunk or 
 destroyed. 
 
 A few words as to the authority of the lexicons will 
 here be in place. Dr. Carson frankly confesses (p. 55) 
 that " all the lexicographers are against the Baptist 
 theory." He might have gone further and acknowledged 
 that there is not on earth a lexicon of the Greek language 
 that gives " dip," " plunge," or " immerse " as the Neiu 
 Testament meaning of baptizo. There are dictionaries 
 or vocabularies or glossaries of the New Testament pre- 
 pared for denominational purposes, and, of course, fur- 
 
I' 'i 
 
 I,/ 
 
 I. 
 
 si, 
 l| 
 
 ^*)';^'■1,i 
 
 
 1' I 
 
 .|Hiil| 
 
 I'iii 
 
 
 ilii:];i '■ 
 
 32 
 
 nishing definitions to suit the demand, but these are not 
 Greek lexicons. Some lexicographers, however, imagine 
 they find immersion in the later Greek classics. And 
 this need not surprise anyone. The early lexicographers 
 were all Catholics. These were Budseus (A.D. 1619), 
 H. Stephanus (A.D. 1572), and Scapula (A.D. 1679). It is 
 well known that for over a thousand years the Catholic 
 Church practised trine-immersion — " three dips for one 
 baptism." When therefore these early lexicographers 
 found baptizo in the writings of Polybius, Strabo, Dio- 
 dorus, etc., they looked at it in the light of the theory and 
 practice of their Church for centuries, and gave the cur- 
 rent rather than the classic meaning of the word. Later 
 lexicographers, as anyone can see for himself, slavishly 
 copy from these earlier ones. Hence the " dip," " plunge," 
 "immerse," "dip repeatedly" of most lexicons. Where did 
 they get the " repeatedly ? " The answer to that question 
 is very significant, as proving the Romish origin of dip- 
 ping for baptism. Lexicographers got the " repeatedly " 
 just where they got the " dip," in the trine or threefold 
 immersions of the Greek and Latin churches. No Bap- 
 tltji will say that in the New Testament or before it, 
 baptizo ever meant " to dip repeatedly." The " repeat- 
 edly " is the patent mark put upon the " dip " to indicate 
 its origin and ownership. 
 
 A word on " Liddeil and Scott," our popular school 
 lexicon. "Of late this lexicon has b6en completely mani- 
 pulated by Immersionists. Yet it does not sustain them, 
 for the simple reason that their theory is so unscientific 
 and absurd it cannot be sustained." They first define 
 baptizo " to dip repeatedly, dip under ; " second, they 
 erase the second part, and put it " dip repeatedly ;" then 
 they change again and give " wet, pour upon." By and 
 by there is another change made, and "immerse" is 
 inserted, — a word not found in any previous edition. 
 And so they go on changing and re-changing their 
 lexicon, on this word — at least eleven changes on one 
 word! They have not so tampered with the defini- 
 
33 
 
 )ular school 
 
 tion of any other word. Prof. Drisler, the American 
 editor of " Xiiddell and Scott," over his own signature, 
 says "changes were made in relation to the article 
 baptizo, which I never saw." It is a well known 
 fact that Dr. Duncan, editor of the Baptist Chron- 
 icle, stole a march upon the unsuspecting editor of the 
 lexicon, and so mutilated the book while it was passing 
 through the press as to favor dipping. Still " Liddell and 
 Scott have not yet ventured to gratify Baptist demands 
 so far as to give " dip " or " immerse " as a Nciv Testa- 
 ment meaning of baptizo. But no one who knows their 
 repeated and whimsical changes, and conaecjuenfly their 
 acknowledged blundering on this word, will attach any 
 importance to what they may say on the subject. For 
 a full history of how the Baptists have manipulated 
 this lexicon to suit their own purpose, the reader is re- 
 ferred to Dr. Ditzler, p. 155, note ; and to " Baptiama" 
 by Rev. John Lathern, p. 173. 
 We are now prepared to go on with our examples. 
 
 Example 12. 
 
 Polybii Hist. lib. I. c. 51, 6. 
 
 ^E^/SoXds re avvsx^^^ edidoffav, ual TtoXXa rcoi^ 
 (THa(pc5v ipaTtri^ov. 
 
 FolybiuSj History ^ bk. I. ch. 51 ^ 6, B.C. 180: 
 
 " They made continued assaults and baptized many of the 
 
 vessels." 
 
 Poly bins here tells us that in a sea- light the Cartha- 
 ginians assaulted the Roman vessels and " baptized " 
 many of them. There is no evidence that the vessels 
 were sunk. But even if they were, that act is quite 
 distinct from a Baptist dipping. The vessels remained 
 for all time at the bottom. The baptism was not any 
 act of sinking, but the changed condition of the vessels, 
 and the baptizing instrumentality (the assaults) came 
 upon the vessels. 
 3 
 
mm 
 
 I ill""; I 
 
 34 
 
 h- 
 
 
 'I- 
 
 
 ", 
 
 l(: ! 
 
 I I ' 
 
 -Ml 
 
 'li»v[l 
 
 ill' :■ 
 
 !'l't, 
 
 ,ii I 
 
 'ii''i) 
 
 !,i'M 
 
 IIIU illjll! 
 
 I If' 
 
 ill 1 
 
 Mm' 
 
 Example 13. 
 
 Polybii Hist. lib. VIII. c. 8, 4 (ed. Schweigh.). 
 
 Ov yBvo^ivoVy riva nkv tcov nXoiajv nXdym 
 uaTiTtinre^ rtt'd 6k huI Hareffrfjtipero' rd 6k nXBlara 
 Tf/s Trpojpas a(f) vipov^ picpOelfft/s BaTrriQojAeva, nXt/fjij 
 SaXdrrtjz iyiyvero xal rapax^^- 
 
 J'olybius, Ilistort/, hk VIIL ch. 8, 4, B.C. 180: 
 
 *' Which, being done, some of the vessels fell on their side, 
 and some were overturned ; but most of them, when the prow 
 was let fall from on high, being baptized, became filled with 
 sea- water and confusion." 
 
 Polybius says these ships were baptized. But what 
 was the baptism ? Was it " the act of sinking ? " We 
 have no evidence that these ships went under the water, 
 but the contrary. If they were under the water who 
 could see the " confusion ? " " But," says the Baptist, 
 " they were filled with sea-water." No doubt of it, but 
 that does not sdy nor imply that they were under the 
 water. Read Mark 4 : 37, 38, " And there arose a great 
 storm of wind, and the waves beat into the ship so that 
 it was now full. And he was in the hinder part of the 
 ship, asleep on a pillow." I "ke 8 : 23, "And there came 
 down a storm of wind on the lake, and they were filled 
 with water, and were in jeopardy." In these verses we 
 have described the precise condition of the ships that 
 Polybius says were baptized. But these ships were not 
 under the surface of the sea, though the water had 
 lashed profusely over them. 
 
 Example 14. 
 Polybii Hist. lib. XVI. c. 6, 2. 
 rerpaofjievrfv xal fiaTtnZo/^evt^v vno vfcejs 7roXe/x{a?. 
 
