Baptism and its meaning

[tabcom]

**Baptism; from the greek words baptizo and bapto

Baptizo bap-tid’-zo

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped’ (bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g. Mark 16:16. ‘He that believes and is baptised shall be saved’. Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle! Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989.

Bapto: bap’-to

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped’ (bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change.

searchgodsword.org/lex/gr…cgi?number=907

searchgodsword.org/lex/gr…cgi?number=911

The English word ‘in’ has ambiguously been mistranslated from the greek words:

1. eis - to sink into clothing
2. epi - to super impose
3. en - with or by

To better understand what baptism ment to a 1st century jew or gentile, these five words (bapto, baptizo, eis, epi, en) need to be researched in greater detail. I’m going to do so within this thread.

Now that I’ve established the original topic, I will not engage in off topic discussions about baptism being water. Those topics will be discussed at a later date after I feel like I’ve coverd this topic to my satisfactionn.**

 

[jemfinch]

You clearly know just enough Greek to be dangerous, but not enough to see the problems in your understanding

eis certainly doesn’t always or often mean “to sink into clothing” and epi certainly doesn’t always or even often mean “to superimpose” (which is one word, incidentally). en doesn’t always mean “with” or “by.” Each of these words is used in many different ways in Greek texts, and the best translation for each of these ways is to preserve the ambiguity that exists in the Greek text by translating them as “in” (in the case of en) or “into” (the most common meaning of eis) or “on” (the most common meaning of epi).

Furthermore, a recipe for pickles written 230 years before Christ began His teaching ministry provides very little support for a claim regarding the meaning of a baptizo in a religious context. Look at the way people wrote English 200 years ago, and look how much the language has changed since then. Furthermore, oftentimes a word means something very different in a secular context as compared to a religious context: the original Greek word for “Trinity” was simply “triad”–which, in a secular context, means any group of three things. In a religious context, however, it came to acquire a new meaning, signifying the whole Godhead, three-in-one. The combination of 230 years of language development, combined with a completely different context, makes Nicander’s recipe nearly useless for determining what the Jews and Christ and the Apostles meant by the word baptizo. For that, we’ll have to look at what they actually did, and all ancient evidence (including the Bible) indicates that baptizo in a religious context meant a purification, most often involving the sprinkling of, pouring of, or immersion in water.

Worst of all, though, your argument begs the question. You assume that baptism refers to “identification with Christ” and then quote Mark 16:16 in defense of your belief. Of course, that’s not an argument: that’s a statement of your belief. We, on our behalf, can clearly prove that baptism in water was the practice of the early Church (the Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius are both excellent examples). We can also prove that when Peter said, “Baptism now saves you,” he was talking about water baptism, because he replies to the claim that “Baptism now saves you by cleansing the flesh with water” indicating that he expected his audience to understand that baptism referred to baptism in water.

What little evidence you’ve presented is nearly useless, and your claims regarding baptism are based only upon your claims regarding baptism.

Jeremy

 

[guanophore]

Furthermore, a recipe for pickles written 230 years before Christ began His teaching ministry provides very little support for a claim regarding the meaning of a baptizo in a religious context. Look at the way people wrote English 200 years ago, and look how much the language has changed since then. Furthermore, oftentimes a word means something very different in a secular context as compared to a religious context: the original Greek word for “Trinity” was simply “triad”–which, in a secular context, means any group of three things. In a religious context, however, it came to acquire a new meaning, signifying the whole Godhead, three-in-one. The combination of 230 years of language development, combined with a completely different context, makes Nicander’s recipe nearly useless for determining what the Jews and Christ and the Apostles meant by the word baptizo. For that, we’ll have to look at what they actually did, and all ancient evidence (including the Bible) indicates that baptizo in a religious context meant a purification, most often involving the sprinkling of, pouring of, or immersion in water.

