Harbinger, May 1, '65.

gint translation takes with the Hebrew text, altering the construction of sentences, changing the meaning of words, and introducing others which have no right to be there." "Even in this very verse we have two specimens of its inaccuracy. In the Hebrew it stands thus: And he went down and dipped in Jordan seven times, according to the word of the man of God. In the Septuagint it stands thus: And Naaman went down and baptized himself seven times, according to the word of Eliseus.' Will any one say that this is a literal translation? And yet this is a very modest amount of license, compared with other passages, considering that the 'man of God' was no other than 'Eliseus,' and that Naaman had been commanded to wash and not to dipthough as this washing was for the purpose of cleansing, the word baptizo was not so very inappropriate."

In the entire course of my reading I do not remember anything equal to this in confusion, obscurity, and contradiction. Unless Mr. Gall has been baptized in the classic sense, and cannot emerge again, perhaps he will explain at some future time

66

1. If TABAL never denotes cleansing in any sense whatever, how comes it to pass that in this passage it is employed to designate the action which Mr. Gall himself says was a religious washing for the purpose of being cleansed ?" 2. Has the Holy Spirit made a mistake in the selection of the word, or did the captain make a mistake in the performance of the action?

3. How can there be some doubt that the meaning here is to dip, when the Hebrew word tabal has no other meaning, as the translators must have known very well?

4. How could it be consistent with historical accuracy to translate tabal by the word cleanse? Wash, which is general, may be accomplished by dipping, but to dip denotes a specific action and could never be faithfully rendered by wash or cleanse. Notwithstanding all the kicking of Mr. Gall against the Septuagint, he seems, from his concluding remarks, not so ill satisfied with the rendering of this particular verse. He thinks baptizo not so very inappropriate; and hence, though our grounds of consent may be different, we almost approach a meeting point. In despite of all the plunging of our learned opponent, a few great points remain clear

1. That the leprous general actually dipped himself in the Jordan seven times. 2. That this was in accordance with the instruction of the man of God.

3. That God set his seal to such strict obedience by the miraculous cure of the loathsome disease.

4. That the Jewish translators of the Hebrew believed that the Greek word baptizo faithfully conveyed the meaning of the Hebrew word tabal.

5. The remark of Mr. Gall, that it was a "religious washing for the purpose of being cleansed," is very loose and vague. It was a wonderful miracle of quite an exceptional character, for which the law made no provision. It stands out clear and bold in separation from the Levitic ceremonial cleansings.

In the Greek version of the Old Testament by Symmachus, A.D. 200, we have this rendering of Psalm lxix. 2, "I am baptized in deep mire." The Hebrew word is TABA, which undeniably signifies to dip. Mr. Gall says that the classic sense was intended-viz.: that the Psalmist was sunk, drowned, overwhelmed in deep mire. He adds, that the Psalmist was not dipped, nor washed, nor cleansed in the deep mire. But to let Mr. Gall into a secret, if the Hebrew word TABA means to dip, then the dipping was a reality, whatever else might follow. If we were confining it to the Psalmist personally, he was, as we well know, many times overwhelmed and immersed in the mire, but never drowned there. Though often sunk and buried in gulfs of darkness and peril, where the moaning torrents menaced him, by the mercy of God he always emerged again. The next point to be made emphatic is the fact that Symmachus deemed the Greek word baptizo a faithful equivalent of the Hebrew word TABA. Though nearly 500 years had elapsed from the Septuagint to his own version, the word baptizo was still considered a truthful rendering of any Hebrew word, Tabal or TABA, undeniably signifying to dip. If nothing more than the bare refutation of Mr. Gall were desired, the matter might be left here; but a considera

Harbinger, May 1, '65.

GALL ON BAPTISM.