 Polybius, History, bk. XVL ch. 6, 2, B.C. 180: 
 " Pierced and being baptized by a hostile ship." 
 
se verses we 
 
 35 
 
 Polybius ia here speaking of a ship of Attains, in a 
 sca-fijjht with Philip. Evidently the •* baptism " expresseH 
 the " condition " of the injured vessel, not the " act of 
 Hinkin<(." There is no evidence that there was any sink- 
 in;^, and we have shewn under Example 13 that the 
 Greeks sharply contrasted baptism with " submersion." 
 The baptizing instrumentality is the " hostile ship." 
 
 Example 15. 
 
 Polyhii Hist. lib. III. c. 72, 4. 
 
 ddftaivov. 
 
 Polyhius, History, hk. III. ch. 72, 4, B.C. 180: 
 
 "They passed through with difficulty, the foot soldiers 
 baptized up to the breasts." 
 
 Polybius is speaking of the passage of the Roman 
 army through the rirer Tebia when it was swollen by 
 heavy rains. Any intelligent person can see that baptizo 
 here does not express "act" but "condition." It does 
 not put the Roman soldiers " into the water " or take 
 them "out of the water," but it expresses the "condition" 
 in which they found themselves with the waters of the 
 swollen river rushing upon them. 
 
 Example 16. 
 
 Polybii Hist. lib. V. c. 47', 2 {ed. Schweigh.). 
 
 Oi Hal (Tvveyyiffavres rois Ttepl rov ^evoirav, dia 
 rr/y ayvoiav rdov roTtaov ov npoaediovro tgov noXe- 
 jjiGDV avrol d' vn avTc5v ftanriZofxevoi nal uata- 
 Svvovrez iv rois riXjuaffiv, axpr^fftoi juev ffaav 
 aTtavre?;^ noXkol dt xal die (pQapifGav avrc^v. 
 
 Polybius, History, hk. V. ch. 47, ^, B.C. 180: 
 
 "Who, coming into near proximity with the forces of 
 Xenoetas, through ignorance of the localities required no 
 enemy, but themselves by themselves baptized and sinking in 
 the pools were all useless, and many of them also perished." 
 
/ 
 
 
 n/.ti 
 
 36 
 
 Polybius is describing the condition of a tody of 
 cavalry sent by Molon to attack Xenoetas in a place 
 where he was protected by the river Tigris, and by 
 marshes and pools. The soldiers were ignorant of the 
 route, and got into the swampy places. Hence the 
 baptism, and worse, the " perishing." Observe the clear 
 distinction between the "baptism" and the " sinking in 
 the pools." They were all baptized but only " many of 
 them " sank into the pools and perished. Those who 
 mired down in the swamps perished, while those 
 " baptized by themselves " were so bespattered with mud 
 and water by the rearing and plunging of the horses, 
 that they were " useless " or unfit for service — not an 
 uncommon experience of military men. 
 
 ;"'!!' 
 
 
 III! 
 
 Ill; 
 
 Example 17. 
 
 Polybii Reliq. lib. XXXIV. c. 3, 7 (ed. Schweigh. Vol. IV. 
 
 p. 626). 
 
 Kav eHTteffrf dt eis tt^v OdXarrav to dopv, ovk ano- 
 XoDkev ion yap Ttrjnrov ek re dpvos ual eXarrjZj 
 S(Tt€y l3a7triQo}JLeyov rov Spvi'vov ftdpeiy jderioopov 
 elvai to XoiTtov nal evavaXijntov. 
 
 Folybius, History, hk. XXXIV. ch. 3, 7, B.C. 180: 
 
 " Even if the spear falls into the sea, it is not lost ; for it 
 is constructed of both oak and pine ; so that when the oaken 
 part is baptized by the weight, the rest is floating and easily 
 recovered." 
 
 I give this as an example from Polybius, but the 
 authorship is extremely doubtful. Conant gives it as 
 from Book 34 of Polybius' History. But Anthon, in his 
 Classical Dictionary, Art. Polybius, informs us that only 
 five of the books of Polybius are extant, and that all 
 after Book 17 are irrecoverably lost. An extract, there- 
 fore, from " Book 34 " is not worth much. The case, 
 
• 
 
 37 
 
 however, presents no special difficulty. The writer, who- 
 ever he may he, is describin^^ tlie manner of catching the 
 sword-tish with a harpoon. Anyone can see that the 
 baptism expresses not the "act" of putting the spear 
 into the water, nor the " act " of taking it out, but the 
 condition of a part of the spear. Observe "harei" 
 (weight) is in the dative case as the baptizing instru- 
 mentality. This is a baptism by "weight," not by 
 water. Polybius writes in a much coarser style of Greek 
 than his classic predecessors, but he does not depart 
 from the classic usage of haptizo — it is always condition, 
 and condition effected by the baptizing element coming 
 upon the subject. 
 
 Example 18. 
 
 Nicandri Georg. II. 
 
 ^pi/ieirf TToXias s/x/SaTtricxov aXjarf* 
 
 Meander J B.C. ISO: 
 
 " Baptize many together with sharp brine." 
 
 This is from a work on husbandry by Nicander (B.C. 
 150). The author is giving directions how to make 
 pickles, and part of his direction is as above, " baptize 
 many together with sharp brine." Conant, on page 74, 
 translates it, " immerse many together in sharp brine." 
 But this is ignoring grammar to save the theory. There 
 is no " in brine " in the Greek. The student will observe 
 that " holme " (brine) is in the dative without a preposi- 
 tion — the dative instrumental — and cannot be rendered 
 "in brine" as the receptive element. Besides, rather 
 than part with his dipping, Conant ignores universal 
 usage. Every housewife knows that in making pickles 
 the vegetables are put, "many together," into the vessel 
 first, and then the " sharp brine " is poured over them. 
 Nicander gives us a Greek baptism by pouring. 
 

 ■ ■:>■ 
 
 pi 
 
 m.' 
 
 :.[ I;:i}i«r;i 
 
 ma :^ 
 
 38 
 
 Example 19. 
 
 Strabonis Geogr. lib. XII. c. 2, 4 (ec?. Tzschucke). 
 
 T(p dk HaOiivri ajwvrtov avGoOev eia rov ftodpov 
 Tf ftia rov vdaros avtiTtparrei Toffovrov Sate j^oXis 
 fia7tri8,sa6ai. 
 
 SirabOf Geography, hk. XII. ch. 2, ^, B.C. 60: 
 
 " And to one who hurls down a dart, from above into the 
 channel, the force of the water makes so much resistance, 
 that it is hardly baptized." 
 
 This is from Strabo, and there is nothing in it 
 to show that haptizo expresses motion or mode of 
 action. The motion is expressed by the word " Kath- 
 ienti " The baptism of the dart is not a " dipping " for 
 it remained in the water. Here, as in our other ex- 
 amples, baptism expresses not a definite action but a 
 definite condition. 
 
 ' Example 20. 
 
 Strabo. lib. XIV. c. 3, 9 (td. Tzschucke). 
 
 ^0 Ss AXe^avdpos €is jz/^^pzor ifXTteffoov uaipot' Kai 
 TO TtXsov inirpenoov rfj rvxr\ nplv aveivai ro xv^a 
 GopfjirfCtey Hal oXrjv rrjv rffxepav iv vdari ysviffOat rijv 
 Ttopelav avv£j3r} jJi^xpi o/xcpaXov PaTtriZojxevoov, 
 
 Strabo, hk. XIV. ch. 3, 9, B.C. 60: 
 
 "Alexander happening to be there at the stormy season, 
 and trusting commonly to fortune, set forward before the 
 storm abated ; and they marched the whole day in the water 
 — they being baptized to the waist." 
 
