Testament ever connects with the root those of baptism and of pillar.'

and its derivatives, are

The Philoxenian or Jacobite Syriac version of the New Testament although it aims to improve the earlier version by adhering more closely to the Greek text, yet follows closely the Peschito in its mode of translating ẞantigo and its derivatives.

It appears to be a fact, that at or before the Christian era, the Shemitish root 2 had fallen into disuse as a verb in all the Aramaean dialects to which we have access, viz. the Syriac, the Chaldee, and the Samaritan; yet that the noun 2, which is derived from this root, and signifies a pillar, was retained in all these dialects, as well as in the Hebrew and Arabic. For in Hebrew, the verb is of very frequent occurrence, in the sense of standing, standing up, standing still, etc. But in all the Aramaean dialects, we find substituted for it the verb p, which in Hebrew signifies to rise up. Thus in the Pentateuch, the Hebrew verb 2 occurs 81 times. But in the Targum of Onkelos it is never translated by 23, but is translated by ip in 72 places, and in the other 9 places it is paraphrased. In the Peschito Syriac Pentateuch, also it is never translated by, but is translated by in 75 places, and paraphrased or omitted in the other six. In the Samaritan Version, it is indeed twice rendered by 125; but in 75 places it is translated by p, e. g. Hebrew Chaldee Dip, and Syriac . On the contrary, wherever the Hebrew noun 12, a pillar, occurs in the Pentateuch, (between 40 and 50 times), it is translated by Onkelos, 2 by the Samaritan, and s by the Syriac. Hence we may infer, that the authors of the Peschito New Testament followed the common usage of all the Aramaean dialects, in their disuse of the root in the sense of standing, and still retaining the noun to denote a pillar. And the root

having become obsolescent in all the Aramaean dialects, the Syrians could take it up, and appropriate it to express any new idea for which it might seem to them suitable.

The rendering of rods unas priodévras, in Hebrews 6: 4, by Am Ajans

(who have once come to baptism,) appears to be no

exception; for the translator doubtless considered roùs pwriodévraç as equivalent το τοὺς βαπτισθέντας, just as the early Greek Fathers did.

1850.]

The Syriac Words for Baptism.

735

And their appropriation of it to denote baptism, did not arise from the poverty of the Syriac language, or from its want of any term corresponding in sense with the Greek verb ßantico. For if it be supposed, that Banzit properly signifies to dip, or to immerse; the Syriac has the verb Arabic

صبغ

7 2

'3"

which answers to the Hebrew and the (tsabog), and properly signifies to dip, to immerse. The Syriac retains the Hebrew and Arabic form of this root, viz. “ Or if we suppose Barrio to mean, to wash, to cleanse by washing; the Syriac has appropriate words for that idea, viz., and L, corresponding with the Hebrew. Or if we can suppose Barrisw to denote affusion or pouring out; the Syrians had, the Aphel of, which expresses this idea.5-Or if we suppose Bazzi to signify to sprinkle, to lustrate by sprinkling; the Syrians had the verb m; or wi, which expresses precisely that idea.6-But the Peschito translators never employ any of these verbs, apparently so suitable for preserving the exact meaning of Banrito. Passing by them all, they take up the verb and its derivatives, as their only terms for baptism.

So firmly established and so universally prevalent, among the Syrian Christians, was the custom of denoting baptism by and its derivatives, that this usage pervaded all their rituals for public worship, and all the discourses and writings of the Syriac Fathers.7 Nor has the usage ever been changed by any Christians using the Syriac language, or speaking any modern dialect derived from Syriac. The recent Nestorian Version of the New Testament, printed at Oroomiah in 1846, everywhere adopts the usage of the Peschito in the

1 See Matt. 14: 30, and 18: 6. Luke 5: 7, and 8: 23. Acts 20: 9. 1 Tim. 6: 9. See Matt. 26: 23. Mark 14: 20. Luke 7: 38, 44, and 16: 24. John 13: 26.