155

tion of the Psalm from which the passage is quoted will lead us into a wider field and provide us with a more advanced position for the defence and illustration of the truth. In rendering the Hebrew word TABA, unquestionably meaning to dip, by the Greek word baptizo, which must have the same import, we have an authority to which all critics and Lexicon makers must bow with reverence. Be it distinctly noted, then, that our Lord Jesus Christ has set his own divine seal to the faithfulness of the rendering made by Symmachus. The Hebrew literally reads thus-" I am dipped in the mire of depth: I am come into depth of waters, where the floods overflow me." Symmachus renders the word dipped by baptizo-" baptized in the deep mire." In Luke xii. 59 it reads thus-"But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished." Let it be observed, then-and the most uncritical reader can satisfy himself on the question-the Psalmist is not speaking of himself. It is the same speaker in the Psalm and in Luke, and the circumstances are the same. The same awful agony is contemplated, which in mournful and mysterious grandeur eclipses all other tragedies. That the 69th is one of the Messianic Psalms, needs little proving-we only require to quote here and there a few verses from the wail. "Deliver me out of the mire, and let me not sink let me be delivered from them that hate me, and out of the deep waters. Let not the waterflood overflow me, neither let the deep swallow me up let not the pit shut her mouth upon me. Reproach hath broken my heart, and I am full of heaviness and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none. They gave me also gall for meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." This is truly the voice of him who was an alien to his mother's children-these are the dreadful wailings and strong cries of him who was numbered with the transgressors, and who made his soul an offering for sin. When we find him in the garden agonising with sweat like blood, and hear from his cross that piercing, tremendous cry, "My God! my God! why hast thou forsaken me?" we should only insult the Divine One by dreaming of a sprinkling. He was sunk and buried, overwhelmed and immersed in the anguish. It was a baptism in suffering, the intensity of which we cannot adequately describe. Indeed, our vocabulary stammers and breaks down whenever we have before us either the depth of his suffering or the fulness and infinity of his love. We remarked concerning the language of the Psalm and the passage in Luke, that the circumstances were the same, only meaning thereby that the same suffering was before him. There is this difference-in Luke the Lord is merely looking forward to the dread expiation; in the Psalm, with boldness not uncommon in prophecy, he speaks as though it were present. We see the pallid face of him whose sick throes and dying agony shook the cross which afterwards shook the world. In the midst of the miraculous darkness which partly veiled the mingled infamy and horror, where his blood was poured out, we see the "mire of depth" in which he was dipped, and the waters in which he was baptized. He was in a deep where there was no standing, and all the billows went over him. We repeat, then, that the Teacher of supreme authority has used his own signet ring in sealing and endorsing the rendering of Symmachus. By the same word he has described the same sufferings. Moreover, he has established the fact that baptizo means to dip, by using the word TABA when his sufferings were present to his mind and BAPTIZO as the full equivalent. In this case Mr. Gall will be compelled to abandon his imaginary classic sense, for the Lord was not drowned or lost in that abyss in which he was plunged. Doubtless he will resort to his second fiction, the Jewish cleanse-indeed, he has done this already, though not with this Psalm before his mind. The learned gentleman is as far away from the truth in his divinity as in his philosophy of language. The Lord was immersed in suffering, but it was not a cleansing. He was baptized in suffering unto death, but neither in the passion of the cross nor in the silence of the grave could that vindication come which would pronounce the cleansing of himself and of his people. While the sepulchre held him prisoner he was still bearing that burden which he alone could bear. The vindication and cleansing came by the resurrection unto life. "Declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead."

156

British Millennial

AN INFIDEL OBJECTION ANNIHILATED. Harbinger, May 1, '65.

In reference to 1 Cor. x. 1-2, our author says, "What concerns us at present is the question whether this baptism was by dipping, or whether it was by pouring or sprinkling"-" Were they dipped in the Red Sea, or did the cloud pour down water upon them?"

66

How the people of Israel were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea presents no difficulty when we bear in mind that baptizo means burial or immersion in any kind of place or element-sand, or fire, or water-cave, ravine, or torrent. Surely the people were baptized into Moses. The walls of water stood up like cliffs of granite, the cloud of God's presence over-arched them as a vault or dome. There, descending into the deep and dark channel, they were baptized into Moses. It was the obedience of the faith. They yielded themselves to his government and guidance, taking him under God as their lawgiver and their king. Mr. Gall is perfectly right when he says that the water of the sea never touched them, but he is wrong, hopelessly wrong-wrong to an extreme which mingles profanity with burlesque-when he calls upon Asaph to help him with a sprinkling. Could it be," says he, "that they were baptized by being sprinkled with water from the cloud of God's own presence?" No, Mr. Gall, it could not be; nor is there any sense or dignity in asking such a question, or putting what you wanted to stand as an argument into the shape of an inquiry. It could not be-first because it is impossible to baptize by sprinkling. It could not be, in the second place, because the cloud of God's own presence was not an atmospheric cloud or a congregation of vapors! Asaph, on whom you vainly call for help, makes no reference to the CLOUD OF GOD'S OWN PRESENCE; but to the clouds, the common water-carriers of the earth. I have heard the supposition before from ignorant men, but never could have supposed that a man of scholarly dignity would lend his name to that which is thoroughly absurd and by no means reverential. The truth is, when Asaph uses the language he is not describing the baptism of the Israelites, but the ruin which fell on the Egyptians. "The clouds poured out water: the skies sent out a sound thine arrows also went abroad. The voice of thy thunder was in the heaven, the lightnings lightened the world, the earth trembled and shook" (Psalm lxxvii. 17-18.) It is clearly manifest from this that the clouds pouring out water is in association with the red arrows of divine wrath and the appaling thunder of the Lord. Thunder, lightning, and tempestuous rain, manifestly added to the dismay and terror of the meeting waters, when the chariots and horsemen of Egypt were overtaken by the angel of death. Whatever sprinkling there was the Egyptians received it-the baptism into Moses was dry, both above and below. G. G.

AN INFIDEL OBJECTION ANNIHILATED.

Ir was the remark of a sagacious politician, that "a lie would travel half round the world while truth was putting on its boots." We often see this verified in the rapid spread of infidel books-like those of Colenso and Renan, which in their bold assertion and plausible sophistry threaten, in their swift progress, to sweep away all the ancient landmarks, and to leave behind only the desolation which tells of a triumphant and resistless march. But after a time, Truth, with a patient bearing and steady pace, comes along; and in the light of her heavenly presence a more vigorous life springs forth, and a richer harvest waves in golden splendor on the desolated fields. We miss only the thorns and thistles of error-the noxious weeds and poisonous plants which the enemy has borne off as his richest spoil, and which can be well spared from their usurped dominion in the territory of divine revelation.

An instructive instance of this is before us. Colenso insists that the reading of the blessings and the cursings of the law from Gerizim and Ebal, to two millions of people, is a sheer imposibility. "For surely no human voice, unless strengthened by a miracle of which the Scripture tells us nothing, could have reached the ears of a crowded mass of people, as large as the whole population of London."

We do not pause to notice the essential difference between the fact that the law was read in the presence of the assembled tribes, and the fact that when read, it was heard by all. The former fact the narrative asserts, the latter it does not assert. It is no uncommon thing in our own conntry, to find a much larger audience present than a speaker can successfully address. But if twenty thousand persons were present at a national fair, and but ten thousand could hear the orator of the day, who would be so silly as to attempt to prove that the other ten thousand were not there, because they failed to hear the speaker? or that it was false that any speech was made, since there were more persons present than one man could address ?

The fact is, in a well arranged camp, like that of Israel, if the heads of the tribes and families heard the law, the end was abundantly served-since through them, it would soon be communicated to their subordinates. But we have an interesting statement of fact to place in opposition to the uninstructed fancy of Colenso. The Rev. John Mills, an English clergyman, has recently published a volume giving the results of a three months' residence at Nablus, at the foot of these mountains. We submit an extract from this work :

"Let us now pause for a moment to review this wonderful event. All the people betake themselves out of their tents on the plain, and make their way from all directions to the valley between the two mountains. The ark is placed in the middle of the valley, with the 'heads of the people' ranged on each side. The Levites of the one half of the tribes stood upon the lower spur of Gerizim to read the blessings, and the Levites of the other half stood upon the lower spur of Ebal to read the curses. The vast congregation filled the valley, and the women and children covered the sides of the mountains like locusts. The Levites on Mount Gerizim then read the blessings, and the Levites on Ebal read the cursings-to which the vast multitude responded, Amen! What a sublime sight! A congregation and a service, compared with which all other assemblies the world has ever witnessed dwindle into insignificance !

"Those who have seen the spot, and have examined it, can readily realize the scene. Just where the two mountains approach each other nearest are the two lower spurs, looking like two noble pulpits prepared by nature, and here the Levites would stand to read. The valley running between looks just like the floor of a vast place of worship. The slopes of both mountains recede gradually, and offer room for hundreds of thousands to be conveniently seated to hear the words of the law. The first time I stood upon that lower spur of Gerizim, the whole scene struck me forcibly, as if Divine Providence had conformed its physical features on purpose to meet the requirements of the occasion.