 What exploding dynamite is to a lot of rrbbish heaped 
 over it, this instance is to the dipping theory. To talk 
 of men walking through the water all day as bein^ 
 dipped in the modern Baptist sense, is simply an absurd 
 
 \^':-U 
 
S9 
 
 use of language, and shows the desperate straits to which 
 the friends of "the theory" are reduced. Observe that 
 in the sentence, the use of haptizo is preceded by an 
 account of the troops being already in the water, so that 
 haptizo did not put them into the water, neither did it 
 take them out of the water, but it expresses the condi- 
 tion in which the soldiers found themselves during " the 
 whole day!' " A whole day " is too long for a Baptist 
 dipping. This has been called " a baptism by marching " 
 and " a baptism by wading ;" more correctly, it is a " bap- 
 tism by wetting." In ordinary weather, the beach, over 
 which the soldiers marched, was dry ground, but we are 
 told a storm was raging at the time, and the soldiers 
 were " baptized as far as the waist," by the storm-lashed 
 waves coming upon them. 
 
 Example 21. 
 
 Strabonis, lib. VI. 2, 9 (Siebenkees). 
 
 Ilepl ^Aupdyarra de Xifxvai rrfv ^tv yevaiv exov(Sai 
 daXarrrf^y rrjv Sh (pvaiv didcporov ovSt ydp roi5 
 (XKoXvpijlSoiS /3a7triC,e(Tdai avtxf^aivsi ^vXgov rponov 
 irTiTtoXaQovaiy. 
 
 Straho, bk. VI. ch. 2, 9, B.C. 60: 
 
 " And around -A.cragas (Agrigentum in Sicily) are marsh- 
 lakes, having the taste indeed of sea-water, but a different 
 nature ; for even those who car^not swim are not baptized, 
 floating like pieces of wood." 
 
 Here, as in our last example, haptizo does not put the 
 subjects into the water — it does not dip or plunge them 
 — they were in the water already, " swimming." But it 
 expresses very emphatically " a new state of life or ex- 
 perience," the secondary meaning which Dr. Conant, on 
 page 159, gives to haptizo y but of which, strange to say, 
 in all Greek literature he seems never to have found an 
 instance. The more the pity. "A new state" — why 
 
1: .■^' 
 
 ..»■ • i 
 
 iliiiiii'iii^i 
 
 40 
 
 y 
 
 that expresses not a modal act, but a changed condition, 
 and every instance of the word we have yet examined 
 is an illustration of it. But Dr. Conant has his theory 
 of " putting into or under water " to defend, and if all 
 Greek literature is against him, so much the worse for 
 Greek literature. He is like Admiral Nelson at the 
 battle of Copenhagen, who, when informed that the 
 battle was going against him, and that the signal for 
 retreat was hoisted, raised the telescope to his blind eye 
 and said, " I cannot see it." Some men have a blind eye 
 with which to look at what they don't want to see. 
 
 Example 22. 
 
 Strabonis, lib. XVI. c. 2, 42. 
 
 EIt^ £7ti7to\aC,ovffa 6ia rrfv cpvffiv rou vSaro^y nad^ 
 Tfv Bcpap.Ev jjLT^Sa xoXvjj.fiov deiffdaiy }Jir}6h ftaTrriZeadai 
 rov e/A/3dvta aW i^aipeaSai, 
 
 Strtibo, hk. XV I. ch. 2, J,2, B,C. 60.-- 
 
 " Then floating at the top on account of the nature of the 
 water, by virtue of which, we said, there is no need of being 
 a swimmer, and he who enters is not baptized, but is lifted 
 out." 
 
 This is Conant's translation. Observe that haptizo 
 does not put into the water — that action is expressed 
 by " embanta " — nor does haptizo lift out of the water — 
 that action is expressed by " exairesthai." But a " lift- 
 ing out of the water" is p necessary part of every 
 Baptist dipping, and they tell us it is a part of the 
 divine command, and a type of the resurrection. That 
 is, " emersion " (taking out of the water) which Dr. 
 Conant, page 88, confesses "is not included in the mean- 
 ing of the Greek word," is a part of the divine com- 
 mand, and a type of the resurrection ! When will men 
 cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord ? 
 
41 
 
 Example 23. 
 
 Strabonis Geogr. lib. XII. c. 6, 4 {ed. Tzschucke). 
 
 Ovtoo 6t nspiTtrftrerai padicos to vSoop navrl rep 
 paTttiadevri sis avro ooffte arscpavovs aXobv aveX- 
 KovffiVy eTteiSav naddoffi kvhKov ffxoivtvoy, 
 
 Strabo, bk. XI I. ch. 6, 4, B.C. 60 : 
 
 " The water solidifies so readily around everything that is 
 baptized into it, that they draw up salt-crowns when they let 
 down a circle of rushes." 
 
 Strabo is speaking of the lake Tatta, in Phrygia 
 (which he calls a natural salt- pit). Much importance is 
 attached by Immersionists to this passage because of the 
 preposition " eis" (into) with baptizo. It may be ob- 
 served that this is a very rare construction, though eia 
 is frequently used with bapto, to dip. In the Scriptures 
 baptizo is never used in connection with the phrase eis 
 hudor (into water). One page 245 of " Classic Baptism," 
 Dr. Dale shews that the use of eis in such passages does 
 not prove that baptizo expresses Tnotion, but simply a 
 change into another state of existence. " In any case of 
 baptism," says Dr. Dale, " the baptized object passes out 
 of one position or condition into another." Josephus 
 (Antiq. Bk. 10, ch. 9, sec. 4) says : 
 
 fisfiaTtriff/xeyov sis avaiffdrfffiav ual vjtvov vnc 
 TTJs jaiOrfS, 
 
 " Baptized into insensibility and sleep by drunkenness." 
 
 Does that imply modal action in baptizo ? Clement of 
 Rome says, " The feast passing into drunkenness," mean- 
 ing, as anyone can see, not motion, but a changed condi- 
 tion. In the New Testament we have baptism ** eis " 
 (into) Moses — baptism "eis" (into) Christ — baptism 
 " eis " (into) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost. Not merely "in the name," but 
 

 1 i 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 * I 
 
 
 § 
 
 i 
 
 11 
 
 Ibtv.''^ 
 
 1'. ■ 
 
 ■; ,^r?>'■■• 
 
 |.i' ,'^' 
 
 L '* 
 
 
 
 l''''!;r.-.i:;ji| 
 
 
 ;i'i!t m •'[1 
 
 
 42 
 
 "into the name," as every scholar must admit. But in 
 none of these cases will it be claimed that " eia " gives 
 modal action to baptizo, but simply a change into another 
 state or condition. Dr. Dale illustrates by the English 
 word '*bury." It is certainly a non-modal word, and 
 yet we say "he buried the ball into the wood." In the 
 example from Strabo the motion into the water is ex- 
 pressed by " kathosi " (let down) ; tne motion out of the 
 water is expressed by " anelkousin " (draw up), while the 
 changed condition is expressed by "baptisthenti." There 
 is a " dip " in this passage, but even ^r. Carson, were he 
 to rise from the dead, could not find it in the word 
 baptizo. The baptizing instrumentality in this case was 
 not the water, but the particles of salt which accumu- 
 lated around the circle of rushes producing "salt-crowns." 
 We now come to Diodorus Siculus, and in his writings 
 we find baptizo occurring four times. 
 
