Joseph Ysebaert on Baptismal Regeneration in the Pauline Epistles

  

A passage of Paul speaks of a baptism in one Spirit and in one body: εν ενι πνευματι ημεις παντες εις σωμα εβαπτισθημεν . . . και παντες εν πνευμα εποτισθημεν 1 Cor. 12.13. If one takes the second part to refer to the Eucharist then the first may be a variant of the fixed expression and refer to the postbaptismal gift of the Spirit. For this, however, the imbibing of the Spirit in the second part is a striking image. Hence one would be rather inclined to take the first section as referring to baptism in water. In support of this it may be pointed out that εις εν σωμα indicates the aim of the rite as being the incorporation in Christ, which is accomplished by baptism. The linking of baptism and Spirit thus does not necessarily mean that the text refers to a gift of the Spirit at baptism. If so, the author would be thinking literally of an immersion in water and metaphorically of an immersion in the Spirit. It is therefore better to take the preposition εν instrumentally in the sense of ‘by means of’ (cf. Mt. 9.34) Paul then says that the incorporation of the faithful is brought about by the one spirit at baptism.

 

In this passage we now finds a first way of expressing the fact that the Spirit operates in baptism. For this operation, Paul has various expressions: baptism purifies and justifies by the operation of the Spirit: εν τω πνευματι του θεου ημων (1 Cor. 6.11), the charity of God is poured forth in baptism through the Holy Spirit: δια πνευματος αγιου Rom. 5.5, the baptismal renewal is the work of the Spirit: ανακαινωσις πνευματος αγιου Tit. 3.5, the children of God are led by the Spirit of God: πνευματι θεου αγονται Rom. 8.14. John says that the rebirth is brought about by the Spirit: εκ (του) πνευματος Jn. 3.5, 6, 8. We thus find the operation of the Spirit at the baptism in water expressed by the genitive, the dative, and by the prepositions εν, δια, εκ. (Joseph Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origins and Early Development [trans. M. F. Foran Hedlund; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Dekker and Van De Vegt N.V., 1962], 61, ephasis in bold added; cf. “Renewal is an effect of baptism, Rom. 6.4; Tit. 3.5, but it is also a process which must continue to occur daily in the life of the Christian, 2 Cor. 4.16, Rom. 12.2” [ibid., 132])

 

Ignatius and Cyprian on the Holy Spirit Operating Through the Instrumentality of Water Baptism

  

Operation and indwelling of the Spirit as distinguished from the gift of the Spirit.—In the early Christian writers, as in the New Testament, the negative and positive effects of baptism are ascribed to the operation of God, and in particular, of the Holy Spirit. This is expressed by the causal dative πνευματι in Clement of Alexandria, who calls the baptismal forgiveness of sins the work of the Spirit: οι βαπτιζομενοι, τας . . . . αμαρτιας τω θειω πνευματι . . . . αποτριψαμενοι Paed. 1.28.1, or, with reference to Jn. 3.5, the preposition εξ is changed to δια in the heretical interpretation of Theodotus: το βαπτισμα ουν διπλουν . . . . το μεν αισθητον δι’ υδατος . . . . το δε νοητον δια πνευματος Exc. 81.2, by Clement: το βαπτισμα γινεται δι’ υδατος και πνευματος Ecl. 8.1, and by Origen: sordes peccati, quae per aquam et spiritum ablui deberent In Rom 5.9. Christians are convinced that water by itself cannot sanctify; this only becomes possible by divine operation. Thus Ignatius perhaps intends to say that by His baptism (παθος) Jesus purified the water: εβαπτισθη, ινα τω παθει το υδωρ καθαριση Eph. 18.2, and Cyprian clearly states: peccata enim purgare et hominem sanctificare aqua sola non potest nisi habeat spirtium sanctum Ep. 74.4. (Joseph Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origins and Early Development [trans. M. F. Foran Hedlund; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Dekker and Van De Vegt N.V., 1962], 70)

 

Joseph Ysebaert on "Water" being used as a Synonym for "Baptism"

  

