Mark 7:4 Marty Livingston Just_A_Servant at yahoo.com
Tue May 2 12:33:42 EDT 2000
Previous message: Hermas’s Masonry Next message: Hermas’s Masonry The word baptizo is used to refer to their tradition of washing tables.
Previous message: Hermas’s MasonryNext message: Hermas’s Masonry More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue May 2 12:45:24 EDT 2000
Previous message: Hermas’s Masonry Next message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in Acts At 12:33 PM -0500 5/2/00, Marty Livingston wrote:>The word baptizo is used to refer to their tradition of washing tables.>>From a Greek language standpoint, would this infer they immersed or dipped>their tables?I don’t think this refers to washing tables, but to washing THEMSELVES(middle 3d pl. aorist BAPTISWNTAI). Presumably those described feelthemselves sufficiently soiled from trading in the Agora that they scrubthemselves; I don’t think there’s any clear notion here of dunking,dousing, or just rinsing, but I’d guess it involves a liberal applicationof water. But presumably this is primarily hands and arms, given theopening of the chapter, verse 2 hOTI KOINAIS CERSIN, TOUT’ ESTIN ANIPTOIS,ESQIOUSIN TOUS ARTOUS …– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Previous message: Hermas’s MasonryNext message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in Acts More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue May 2 13:15:09 EDT 2000
Previous message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in Acts Next message: Mark 7:4 Dear Carl, I agree with what you wrote about Mark 7:4, but what about the nounBAPTISMOUS in the latter part of the verse: BAPTISMOUS POTHRIWN KAI XESTWNKAI CALKIWN [KAI KLINWN], or “baptisms of cups and pitchers and bowls [anddining couches]”?Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in ActsNext message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Tue May 2 13:28:45 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Discourse Analysis I would think BAPTIZW refers to “washing” of anything, not just a specificobject, as was asked about washing of tables in a previous message. And eventho I happen to have been raised as a Baptist, I doubt that the tables wereimmersed!! 🙂 They were simply washed, with sufficient water placed onthem, perhaps with a cloth, as I wash tables, to make them clean.Translating BAPTIZW as “wash” would nicely correlate with “washing ofregeneration” (Titus 3:5), since baptism by/in the Spirit andregeneration/washing by the Spirit may be regarded by Paul as parallel (orperhaps even nearly the same) action.WayneBible translation discussion list:http://www.egroups.com/group/bible-translation
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Discourse Analysis More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 a b just_a_servant at yahoo.com
Tue May 2 13:22:47 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 — “Harold R. Holmyard III” <hholmyard at ont.com>wrote:> what about the noun> BAPTISMOUS in the latter part of the verse:> BAPTISMOUS POTHRIWN KAI XESTWN> KAI CALKIWN [KAI KLINWN], Yes, it was the second part of the verse that I had inmind. Sorry for not being more specific.Marty Livingston__________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.http://im.yahoo.com/
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue May 2 14:23:35 EDT 2000
Previous message: Discourse Analysis Next message: Mark 7:4 Dear Wayne, It is interesting that you would translate BAPTIZW as referring to the”washing” of anything, because I have long felt that this aspect of thebaptismal ceremony is often overlooked. We concentrate on theidentification with Jesus’ death and resurrection, but the originalceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church ordinance ought topreserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:”And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,calling on his name.”Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Discourse AnalysisNext message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Tue May 2 14:42:37 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 Harold responded:>Dear Wayne,> It is interesting that you would translate BAPTIZW as referring to the>“washing” of anything, because I have long felt that this aspect of the>baptismal ceremony is often overlooked. We concentrate on the>identification with Jesus’ death and resurrection, but the original>ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church ordinance ought to>preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:I fully agree, Harold. I haven’t understood this aspect of baptism for verylong (even tho there are so many clues to it in scripture), so I’m glad forthis discussion which is helping me.Thanks,Wayne