3 It occurs in Matt. 6: 17, and 15: 2, 20, and 27:24. Mark 7: 2, 3, 5. Luke 5: 2. John 9: 7, 11, 15, and 13: 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14. 1 Tim. 5: 10. Rev. 7: 14.

4 It occurs in John 13: 10. Acts 9: 37, and 16: 33.

2 Peter 2: 22. Also, from this root, the verbal noun

1 Cor. 6: 11. Heb. 10: 22.

which is used for ܂ܣܚܝܐ

"the washing (hovтpòv) of regeneration," Ephes. 5: 26.

5 See Matt. 26: 7. Mark 14: 3. Acts 10: 45. Heb. 9: 22.

6 See Matt. 26: 7. Heb. 9: 13, 19, 21, and 10: 22, and 11: 28, and 12: 24, and

1 Peter 1: 2,

7 See Assemani Biblioth. Orient. Clement. Vaticana, passim.

translation of Barrio and its derivatives; except in two instances, in which Christian baptism is not intended, viz. Mark 7: 4, ("From the market, except they wash, they eat not);" and Luke 11: 38, ("They marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner);" in both which places, they render Barrio by (Chaldee bb), he washed. And in the translation of Banriouòs, they follow the Peschito, except in Mark 7: 4, 8, where "the washing of cups and pots," is translated

. And the Rev. D. T. Stoddard, one of the missionaries at Oroomiah, who had a hand in bringing out this version, states, that among the Nestorian Christians, the word is the only term ever used to denote baptism; that they so exclusively appropriate it to this use as never to use it for anything else; and they seem not to know that the word ever had any other meaning. It has been already stated, that the Jacobite or Philoxenian Version of the New Testament closely follows the example of the Peschito. And I now add, that the same example is often followed by the Arabic Version, which -as is generally conceded-was originally made from the Syriac; for in 49 places out of 73, it renders Bazzio-just as the Syriac does—by (); and in 23, renders it by

to immerse.

صَبغ

The facts in the case are now before us; and the question to be answered, is, With what propriety and for what reasons, did the early Syrian Christians designate baptism, uniformly and exclusively by the verb, and its derivatives?

In answering this question, it is necessary that we should first ascertain the primitive and proper meaning of the word. For this Shemitish root was certainly not invented by the Syrian Christians, for the special purpose of denoting baptism. It existed and was in common use long before the gospel was published, although, as already stated, it had become obsolescent in all the Aramaean dialects.

As we have no Syriac works except the writings of Christians, and as they from the first appropriated the obsolete verb exclusively to the reception of baptism, we cannot expect to find this verb used in any other sense, in any of the existing Syriac books. Whatever meaning, or meanings, it may have previously had, they were all laid aside or discontinued by the Syrian Christians. Yet, notwithstanding the transfer of the root to altogether a new application, one of its early derivatives was retained, and therefore seems to be indicative of its primitive physical meaning. This derivative is the noun pasas,

1850.]

The Syriac Words for Baptism.

737

which signifies a pillar or column that stands erect, and therefore associates with this root the idea of standing up, or standing erect and firm. And as this ancient derivative is retained, with the same signification, not only in the Syriac but in all the Aramaean dialects, and also in all the Shemitish languages, it affords strong evidence that it is a good index to the primitive meaning of this root.

But, for further evidence on this subject, let us recur to the kindred Shemitish languages and to the other Aramaean dialects. Our first recourse will be to the Hebrew, the best understood of all the languages of the Shemite family, and of which we have by far the most ancient and authentic specimens.

In Hebrew we find, that the root 2 is an intransitive verb, and that it signifies, as Gesenius informs us, (1) To stand, before, over, or by a person or thing; (2) To stand firm, to be enduring; (3) To stand still, to stop moving; (4) To stand up, to rise up. And in Hiphil, the causative conjugation, it signifies, To cause to stand up, to set up, to erect. The Hebrew derivatives from this root are is a stand or stage, a stopping or lodging place, a pillar or column, pa station; and the participle signifies established, made firm or stable. Here every one can clearly see, that the primary meaning of the root 2, in Hebrew, is to stand up, in opposition to sitting or lying down, to stand firm or still, in opposition to tottering and to moving onward.