 Example 24. 
 Diodori Siculi Biblioth. Hist, lib. XVI. c. 80 {ed. Bekker), 
 '0 TtorafAoz piaiotipcp rep pBvjxati xaracpepo fxevo^ 
 
 TtoWo-ds e/SaTttiQe^ xal /xsra rcov onXoov diavr^x^M^^- 
 
 ovs 6iiq)deipe, 
 
 Diodorus, bk XVI. ch. 80, B.C. SO: 
 
 " The river, rushing down with a more violent current, 
 baptized many, and destroyed them swimming through with 
 their armor." 
 
 Diodorus is here speaking of the defeat of the Cartha- 
 ginian army. The fleeing soldiers were driven into a 
 river swollen by a recent storm, and the water " rushing 
 down " upon them baptized them. Here, then, is a Greek 
 baptism, only thirty years before the time of our Lord. 
 What was the mode ? The most perverse ingenuity, by 
 any amount of philological torture, cannot extort from 
 this passage a confession in favor of dipping. We are 
 distinctly told the swollen river " rushed down " upon 
 
43 
 
 the soldiers. The baptizing element was moved, not the 
 baptized persons. 
 
 Example 25. 
 
 Diodori lib. I. ch. 36. 
 
 Tdov 6e x^P^^^^^ Or/pldDv ra noWa jukv vno rov 
 Ttota/iov TtepiXt^cpdsyra Siacpdeiperai fta7triZ6}A€vay 
 riva 6^ €15 Tovs /xsteojpovs extpevyovTa tottovs 
 dtaffGoQsrau 
 
 Diodorus, bk. I. ch. 36, B.C. 30: 
 
 " Many of the wild animals, overtaken by the river, perish, 
 being baptized ; but some, escaping to the grounds, are saved." 
 
 The author is describing the sudden overflow of the 
 Nile, and consequently the extensive destruction of 
 cattle. What was the mode of this baptism ? Aie the 
 waters, in this case, formed into a sort of inland sea, or 
 vast baptistery, and then the herds of wild animals 
 brought and dipped into and under those waters ? Non- 
 sense. The animals are browsing upon the pasture 
 ground ; the flood of waters rushes upon them with irre- 
 sistible force, a few narrowly effect their escape, but 
 most of them are overwhelmed and perish. Baptists put 
 their subjects into the water, Diodorus brought the 
 waters upon the subjects. 
 
 Example 26. 
 
 Diodori lib. XL c. 18. 
 
 '0 dh vavapx^^ Ttpotjyov/xevos rrfZ ta^sao^ ual Ttpdo- 
 TOS ffvvatpaS jxdxv*^ SiecpSaprf, Xaj^Ttpc^S ayooviaa- 
 fxevoS' ri/s de renos ftaTtriGdei&rfS, rapaxtf natiffx^ 
 TO vavriKOv tc5v papjSapoDv, 
 
 Diodorus, Historical Library, bk. XI. ch. 18, B.C. 30: 
 
 " The commander of the fleet, leading on the line, and first 
 joining battle, was slain after a brilliant conflict ; and his ship 
 being baptized, confusion seized the fleet of the barbarians." 
 
pjr: 
 
 I'M ■ 
 
 44 
 
 This is said of the Persian fleet at the battle of Salamis. 
 The injury received by the ships is here calJed a baptism. 
 And the mode is evident. The assaults of the enemy 
 upon the ships constituted the baptizing instrumentality. 
 
 m 
 
 ^k]] \ 
 
 ■i ' .' 
 
 Example 27. 
 
 Diodori Siculi Biblioth. Hist. lib. I. c. 73 (ed. Bekker). 
 
 Trjv de devripav fioipav oi /SafftXeiS napsiXrfcpaaiv 
 eiz TtpoffodovZ' . . . roi)s 6k idtcoTas did rt)v in tov~ 
 raov svjtopiavy ov /SaTtTiZouffi raU €i(X<popai5, 
 
 Diodorus, hk. /., ch. 78, B.C. SO: 
 
 "The second part the kings have received for public 
 revenue; . . . and on account of the abundant supply of 
 these, they do not baptize the common p. >ple with taxes." 
 
 Once more we ask what was the thing moved in this 
 baptism — the persons baptized or the baptizing instru- 
 mentality ? Even Conant renders by " whelm with taxes," 
 a word which implies that the taxes, that is, the baptiz- 
 ing instrumentality, come upon the people. Observe 
 " eisforais " (taxes) is in the dative without a preposi- 
 tion, and demands this construction. 
 
 
 The Whole Summed Up. 
 
 We have now examined all the known and undoubted 
 instances of baptizo from the earliest recorded occurrence, 
 in Pindar, B.C. 500, up to the time of our Lord. We 
 have endeavored to deduce the import of the word, 
 not from the contradictory testimony of lexicons, or from 
 the careless and ignorant concessions of scholars, who, 
 however erudite on some other subjects, knew little and 
 cared less about the mode or meaning of baptism, but 
 from the actual use of the word. 
 
45 
 
 We have made our reference directly to the original 
 passages in which the word occurs, in both sacred and 
 profane literature. The usus loquendi of a word is the 
 supreme court of appeal by which any proposed mean- 
 inir must ultimately stand or fall. A lexicon definition, 
 or a learned man's opinion is absolutely worthless 
 unless it is sustained by the occurrence of the term. 
 The instances we have examined shew a great variety 
 of meanings, but all expressing a changed state of con- 
 dition, never once mode of action, such as "dip," "plunge" 
 or "immerse." Where the context is given, or the sur- 
 rounding circumstances, a little examination shews 
 that the baptizing element is moved and brought upon 
 the person or thing baptized. In the pure classics the 
 youth in a condition of mental perplexity is a baptized 
 youth ; the man in a condition of drunkenness is a bap- 
 tized man ; the coast in a condition of being overflowed 
 is a baptized coast. There was a different state or con- 
 dition each time, but all were classic Greek baptisms. 
 And as to the mode, there was no dip in effecting these 
 baptisms. In the one case the baptizing instrumentality 
 was the questions ; in the other, the wine ; and in the 
 last, the waves. But the youth was not put into the 
 questions, the questions were put to him ; the man was 
 not plunged into the wune, the wine was put into him ; 
 the coast was not taken up and dipped into the sea, the 
 sea came upon the coast. 
 
 In the Septuagint we, for the first time, find the word 
 used to expross the condition of religious purity. The 
 person in a (ondition of purification from leprosy is a 
 baptized person ; the person in a condition of purifica- 
 tion from the touch of a dead body is a baptized person, 
 and the person in a condition of purification from 
 association with heathen Gentiles is a baptized person. 
 And here, as in the older classics, the baptizing element 
 uniformly comes upon the subject. 
 
 In later Greek, the man in the condition of being 
 overcome by sleep, is a baptized man ; the ship in the 
 
il' I 
 
 
 m 
 
 'II! 
 
 46 
 
 condition of bein^ attacked by enemies or lashed by tlie 
 wild waves, is a baptized ship ; the soldiers exposed to 
 the rushing waters are baptized ; the people over- 
 whelmed with taxcK are baptized ; the vej^etables made 
 into pickles are baptized. And in each case the baptizing' 
 element comes upon the subject. The sleep comes upon 
 the man ; the waves and the assaults come upon the 
 ships ; the waters come upon the soldiers ; the taxes are 
 imposed upon the people, and the brine is poured upon 
 the vegetables. 
 