The water.—From a term used for the baptismal water the noun υδωρ developed to a certain extent into a name for baptism itself. This development is indicated in the New Testament. When the Spirit descends upon the family of Cornelius, Peter says that one cannot all the same refuse them ‘the water’: μήτι τὸ ὕδωρ δύναται κωλῦσαί τις τοῦ μὴ βαπτισθῆναι τούτου. Pseudo-Barnabas now intends to examine what the Lord has revealed concerning the water and the cross: περι του υδατος και περι του σταυρου Ep. 11.1. Hermas calls the seal the water in order to say that it is conferred in baptism: η σφραγις ουν το υδωρ εστιν Past. 93.4, and alludes to baptism as the water: η ζωη υμων δια υδατος εσωθη και σωθησεται ib. 11.5, cf. 32.1. The term becomes more technical when it is said that Paul promises the water to Thecla: ληψη το υδωρ Act. Paul. Thecl. 25. Origen says that one does not always receive the Holy Spirit after the water: πνευματος . . . ου πασιν μετα το υδωρ εγγινομενου In Jo. 6.33.169. From Tertullian onwards the same development of aqua is found in Latin: de sacramento aquae nostrae Bapt. 1.1, cf. Paen. 6.18, Pass. Perp. 3.5. (Joseph Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origins and Early Development [trans. M. F. Foran Hedlund; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Dekker and Van De Vegt N.V., 1962], 77-78)

 

Joseph Ysebaert on 2 Kings 5:14 (LXX) and the use of βαπτιζω and its Reception by Irenaeus of Lyons

  

The oldest, both in the original and in the Greek, is the only one that still allows comparison with its Hebrew equivalent. The story is that of the cleansing of Naaman in the Jordan. The prophet Elisha has ordered the Syrian to bathe seven times in the Jordan in order to be cleansed: λουσαι επτακις . . . και καθαρισθηση 4 Reg. 5.10. Irritated, Naaman thinks that he would do better to bathe in the rivers of Damascus but his servants exhort him to carry out the command by the prophet. The original text three times uses rḥṣ translated every time by λουειν. However, when Naaman finally washes himself in the Jordan the Hebrew uses ṭbl q. intransitively, an unusual voice of βαπτιζειν: και κατεβη Ναιμαν και εβαπτισατο εν τω Ιορδανη επτακι . . . και εκαθαρισθη ib. 5.14.

 

The Hebrew text describes the bath that Naaman finally takes as a ‘plunging of oneself into the river’. One may take into account that rḥṣ does not refer clearly to a complete bath since it is also sued for the washing of hands and feet. Now ṭbl indicates that the washing was complete and the use of this term in the story of Naaman may have influenced its rise as the normal technical term for the ritual bath.

 

In the Septuagint the translator shows understanding of the emphatic description of Naaman’s bath as a sevenfold plunging. To the usual rendering by βαπτειν he prefers the intensive βαπτιζειν and translates the intransitive usage of the Hebrew term by the middle voice. As a result the middle voice of βαπτιζειν obtains a new meaning for an immersion without the connotating of perishing. The spread of this verb as the Greek technical term for the Jewish ritual washing, instead of simply the middle voice of βαπτειν, may now be explained by the fact that the translator used it in the episode of Naaman. (Joseph Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origins and Early Development [trans. M. F. Foran Hedlund; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Dekker and Van De Vegt N.V., 1962], 29-30)

 

Irenaeus quotes 2 Reg. 5.14 concerning the curing of Naaman with βαπτιζειν in the middle voice but himself uses the passive in order to explain how this purification is a prefiguration of Christian baptism: εβαπτισατο, φησιν, εν τω ‘Ιορδανη επτακις ου ματην παλαι Ναιμαν λεπρος ων βαπτισθεις εκαθαιρετο αλλ’ εις ενδειξιν ημετεραν fr.Gr. 35 (33). (Ibid., 79)

 

Joseph Ysebaert on Instances of ברא Denoting Re-creation and not Creation Out of Nothing (Ex Nihilo)

  

New creation of man.—For the terminology of re-creation, we must base our observations on the manner in which the Old Testament speaks of God’s creative activity in general. The Hebrew technical term for ‘to create’ is br’, properly ‘to cut’, but one finds in the same sense qnh, properly ‘to acquire’, yṣr, properly ‘to shape’ like a potter, and the general ‘śh ‘to make’’. The Septuagint translates by κτιζειν, πλασσειν, and ποιειν.

