Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Baptism by Sprinkling (A very clear explanation)
Reformation Online ^ | Rick Martin

Posted on 12/19/2006 9:32:45 AM PST by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 last
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar; editor-surveyor; Uncle Chip; xzins; jkl1122
Mat 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26 [Thou] blind Pharisee, cleanse first that [which is] within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
This shows that "baptism" or ritual washing of dishes is merely a ritual cleansing without submerging it into water.

There's a couple of problems with your interpretation here.

1. Do you really believe that the Pharisees, who were so paranoid about being unclean, would actually neglect to wash the inside of their cups and bowls in any fashion? I'm not a Pharisee, but even I know that it's a pretty good idea to throughly wash something as opposed to just sprinkling it with water if you want to get it clean.

2. This isn't a statement about the exact means of ritualistic washing that they did, but rather a statement about their hypocrisy. Else why would they be filled with "extortion and excess"? The meaning is that they took great pains to make sure everyone knew they outwardly cleaned their vessels, but inwardly they (the Pharisees) were full of extortion and excess. This thought is summed up in the next two verses:

Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

3. It may be nitpicking, but "baptizo" or "baptismos" aren't even used in these verses.

3. the KJV has "tables", the Douai Reims has "couches". Can you immagine trying to eat reclining on a wet couch!

They weren't what we would call "couches" today. They could have been small benches, pillows, whatever. Or as pointed out, that phrase is disputed and doesn't appear in the majority text. Either way, there are scholars who point out that they would have immersed it anyways.

They were EXTREME. They made God's laws a burdens. That means they went above and beyond what was really required. A "sprinkling" of eating and drinking utensils seems like so much underkill for them.

I wouldn't go so far as to say you're being dishonest, but you're really grasping to maintain that the term "baptizo" or "baptismos" means anything but immersion.

81 posted on 12/23/2006 6:39:51 PM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: DouglasKC

***I wouldn't go so far as to say you're being dishonest, but you're really grasping to maintain that the term "baptizo" or "baptismos" means anything but immersion.***

Thirty five years after the death of John the apostle they were using the word baptize to mean immerse, sprinkle and pour. I have merely pointed out that it was also used in these verses 95 years earlier.

***1. Do you really believe that the Pharisees, who were so paranoid about being unclean, would actually neglect to wash the inside of their cups and bowls in any fashion?***

This was not washing to remove old food. This was ceremonial cleansing to make them "legal" for meal use.
As the verse said, they made the outside "clean" but ignored the inside.
The only way to do that would be to either sprinkling or a minor "dip" in a larger bowl of water just to let the outside of the pot touch the water, but not immerse it fully.

Much like a dove was "dipped" into the blood of another dove, or a finger "dipped" into the palm of the hand just to get a few drops of blood or oil on it for sprinkling purposes. Christ is using this as an example of the lives of the Pharasees. clean on the outside, rotten on the inside.

**3. It may be nitpicking, but "baptizo" or "baptismos" aren't even used in these verses.***

They don't have to be. But they WERE used in the other verses about ritual cleansing. And both of these deal with ritual cleansing before meal time.

***They weren't what we would call "couches" today.***

They ate in the Greek fashion, reclining on their side on a couch, with a low table in front of them.


82 posted on 12/23/2006 7:06:53 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar; DouglasKC; editor-surveyor; xzins
Thirty five years after the death of John the apostle they were using the word baptize to mean immerse, sprinkle and pour.

Just because a word is used, doesn't mean it is used properly in accord with its meaning. And when it is used improperly, that improper useage does not change its objective meaning.

Just 10 years after the death of Christ, heretics were using the word "Christian" to describe their heresies. Did that make their heresies "Christian"?

Just because people call themselves "Christian" doesn't mean they are, and just because people call sprinkling "baptism", doesn't mean it is.

If as you say, the word has evolved, why are the two words: "baptize" and "sprinkle" defined differently in the dictionary. Why have the definitions not evolved?

The only place sprinkling means baptism is in the minds of those who want it to and who use the word improperly.

83 posted on 12/24/2006 4:52:27 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
***The only place sprinkling means baptism is in the minds of those who want it to and who use the word improperly.****

Tell me, how many words in American English slang say one thing but mean something completely different.
Do you not think that the ancient speakers of Greek or Aramaic didn't have their slang also.
The word "bapize" was obviously a form of slang for "ritual cleansing".
Why else would the word "baptize" be used to refer to the Pharisees' ritual cleansing of cups.
And again, the NASB has a margin note that the Pharisees "sprinkled" (baptizo") themselves when returning from the market.
84 posted on 12/24/2006 7:23:48 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks for posting this.

BTW, the Christmas Markets in Koln, Rothenburg, Dinklesbuhl and Freiburg were lovely this year. We're hitting some of the French Markets later this week.


85 posted on 12/24/2006 7:33:32 AM PST by Gamecock (Pelagianism is the natural heresy of zealous Christians who are not interested in theology. J.I.P.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar; DouglasKC
Tell me, how many words in American English slang say one thing but mean something completely different.