I have to disagree with you on this point, Jeremy. I think the recipe for pickling has much to offer us. Once the cucumbers are dipped or buried in the fluid, they are forever changed. This is very true of Christian water baptism, where the sould is regenerated, cleansed, and set apart for God. Baptism changes us forever, so that we can never go back to our previous state. However, I also agree that this meaning of the word cannot be the only one we look at, because there are vast differences between the secular and the religious meanings.

 

[Randy_Carson]

**Now that I’ve established the original topic, I will not engage in off topic discussions about baptism being water. **

Baptism without water?

Let’s go to the Word of God:

1. 
   *]Matthew 3:6
   Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.
   *]Matthew 3:11
   “I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
   *]Matthew 3:13
   Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
   *]Matthew 3:16
   As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him.
   *]Mark 1:8
   I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”
   *]John 3:23
   Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized.
   *]Acts 8:36
   As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?”
   *]Acts 8:38
   And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.
   *]Acts 10:47
   Then Peter said, “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”
   *]Acts 22:16
   And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’
   *]1 Peter 3:20-22
   *]God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledgea] of a good conscience toward God.
   Even these last two point to water baptism: washing requires water, while Noah and his family were saved through the flood waters. Finally, even the parting of the Red Sea in Exodus pre-figured water baptism.
   
   Oh, and lest we forget:
   
   5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. (John 3:5)
   
   No, Jesus was not referring to amniotic fluid here!
   
   Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[jemfinch]

I have to disagree with you on this point, Jeremy. I think the recipe for pickling has much to offer us. Once the cucumbers are dipped or buried in the fluid, they are forever changed. This is very true of Christian water baptism, where the sould is regenerated, cleansed, and set apart for God. Baptism changes us forever, so that we can never go back to our previous state.

But we don’t need to dredge up Nicander to show this. The Bible and Tradition are clear on this point.

Regarding the meaning of the word baptizo, Nicander’s recipe, written 230 years before Christ preached, is practically useless.

Jeremy

 

[JaneFrances]

And, of course, one mustn’t overlook the Biblical usage of baptism which doesn’t imply immersion at all. . .

From Catholic Answers:

Thus Luke 11:38 reports that, when Jesus ate at a Pharisee’s house, “[t]he Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash [baptizo] before dinner.” They did not practice immersion before dinner, but, according to Mark, the Pharisees “do not eat unless they wash [nipto] their hands, observing the tradition of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they wash themselves [baptizo]” (Mark 7:3–4a, emphasis added). So baptizo can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion.

 

[MariaG]

Now that I’ve established the original topic, I will not engage in off topic discussions about baptism being water. Those topics will be discussed at a later date after I feel like I’ve coverd this topic to my satisfactionn.

Unfortunately, you have set up a false dichotomy. You seem to think that water baptism is independent of a permanent change?

Baptism, done with water, produces a permanent change to our souls. It is not the water that produces the change, but God who choses to make this change through the visable sign of water.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Philthy]

Baptizo bap-tid’-zo
The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words.

Sorry, but this doesnt show “the” meaning of baptizo clearly - it shows “a” meaning of baptizo. Furthermore, to assume that “a” meaning of baptizo for a pickle recipe over 200 years prior to Christs ministry definitively reveals “the” meaning of baptizo in the NT context is, as jemfinch has already pointed out, an invalid assumption.

tabcom:

Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped’ (bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change.

So far we can conclude one thing with certainty: baptizo and bapto BOTH involve a liquid. That contradicts your argument and supports the simple, consistent, Scriptural, Catholic teaching.
Secondly, it is unclear how much Nicander says here and how much you have inferred. Does the Nicander make a distinction between the temporary and permanancy of the actions or did you infer that?

tabcom:

When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g. Mark 16:16. ‘He that believes and is baptised shall be saved’.

There is not a single thing here that remotely suggests anything regarding “union and identification with Christ”. You pulled that out of your hat of preconcieved notions. It is eisegesis of the most obvious sort.

tabcom:

Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle! Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989.

