Although, however, the rites of Baptism and the Supper have been so generally adopted, as appertaining to their own religious system, by the professors of faith in Jesus, I cannot consider it true, in any accurate sense of the terms, that they are of Christian origin. On the contrary, there is every reason to believe that, before the coming of Christ, these practices actually formed a part of the customary Jewish ritual.

First, with respect to baptism in water. It is notorious, that, according to the ceremonial law of the Jews, there could be no removal of uncleanness, no purification either of things or persons, without ablution in water. On various occasions the performance of that ceremony was appointed by the divine law; and, on many others, it was observed on the authority of Rabbinical tradition. Now, these "divers carnal washings," to which the Jews were so much accustomed as a ritual means of purification, are, in the Greek Testament, described as baptisms; Heb. ix, 10; Mark vii, 4; Luke xi, 38; and it is certain that the principal of them were effected by dipping or immersion. Before going into the temple to minister or officiate, the priests of the Jews were accustomed to dip their whole body in water, and the house in which this ceremony was performed was denominated "the house of baptism;" Cod. Joma. c. 3, quoted by Hammond on Matt. iii. Persons of every description, who had contracted any bodily pollution, were strictly enjoined by the law to wash or bathe their flesh; see Levit. xv, 5. 8. 11; and the learned Jews determine that, if the least part of the surface of the body was not wetted by the dipping, the purification was incomplete. In the Greek original of the book of Ecclesiasticus, a person purified, after touching a dead body, is described as one dipped or baptized; ch. xxxiv, 25. Judith, when on the point of performing an action

which she erroneously deemed to be of a highly religious nature, "washed (or, as in the Greek, baptized) herself in a fountain of water;" ch. xii, 7. The Jew not only washed, but, on particular occasions, dipped himself before he sat down to meat; Mark vii, 4; Luke xi, 38, Greek text. Now, although the baptism practised by John and by the apostles did not, in all its circumstances, resemble those Jewish washings to which I have now adverted, yet it was precisely similar to them in that main particular of immersion in water; and, in all these instances, this immersion was typical of one and the same thing-that is to say, of a change from a condition of uncleanness to one of comparative purity. But the Jewish dipping, from which the baptism, first, of John, and afterwards, of the apostles, principally took its rise, and of which those baptisms may, indeed, be considered as mere instances, was the dipping on conversion. We read in the book of Exodus, that three days before the delivery of the law, "the Lord said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes;" in pursuance of which command, we are afterwards informed [that "Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes," Exod. xix, 10, 14. From the comparison of other similar passages, it appears probable that the washing of clothes here mentioned was a baptism or immersion in water of the whole body, together with the apparel; compare Levit. xi, 25; xiv. 47; xv, 5, &c. Such is the express judgment of the Rabbinical writers; and they further determine that this baptism was commanded and observed, on the principle that the Israelites were then about to be introduced to a new religious covenant or dispensation;-that, in other words, it was a baptism of conversion, to a purer and

more excellent system of worship, faith, and conduct, than that to which they had hitherto been accustomed ; Maimonides Issure Biah, cap. 13. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. in Matt. iii, 6.

2

- Hence, as it is declared by Maimonides and other Jewish writers, arose the baptism of proselytes, or of the Gentile converts to the religion of the Jews. It was a principle well understood amongst that people, that, as it was with the Israelite, so it should be with the proselyte; see Num. xv, 15; and, accordingly, as the Israelites had entered into their covenant by "circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice," the same introductory rites were considered indispensable to the proselyte. According to the traditions of the Rabbins, circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice, were enjoined on every male, and the two latter on every female convert from heathenism to the Jewish faith. It was a trite axiom, as Lightfoot informs us, that no man could be a proselyte until he was circumcised and baptized. In the Babylonish Gemara, (part of the Talmud) we find the following disputation. "The proselyte who is circumcised and not baptized, what are we to say of him? Rabbi Eliezer says, Behold he is a proselyte; for so we find it was with our fathers (the Patriarchs,) that they were circumcised and not baptized. He that is baptized and not circumcised, what are we to say of him? Rabbi Joshua says, Behold he is a proselyte; for so we find it is with females. But the wise men say, Is he baptized and not circumcised? or, is he circumcised and not baptized? He is no proselyte until he be circumcised

2 The proselytes were of two descriptions: proselytes of the gate, who forsook idolatry and worshipped the true God, but did not conform to the Jewish law; and proselytes of justice, who went further, and embraced the whole legal and ceremonial system. It was the latter only who were baptized.

and baptized;" Jevamoth, fol. 46, 2. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. in Matt. iii, 6.

Maimonides, who was a man of extraordinary sense and learning, and was deeply versed in the laws and customs of the ancient Jews, has stated a variety of particulars respecting the baptism of proselytes. It appears that, about three days after circumcision, the convert to Judaism was conducted, during the day time, to a confluence of waters, whether natural or artificial, sufficiently deep to admit of entire immersion. Having been placed in the water, he was instructed in various particulars of the Jewish law, by three scribes of learning and authority, who presided over the whole ceremony; and, when these doctors had received his promises of a faithful adherence to the Jewish institutions, and had fully satisfied themselves respecting his motives and condition of mind, he completed the immersion of his whole person by dipping his head. He then ascended from the water, offered his sacrifice to the Lord, and was thenceforward considered as a complete Jew, and as a new or regenerate man; Issure Biah, cap. 13, 14. Wall on Infant Baptism, p. xliv. Selden de Synedriis, lib. i, cap. 3.

I am aware that the existence of the rite of proselyte baptism, before the Christian era, is disputed by some of the learned, on the ground that such a rite is not specifically mentioned either in the Old Testament, or in the most ancient uninspired writings of the Jews; but this omission is very far from being sufficient to prove the negative; and the doubt which it occasions appears to be very greatly out-balanced by positive evidences in favour of the antiquity of the practice. It seems necessary shortly to glance at these evidences.

1. The Jewish writers, who make mention of the baptism of proselytes, expressly describe it as an ordi

3

nance practised among their countrymen at a date long prior to the Christian era. Thus, it is said in the Talmud, that Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, was baptized as a proselyte; Tract. Repudii, Hammond on Matt. iii. From Maimonides we learn that the baptism of proselytes was practised from age to age, after the Israelites themselves had been initiated into their covenant in the days of Moses; and, again, he makes mention of the proselytes in the time of David and Solomon, as of persons who had been baptized; Issure Biah, cap. 13.

66

2. There was a marked resemblance in several leading particulars between the baptism of proselytes, as described in the Talmud and by Maimonides, and the baptism practised by John and the early teachers of Christianity. The baptism of the proselytes was a complete immersion, and was appointed to take place in a confluence of waters. The baptism of John and of the Christians is generally allowed to have been of the same character. "John baptized in Ænon, near to Salim, because there was much water there,” John iii, 23; and when the Ethiopian was to be baptized, we read that he and Philip went down or descended into the water," and afterwards, that they "came up out of the water," Acts viii, 38, 39. It has, indeed, been remarked that, as the proselyte dipped his own head, he might be considered as baptizing himself, whereas the convert to Christianity was baptized by the minister who converted him; and the disciples of John were baptized by that prophet. But, I apprehend, the supposed difference in this respect is merely imaginary; for, although the proselyte plunged his own head in conclusion of the rite, he might properly be described as being baptized by the persons who placed him in the water, and who arranged the whole ceremony.

לדררות 3