 There is nc dipping in the Greek, secular or sacred, 
 prior to the Christian era. Classic Greek says it is not 
 in me ; Hellenistic Greek says it is not in me ; and later 
 Greek says it is not in me. If any Baptist denies this, 
 we demand in support of his denial, not scraps of 
 " opinions," or ignorant concessions, or mutilated quota- 
 tions, but the actual instance of the word. We remind 
 him also that his position demands not one instance 
 merely, but every instance, without one exception, to be 
 an instance of dipping. It is impossible, however, to 
 find one. Baptists make haptizo express a definite act, 
 the Greeks made it express a definite condition ; Bap- 
 tists put the subject into the water, the Greeks uni- 
 formly brought the water upon the subject. 
 
 Our argument is inductive, and our conclusion is co- 
 extensive with our premises. We examine carefully 
 each instance of the occurrence of the word, and we 
 predicate of the whole what we have proved true of 
 each case ; and our conclusion is that there is no sen- 
 tence in Greek literature, prior to the time of Christ, 
 where any kind of baptism is effected . by the person or 
 thing baptized being applied to the baptizing element. 
 The baptizing element is uniformly represented as being 
 applied to the person or thing baptized. There is, 
 therefore, no "dipping" for baptism up to this time. 
 Baptism, in the classics, is always a word of power, 
 indicating a changed state or condition ; and never do 
 we find that changed state or condition brought about 
 after the manner of the modern Baptists. 
 
47 
 
 Mode and Meaning in the New Testament. 
 
 When we come to the New Testament, we find 
 hdptizo occurring about eighty times, baptisma some 
 twenty times, and baptismos ^ 'mes. But in the 
 
 words of Dr. Charles Hodge, America's greatest theo- 
 lof^ian, "so far as the New Testament is concerned, there 
 is not a single case where baptism necessarily implies 
 immersion." (Systematic Theology, Vol. III., p. 536 ) 
 Not one instance, or command, or metaphor, or even an 
 allusion do we find that can be logically construed into 
 a sanction of " dipping." In the Scriptures the word is 
 used as indicating an effect infinitely grander, nobler, 
 more powerful than any water-dipping. Here, just as 
 in the classics, the word is non-modal ; but while in the 
 classics the effect indicated is usually of a bp.d, low, or 
 destructive nature, in the New Testament it has a 
 nobler, a consecrated, a spiritualized meaning. Look at 
 some of the instances. The apostles were baptized with 
 the Spirit, when their condition was completely changed 
 by the Spirit of God. They were baptized with fire, 
 when by that purifying element, their dross was purged 
 away, and they were brought into a new state of mind, 
 spake with tongues of fire and became red-hot men. 
 Paul tells us (1 Cor. 10 : 2) that the children of Israel 
 were baptized, when passing "on dry ground" (Ex. 14: 
 16-22) through the sea. They could not have been 
 dipped or immersed " on dry ground." They were 
 brought out of a condition of distrust and rebellion into 
 a condition of conp'ete submission to God and His ser- 
 vant, Moses; so we read (Ex. 14: 31), " Then the people 
 feared the Lord and believed the Lord, and His servant, 
 Moses." Noah and his family were baptized in the ark 
 (1 Peter 3: 20, 21), when the wickedness which threa- 
 tened to sweep them away was removed, and they were 
 anew consecrated in covenant to God — their condition 
 changed. Our Lord Jesus Christ was baptized with His 
 sufferings (Luke 12 : 50), when His state or condition 
 
T 
 
 
 I: 
 
 \\ 
 
 fill 
 
 I • 
 
 ;..' f^ 
 
 r i 
 
 ^ il!!l' 
 
 A 
 :! » 
 
 111 
 
 i.if»J 
 
 i'! 
 
 I'l!:''' 
 
 ;'!i| l!:i! 
 
 
 k 4 
 
 ■'JiSiJ 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 ,I|,H 
 
 i; I 
 
 !< I { 
 
 48 
 
 was changed, by His being made perfect through suffer- 
 ing (Heb. 2 : 10). Every believer is baptized with the 
 Spirit, that is, his powers and faculties are brought under 
 the purifying, sanctifying influence of the Spirit. We 
 are baptized with water, when we are symbolically 
 brought into this changed state towards God. Water 
 itself does not effect the change, but shews it forth, or 
 makes it manifest. Baptism with water symbolizes that 
 state or condition of spiritual purity effected in the soul 
 by the Holy Ghost applying to the soul the cleansin;^' 
 blood of Christ, which is the "blood of sprinkling" (Heb. 
 12 : 24 . 1 Peter 1:2). 1 Cor. 12 : 13 tells us what ?— 
 that the one baptism of Eph. 4 : 5 is the baptism by 
 ** one Spirit." Water baptism is onrj the sign or symbol 
 of that one baptism. I crave the reader's clos*^ attention 
 to this point. A clear apprehension of the distinction 
 between the Spirit or real baptism, and water or symbol 
 baptism, would save from the grave errors into which 
 Baptists, Campbellites, Dunkards, Christadelphians and 
 other immersionist sects have fallen. In the Scriptures 
 we find " one circumcision " (Rom. 2 : 28, 29), and " one 
 sign or symbol of circumcision " (Rom. 4 : 11) ; one Pass- 
 over (1 Cor. 5 : 7), and one sign or symbol of tha Pass- 
 over (Ex. 12); one real supper, spiritual in its nature 
 (John 6 : 53, 54), and one symbol supper — of bread and 
 wine, symbols of His body and blood. So there is " one 
 baptism " (Eph. 4 : 5 and 1 Cor. 12, 13), and one symbol 
 of baptism, that administered with water in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 
 Aijd our position is that both in symbol, and in real 
 baptism the baptizing element or agency always comes 
 upon the person. The Scripture represents man as the 
 passive recipient, and the Holy Ghost as the agent ever 
 active in applying to the soul the blessings of redemp- 
 tion. But the immersion theory reverses this by repre- 
 senting man as the active agent, and the Holy Ghost as 
 merely the passive recipient of those bapti^^ed not by 
 Him but within Him. 
 
 Ir;:i jljlj 
 
"'^F* 
 
 49 
 
 Let us open our Bibles and hoar what the Lord saith. 
 as to the mode of baptism. The apostles were baptized 
 with the Holy Ghost (Acts 1:5), and the Spirit was 
 "poured out" on them (Acts 2:1G, 17-33); tney were 
 baptized with fire (Matt. 3:7), and a tongue of fire 
 came down and "sat upon each of them." Three 
 thousand receive water baptism during the few closing 
 hours of a single day, and in a city where there 
 was no place that opposing and dominant Jews would 
 permit to be used for immersion. Paul was baptized 
 in his own room (Acts 9 : 17, 18), wher^ he could 
 not have been immersed. The inspired record says 
 "anastas ebaptiathe" having stood up he was baptized. 
 The jailer of Philippi was converted in the jail, at 
 the midnight hour, and we are told that there " he was 
 baptized, he and all his straightway " (Acts 16 : 33). No 
 immersion bore. Cornelius and his household having 
 had the Spirit poured out upon them, water was brought 
 and poured out upon them as an emblem of this spiritual 
 baptism (Acts 10 : 47, 48. See Alford in loc). The child- 
 ren of Israel were baptized with or by the cloud as the 
 symbol of their baptism by the Spirit, and the cloud 
 •' poured out water " upon them as it passed from before 
 them to the rear (Psa. 77 : 17 ; also Judges 5 : 4). En, as 
 occurring in 1 Cor. 10 : 2, often means with or hy. See 
 Luke 11 : 20 ; 14 : 31 ; 22 : 49 ; Acts 1 : 5 ; 4 : 7 ; Rev. 
 6:8; 13 : 10 ; etc. Noah and his family were baptized 
 with the flood, and they rode safe and dry over its waves 
 (1 Peter 3 : 20, 21). The Saviour was baptized with His 
 sufferings (Luke 12 : 50) when His sufferings were "laid 
 upon Him " (Isa. 53 : 6). The Great Baptizer is Christ 
 Himself, and He baptizes His people with the Holy 
 Ghost when He "pours out" the Spirit upon them 
 (Titus 3 : 5, 6, R. V.) 
 
 From all this it will be seen that the word haptizo in 
 the Scriptures, as in all preceding literature, has no 
 specific reference to mode, but expresses state or con- 
 dition brought about, as the context shews, by the bap- 
 4 
 
50 
 
 itv '^ 
 
 >i 
 
 il 
 
 
 li: ' r-l, 
 
 '!;i!l 
 
 
 tizing element, whether fire, suffering, water, or the 
 Spirit coming upon the subject. The word does not 
 mean " to dip," or " to immerse," neither does it mean "to 
 sprinkle" or " to pour." Immerse, sink, dip, often occur 
 in the Old and New Testaments, and the Apocrypha, and 
 are always rendered by the Greek words, enduo, pontizo, 
 huthizo, dupto, katapontizo, Jcataduo or bapto (Psa. 69 : 
 2,15; 124:4; Ex. 15 :4, 5, 10 ; 2 Mac. 12 :4 ; 1 Tim. 6:9; 
 Luke 5:7; Matt. 18 : 6 ; 14 : 13 ; 26 : 23 ; Mark 14 : 20; 
 John 13 : 26.) When the sacred writers would express 
 the idea of dip, etc., they always use one or other of the 
 above woi/ds, and never use baptizo ; and when they 
 refer to the religious rite they always use baptizo, but 
 never any of the above terms. There is no exception to 
 this rule. Could anything more clearly prove that there 
 is something in baptism that cannot be expressed by any 
 of these words ? If " dipping is baptizing, and baptizing 
 is dipping," it is inconceivable that baptizo should never 
 once be used interchangeably with words expressing dip, 
 etc. Baptists challenge us to substitute " pour " or 
 "sprinkle" for baptizo. Our reply is that we have 
 never made the word baptizo the equivalent of " pour " 
 or " sprinkle," or any other word of mere action. This 
 would be to fall into the same blunder as immer- 
 sionists, who see in the word, "mode and nothing 
 but mode.' Christian baptism is first, a powerful change 
 in the soul produced by God's Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13), 
 and then water is used as a symbol to make manifest 
 this internal change. But in every case, without ex- 
 ception, whether in real or in symbol baptism, the 
 baptizing element comes upon the person baptized ; the 
 person baptized is never spoken of as dipped or plunged 
 into the element. "If anything out of mathematics," says 
 Dr. Dale, " Christie Baptism," p. 22, " was ever proved, 
 it has been proved that this word baptizo does not mean 
 to dip ; that it never did, that it never can so mean 
 without there be first an utter metamorphosis as to its 
 essential character." The mode of the Spirit's baptism 
 
51 
 
 is always " pouring," " shedding forth," " sprinkling," 
 "coming down like rain," or "like showers," "falling 
 upon " "(Isa. 44 : 3 ; Ezek. 36 : 25-27 ; Psa. 72 : 6 ; Hos. 
 14 : 5 ; Joel 2 : 28, 29 ; John 1 : 32 ; Acts 2 : 17-33 ; 
 10 : 38 ; John 20 : 22). 
 
 Spiritual — that is, real baptism — is always by the 
 Spirit coming upon the person baptized, and the symbol 
 conforms to the real — the element comes upon the sub- 
 ject. The figure is as familiar as it is beautiful. Just 
 as the rain descending out of heaven penetrates the 
 earth and makes it fruitful, so the symbol of sprinkling 
 or pouring sets forth the Spirit of life from God im- 
 parted to the dead, entering the heart, purging its cor- 
 ruption, and creating new life and growth. 
 
 Having traced haptizo in its mode and meaning from 
 its first recorded occurrence in Pindar, B.C. 500, up 
 through the pure classics, the Septuagint, the later 
 Greek, and the New Testament, we might now fairly 
 close our argument with the conclusion that, instead of 
 the word meaning " dip and only dip in all Greek litera- 
 ture," no Greek writer, inspired or uninspired, ever uses 
 the word in that senst. But as haptizo frequently 
 occurs in some writers immediately following the New 
 Testament era, we will examine a few instances in order 
 to illustrate and confirm what we have shewn to be 
 its meaning up to this time. 
 
 Baptizo in the Post-Apostolic Era. 
 
 Of all the examples later than the New Testament, 
 even Conant translates about one-half by the words 
 "whelm" and " overwhelm," which imply the applica- 
 tion of the baptizing element to the subject. Josephus 
 was a Jewish priest, who was made prisoner by Titus 
 in the war which ended in the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem. He wrote his Jewish " Antiquities " and his 
 " History " at Rome after A.D. 70. The word haptizo 
 occurs in his writings fourteen times. We have al- 
 
sa 
 
 111 
 
 iiilliiiiS 
 
 Hi 11 
 
 ready, on pajjje 31, quoted fiom him where he speaks 
 of vessels and men being baptized by the storm-raised 
 waves, but these vessels and men were not sunk. The 
 water came upon them. 
 
 In his narrative of the storm that followed the ship in 
 which Jonah sailed (Antiq. Bk. 9, ch. 10, sec. 2) Josephus 
 says : 
 
 ^Offov ovTtco /liWovro^ /SaTrriQsffdai rov (THacpov?. 
 " The ship being just about to be baptized " — 
 
 that is, by the storm-raised waves dashing over it. The 
 ship was not necessarily injured or ruined by the bap- 
 tism. In his Antiq. Bk. 4, ch. 4, sec. 6, he says : 
 
 Tov5 ovv a/to veupov /x€jiita(T/iSvov5f rrjs ricppaz 
 oXiyov €15 Tttjyrfv €vievt€S ual v(X(Too7roVy PaTtriiJavrh 
 re Hal tf}s re^pas taurrf? eis TtrjyrjVy sppaivov rpirri 
 Kal e/SSojjtTf rc3v j^jaepcov, 
 
 " Any persons being defiled by a <lead body, they put a 
 little of these ashes and hyssop into spring water, and bap- 
 tizing with these ashes in water, sprinkled them on the third 
 day and on the seventh." 
 
 This is a literal translation f ro)n the Greek. Josephus 
 calls the purifying rite a baptizing, and he states the 
 mode to have been " sprinkling." He does not depart 
 from the previous usage of the word. Conant, on page 
 33, remodels the Greek text of this passage, and then 
 attempts " to baptize hyssop " instead of the " man defiled 
 by the dead." Thus he takes an unwarranted liberty 
 with the text. He contradicts Moses (Num. 19 : 20), and 
 Paul (Heb. 9 : 13), both of whom tell us that baptism 
 from the dead was to be effected by sprinkling. But 
 anything to save dipping. 
 