What do you mean? I don't understand you. By "slang" do you mean the dictionary meaning or what someone down the street means by it or what I mean by it or someone else? Do you mean its objective meaning or a subjective one? ---- Do you understand now what I mean?

Do you not think that the ancient speakers of Greek or Aramaic didn't have their slang also.

We're not talking about a theoretical them, we're talking about what the authors of Scripture meant by the word "baptizo", nothing else.

The word "bapize" was obviously a form of slang for "ritual cleansing".

Obvious to whom? Where is your evidence? The word "baptize" and what it means originates with John the Baptist, both its useage and what he was doing, and it certainly was not a ritual because he refused to baptize the Pharisees.

Why else would the word "baptize" be used to refer to the Pharisees' ritual cleansing of cups.

It was a ritual "baptizing" [dipping, plunging, immersing, dunking, pouring on of enough water to get them thoroughly wet.] The Pharisees believed that demonic forces were picked up by contact with Gentiles during everyday activities, but by getting their hands thoroughly wet and then letting the water drip off of them, the demon forces flowed off and out of their hands with the water. Now how would sprinkling serve that purpose? It wouldn't.

And again, the NASB has a margin note that the Pharisees "sprinkled" (baptizo") themselves when returning from the market.

Note that it is in the margin which means that the majority of the translators of that version did not agree with it.

86 posted on 12/24/2006 8:17:12 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

***Note that it is in the margin which means that the majority of the translators of that version did not agree with it.***

But enough translators DID agree with it (sprinkle) so it could not be completely ignored and was put in the margin as an alternate meaning.

****It was a ritual "baptizing" [dipping, plunging, immersing, dunking, pouring on of enough water to get them thoroughly wet.]****

Yet I have shown you in Matthew how Jesus used this ritual cleansing as a parable of their uncleanliness because they only wet the OUTSIDE of the pot and not the inside. Definitly not a complete immersion. And in Mark the word "baptize" is used for the same ritual.

I must also point out that those whom the first Apostles taught were sprinkling, pouring and immersing after the deaths of the first Apostles.


87 posted on 12/24/2006 8:53:27 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Ruy Dias de Bivar; DouglasKC; xzins
"The only place sprinkling means baptism is in the minds of those who want it to and who use the word improperly."

Let's peel this onion down to it's core: Sprinkling is convenient for those who wish to call their infant dedication rituals "baptisms." But we all know that the child has no understanding of the event, and thus it is not really a baptism as it is called out in the scriptures. Certainly they are not going to immerse the infant in a pool of water, and sprinkling is their only realistic option. If they did their dedications in a more scripturally affirmed way, this thread would not even exist.

88 posted on 12/24/2006 10:01:26 AM PST by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

You are grasping at straws. Pretty soon you will have enough for another straw man.


89 posted on 12/24/2006 10:16:18 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
****You are grasping at straws. Pretty soon you will have enough for another straw man.****

On CHRIST the solid rock I stand,
All other ground is sinking sand.

I know that it is not the getting wet by any method that saves a person. It is the inward change brought about by the Holy Spirit. Methods of baptism has no saving value in themselves. If it did, then certain heretical groups would also have to be saved .
90 posted on 12/24/2006 11:16:06 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Uncle Chip; DouglasKC; xzins

***Sprinkling is convenient for those who wish to call their infant dedication rituals "baptisms." ***

Just for the record, I don't believe in infant baptism by any method.


91 posted on 12/24/2006 11:19:02 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
I know that it is not the getting wet by any method that saves a person. It is the inward change brought about by the Holy Spirit. Methods of baptism has no saving value in themselves. If it did, then certain heretical groups would also have to be saved.

Amen. We are on the same page.

On a side note, I wonder if there are churches or groups that sprinkle adults in lieu of baptism, or if they just sprinkle the infants.

92 posted on 12/24/2006 11:48:07 AM PST by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
" I don't believe in infant baptism by any method"

That's cool, but where do you think the sprinkle cakme from? It's pagan.

93 posted on 12/24/2006 2:19:47 PM PST by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

***That's cool, but where do you think the sprinkle cakme from? It's pagan.****

Actually, Moses took scarlet thread, tied hyssop to a stick, dipped it in blood and water and sanctified the BOOK and the People.

Check the OT their are many other references to sprinkling.


94 posted on 12/24/2006 3:06:16 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Do you mean straw men like that Constantine made Christinainity a state religion" (proven false), that Constantine presided over Eccumenical councils? (proven false) That Jews is and around Nazaerth spoke predominatly Hebrew? (proven false, including with quotes from jewish Scholars no less) That the Septuagint was written by Origen? (proven false by at least 5 archaological finds that predate Christ, whom Predates Origen)).

You'd know straw men all right.


95 posted on 12/24/2006 3:11:54 PM PST by kawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson