V. RITUAL writing to the He brews the apostle makes mention of divers baptisms' (Stackepois pavrtapats) as amongst the carnal ordinances of the ancient dispensation.
That there were ritual baptisms practised by the Jews there can be no doubt, and the connection in which the apostle introduces the expression strongly favours the conclusion, that he refers under it to the sprinkling of the blood upon the altar, and the sprinkling of the unclean with the water of separa tion (Halley an the Sacraments, i. 383). Beyond the use of the word, however, it does not appear that any connection subsists between these bap tisms and the ritual baptism of the N. T.
The earliest mention of baptism as a rite is in the account which the evangelists give of the working of John the Baptist. Whether there existed amongst the Jews previous to this an ordinance of baptism in the case of proselytes from heathenism, is a point which has been keenly discussed, but which it does not seem necessary to consider here. [PROSELYTE.] It may suffice to remark, that as John's baptizing appears to have excited no sur prise among the Jews, but to have been regarded by them as the proper and accredited mode by which a new teacher might designate those who professed themselves his disciples, the presumption is, that the rite was one with which they were familiar from their own practice in regard to con verts from heathenism.
1. yahn's Baptism.—John, the forerunner of Jesus, appeared preaching and baptizing ; and great multitudes submitted to his baptism (Matt. iii. ; Mark i. 4, 5 ; Luke iii. 3).
The baptism of John was a baptism with water unto repentance. He came announcing the near approach of the kingdom of heaven, and of the new state of things which would then be intro duced; he rebuked the prevailing sins of his day with stern severity, and called upon all to repent ; and he made disciples of those who came to him by baptizing them. He thus, as Paul says, 'bap tized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him who should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus' (Acts xix. 4). It has not been supposed by any that John's baptism effected repentance in those on whom it was administered ; on the contrary, this is strenuously denied even by those who are most disposed to attach to Christian baptism regenerating power (see Pusey, Tracts for the Thin's, No. 67). The only difference of opinion as to the significance of John's baptism lies between those who maintain that it was a token of the sincerity of the parties who submitted to it—a sign that they had really repented and embraced John's doctrine ; and those who find in it merely a badge of discipleship, a designation of those who enrolled themselves among John's followers, an outward expression of their willing ness to be taught by him, with a view to that re pentance and remission of sins which he preached. This latter view seems the more correct, because —t. It preserves the just sense of the phrase pair els, used to describe the design of John's baptism (Mark i. 4) ; 2. It best accords with Paul's description of the intention of John's baptism, as announced by himself, viz., that they should believe on Him who was coming ; and 3. It is supported by the historical facts, that he multitudes who received John's baptism were such, that it was im possible to ascertain by any just test the sincerity of each one's profession, whilst of not a few John himself knew that they were not real converts, but were in many cases very ignorant, and in some cases bad men (Matt. iii. 7-12; Luke iii. 7-17).
We cannot for a moment suppose that John would have administered what he regarded as a sign or token of actual conversion to persons whom he knew to be unconverted, or even to persons of whose conversion he possessed no credible evi dence.
Among those who submitted to the baptism of John was our Lord himself. With the cavils and criticisms which this part of the evangelical narra tive has provoked, we have here no concern [see JESUS CHRIST] ; all that legitimately comes before us at present is involved in the question, Why did He who had no sins to confess, and DO repentance to make, insist upon submitting to a baptism which was of repentance, with a view to the remission of sins ? The proper answer to this question has been furnished by our Lord himself. In reply to the remonstrance of John, who humbly shrank from seeming to assume any semblance of superiority over Him whose advent he had come to announce, Jesus said, ei.Ocs dp-n• oiircos "yap Irphr011 171..al. Ir &tall atKeLLOCI5P77x. The dim here has reference to the existing relations between John and Jesus, relations which were to be reversed when the latter should come forth as the Teacher of Israel, but which were still in force so long as the burning and shining light' of John's ministry was in the ascendant, whilst that of Jesus was still beneath the horizon. And this may suggest to us the true reason why our Lord sought John's bap tism, as expressed by his own words. Our Lord appeared as a Jew, subject to all the divine ordi nances ; in the mission and working of John He recognized a divine ordinance, part of that StKaLocrovn which every Jew was bound to observe ; through it was the divinely appointed transit to the Mes sianic dispensation ; and through it consequently He who had come to inaugurate and announce that dispensation must needs pass, that as God's servant He might fulfil all the Father's will. In this sense our Lord's baptism by John had the same significancy that the baptism of others by John had ; it was a confession of submission to John's teaching, and a profession of readiness for the coming dispensation. Jesus, who had begun his earthly career as a disciple of Moses, became a disciple of John when he appeared as the herald of the economy which was to supersede that of Moses ; and so passed on to his own high place as the author and administrator of the new economy by the path which God had seen meet to appoint. Had the baptism of John been a sign or seal of repentance, it could not have been submitted to by Him who knew no sin ; but as a mere outward designation of submission to John's teaching, and acceptance of his announcement that the kingdom of the Messiah was coming, and of a consequent change from Judaism towards (els) Christianity, it could be properly received by Him ; and he saw meet to receive it, that he in receiving it, and John in administering it, might fulfil all that God had appointed.