 Plutarch was born A.D. 50, and wrote probably about 
 A.D. 80. He uses haptizo fifteen times. An instance 
 
63 
 
 irom him of " baptism " without "possibility of sinking " 
 will be found on page 30. In his Life of Marcellus, ch. 
 15, he draws a sharp contrast between the " act of sink 
 in^ " and " baptizing." (See Conant, Ex. 3.) In his 
 ** Physical Questions," he gives us a baptism by pouring. 
 It is Conant, Ex. 66. Here is the Greek : 
 
 J id ri Tc5 oi'vcpdaXaffffav Trapax^ovcTi^ Hal xfiV^f^^"^ 
 tivot \kyovGiv dXisiS KO^iaOffvai Ttpofftattovra fian- 
 ti^siv rov Jiovvffov Ttpos rrfv ddXattav ^ 
 
 And here is Conant's translation, which we readily 
 accept : 
 
 " Why do they pour sea-water into wine, and say that men 
 received an oracle commanding to baptize Bacchus (wine) in 
 or at the sea *?" 
 
 This passage, as with the arms of Samson, takes hold 
 of the pillars of immersion, and shakes them into hope- 
 less ruin. Dr. Carson's strong words on another passage 
 suofgest themselves, with a new application : " It would 
 require the ingenuity of Satan " to put a dip here. The 
 water was " poured " into the wine to baptize it, that 
 is, by making it less intoxicating. As their warrant 
 for so doing, Plutarch relates about the oracle command- 
 ing to baptize wine at the sea. 
 
 We may look at Conant, Ex. 86. It is from ^sop's 
 Fables, of which the date is uncertain. A man is repre- 
 sented as taking revenge on a troublesome fox. The 
 Greek reads : 
 
 Kai arvTteiov iXaicp panriffa^y rrj Hspncp tavxr}^ 
 TtpoadrfGa^y vcprfips TtvpL 
 
 "And baptizing tow with oil, he bound it to her tail, and 
 set fire to it." 
 

 I.' 
 
 h' . I. ' 
 
 m 
 
 I 
 
 
 \i 4 
 
 
 'ill'fl'lf 
 
 |:!i!''r^ 
 
 '••■(I 
 
 ! 
 
 lii:.:;;:;,!i 
 
 it'll Wu 
 
 ,! " 
 I!! 
 
 ill 
 
 iliiiii 
 Hi 
 
 ! f 
 
 \ 
 
 ■I'll! '■, 
 III 
 
 54 
 
 Oonant translates " dipping tow in oil." But this is 
 inadmissible. There is no " in oil " in the Greek. The 
 student will observe that " elaia " (oil) is in the instru- 
 mental dative, without a preposition, and cannot denote 
 a receptive element. The construction is not an uncom- 
 mon one. In James 5: 14 we read, "Anointing him 
 with oil (elaio) ; in Matt. 6: 13 we have, "Anointed with 
 oil {elaio) many that were sick ; " in Luke 7 : 46 we 
 have, " My head with oil (elaio) thou did not anoint." 
 Would any one say " anoint my head in oil ? " Yet 
 that would be as reasonable as saying that the tow was 
 " dipped in oil." The anointing was by pouring (Mark 
 14 : 3-8) and this tow was baptized with oil by having 
 a little of the oil poured on it to make it burn longer 
 and more intensely. So to-day, some pour coal oil 
 upon kindling wood to facilitate its burning. The oil is 
 poured on the wood, not the wood dipped into the oil. 
 
 What about other early instances ? Irenaeus (AD. 
 170) in his work, " Ad Her," Bk. 3, ch. 17, uses the fall- 
 ing of rain and "pouring of water on dry wheat flour" 
 as types of baptism with water. 
 
 Origen (A.D. 240) represents the wood on the altar, 
 over which water was poured at the command of Elijah 
 (1 Kings 18 : 33), as having been baptized. 
 
 "Baptism by tears" (dia dakruon) was a fiequent 
 expression with the early Christians. (See Dr. Dale's 
 " Patristic Baptism," p. 514.) It would be nonsense to 
 speak of a man, in fact or in figure, as dipped into his 
 own tears. 
 
 Cyprian, who was constituted Bishop of Carthage, 
 A.D. 248, speaking of some who were baptized by 
 sprinkling, quotes Ezek. 36 : 24, in justification of the 
 praMtiee, " I will sprinkle clean water upon you and ye 
 shall be clean." 
 
 The water and blood shed from Christ's side were 
 "baptisms," and are so called by Origen, Tertullian, 
 Ambrose, Athanasius, John of Damascus, and the Syrian 
 fathers. 
 
65 
 
 We are now prepared to conclude with Dr. C. Hod,^e, 
 Volume III., page 526 (slightly condensed), " In the 
 classics, in the Septuagint, in the Apocryphal writings 
 of the Old Testament, in the New Testament, and in 
 the writings of the Greek fathers, the word haptizo is 
 used with such latitude of meaning as to prove the 
 assertion that the command to baptize is a command to 
 immerse, to be utterly unauthorized and unreasonable." 
 
 The Origin of Immersion for Baptism. 
 
 But if the validity of baptism in its Scriptural form 
 by sprinkling was universally acknowledged by the 
 Greek fathers, we enquire how came the Scriptural 
 mode to be generally abandoned in the early centuries, 
 and immersion to be substituted for it. The origin of 
 dipping for baptism is not difficult to trace. Even in 
 the apostles' days there was a disposition on the 
 part of many to depart from the simplicity of the 
 Gospel. This was particularly the case with regard to 
 the sacraments of the Church. The apostle sharply 
 reproves the Corinthians (1 Cor. 11) for their abuse of 
 the Lord's Supper. And in the first chapter of the 
 same epistle he utters this strange and significant decla- 
 ration, " I thank God that I baptized none of you, but 
 Crispus and Gains, least any should say that I had bap- 
 tized in my own name." 
 
 But in the second and third centuries we find the state 
 of things far more deplorable. The disposition to ascribe 
 peculiar virtue to external forms had gone on constantly 
 increasing until, by-and-by, nude immersions, accom- 
 panied with exorcism, anointing, and every species of 
 superstition, fairly ran riot in unseemly and scandalous 
 practice. It was thought that there was a saving virtue 
 in the very water baptism. Just as it was believed that 
 the bread and wine after consecration became the real 
 body and blood of Christ, so it was believed that the 
 water of baptism after the invocation possessed the real 
 
56 
 
 t'i..T 
 
 i-*^ 
 
 '! i 
 
 
 'lu 
 
 '^'•[:M 
 
 ' .."I'l 
 
 liillill! 
 
 presence of the Spirit. The natural conclusion from this 
 was that the more water the better, and that the water 
 should be applied to the whole body so that the regen- 
 eration might be complete. We, therefore, now find 
 trine immersions in a nude state, accompanied with 
 exorcism, unction, the giving of salt and milk to the 
 candidate, clothing him in snow-white robes, and crown- 
 ing him with evergreens. Mark well this fact, the very 
 first mention of " dipping," as a mode of water baptism, 
 is "threefold, dipping," "in a nude state," "for the pr.rpose 
 of washing away the sins of the soul," accompanied by 
 the " sign of the cross," " anointing with oil," *' blessing 
 the water," and other superstitious practices. 
 