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue May 2 14:43:19 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 At 1:23 PM -0500 5/2/00, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:>Dear Wayne,> It is interesting that you would translate BAPTIZW as referring to the>“washing” of anything, because I have long felt that this aspect of the>baptismal ceremony is often overlooked. We concentrate on the>identification with Jesus’ death and resurrection, but the original>ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church ordinance ought to>preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:> >“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,>calling on his name.”But the Greek root BAF does seem to mean fundamentally plunge, immerse, orsoak (I’ve seen it used in contexts such as the tempering of white hot ironin a water bath and the dying of wool by steeping it in the pigmentedliquid. And while I wouldn’t perhaps want to push the matter too far, froma ritual and symbolic perspective, the “washing” is simultaneously (1) adissolution into the waters of chaos and emergence as a new creation, and(2) a KAQARSIS wherein what pollutes is separated off and what emerges isKAQAROS, “clean,” and “pure.”– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Bill Ross wross at farmerstel.com
Tue May 2 15:19:37 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 <Harold>…but the original ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the churchordinance ought to preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:”And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,calling on his name.”<Bill>I don’t think baptim is properly understood as a washing (see 1 Peter 3:21).But grammatically speaking…EPIKALESAMENOS is either defining the washing or both the baptism and thewashing:Acts22:16KAI NUN TI MELLEIS ANASTAS BAPTISAI **KAI** APOLOUSAI TASAMARTIAS SOU EPIKALESAMENOS TO ONOMA AUTOUBill RossNotes:1 Peter321O KAI UMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWZEI BAPTISMA OU SARKOS APOQESISRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON DI ANASTASEWS IHSOU CRISTOU1 Pet 3:21 (KJV)”The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not theputting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good consciencetoward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 roseann roseann at Intellisys.net
Tue May 2 15:42:11 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 Are we saying then that the word baptism can mean either sprinkling, pouringor dipping? If so, why the distinction in Lev. 14:15-16. It’s myunderstanding that the word pour is translated from CHEO in vs. 15 and theword dip from BAPTIZO vs. 16 and the word sprinkle from RHANTIZO – vs. 16.(Heb. to Gk.)God bless,Roseann EkmanThomas St. Church of ChristAltus, OKhttp://www.showcase234.com/religion/pictures/roseann.htm><Harold>>…but the original ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church>ordinance ought to preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:> >“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,>calling on his name.”> ><Bill>>I don’t think baptim is properly understood as a washing (see 1 Peter3:21).> >But grammatically speaking…> >EPIKALESAMENOS is either defining the washing or both the baptism and the>washing:> >Acts 22:16 KAI NUN TI MELLEIS ANASTAS BAPTISAI **KAI** APOLOUSAI TAS>AMARTIAS SOU EPIKALESAMENOS TO ONOMA AUTOU> >Bill Ross> >Notes:>1 Peter 3 21 O KAI UMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWZEI BAPTISMA OU SARKOS APOQESIS>RUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON DI ANASTASEWS IHSOUCRISTOU> >1 Pet 3:21 (KJV)>“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the>putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience>toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”> > >—> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/>You are currently subscribed to as: roseann at Intellisys.net>To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > >
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 yochanan bitan ButhFam at compuserve.com
