Newspaper Page Text
outstanding obligations contracted by Old
Testament promises.
New Testament Ceremonies: On the other
hand, the sacraments of the New Testament
are receipts or guarantees that the full pay
ment has been made once for all. "As oft as
ye do it, ye show forth the Lord's death till
He come."
The Law can, therefore, no more demand
payment of notes against us; Christ has once
for all made full payment, and we hold the
receipts. Neither the Old Testament nor the
New ever claimed that ceremonies were real
payments. The ritualists and saeramenta
rians are the fiat money men in the moral
world.
Yet in these ceremonies of the Old Testa
ment, we have our dictionary explaining such
terms as propitiation, expiation, sacrifice, lamb
of God, and making clear both the nature and
mode of the purifications, which in the New
Testament are called baptisms.
This brings \is to our third illustration.
Third Illustration, The Nature and Mode of
Baptism: (1) The New Testament gives u*
only "prima facie" evidence here. It assumes
that we already know. The Greek word
"bapto," "to dip or to dye," passes in its deri
vative, "baptizo," to "dye in the wool," "dye,
warp and woof," "submerge" with no
"emerge," "conquer," "subdue." Evidently
it no more then meant to dip than "manufac
ture" now means "with the hand to make,"
or "spirit" means wind or scent or odor. Just
so in Romans 6 and Col. 2, "thapto," "The
last rite of sepulcher," pictures a funeral pile
or vault, and not our modern bestowment un
der the sod.
(2) "As then, the New Testament does not
describe this rite, and the lexicons give little
light on either the nature or mode, how shall
we secure this information?
When the French base-ball player would
settle a disputed point, he does not go to the
original meaning of his word for base-ball, but
to the American book of rules. So let us leave
the lexicons, and go to the Hebrew Book of
Rules.
Reference to the Old Testament, especially
the Book of Leviticus, to the Septuagent
Greek word for purification, to Josephus, and
above all to the New Testament Greek equiva
lent for the Jewish purifications gives us this
very clear information :
"Baptizo and its derivatives are the Greek
renderings of the Hebrew words for purifica
tions.
Take a notable example: from Leviticus 14
and 2 Kings 5. In Lev. 14, the water cere
mony for cleansing a leper was a seven-fold
sprinkling. It is interesting to note that shav
ing the body was part of the purification. It
represented, like circumcision, a cutting off
of the filth of the flesh. The cleansing of Naa
man was a little irregular, but the Hebrew
word the prophet used in commanding his
cleansing describes the water ceremony of Lev.
14. And the Sept. says that Naaman baptized
himself seven times in the Jordan.
Edek. 36 :25 describes the Messiah as sprink
ling with clean water, no blood and ashes in
termingled. Isaiah 52:15 describes the Mes
sianic exaltation as sprinkling many nations.
It is interesting to note that the Ethiopian
eunuch had just read this promise, when he re
quested Philip to baptize him.
In John 1, the Pharisees recognize John Bap
tist's ceremony as a baptism, but question his
authority, if not Elijah or the Messiah, to per
form it. In chapter 3:22-26, John uses purifl
cation and baptism as the same thing. The
same appears in Mark 7 :4, same in Luke 11 :38;
The derivatives of baptizo render the words for
Hebrew purifications.
In Ileb. 9:9-10, all the ceremonies other than
the "gifts and sacrifices," are described as
baptisms (washing in English rendering).
Verses 11-17 connect these sacrifices with
Christ's great propitiatory sacrifice, while
19-22 present the application of the benefits
of the sacrifices as a sprinkling of the peo
ple.
Exodus 24 :4-8 is the first great baptizing. A
study of the many priestly and self-baptisms of
Leviticus gives not one single immersion.
(3) The Baptisms of John and His Baptism
of Christ : Our Book of Rules makes clear that
one ceremonially impure person would render
any standing water unclean. "Where many
were to be cleansed, the baptizer must go to
"living" or running water. In addition John
was conducting an almost continuous camp
meeting. Millions came to hear him and re
ceived his rite. For many reasons, therefore,
on that Sabbatic year, John sought the river
and the "many waters" (John 3:23) of Aenon
near to Salem.
But as a Hebrew priest as well as prophet,
we are certainly justified in claiming that a
heavy burden of proof rests upon the imraer
sionist or any one else who claims that John
departed from a ritual of affusion prescribed
for fifteen hundred years. Further, we must
not forget that every one of the pictures which
archaeological research has furnished us of
the baptism of Christ, presents Him as stand
ing on the edge of the Jordan, and J thn is
pouring the water upon Him, while ^ dove
rests upon His head.
