Books: To Infidelity and Back
H >>
Henry F. Lutz >> To Infidelity and Back
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12
As already stated, I was first led to think on this subject while I
studied New Testament Greek under President Cary, of the Meadville
Theological School. When we came to the word _baptizoo_, Dr. Cary
told the class that all Greek scholars of note agree that the meaning
of the word in the mouth of Jesus was _to immerse_. This statement
was a great surprise to me, and I decided to discover for myself
whether this was the fact or not. This was the beginning of my
investigation of the subject of baptism. I found that Dr. Cary was
correct in his statement. What influenced me greatly was the fact
that the German rationalists, who are recognized as among the best
scholars of the world, and who are perfectly impartial on this
subject, as they do not care what the Bible teaches about baptism,
all say that baptism is immersion, without ever hinting at a
possibility for difference of opinion. I investigated the matter for
several years, as I found opportunity, until there was not the shadow
of a doubt left in my mind that immersion is New Testament baptism.
While a student at Oberlin Theological Seminary, I found that all the
authorities they used in New Testament Greek, taught immersion, while
their churches practise sprinkling. In studying Hebrews in the Greek,
we used Dr. Westcott's commentary. When we came to Heb. 10:22,
"having our bodies washed with pure water," Dr. Westcott said this
referred to the "laver of regeneration" or the primitive practice of
immersion. When we studied Romans in Greek, we used Dr. Sanday's
International Critical Commentary. The professor told us it was the
very best and probably would be for years to come. When we came to
Rom. 6:4, "buried with him through baptism," Dr. Sanday never raised
a doubt about the meaning, but in eloquent words spoke about the
beautiful representation of burial and resurrection with Christ in
baptism. This astonished me very much, as Drs. Westcott and Sanday
were noted Episcopalian scholars, and the Episcopal churches practise
sprinkling. We used Dr. Thayer's New Testament Greek lexicon, which
the professor informed us was the very best in the English language.
This lexicon defined _baptizoo_ as meaning _to dip_, and never hinted
that sprinkling or pouring might he its meaning. As I said above, I
found Dr. Cary correct in claiming that all Greek scholars of note
agree that the meaning of the word in the mouth of Jesus was _to
immerse_, and I have never been able to get hold of a single New
Testament lexicon that defines _baptizoo_ as ever meaning to sprinkle
or pour.
The following chart and facts will help us to get at the truth about
the meaning of the Greek word _baptizoo_ without quoting from a long
list of lexicons:
[Illustration: A STUDY IN MEANING OF WORDS.]
You notice in the chart that we have three separate and distinct
words in the Greek for immersion, sprinkling and pouring; and these
words have their primary or proper, secondary or tropical meanings,
all of which must be differentiated. The primary or proper meaning
has reference to specific acts, the secondary meaning refers to
things done by means of these specific acts, while the tropical or
metaphorical meaning departs from the specific meaning of the words
and therefore cannot have reference to the specific outward acts
indicated by the words. For this reason it is a law of language,
recognized by all scholars, that you must give a word its primary or
proper meaning when it is employed in commanding an outward act,
unless the context demands another meaning.
Notice the English words _shoot_, _hang_ and _poison_. These express
specific outward acts; and, then, in their secondary meaning, they
mean to kill, but always to kill in the way indicated by the primary
meaning of the word. A man can be hung, shot or poisoned without
being killed; but if it is reported that he was hung, shot or
poisoned, we would all understand that he was killed. However, you
cannot conceive of words so changing their meaning, that when it is
said a man was hung, it means that he was shot, or when it is said he
was poisoned, it means he was hung. No more is it conceivable that
when the Greek word _baptizoo_ (to immerse) was used, it meant to
cleanse by sprinkling (_rantizoo_), or when the word _rantizoo_ (to
sprinkle) was used, it meant to cleanse by immersing (_baptizoo_).
These words refer primarily to separate and distinct outward acts. It
is true they may meet in their secondary meaning in the idea _to
cleanse_; but they always refer to cleansing in the way indicated by
the primary meaning of the word used. When they travel so far from
their primary or proper meaning, which has reference to specific
outward acts, that their meaning is said to be tropical or
metaphorical, they lose their specific idea and have no longer any
reference to the specific acts denoted by the words.
It is true that words can and do often change or enlarge their
meaning. But this is always to supply a need created by the lack of a
proper word to express an associated idea. Now, both the specific and
general ideas with reference to the application of water are so
copiously supplied with words in the Greek, that they preclude the
necessity of changing the meaning of a word like _baptizoo_ to supply
such a need. We have _louoo_, to wash or bathe the body; _niptoo_, to
wash a part of the body, as the hands, feet, face, etc.; _plunoo_, to
wash clothes; _brechoo_, to wet, to rain; _katharizoo_, to cleanse;
_ekcheoo_, to pour; _rantizoo_, to sprinkle; _baptizoo_, to immerse,
etc.
Thus we have a threefold guard to keep _baptizoo_ to its primary or
proper meaning of _to dip_ or _immerse_. First, an abundance of Greek
words to express every general and specific idea about the
application of water, except that of immersion; second, the fact that
a tropical meaning of a word cannot refer to the specific outward act
indicated by the word; and third, the law of interpretation which
demands that a word be given its primary or proper meaning in
commandments, or plain narrative, unless the context expressly
demands a different meaning.
The above definitions of the word _baptizoo_ are taken from Dr.
Thayer's "New Testament Greek Lexicon." In reply to letters inquiring
about Dr. Thayer's "New Testament Greek Lexicon," the following
answers-were received. It is the "best" (Professor Hodge, of
Princeton); it is the "very best" (Dr. Alexander, of Vanderbilt
University); "nothing can compare with it" (Dr Hersman, president of
the Southwestern Presbyterian University). This opinion is
practically made unanimous from the fact that Dr. Thayer's Lexicon is
used at all of the leading schools in the country.
A request for an authoritative lexicon that gives "sprinkle" or
"pour" as a meaning of _baptizoo_, elicited the following answers:
"There is no such lexicon" (Professor Humphreys, of the University of
Virginia, and Professor D'ooge, of Colby University); "I know of
none" (Professor Flagg, of Cornell); "I do not know of any"
(Professor Tyler, of Amherst). "_Baptizoo_ means _to immerse_. All
lexicographers and critics of any note are agreed in this."--_Dr.
Moses Stuart._
Thus we learn, through the testimony of experts, without consulting
all the numerous Greek lexicons, that they define the word _baptizoo_
as meaning _to immerse_ and that none of them say it means _to
sprinkle_ or _to pour_.
The great mass of Christians know nothing about the Greek experts who
make the lexicons, but are much better acquainted with and influenced
by the great church leaders and church standards. Therefore we
present the following quotations:
_Scholars and Churches Admit that Christ Taught Immersion._
NOTE.--These quotations are taken from a tract of mine on baptism.
I. _Council of Toledo_, 633 (Catholic): "We observe a single
immersion in baptism."
2. _Council of Cologne_, 1280 (Catholic): "That he who baptizes when
he immerses the candidate in water," etc.
3. _Martini_ (Roman Catholic): "In all of the pontificals and rituals
I have seen (except that of Madeleine de Beulieu), and I have seen
many, ancient as well as more recent, immersion is prescribed."
4. _Dollinger_ (Roman Catholic): "Baptism was administered by an
entire immersion in water." (Chu. History, vol. 2, p. 294.) "A mere
pouring or sprinkling was never thought of." (First Age of Chu., p.
318.) "Baptism by immersion continued to be the prevailing practice
of the church as late as the fourteenth century." (Hist. Ch., vol. 2,
p. 295.)
5. _Ritual of Greek Catholic Church_: "The priest immerses him,
saying the servant of God is immersed, in the name of the Father,"
etc.
6. _Russian Catechism_ (Greek Catholic): "This they hold to be a
point necessary, that no part of the child be undipped in water,"
etc.
7. _Alex. De Stourdza_ (native Greek): "The verb baptize, _immergo_,
has, in fact, but one sole acceptation. It signifies, literally and
always, to plunge. Baptism and immersion are, therefore, identical,
and to say baptism is by aspersion is as if one should say, immersion
by aspersion, or any other absurdity of the same nature." (Con. sur
LaDoc. et L'Esprit, p. 87.)
8. _Dr. Kyriasko_, of University of Athens, Greece: "The verb baptize
in the Greek language never has the meaning of to pour or to
sprinkle, but invariably that of to dip." (Letter to C. G. Jones,
Lynchburg, Va.)
9. _Syrian Ritual_ (Nestorians): "The priest immerses him in water,
saying such a one is baptized in the name of the Father," etc.
10. _Martin Luther_: "Baptism is a Greek word. In Latin it can be
translated immersion, as when we plunge something into water, that it
may be completely covered with water; they ought to have been
completely immersed." (The Sacrament of Baptism.)