Tue May 2 16:10:09 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Discourse Analysis shalom Marty,EGRAYSAS:>The word baptizo is used to refer to their tradition of washing tables. >From a Greek language standpoint, would this infer they immersed or dipped>their tables?The question is not Greek language but Jewish CULTURE.(E.g. rich people used stone tables so they did not have problems withclean/unclean. Stone is clean by definition.) Mark 7.4 has cups, pitchers and copper bowls, for sure. All weredipped/immersed when needing ritual purification. So were beds! cf. Kelim 19.1 ‘if someone takes a bed apart to immerse it…” You might want to read the division tohorot ‘cleannesses’ in themishnah if you want the details. E.g., a flat table did not get unclean. errwso Randall Buth
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Discourse Analysis More information about the mailing list
Fwd: Re: Mark 7:4 George Goolde goolde at mtnempire.net
Tue May 2 16:30:40 EDT 2000
Previous message: Discourse Analysis Next message: Acts 2:38 — umwn >Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:15:52 -0700>To: “Marty Livingston” <Just_A_Servant at yahoo.com>>From: George Goolde <goolde at mtnempire.net>>Subject: Re: Mark 7:4> >At 12:33 PM 5/2/00 +0000, Marty Livingston wrote:>>The word baptizo is used to refer to their tradition of washing tables.>> >From a Greek language standpoint, would this infer they immersed or dipped>>their tables?> >Were you referring here to KLINWN, their dining pillows?> >GeorgeGeorge A. GooldeProfessor, Bible and TheologySouthern California Bible College & SeminaryEl Cajon, Californiagoolde at mtnempire.net
Previous message: Discourse AnalysisNext message: Acts 2:38 — umwn More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Bill Ross wross at farmerstel.com
Tue May 2 16:47:28 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 <Roseann>>Are we saying then that the word baptism can mean either sprinkling,pouringor dipping?<Bill>That is not what I was saying. I was only referring to the symbolism which Itake to mean burial more than anything else.Bill Ross
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Jonathan Robie Jonathan.Robie at SoftwareAG-USA.com
Tue May 2 17:28:29 EDT 2000
Previous message: Acts 2:38 — umwn Next message: Mark 7:4 I went over to Perseus to see how this word is used in non-theological contexts (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/lexindex?lookup=bapti/zw&lang=greek&formentry=0). Both their glosses and their examples are interesting. Consider the following glosses: dip, plunge, (passive) to be drowned, (of ships) sink or disable them, flooded, to be drenched, soaked in wine. If we were to look just at the glosses, the force of this word does seem more related to dunking and drenching than to washing.Now consider some of these example:ophlêmasi bebaptismenoi, over head and ears in debt (Plu.Galb.21)ebaptisan tên polin flooded the city, metaph., of the crowds who flocked into Jerusalem at the time of the siege, J.BJ4.3.3hôs ek tou bebaptisthai anapneousi Hp.Epid.5.63; to be drenchedgnous baptizomenon to meirakion seeing that he was getting into deep water, Plat. Euthyd. 277d;b. eis anaisthêsian kai hupnon J.AJ10.9.4The illustrative examples chosen by LSJ don’t seem to be talking primarily about washing. Personally, I like the notion that getting baptized is getting yourself into deep water ;->JonathanJonathan Robiejwrobie at mindspring.com (http://metalab.unc.edu/)B-Hebrew (http://metalab.unc.edu/bhebrew)Little Greek (http://metalab.unc.edu/koine)Little Greek 101 (http://metalab.unc.edu/koine/greek/lessons)
Previous message: Acts 2:38 — umwnNext message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue May 2 18:04:32 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 Dear Bill, You discount a connection of washing with the idea of baptism in Acts22:16 because of 1 Pet 3:21:hO KAI hUMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWiZEI BAPTISMA OU SARKOS APOQESISRUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON DI ANASTASEWS IHSOU CRISTOU1 Pet 3:21 (KJV): The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now saveus (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of agood conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:There is no need to interpret 1 Pet 3:21 as contradictory to the idea ofbaptism as a washing. What Peter denies is that baptism is a washing of theflesh. What Ananias in Acts 22:16 speaks of is a washing away of sins, thatis, a cleansing of the conscience. The whole idea of a baptism was aceremonial washing, as