Again, are you serious? This is not statement of fact, it is eisegesis of the most obvious sort.

tabcom:

To better understand what baptism ment to a 1st century jew or gentile, these five words (bapto, baptizo, eis, epi, en) need to be researched in greater detail. I’m going to do so within this thread.

Will you be “researching” by listening to the ECFs of the same time period? Actually, you can extend the ECF study to 250 AD as that allows the same amount of time between Christs ministry and Nicander’s recipe. Such testimony should be the most definitive sort of information. Unless there are wildly contrary claims as to the meaning of the term, I would think that would be our best way of knowing what was meant by the terms. Certainly it is a much better gauge than a pickle recipe. And it is far superior to modern, prejudiced interpretations of what those texts mean based on word studies.

tabcom:

Now that I’ve established the original topic, I will not engage in off topic discussions about baptism being water. Those topics will be discussed at a later date after I feel like I’ve coverd this topic to my satisfactionn.

Im confused - we are not going to be discussing - among other things - the relationship between baptism’s meaning and water? Then I guess I missed the “original topic”. I thought it was going to be “Baptism and its meaning”. On what basis would discussing water be off topic? Certainly not based on a pickle recipe that dips and submerges in water and another solution to baptize.

 

[tabcom]

**Jeremy . . . I read your post (#2) and thought the first two paragraphs were infomative. Regarding the rest of the post, it is Off Topic and I have no comment. **

 

[tabcom]

And, of course, one mustn’t overlook the Biblical usage of baptism which doesn’t imply immersion at all. . . So baptizo can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion.

Most excellent contribution to the Original Topic. :clapping:

 

[tabcom]

(the The Strong’s Greek Lexicon citation) shows “a” meaning of baptizo.

**
Yes, indeed. I used it as a starting point, not an end point for exploring what the word baptism, or more correctly, baptizo ment to a 1st century jew or greek. There is much more to examine.**

So far we can conclude one thing with certainty: baptizo and bapto BOTH involve a liquid.

Within the context of the posts presented within this thread to this point, I’d agree with that.

Secondly, it is unclear how much Nicander says here and how much you have inferred. Does the Nicander make a distinction between the temporary and permanancy of the actions or did you infer that?

**The purpose of the Strong’s reference is to demonstrate a secular source that uses the words baptizo and bapto. Nothing more. **

You pulled that out of your hat of preconcieved notions. It is eisegesis of the most obvious sort.

**
**Wow. That is a big word, eisegesis. I had to look it up.

“Eisegesis is the approach to Bible interpretation where the interpreter tries to “force” the Bible to mean something that fits their existing belief.”

Ok, now that I know what it means, I fail to see how my reply will remain on topic. Therefore, I decline to comment.**

**

On what basis would discussing water be off topic?

**The intent of the original topic is to explore what the word baptizo and bapto ment to a first century jew and gentile. The pickle recipe was used only to set the tone.

So what is the point of this thread at all? This is how I study Scripture. I study the culture, the customs, the idioms, the metaphors, the language of the jews, gentiles, early believers.

Having precluded water from the topic of baptism, there is much to learn. Stay tuned . . .
**

 

[guanophore]

But we don’t need to dredge up Nicander to show this. The Bible and Tradition are clear on this point.

Regarding the meaning of the word baptizo, Nicander’s recipe, written 230 years before Christ preached, is practically useless.

Jeremy

Not at all! It is entirely appropriate to glean the understanding of language from the era in which it was used. We do this with all kinds of koine words. It is a good place to start.

 

[guanophore]

**
**Wow. That is a big word, eisegesis. I had to look it up.

“Eisegesis is the approach to Bible interpretation where the interpreter tries to “force” the Bible to mean something that fits their existing belief.”

Ok, now that I know what it means, I fail to see how my reply will remain on topic. Therefore, I decline to comment.****

**The intent of the original topic is to explore what the word baptizo and bapto ment to a first century jew and gentile. The pickle recipe was used only to set the tone.

So what is the point of this thread at all? This is how I study Scripture. I study the culture, the customs, the idioms, the metaphors, the language of the jews, gentiles, early believers.