"To this simple narrative an objection has been brought, alleging that the distance between the two mountains is too great for the human voice to traverse. And this objection would have greater force still with those who imagine the reading to have taken place on the very summits of the mountains an idea which has no foundation in the Scripture narrative, although some Christians as early as Jerome, as well as Josephus and the Talmud, seem to have adopted the notion. In reply to this objection, authors have generally pointed out the great difference in the state of the atmosphere in that country compared with that of our own, and how much farther one can see and hear in Palestine than in Great Britain. Travellers have been surprised at these apparent phenomena in Palestine and Syria. We had a remarkable example on the very spot under notice One day when passing down the valley, we heard two shepherds holding conversation. One was on the top of Gerizim, out of our sight, and the other was close by us in the valley. Dr. Robinson mentions a spot in Lebanon where the voice can be heard for two miles.

“I am not aware whether any experiment to test the point had ever been made upon the spot previous to the one about to be mentioned. Having satisfied myself more than once during my stay in Nablus of its feasibility, and remarking this to my native friends there, a party, including Amram the priest, agreed to go to the spot and test the question. Circumstances, however, prevented us from carrying out our resolution. But before I left the country two friends joined me, the Rev. David Edwards, of Newport, and Mr. John Williams,

158

SIN: ITS EFFECT AND CURE.

Harbinger, May 1, '65.

of Aberystwyth; and on our way northwards from Jerusalem we resolved to make the experiment. We had pitched our tent in the valley near the foot of Gerizim, on the line between the two mountains, where I have supposed the ark to have formerly stood. I clambered up Gerizim, and Mr. Williams up Ebal, Mr. Edwards remaining with the men at the tent. Having reached the lower spur, I found myself standing as it were upon a lofty pulpit, and my friend found himself similarly situated on Ebal. Having rested awhile, I opened my Bible, and read the command concerning the blessings in Hebrew : and every word was heard most distinctly by Mr. Edwards in the valley, as well as Mr, Williams on Ebal. Mr. Williams then read the cursings in Welsh, and we all heard every word and syllable. Before we descended, Mr. Edwards requested us to sing, and gave out, 'Praise God from whom all blessings flow,' &c. I commenced it upon the tune Savoy, or the Old Hundreth: but as I was standing upon a very elevated pulpit, I pitched the tune in a key too high for them to join me. I was determined, however, to sing it through; and if ever I sang well and with spirit, I did so then on Gerizim, and was heard most distinctly by all. And it was our impression at the time, and still is, that if the whole area before and around us had been filled with the hundreds of thousands of Israel, every soul amongst them would have heard every note and word with perfect clearness."

Thus it is that shallow sophistry and ignorant criticism-bats of the twilight -flee before the clear, strong light of truth. There is always this difference between the plausible themes of error and the harsh aspects of truth: the former, like artificial flowers, look beautiful at a certain distance, but on close inspection, are stripped of all their attractiveness; while the latter, like all the works of God, will bear the closest inspection, and appear more divinely beautiful as they are more diligently scrutinized. We must place Colenso among those who "desire to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm."

I. E.

SIN: ITS EFFECT AND CURE.

"God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life."

"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."

EVER since sin entered into the world it has divided the human family into various sections, setting man against his fellow and against his Maker. The purpose of God evidently has been to convince his creatures of this fact, and to impress upon them the importance of reconsidering their position. In the Bible we read of sin, its effects and cure. The first act of disobedience drew forth the sentence of death, the second recorded act brought death itself. Abel offered" of the firstlings of his flock, and the Lord had respect unto Abel and his offering; but unto Cain and his offering he had not respect." The excellency of Abel's offering was not so much in the way in which it was presented as in the sacrifice itself. Blood was not typified in the fruit of the ground offered by Cain, and without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin. We may gather from this, that animal sacrifice was introduced into the world soon after sin made its appearance. The sacrifice of animals lasted about 4000 years, until the Lamb of God came among men to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

The almost innumerable number of bullocks, goats, rams, and lambs, offered by man, had failed, through the weakness of the flesh, to accomplish the final purpose of God. "He sent his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh." He was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification. Many and frequent were the complaints of God's