11. _Lutheran Catechism_, p. 216: "In what did this act (baptism)
consist?" Answer: "The one to be baptized was first immersed in
water, signifying death, and then he was drawn out again and was
dressed with a new dress, as if he now were a different new being."
12. _John Calvin_ (Presbyterian): "The word baptize signifies to
immerse, and it is certain that the rite of immersion was observed by
the ancient church." (Inst. Book 4, c. 15.)
13. _Richard Baxter_ (Presbyterian): "It is commonly confessed by us
to the Anabaptists, as our commentators declare, that in the
Apostles' time the baptized were dipped over head in the water."
(Dis. Right to Sac., p. 70.)
14. _Dr. W. D. Powell_, while in Athens, Greece, wrote: "I found that
all churches in Greece--the Presbyterian included--are compelled to
immerse candidates for baptism, for, as one of the professors
remarked, 'the commonest day laborer understands nothing else for
_baptizoo_ but immersion.'"
15. _Zwingle_ (Reformed): "When ye were immersed into the water of
baptism, ye wrere engrafted into the death of Christ." (Com. Rom.
6:3.)
16. _John Wesley_ (Methodist): "We are buried with him, alluding to
the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion." (Notes on N. T., Rom.
6:4.) "Baptized according to the custom of the first church and the
rule of the Church of England, by immersion." (Journal, vol. I, p.
20.) In Savannah, Ga., Sept., 1737, Wesley was found guilty of
breaking the laws of the realm, among other things "by refusing to
baptize Mr. Parker's child otherwise than by dipping." (Jour., vol.
I, pp. 42, 43.)
17. _The Methodist Discipline_ of 1846, and the old Discipline
compiled by Wesley himself, assert that "Jesus was baptized in the
river of Jordan, and that the sixth of Romans means simply a burial
in water."
18. _Adam Clark_ (Methodist): "As they received baptism as an emblem
of death, in voluntarily going under the water, so they received it
as an emblem of the resurrection into eternal life, in coming up out
of the water." (Com., vol. 4, N. T.)
19. _Prayer Book_ (Church of England): "The priest shall dip him in
the water, discreetly and warily."
20. _Conybeare and Howson_ (Episcopalians): "It is needless to add
that baptism was administered by immersion, the convert being plunged
beneath the surface of the water to represent his death to the life
of sin, then raised from this momentary burial to represent his
resurrection to the life of righteousness. It must be a subject of
regret that the general discontinuance of this original form of
baptism has rendered obscure to popular apprehension some very
important passages of Scripture." (Life of St. Paul.)
26. _Prof. L. L. Paine_ (Congregational): "It may be honestly asked
by some, Was immersion the primitive form of baptism? As to the
question of fact, the testimony is ample and decisive. It is a point
on which ancient, medieval and modern historians alike, Catholic and
Protestant, Lutheran and Calvinist, have no controversy. No historian
who cares for his reputation would dare to deny it, and no historian
who is worthy of the name would wish to."
27. _Dr. George Campbell_ (Presbyterian): "I have heard a disputant
of this stamp, in defiance of etymology and use, maintain that the
word rendered in the N. T. baptize means more properly to sprinkle
than to plunge. One who argues in this manner never fails, with
persons of knowledge, to betray the cause he would defend; and though
in respect to the vulgar, bold assertions generally succeed as well
as arguments, sometimes better, yet a candid mind will disdain to
take the help of a falsehood even in support of the truth." (Lect. on
Pul. El. Lect, 10, pp. 294, 295.)
28. _Philip Schaff_ (Un. Theo. Sem.): "The baptism of Christ in the
river Jordan, and the illustrations of baptism used in the N. T., are
all in favor of immersion rather than sprinkling, as is freely
admitted by the best exegetes, Catholic and Protestant, English and
German. Nothing can be gained by an unnatural exegesis." (Teaching of
Apostles, pp. 55,56.)
29. _Paul_: "We are buried with him by baptism into death; that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father,
even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:4.)
30. _Peter_ says our bodies are washed in baptism, (1 Pet. I:23.)
31. _Mark_: "Jesus--was baptized in [Marg., Greek, _into_] the
Jordan" (Mark 1:9, A. R. V.). He could not have been baptized _into
the water_ without being immersed.
_Churches Have Changed Immersion to Sprinkling_.
1. The first record of sprinkling for baptism is that of Novatian, A.
D. 250. It was thought he was dying and, as he could not be immersed,
they sprinkled water on him. Thus originated what was called _clinic_
or _death-bed_ baptism. Its introduction was vigorously opposed for
centuries and clinics were not admitted to sacred orders, many
doubting their baptism.