Proselyte kaptisms: As these and the bap
tisms of the | early church came several centu
ries after the New Testament era; came in a
time when the church was rapidly degenerat
ing into superstition and ceremonialism ; when
the simple rite of the Lord's Supper was ap
proximating the ex opera idea, we need not
6tav to disduss their confusioiv of prepara
tory washings with the baptism itself.
Conclusion: The self-baptisms, the cere
monial requirements for running water, the
commingling of blood and ashes with the wa
ter, all these pass with the shedding of the
atoning blood. The kindergarten methods
come to an end. The priestly initiatory bap
tisms alone remain. The Great Baptizer now
sprinkles you and me with clean water.
Fourth Illustration, The Family Covenant:
The priestly or initiatory baptism is continued
under the New Testament dispensation. Its
mode of application is by affusion. But to
whom is it to be applied? Some say to none
except those who can express their own faith
and repentance. Does not the burden, here
again, rest upon them to show why, when and
where the old constitutional law, which rec
ognized the whole household of believing par
ents, does not continue in force? Where does
the New Testament repeal this lawf
In every state the children are citizens of
the state. The special purpose of government
is to secure the blessings, protection and lib
erty for ourselves and our children. We want
to give them everything to fit them for citi
zenship. They do not, it is true, assume re
sponsible citizenship until they reach majority ;
yet they are most essentially of the kingdom,
and were there a rite prescribed to give ex
pression to this fact, they would unquestion
ably receive it. Now in the constitutional laws
of the church (found in the Old Testament*
there -were such rites ? circumcision and the
purifications of birth (see Luke 2 :22 A. R. V.
and Lev. 12:2-6). These initiatory rites were
applied to the children; but they did not par
take of the ordinance indicative of responsi
bility, until they could understand. Compare
Luke 2:21-22 with 41, 42 ff.
When the first initiatory rite was prescribed
to Abraham for his seed it rebuked want of
faith and family impurity and impressed the
necessity of propagating a holy seed. Abra
ham was to be known afterwards as one who
commanded his family after him. See Gen.
15 :18. Circumcision required faith; just as
much as its New Testament successor, see Ro
mans 4 :2. And it sealed a solemn covenant be
tween God and the parents or parent for the
benefit of the child.
The New Testament does away with mere
ceremonial distinctions as between male and
female. Instead of bloody baptisms as above,
it gives the more simple initiatory rite of clean
water baptism. But the New Testament no
where does away with the family covenant.. If
the children, who for fifteen centuries had thus
been in the church and the kingdom, are now
put out, surely a very heavy burden rests upon
our immersionist brethren to show os where
they have any authority for such a revolu
tionary action.
On the contrary, the New Testament makes
clear that this covenant continues. The King
of the Kingdom (see Mt. 19 :13-14) receives the
little children, and says "to such belongeth
the kingdom of heaven." Have they not then
the right to receive the sign to be bestowed
in recognition of this fact?
In Peter's sermons at Pentecost (Acts 2 and
3) he goes back to the Abrahamic covenant,
which include * the children, and transmitted
it to all the families; and declares this prom
ise is still "to you and your children," and
thus on and on to those that are afar otf.
Paul's answer to the jailer's cry rebuked an
element of selfishness in it, and says, "believe
on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved and
thy house." The old-time religion, in other
words, will lead to such training (see Deut.
6:6-7) that both parents and children will be
lead to salvation.
But the time would fail ma to continue.
Christian parents, let these words be upon your
hearts; teach them diligently to your children,
talk about them when you sit in your house,
and when you walk by the way, when you
lie down, and when you rise up. Then shall
your sons be as plants about your table; and
your daughters as cornerstones polished after
the similitude of a palace.
Here again, we see, Christ did not destroy
but wonderfully fulfilled.
Conclusion.
In regard to each specification of Moral Law,
of Judicial Law and of Ceremonial Law, lie
became the end of the law for righteousness
to all thaf believe. So in regard to the whole
of the law and the prophets, His assertion is
vindicated: ? "Think not that I am come to
destroy the law and the prophets. I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfill. Verily, I say
unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or
one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law
till all be fulfilled." See Psalm 19:7-14.
Clinton, S. C.
I have no power to look across the tide, to
know, while hfre, the land beyond the river;
but this I know, I shall, be God's forever; so I
can trust.