T

If now we turn to Buxtorf's Lex. Chald. Talmud. et Rabbinicum, we find that he makes signify, Stare, consistere, persistere, subsistere; and in the Talmudic writers, Surgere; and he says, with the Hebrew grammarians, bp, verbum stans, is an intransitive verb; and among the Rabbins, the noun 2 is a perpendicular or a perpendicular line. He also mentions most of the Hebrew derivatives, as above stated; and likewise adds 2 stans, erectus, in pedes constitutus, the opposite of sedens, in sella constitutus; and sistentia, firmitas, firmitudo.

con

If we go to the Arabic, Freytag's Lex. Arabico-Latinum will tell us, that (2) signifies, in Conjug. I. to afflict or oppress, to prop up or make stable, to write with a pole, etc.; in II. Conj. to abstract, resist or sustain, as the banks of a river a flood; and to administer baptism; in IV. Conj. to support with a prop or pillar; and also, to receive baptism; in V. Conj. to intend, to purpose; in VII. Conj. to become established; in VIII. Conj. to lean upon, be supported by. It also mentions more than a dozen derivatives from this root, with the significations, respectively, of a fixed purpose, advice received, a compact, a gall or bruise on a camel's back, a tall structure, pillar, or tentpole, vigorous youthfulness, to be relied on, or trust-worthy, a prop,

pillar, or support (very common; e. g. Koran Sur. 13: 2, and 31: 9, and 104: 9), the advanced part of an army, protracted, supported by pillars, and also baptism, and a baptizer.

If we go to the Ethiopic, Castell's Lex. Heptaglot. informs us, that this root denotes columnam erexit, statuit, stabilivit; and that one of its derivatives denotes a column or pillar.

If we return to the Aramaean dialects, which are allied more closely with the Syriac, Castell will tell us, that the Chaldee verb 2 signifies surrexit, imprimis ad orandum; and that its derivative signifies surrectio, statio, subsistentia, duratio. And we have before seen, that the Chaldee noun is used for a pillar, more than 40 times, in the Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch. In the Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch, the root T, (though generally translated by Dp, to stand up,) is twice retained in its unchanged form, ; viz. Gen. 19: 27, and Deut. 4: 11; and its derivative 71, a pillar, occurs over 40 times.

Schindler, in his Lexicon Pentaglotton, says, that the root, in this family of languages has three significations, viz., I. Stetit, substitit, constitit, perstitit, mansit, perseveravit, duravit, moratus est, perseveravit, desiit; stabilitus, firmus fuit; item ministrare, resistere. In all these acceptations the idea of standing, or some modification of that idea, seems to be involved. He next mentions the various Hebrew, Arabic and Rabbinic derivatives from this root, all retaining the same primary idea. — II. In Syriac and Arabic, this root signifies, Baptizatus, in aquam immersus, tinctus, lotus fuit; and he offers this expla nation: Stabant enim, qui baptizabantur. With this second signification he connects those Syriac and Arabic derivatives which relate to baptism.-III. In Arabic, with Gain instead of Ain, (gamd) denotes the pod of beans and other leguminous plants; also a casket, a box, a sheath, etc.

-

This mass of evidence seems to prove, beyond all controversy, that the primary meaning of the verb was, to stand, stand up, stand firm, stand still, etc.

We now proceed to say, that in appropriating this verb to denote the reception of baptism, the Syrian Christians did not change entirely the radical idea attached to it. They only transferred it from a physical to a metaphorical sense, or used it to denote a mental and not a bodily act. The proof lies in the fact, that they retained perfectly its grammatical character and its syntactical construction. In its primary meaning, is an intransitive verb, or denotes a physical act, which is confined to the person performing it and does not affect another person.