 

It may be remarked that br’ indicates God’s creative activity in a wider sense, including the creation of human life in the womb and God’s abiding concern with His creation. This activity may closely approach the concept of re-creation. One can, for example, speak of a renewed people as a newly created people: λαος ο κτιζομενος (br’) αινεσει τον κυριον Ps. 101.19. A similar idea is expressed with the words: εξαποστελεις το πνευμα σου, και κτισθησονται (br’), και ανακαινιεις (ḥdš) το προσωπον της γης ib. 103.30. Here we approach a use of the compound ανακτιζειν for re-creation as a counterpart of ανακαινιζειν in the second half-line. The same is true of κτιζειν alongside εγκαινιζειν in another passage, in which the new creation refers to man’s inner renewal: καρδιαν καθαραν κτιζον (br’) εν εμοι, ο θεος, καν πνευμα ευθες εγκαινισον (ḥδš) εν τοις εγκατοις μου ib. 50.12,cf. Jub 1.21 ff. It is remarkable that we have here ανακτισον preserved as Aquila’s translation, Ps. 50.12 Aq. This compound is rare in the profane language and where it does occur it means 'to re’'. It is absent in the Septuagint and in the New Testament but is found for re-creation in the Apostolic Fathers . . . . In other texts, of which only the first quoted may go back as early as the third century, we find br’, sometimes ‘śh, in the expression br’ (‘śh) bryh ḥdšh, ‘to create (make) a new creature (creation)’. The expression is applied to atonement and forgiveness of sins. The Talmud Yerushalmi states: ‘As soon as, on the Day of the New Year, you shall be assembled before Me for judgment and (on the Day of Atonement)shall go out in peace, I shall ascribe this to you as though (k’ylw) you have been created (br’) as a new creature (kbryh ḥdšh)’ Midr. Ps. 18.6 (R. Simon c. 320). ‘At the Day of Atonement I shall cleanse you and (create) you as) a new creation (bryyh ḥdšh)’ Lev. Rabbah 30.3 (R. Isaac c. 320).

 

The expression is also applied to the change by which God made Moses more eloquent: ‘I will lcreate (br’) thee (as) a new creature (bryh ḥdšh), as it is said: And the woman conceived (hryh) and bears (yld)’ Tanhuma Ex. 21.8 (on 4.10) (R. Juda b. Simon c. 370), and to the change brought about by God in Abraham through circumcision or by changing his name: ‘After I have created (br’) them (as) a new creature (byryh ḥdšh)’ Gen. Rabbah 39.11 (R. Berekiah c. 420).

 

In eschatological contexts the expression is applied to the late concept that the Messiah after a time of suffering in obscurity will be re-established by God: ‘At that time I shall create (br’) him (as) a new creature (<bryh> ḥdšh)’ Pesikta Rabbati 31, cf. Midr. Ps. 2.9, and to resurrection ‘(Yahweh) will create (br’) the righteous (as) a new creation (bryh ḥdšh)’ Tanhuma Gen. 2.12 (on 8.1), but one also finds the expression applied to escape from danger: ‘The Holy One, blessed be He, created (br’) them (i.e. people in danger of death) as a new creation (kbryh ḥdšh)’ Midr. Ps. 102.3 (R. Juda b. Simon c. 370), ‘The Holy One, blessed be He, created (br’) them (i.e. people in danger of death) (as) a new creation (bryh ḥdšh)’ Lev. Rabbah 30.3, even in common speech: ‘What a danger you ran! Your mother has really born (yld) you there! What trouble you have been through! Here you have been created (br’) (as) a new creature (bryyh ḥdt’) Cant. Rabbah 8.5 (R. Berekiah c. 420). (Joseph Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origins and Early Development [trans. M. F. Foran Hedlund; Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Dekker and Van De Vegt N.V., 1962], 122-23, 124-25)