2. _Pope Stephen III_. In 754 the monks of Cressy asked Stephen III.:
"Is it lawful, in case of necessity, occasioned by sickness, to
baptize an infant by pouring water on its head from a cup or the
hands?" The Pope replied: "Such a baptism, performed in such a case
of necessity, shall be accounted valid." Basnage says:" This was
accounted the first law against immersion."
3. _The Council of Ravenna_, 1311, decreed: "Baptism is to be
administered by trine aspersion or immersion." This was the first
authority for sprinkling except in case of sickness.
4. _Cardinal Gibbons_ (R. Catholic): "Since the twelfth century the
practice of baptizing by affusion has prevailed in the Catholic
Church, as this manner is attended with less inconvenience than
baptism by immersion." (Faith of Our Fathers, p. 275.)
5. _Bishop of Bossuet_ (R. Catholic): "The case (communion under one
kind) was much the same as that of baptism by immersion, as clearly
grounded on Scripture as communion under both kinds could be, and
which, nevertheless, had been changed into infusion, with as much
ease and as little contradiction as communion under one kind was
established, so that the same reason stood for retaining one as the
other. It is a fact most certainly avowed in the Reformation,
although some will cavil at it, that baptism was instituted by
immersing the whole body in water. This fact, I say, is unanimously
acknowledged by all the divines of the Reformation: by Luther, by
Melancthon, by Calvin, by Casaubon, by Grotius, by all the rest."
(Varia. Protest., vol. 2, p. 370.)
6. _Archbishop Kenrick_ (R. Catholic): "The change of discipline
which has taken place as to baptism should not surprise us, for,
although the church is but the dispenser of the sacraments which her
Divine Spouse instituted, she rightfully exercises a discretionary
power as to the manner of their adminstration. Immersion was well
suited to the Eastern nations, whose habits and climate prepared them
for it, and was, therefore, practiced in the commencement, whenever
necessity did not prevent it. Cases, which at first were exceptional,
gradually multiplied, so that, at length, the ordinary mode of
baptism was by affusion. The church wisely sanctioned that which,
although less solemn, is equally effectual. The power of binding and
loosing, which she received from Christ, warrants this exercise of
governing wisdom. It is not for the individuals to question a right
which has been at all times claimed and exercised by those to whom
the dispensation of the mysteries is divinely intrusted." (Kenrick on
Bap., p. 174.)
7. _Haydock, Endorsed by Pope Pius IX_.: "The church, which cannot
change the least article of faith, is not so tied up in matters of
discipline and ceremony. Not only the Catholic Church, but also the
pretended reformed churches, have altered the primitive custom in
giving the sacrament of baptism and now allow of baptisms by
sprinkling and pouring water upon the person baptized."(Notes on
Douay Bible, Matt. 3:16.)
8. _Lutheran Catechism_, p. 208: "What is baptism?" Answer: "To dip
under water." "Do we still baptize in that way?" Answer: "No; because
of the rough climate, the subject now is only sprinkled."
9. _John Calvin_ (Presbyterian): "Wherefore the church did grant
liberty to herself, since the beginning, to change the rites
somewhat, excepting the substance. It is of no consequence at all
whether the person that is baptized is totally immersed, or whether
he is merely sprinkled by an affusion of water. This should be a
matter of choice to the churches in different regions."
10. _Westminster Assembly_ (Presbyterian), 1643: "In the Assembly of
Divines, held at Westminster in 1643, it was keenly debated whether
immersion or sprinkling should be adopted; 25 voted for sprinkling,
and 24 for immersion; and even that small majority was obtained at
the earnest request of Dr. Lightfoot, who had acquired great
influence in that assembly." (Edinburgh Ency., vol. 3, p. 236.)
11. _Dr. Wall_ (Episcopalian): "One would have thought that the cold
countries should have been the first that should have changed the
custom from dipping to affusion. But by history it appears that the
cold climates held the custom of dipping as long as any; for England,
which is one of the coldest, was one of the latest that admitted this
alteration of the ordinary way. . . . The offices or liturgies for
public baptism in the Church of England did all along, so far as I
can learn, enjoin dipping, without any mention of pouring or
sprinkling. The Prayer Book, printed in 1549, adds: 'And if the child
be weak, it shall suffice to pour water upon it'"(Wall's Hist. Inft.
Bap., vol. 3, pp. 575,579.)