we have already seen in Mark 7:4. It seemsunfruitful to ignore that aspect of the meaning of baptism in Acts 22:16,especially when it explains the presence of the word “wash” in the context.Let me quote a piece of my paper on 1 Pet 3:18-4:6:Peter’s short excursus on the nature of baptism is a reminder of thestarting point of the Christian life; Christians should preserve throughright behavior the good conscience which they sought by baptism.40 Theword “flesh” is emphatically forward, for “baptism” in Greek often implieda bath purifying the flesh.41 Yet the defining characteristic of savingbaptism (1 Pet 3:21), the “thing asked” (EPERWTNMA) of God by converts, isinstead a purified “conscience.”42 The reading can be: “baptism, not (abaptism) of flesh, a putting away of filth, but (a baptism) of a goodconscience, a thing asked unto God.”43 The contrast between “flesh” and “conscience” also occurs in Heb9:9-10 and 9:13-14, where the former passage additionally mentions”baptisms.” According to Heb 9:13-14 the basis of contrast between the twokinds of baptism in 1 Pet 3:21 would be the nature of the cleansing:physical washings of the Law as against spiritual cleansing found inChrist’s atonement.44 Although Christian baptism has respect to inwardchange, a conscience which no longer testifies to uncleansed sins (Heb10:1-2) is not simply the consequence of repentance; a divine applicationof Christ’s blood (Heb 9:14; 1 John 1:7) is necessary. And since God haspromised salvation to those who repent and are baptized, as Peter spoke atPentecost (Acts 2:38-40), obedient immersion that symbolizes a washing awayof sins (Acts 22:16) serves as a formal request that God act on thebeliever’s behalf.45If you need the footnotes, please ask, and I will give them to you. Theyare very long and not computerized due to a glitch.Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue May 2 18:16:44 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 Dear Roseann, The verb in Lev 14:16 is not BAPTIZW but BAPTW. Clearly, BAPTW refersto the priest’s dipping his finger in the oil. BAG lists “dip” as themeaning for BAPTW, but for BAPTIZW it gives a wider reference of meaningthat includes the ideas “dip, immerse, (mid.) dip oneself, wash (innon-Christian lit. also plunge, sink, drench, overwhelm; [fig.] soak,” andBAG adds that in Christian literature BAPTIZW refers to “wash” only in aritual sense. The verb is use of Jewish ritual washings, of Christianbaptism, and in a figurative sense related to the idea of Christian baptism.Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Tue May 2 18:27:22 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 Dear George, “Dining Pillows” may be a valid translation for KLINWN in Mark 7:4,but the NIV has dining couches in its footnote on the variant in Mark 7:4.BAG defines KLINH as “bed, couch,” and speaks specifically of a “diningcouch” in Mark 7:4.Yours,Harold Holmyard
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Mike Sangrey mike at sojurn.lns.pa.us
Tue May 2 18:41:23 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto Regarding the various possible glosses for BAPTIZW:I find it somewhat interesting that English has the word ‘awash’ to signify being flooded.There appears to be some correlation between ‘floodedness’, ‘washing’, and ‘cleansing’ in people’s minds.Perhaps BAPTIZW has the attributes of all three?Perhaps the one true and correct method of Baptism would be under a waterfall?:-)— Mike Sangreymike at sojurn.lns.pa.usLandisburg, Pa. There is no ‘do’ in faith, everywhere present within it is ‘done’.
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Tue May 2 20:02:11 EDT 2000
Previous message: Hermas’s Masonry Next message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto > >Perhaps the one true and correct method of Baptism would be under awaterfall?Just as long as the top of the head gets wet, Mike! :)Wayne
Previous message: Hermas’s MasonryNext message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Paul, Doug Doug.Paul at GD-CS.COM
Wed May 3 07:26:04 EDT 2000
Previous message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in Acts Next message: Mark 7:4 The figure of being buried with Christ in baptism makes sense if baptism isimmersion. Certainly I wash the dishes by dipping them in the water.Immersion and washing can be the same act.______________________________________________Doug Paul (781) 455-4216System Engineer FAX:(781) 455-2042General DynamicsCommunication Systemsdoug.paul at GD-CS.com______________________________________________—–Original Message—–From: roseann [mailto:roseann at Intellisys.net]Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2000 3:42 PMTo: Biblical GreekSubject: Re: Mark 7:4Are we saying then that the word baptism can mean either sprinkling, pouringor dipping? If so, why the distinction in Lev. 14:15-16. It’s myunderstanding that the word pour is translated from CHEO in vs. 15 and theword dip from BAPTIZO vs. 16 and the word sprinkle from RHANTIZO – vs. 16.(Heb. to Gk.)God bless,Roseann EkmanThomas St. Church of ChristAltus, OKhttp://www.showcase234.com/religion/pictures/roseann.htm><Harold>>…but the original ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church>ordinance ought to preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:> >“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins,>calling on his name.”> ><Bill>>I don’t think baptim is properly understood as a washing (see 1 Peter3:21).> >But grammatically speaking…> >EPIKALESAMENOS is either defining the washing or both the baptism and the>washing:> >Acts 22:16 KAI NUN TI MELLEIS ANASTAS BAPTISAI **KAI** APOLOUSAI TAS>AMARTIAS SOU EPIKALESAMENOS TO ONOMA AUTOU> >Bill Ross> >Notes:>1 Peter 3 21 O KAI UMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWZEI BAPTISMA OU SARKOS APOQESIS>RUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON DI ANASTASEWS IHSOUCRISTOU> >1 Pet 3:21 (KJV)>“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the>putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience>toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”> > >—> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/>You are currently subscribed to as: roseann at Intellisys.net>To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > > — home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/You are currently subscribed to as: doug.paul at gd-cs.comTo unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu
Previous message: Periphrastic construction “EIMI + Participle” in ActsNext message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed May 3 09:01:07 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: Mark 7:4 At 7:26 AM -0400 5/3/00, Paul, Doug wrote:>The figure of being buried with Christ in baptism makes sense if baptism is>immersion. Certainly I wash the dishes by dipping them in the water.>Immersion and washing can be the same act.This is one of those questions that is multi-faceted; it started out as arelatively simple matter of how the word BAPTISMOS may be applied in thepericope opening Mark’s seventh chapter to refer to such a variety ofwashings and just what sort of washings were envisioned in the sayingattributed to Jesus. It sort of “overflowed”–if I may be allowed the pun(and even if I may not!–in which case, take it as a simple metaphor) intoquestions about the form and meaning of Christian ritual baptism, and that,I think, is where theological assumptions began to enter into the”equation” of how the words BAPTIZW and BAPTISMOS may legitimately beunderstood in the GNT: is it “dunk,” “douse,” “dabble,” or what? I’veargued that the essential sense of the Greek root BAF (beta-alpha-phi) is”plunge,” “flood,” or “dip”; there’s always a peril in the attempt toexplain usage from etymology, even when there seems little question of whatthe authentic etymology is. The notion of “cleansing” seems inherent in theritual as practiced by John (and apparently recurrently by the Qumrancommunity), and from the perspective of religious symbolism there seemslittle difference between John’s “baptism of repentance” and the procedureof KAQARSIS practiced by priests of Apollo at Delphi whereby the MIASMA or”stain/pollution” of a crime (particularly of bloodshed) could be purged bya regimen of confession and penance (Herakles’ DWDEKA PONOI wereprescribed, according to mythic lore, for his involuntary murder of hiswife and children in a fit of madness sent upon him by his wicked witch ofa stepmother). The same idea seems to be involved in the Johannine ritualof footwashing (John 13) which some interpreters have taken to be theJohannine replacement for ritual baptism (although others dispute that),inasmuch as it involves the notion of KAQARSIS (as does also, perhaps, the”pruning”–KAQAIREI–of the Johannine allegory of the Vine)–so Jesus says,hO LELOUMENOS OUK ECEI CREIAN EI MH TOUS PODAS NIYASQAI, ALL’ ESTINKAAQAROS hOLOS: KAI hUMEIS KAQAROI ESTE, …(13:10). At any rate, whateverthe language used, there