Having precluded water from the topic of baptism, there is much to learn. Stay tuned . . .
**

You just gave an excellent example of eisegesis. You said you were going to study all teh available information, then you summarized (before the study has really begun) that you have already precluded water from the topic of baptism!

Yes, there is much to learn.

 

[tabcom]

Not at all! It is entirely appropriate to glean the understanding of language from the era in which it was used. We do this with all kinds of koine words. It is a good place to start.

** I’m going to give shout out to guanophore.
Thank you for understanding the spirit of this thread.**

 

[guanophore]

This protestant holds water baptism as a necessity according to the early apostolic church teachings. We cannot separate water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ from faith. It simply cannot be done. If you have faith in Jesus Christ, then that faith takes you to be baptized for the remission of sins.

You will have to take that up with tabcom, he is the one who says that baptism does not include water.

 

[savedsinner]

**
To better understand what baptism ment to a 1st century jew or gentile, these five words (bapto, baptizo, eis, epi, en) need to be researched in greater detail. I’m going to do so within this thread.

Now that I’ve established the original topic, I will not engage in off topic discussions about baptism being water. Those topics will be discussed at a later date after I feel like I’ve covered this topic to my satisfaction.**

I am still not quite sure what you are getting at here. Is it that you want to know how the early Christians viewed baptism?
If so, then you would probably want to read the church fathers on the topic of baptism, and not go to the Greek and then say, well I understand the Greek to say … so the early Christians must have believed it this way also.

If so here is a comment from Tertullian

Chapter 1. Introduction. Origin of the Treatise

Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life! A treatise on this matter will not be superfluous; instructing not only such as are just becoming formed (in the faith), but them who, content with having simply believed, without full examination of the grounds of the traditions, carry (in mind), through ignorance, an untried though probable faith. The consequence is, that a viper of the Cainite heresy, lately conversant in this quarter, has carried away a great number with her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim to destroy baptism. Which is quite in accordance with nature; for vipers and asps and basilisks themselves generally do affect arid and waterless places. But we, little fishes, after the example of our ΙΧΘΥΣ Jesus Christ, are born in water, nor have we safety in any other way than by permanently abiding in water; so that most monstrous creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, knew full well how to kill the little fishes, by taking them away from the water!

 

[tabcom]

You just gave an excellent example of eisegesis. You said you were going to study all teh available information, then you summarized (before the study has really begun) that you have already precluded water from the topic of baptism!

**To clearify, one more time, the intent of this thread is to explore what the words bapto, baptizo, en, eip, eis, would have ment to a 1st century jew or gentile. By my statement ‘Having precluded water from the topic of baptism’, I am saying, ‘let’s explore other meanings to these words.’ That will only come about if we all leave our theology outside this thread. Randy Carson has listed 13 items that he believes means water baptism. I very much would like to respond to them; in due time, in separate threads. **

 

[tabcom]

I am still not quite sure what you are referring to. Is it you want to know how the early Christians viewed baptism?

**
Thank you for the question. I want to know how the pre-christian Church would have viewed baptism. By that I mean, before Acts 2.

The answer, in part, has to do with what a person had to do to be a Jew at the time of Jesus’ ministry.

Three things were required:

1. circumcision
   2 water baptism
2. offering two turtle doves

The ritual of circumsion was performed on Jesus (Luke 2:21).
Joseph and Mary performed the custom of offering two turtle doves (Luke 2:24).
Jesus, as a full grown man, completed the tradition of water baptism (Matt. 3:13).**

 

[Church_Militant]

Well gee…look at what one of the earliest authentic Christian documents says about it.
The Didache

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism.
And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

 

[savedsinner]

So what you are looking for would be similar to what is written in this article:
THE JEWISH BACKGROUND OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM
BY Ron Moseley, Ph. D.

I am not sure right off what exactly baptism was like in the Jewish culture at the time of Christ. I have heard that the Essenes were really into water purification like baptism, but other than that I also would like to find out more about this.