12. _Dean Stanley_ (Episcopalian): In speaking of immersion, he says:
"The cold climate of Russia has not been found an obstacle to its
continuance throughout that vast empire. Even in the Church of
England it is still observed in theory. The Rubric in the public
baptism for infants enjoins that, unless for special causes, they are
to be dipped, not sprinkled."(Institutes, pp. 18,19.) The Church of
England has changed to sprinkling, but its creed teaches immersion.
13. _Sir John Floyer_: "I have now given what testimony I could find
in our English authors, to prove the practice of immersion from the
time the Britons and Saxons were baptized, till King James' days,
when the people grew peevish with all ancient ceremonies, and through
the love of novelty and the niceness of parents, and the pretense of
modesty, they laid aside immersion." (History of Cold Bathing, p.
61.)
14. _Bishop A. C. Coxe, editor of Ante-Nicene Fathers_
(Episcopalian): "The word (_baptizo_) means to dip. In the Church of
England dipping is even now the primary rule. But it is not the
ordinary custom. It survived far down into Queen Elizabeth's time,
but seems to have died out early in the seventeenth century. I ought
to add that in France (unreformed) the custom of dipping became
obsolete long before it was disused in England. But for this bad
example, my own opinion is, that dipping would still prevail among
Anglicans. I wish that all Christians would restore the primitive
practice." (In a letter to J. T. Christian.)
Thus we have the testimony of all the scholars in all the churches,
who are recognized as Greek experts outside of their own party, that
the New Testament teaches immersion and that it has been changed to
sprinkling and pouring by human authority. We do not believe that
this change was made with a bad motive. It was evidently done in
sincerity and in the honest belief that it was the right thing to do.
We must accept the honest testimony of these scholarly experts that
the New Testament teaches immersion, but we certainly believe they
were mistaken in taking the liberty to change Christ's command. If we
take such liberties, all of the commandments of Christ will soon be
set aside and confusion will be worse confounded. Indeed, it is this
very liberty of substituting what men thought best for the things
revealed in the New Testament, that has caused our present sectarian
divisions by adding human names, creeds, customs, etc., to the
primitive gospel.
_Scriptures to Show It is Wrong to Change Christ's Commands_.
"They have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the
everlasting covenant" (Isa. 24:5).
"Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the
commandments of men. For laying aside the commandments of God, ye
hold the tradition of men. Ye reject the commandment of God that ye
may keep your own tradition. Making the word of God of none effect
through your tradition, which ye have delivered; and many such like
things ye do" (Mark 7:7-9, 13).
"Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man
disannulleth, or addeth thereto" (Gal. 3: 15).
"Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the
fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and
stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry" (I Sam. 15:22,23).
"He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer
shall be abomination" (Prov. 28:9).
"Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them, I will liken
him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock. And every one
that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be
likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand; and
the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat
upon that house; and it fell; and great was the fall of it" (Matt.
7:24, 26,27).
"If ye love me, keep my commandments. He that hath my commandments
and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me. If a man love me, he will
keep my words. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you"
(John 14: 15,21,23; 15:14). "Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not
the things which I say" (Luke 6:46).
"And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God,
being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and
lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not
baptized of him" (Luke 7:29,30.)
"And hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a
liar, and the truth is not in him" (I John 2: 3,4).
But, after all, the very best way for ordinary people to learn the
meaning of baptism, is to go to the English Bible. Although human
authority and prejudice have hindered the translators from
translating the Greek word, and thus telling us what it means in
English, the contexts and sidelights on the subject make its meaning
so plain that all can readily see it if divested of prejudice and
preconceived ideas.
By reading the introduction to the English Revised Bible, you will
learn that the translators of the Authorized Version were forbidden
to translate the word. Other translators have followed their example;
so that it is neither translated to _sprinkle, to pour_ nor _to immerse_
in our standard English Bibles. The Greek word _baptisma_ has simply
had the last letter dropped and been carried over into English bodily.
But the word has been translated in numerous editions in various
languages, and whenever it has been translated, it was always by
the word _immerse_ or an equivalent term. No scholar, in any language,
has ever had the temerity to translate it _to sprinkle_ or _to pour_.
Even our English translators translate it when it is not used as an
ecclesiastical term. And when they translate it, they say it means _to
dip_. In 2 Kings 5:14, we read of Naaman, "He went down and _dipped_
[_baptizato_] himself seven times in Jordan." We may not have a
sufficient knowledge of Greek to determine what Jesus meant when he
commanded us to be baptized. But the Apostles certainly understood
him; and if we can find out what they did when they baptized, and we
do the same thing, then we know we are right, and have done what
Christ commanded.
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12