appears to be always the implication that the”cleansing,” whatever ritual expression it may take, and whether or not oneunderstands the ritual expression as having efficacy “ex opere operato,”points to an alteration of the relationship between the one cleansed andGod.And that’s where our interpretations tend to diverge (if they don’tconverge, at any rate, then they must diverge). Already Paul was linkingthe ritual of baptism with (symbolic?) death and burial with Christ inexpectation of sharing his resurrection (Rom 6:3-4) and Matthew’s Jesusseems to understand his own baptism not so much as a cleansing of his ownsins but as a means of “fulfilling all righteousness” (PLHRWSAI PASANDIKAIOSUNHN, Mt 3:15), presumably, as many interpreters understand it, withreference to his anticipated saving death–and even Mark (which I continueto think is the earliest gospel) has Jesus alluding to his death as abaptism also, when he says to James and John, DUNASQE PIEIN TO POTHRION hOEGW PINW H TO BAPTISMA hO EGW BAPTIZOMAI BAPTISQHNAI? (Mk 10:38). So theassociation of baptism with the dying of Jesus and the efficacy of thatdying and with cleansing, in one ritual expression or another, seems to becommon to BAPTIZW and BAPTISMOS except when they are used of otherwashings. But our interpretations tend to diverge when we get into thequestion of the MODE in which the cleansing water is brought to bear uponthe repentant and cleansed believer: is it “dunking,” “dowsing,” or”dabbling”? I don’t think we have any business here on arguingabout which means is THE proper one simply on the basis of what BAPTIZW andBAPTISMOS may “literally” mean. “Dunking,” “dowsing,” and “dabbling” aregoing to continue to have their proponents for reasons of their ownconscience. But I do think that the richness of the symbolism of watercleansing ought not to elude us, however we may differ over the means bywhich it is ritually applied. I referred a couple days ago to the notionthat immersion is symbolically a death by dissolution into the primevalwaters of chaos and that re-emergence is a resurrection or thebirth/coming-into-being of a “new creature” or “new creation” (KAINHKTISIS, 2 Cor 5:17). And these symbolic dimensions reach pretty far; it’sworth noting that one of the preferred themes of artistic representation byChristians in the Roman catacombs (I think this is true) was the arkfloating above the flood–and the little boat with a cross for a mast thatfloats above the waters in the emblem of the World Council of Churches atopthe Greek word OIKOUMENH is indeed a representation of the same idea: it issimultaneously the ark that bears the redeemed above the eschatologicalflood and the little ship on the Sea of Galilee that bears disciples withtheir master from the hither shore to the farther shore.I don’t know whether or not this has been a worthwhile exercise, and I knowthat it exceeds the ordinary range of our endeavors to get clear about themeaning of a Greek word used in the GNT or of a text in the GNT, but itdoes seem to me that when we come to the words BAPTIZW and BAPTISMOS, weers tend to get hung up (each time, whether annually, or twice ayear) on minutiae about the one appropriate MODUS OPERANDI of baptism orthe sole legitimate interpretation of what baptism means. I keep thinkingthat it’s a much bigger thing than one that can be so readily delimitedwith precision to one MODUS OPERANDI or to one legitimate interpretation ofthe meaning.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics/Washington UniversityOne Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: Mark 7:4 More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 roseann roseann at Intellisys.net
Wed May 3 09:29:29 EDT 2000
Previous message: Mark 7:4 Next message: koin/ classical-difference Hello Doug,I agree with your statement. My question was geared to the idea/questionfrom another about how the word BAPTISMOUS is being used in regard tocleaning tables/cups/pitchers and kettles….Mark 7:4. I notice in myinterlinear that in reference to the washing of hands the word RHANTIZONTAI(sprinkle) is used, yet the root word for baptize is use in regard to thewashing of dishes…which I thought would indicate immersion. The confusioncame in my mind when the same word is used in regard to washing tables(KJV) – my footnote adds, from some mss., couches!! NIV leaves out tables.Another thing: if the washings whether of hands or utensils, wereCEREMONIAL washings I would think that the *washings* of Christianity wouldnot carry that connotation. Matt., Mark, Luke and John is chronologicallystill under the Law system and therefore, ceremonial washings of Judaismwere intact, but wouldn’t the immersion baptism under Christianity (afterit’s inception in Acts 2) be… symbolic perhaps, but *not ceremonial*?Thanks for your comments.God bless,Roseann EkmanThomas St. Church of ChristAltus, OKhttp://www.showcase234.com/religion/pictures/roseann.htm>The figure of being buried with Christ in baptism makes sense if baptism is>immersion. Certainly I wash the dishes by dipping them in the water.