# PreChristian and Early Christian Souces for Mode of baptism



## timmopussycat (Dec 8, 2009)

Grillsy said:


> I am trying to find sources pointing to why we sprinkling/pour when baptizing. I am looking for sources from the early church but also evidence from pre-Christian era Judaism. Can anyone help?



To open this topic up for source contributions from cb's.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Dec 8, 2009)

The Didache presents two "modes" as salutory or proper, with an apparent preference for "running water." Such language is obviously open to various interpretive gloss, however it seems to me most apt to the idea of "pouring."

Trans. by J.B. Lightfoot7:1 But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water.
7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able;
7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.​
I'll add some notes:
sect.2, "in the name of," is "eis to onoma"; "in living water" is "en hudati zonti"
sect.3, "in other water" is "eis allo hudor"
sect.4, "in cold... in warm" is "en psuchro, en thermo"
sect.5, "on the head" is "eis ten kephalen"; in the name" is "eis onoma"

One can easily see the general flexibility of just these two Gk. prepositions here, eis and en.

As the notion of "living" or "running" water is present, along with the explicit "pouring" (since the water would not be moving on its own)--the word *ev/in* is the most neutral translation; however the word is often in our Scriptures translated with "by", the sense or force of the term being _instrumental,_ rather than _locative_, and I see it as contextually the more appropriate rendering.


----------



## timmopussycat (Dec 8, 2009)

Some decades ago, I stood in the baptistry of a ruin of what I recall was a 3rd or 4th century basilica at Ephesus. That baptistry was designed for an adult to lie in and receive either a full body pouring or full immersion. Sprinkling was clearly contra indicated by the design.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Dec 8, 2009)

And I'm not at all surprised that you were able to examine such things, since we also have literary remains from that period indicating that some Christians were being baptized full-bodily and in the nude.

It would be my contention that by the 3-4 century, Christian "competition" with the pagan Mystery religions was well underway. "Competition" soon "corrupted" the simplicity of the church's ordinances then, even as such strivings to imitate the world's methods also do today. Nothing essential changes about human society except the calendar.

While architecture also points to the elaborations of the Christian "mysteries", the real evidence is found in the literary remains of the day. BOTH the sacraments of the church were well on their way to being converted into pseudo "Mystery-rites" which were "better" than the secrets of the pagans.

See Hughes Oliphant Old, _The Shaping of the Reformed Baptismal Rite in the Sixteenth Century_. I don't agree with all his conclusions, however the book is an excellent resource, and he spends a chapter discussing the corruption/elaborations on baptism after the primitive church-era.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jan 3, 2010)

I just finished reading Warfield's article "The archaeology of Baptism." In it, he points out that the reason for the baptismal pools is not so that individuals can "lie down," but so that individuals could stand in water. The drawings, etc. from the time seem to indicate that either 1) the individual stood in water and had water brought up over his head and poured down and/or 2) the individual stood in water and dipped/bowed his head into the water. Lying down in a pool is apparently unattested; to the contrary, in some sources the insistence is upon "standing" as being necessary in such baptisms, even in the case of infants (who had to be held standing).

Interestingly, the controversy over baptism at this time had nothing to do with mode, but with the number of applications of water. Some held that a single application was invalid, and that a three-fold application was necessary. This was, in part to distinguish the rite from Jewish proselyte baptism, and symbolically it was tied to the number of days Christ was in the tomb (there may have been Trinitarian reasons as well).


----------