 The first person to mention dipping for baptism is 
 TertuUian, and in his " De Corona Militis" Tertullian 
 frankly acknowledges that for trine immersion, oblations 
 for the dead, the sign of the cross, etc, there was no 
 Scripture authority. His words are : " Harem et aliarum 
 ejusmodi disci plinarium silegem expostules scripturarum, 
 nullum invenies:" " For these and such like rules if thou 
 requirest a law in the Scriptures, thou shalt find none." 
 Again he says, " Dehinc ter mergitamur amplius respon- 
 dentej, quam Dominus in Evangelio determinavit : " 
 "Then we are three times immersed, answering somewhat 
 more than the Lord prescribed in the Gospel." Baptist 
 writers try to limit this confession to the " three times," 
 but when we remember the well known fact that in the 
 Old Latin Bible which Tertullian used, baptism is never 
 called an immersion, we cannot doubt what he meant by 
 the words, "more than the Lord prescribed in the Gospel." 
 When Tertullian follows the law of Scripture, he speaks 
 of " two baptisms (water and blood) poured from the 
 Saviours side" (" De Baptismo" ch. 16); and of the 
 " aspersion of water " in baptism, " periginem aquae " 
 (De Poeintentia, 6). 
 
 Baptists are fond of claiming the history of the early 
 practice of the Church as wholly in their favor. But 
 there is no early or ancient authority for immersion, 
 
67 
 
 from Terfcullian onward, that is not also an authority 
 for the various superstitions that, from the beginning, 
 accompanied immersion. " There is no historical fact," 
 savs Robinson, a Baptist historian, " better authenticated 
 than this." 
 
 Thus, immersion as a mode of baptism came into use. 
 It did not originate in the supposed fact that the early 
 Christian fathers understood the word haptizo to mean 
 "dip" or "immerse," or from any supposed Scripture 
 authority for this mode. They believed in the " real 
 presence of the Spirit in the blessed water," and they 
 believed that the best way to secure the saving efficacy 
 (vis baptismatis) of the " blessed water " was to put the 
 person naked into it three times. It took three dips and 
 a great deal more to constitute one " ancient " baptism. 
 
 immersion, 
 
 Exclusive Dipping a Modern Theory. 
 
 For sixteen hundred years after the commission to bap- 
 tize was given, there is no evidence that any man ever 
 put any other man, woman or child into and under 
 water a single time and called such action "Christian 
 baptism." Again, for sixteen hundred years after the 
 commission was promulgated, there is no record that 
 any man or set of men ever called in question the 
 Scripture authority for baptism by sprinkling. The 
 evidence for immersion stands wholly in the super- 
 stitious practices of the Catholic Church for more than 
 a thousand years, in the bold assumptions of modern 
 immersionists, and in the unwarranted concessions of a 
 certain class of writers and speakers. But these prac- 
 tices, assumptions and concessions are unsustained by 
 the historical usage of the word, and are utterly at 
 variance with the teaching of Scripture. 
 
 The Greek and Roman Churches, while all through 
 the " dark ages " practising threefold immersions, with 
 many other superstitions, for baptism, always maintained 
 the Scripture authority for baptism by effusion, aspersion 
 
^M 
 
 .1 . I 
 
 ■^;ii; 
 
 Mil 
 
 
 ■'■'ili ^M,,,, 
 
 
 fe*-' 
 
 1: p 
 
 IM 
 
 ll i 
 
 ll'l' 
 
 5« 
 
 or sprinkling. I have before me " Notes on the Rubrics 
 of the Roman Ritual," by the Rev. James O'Kane. He 
 is one of the highest authority in the Roman Church. 
 In Sec. 176, O'Kane tells us that the Greeks " very fre- 
 quently baptized by effusion," and that in the Russo- 
 Greek Church " both modes (immersion and effusion) are 
 in use." In Sec. 177, O'Kane says, "It is quite certain 
 that from the very beginning baptism was frequently 
 conferred by effusion. * * * It is the common opinion 
 of theologians that this (aspersion or sprinkling) was 
 the mode us jd by the apostles in baptizing the multitude 
 of converts mentioned in Acts 2 : 41." He then gives 
 the following quotation from the Catechism oi* the 
 Council of Trent (1546): " By the common custom and 
 practice of the Church, there are three ways of admin- 
 istering baptism — immersion, effusion f,nd aspersion ; and 
 that administered in any of these three ways it is valid, 
 * * * aspersion, the manner in which there is reason 
 to believe Peter administered baptism when on one dav 
 he converted and baptized three thousand persons (Acts 
 2 : 41)." The Greek and Roman Churches never claimed 
 that immersion was the only mode of baptism, and never 
 denied the Scriptural warrant for sprinkling as a mode 
 of baptism. Prior to A.D. 1600, no man, or class of men 
 of whom we have any record, regarded dipping as any- 
 thing more than a mode of water baptism, or denied the 
 Scriptural character of baptism by sprinkling. But we 
 have seen that in all Greek literature up to the time of 
 Christ, and for two hundred years after, ^her^ is not a 
 single instance v/here haptizo means " to dip," that is, " to 
 put into water and take out immediately." Dr. Kendrick, 
 Baptist, and fi, professor of Greek in the Rochester Uni- 
 versity, says in the Baptist Quarterly for April, 1869, 
 " Baptizo never takes out what it puts into the water." 
 And Dr. Conant, on p. 88, says, " there is no emersion 
 (taking out of the water) in the Greek word." "Immer- 
 sion" that is, putting into and under water, without 
 " emersion" a taking out of the water, can only mean 
 
69 
 
 to drown. Was this what our Lord commanded in the 
 commission (Matt. 28 : 19) ? 
 
 Buried with Christ. 
 
 Baptism, we are told, is a burial. And the ordinary 
 Baptist imagines he has vanquished all opposition when 
 he refers to Rom. 6 : 4 and Col. 2 : 12. But there is 
 no reference in these passages to water-baptism.* In 
 1 Cor. 12 : 13, we read, " by one Spirit are we all bap- 
 tized into one body." It is to this baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost that the apostle refers, as is evident from the 
 effects ascribed to the baptism. In Col. 3 : 3, the apostle 
 says, " Ye are dead and your life is hid (yes, burr \) with 
 Christ in God." Being baptized with the Holy Ghost, 
 we are in point of law one with Christ. Thus the 
 apostle savs, " Crucified with Christ " (Rom. 6:6); 
 " Sufferers \irith Christ" (Rom. 8:17); "Dead with 
 Christ " (Rom. 6:8); " Buried with Christ " (Rom. 
 6:4); "Quickened with Christ" (Eph. 2:5); "Raised 
 with Christ " (Eph. 2:6);" Seated with Christ " (Eph. 
 3:6); "Glorified with Christ" (Rom. 8:17). All 
 these passages bring before us the indissoluble union 
 between the believing soul and the Saviour, through 
 which we are " dead to sin," and can " live no longer 
 therein." Not by water, but by the Spirit of the Lord 
 are we crucified, dead, buried, and risen with Christ. 
 Let us pray for this baptism, and may the Spirit be 
 poured out upon us, and the " blood of sprinkling " be 
 applied to every heart. 
 
 *'t'or a full discussion of Rom. 6:4, and Col. 2:12, see the 
 Author's "Immersion, a Romish Invention," pp. 50-55. 
 
 ' emersion