>Immersion and washing can be the same act.> >______________________________________________>Doug Paul (781) 455-4216>System Engineer FAX:(781) 455-2042>General Dynamics>Communication Systems> >doug.paul at GD-CS.com>______________________________________________> > >—–Original Message—–>From: roseann [mailto:roseann at Intellisys.net]>Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2000 3:42 PM>To: Biblical Greek>Subject: Re: Mark 7:4> > >Are we saying then that the word baptism can mean either sprinkling,pouring>or dipping? If so, why the distinction in Lev. 14:15-16. It’s my>understanding that the word pour is translated from CHEO in vs. 15 and the>word dip from BAPTIZO vs. 16 and the word sprinkle from RHANTIZO – vs. 16.>(Heb. to Gk.)>God bless,>Roseann Ekman>Thomas St. Church of Christ>Altus, OK>http://www.showcase234.com/religion/pictures/roseann.htm> > > >><Harold>>>…but the original ceremony clearly implied a washing. And the church>>ordinance ought to preserve this idea. See Acts 22:16:>> >>“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thysins,>>calling on his name.”>> >><Bill>>>I don’t think baptim is properly understood as a washing (see 1 Peter>3:21).>> >>But grammatically speaking…>> >>EPIKALESAMENOS is either defining the washing or both the baptism and the>>washing:>> >>Acts 22:16 KAI NUN TI MELLEIS ANASTAS BAPTISAI **KAI** APOLOUSAI TAS>>AMARTIAS SOU EPIKALESAMENOS TO ONOMA AUTOU>> >>Bill Ross>> >>Notes:>>1 Peter 3 21 O KAI UMAS ANTITUPON NUN SWZEI BAPTISMA OU SARKOS APOQESIS>>RUPOU ALLA SUNEIDHSEWS AGAQHS EPERWTHMA EIS QEON DI ANASTASEWS IHSOU>CRISTOU>> >>1 Pet 3:21 (KJV)>>“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the>>putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a goodconscience>>toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”>> >> >>—>> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/>>You are currently subscribed to as: roseann at Intellisys.net>>To unsubscribe, forward this message to>$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu>> >> >> > > >—> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/>You are currently subscribed to as: doug.paul at gd-cs.com>To unsubscribe, forward this message to>$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > >—> home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/>You are currently subscribed to as: roseann at Intellisys.net>To unsubscribe, forward this message to$subst(‘Email.Unsub’)>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe- at franklin.oit.unc.edu> > >
Previous message: Mark 7:4Next message: koin/ classical-difference More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Wayne Leman wleman at mcn.net
Wed May 3 10:43:20 EDT 2000
Previous message: Acts 2:38 — umwn Next message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto My doubt was wrong, Randall. Thanks for reminding us to check cultural info.I preach this need, also, but used my American worldview in this case andwas wrong.Shalom,WayneBible translation discussion list:http://www.egroups.com/group/bible-translation>> And even>>tho I happen to have been raised as a Baptist, I doubt that the tables>were>>immersed!! 🙂> >doubt?> >‘O Lord I believe, — help me — lift this out of the mikve’ 🙂>See MKelim 19.1, where someone dismantles a bed so that he can immerse it!> >Reading thru the eyes of the original culture is vital, but few do it, even>NT scholars.>(the early records are all in Hebrew anyway.)> >errwso>Randall Buth>en Ierosolumois>
Previous message: Acts 2:38 — umwn Next message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto More information about the mailing list
Mark 7:4 Mr. Gary S. Dykes yhwh3in1 at lightspeed.net
Wed May 3 13:03:43 EDT 2000
Previous message: Genesis 1.2 epefereto Next message: pragmatics at the well Another reply!!
Previous message: Genesis 1.2 epeferetoNext message: pragmatics at the well More information about the mailing list