IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, WHEN DID THE WORD IMMERSION BECOME BAPTISM?

Borrowed from the Visual Thesaurus

NT:907 baptizo (bap-tid’-zo); from a derivative of NT:911; to immerse, submerge; to make overwhelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the N. T.) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism: KJV – Baptist, baptize, wash.

NT:908 baptisma (bap’-tis-mah); from NT:907; immersion, baptism (technically or figuratively): KJV – baptism.

NT:909 baptismos (bap-tis-mos’); from NT:907; ablution (ceremonial or Christian):

NT:910 Baptistes (bap-tis-tace’); from NT:907; a baptizer, as an epithet of Christ’s forerunner: KJV – Baptist.

NT:911 bapto (bap’-to); a primary verb; to overwhelm, i.e. cover wholly with a fluid; in the N. T. only in a qualified or specially, sense, i.e. (literally) to moisten (a part of one’s person), or (by implication) to stain (as with dye): KJV – dip.

(Biblesoft’s New Exhaustive Strong’s Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

If we follow Strong’s ‘rule,’ and take the primary word as the definition, we have the word that proceeded out of the mouth of God.

If we accept “anything” after the “i.e.,” we will come out with possible uses of the word.

The next word has 2 “i.e.”s, which makes it doubly suspect.

No doubt someone used the word figuratively somewhere at sometime in the Greek culture, which supposedly makes it a ‘possible’ meaning of the word.

Even the washing of cups, etc., refers to covering with water.

NT:911 bapto (bap’-to); a primary verb; to overwhelm, i.e. cover wholly with a fluid; in the N. T. only in a qualified or specially, sense, i.e. (literally) to moisten (a part of one’s person), or (by implication) to stain (as with dye):

Who knows if the following exerpt from an article is right or not, but Webster’s Dictionary says it was first used in the 1200’s.

Origin and Etymology of baptize
Middle English, from Anglo-French baptiser, from Late Latin baptizare, from Greek baptizein to dip, baptize, from baptein to dip, dye; akin to Old Norse kvefja to quench

First Known Use: 13th century
https://www.facebook.com/notes/joshua-ingram/kjv-and-the-word-baptize-did-they-make-it-up-part-1/10151658284793471/

Semantical Relationship of “Baptism” to the KJV Translators

In semantics, which is the study of the significance of words and the concepts to which they refer, there is a basic principle that what a word means to its users is determined by what its users do with that word. (55) For the purpose of this study, this principle may be formulated as a question: ‘Did the words ‘baptism’ and “to baptize’ mean” “immersion” and “to immerse” to the KJV’s translators, that is, were they synonymous with each other?” There are three key sources of evidence, which practically demand an affirmative answer to this question.

Other English Bibles

The first of these decisive factors is that every Bible, from the very first English Bible written by John Wycliffe (c. 1384) to the last Bible in English prior to the KJV, the Rheims New Testament (1582), uses either the exact words “baptism” and “to baptize” or their contemporary English equivalents in their original texts. (56, 57, 58) What did the users of these Bibles take those words to mean? The study of the baptismal mode in England indicates that they understood those words to mean “immersion” and ‘to immerse.”

I tried to check on Wycliffe’s translation, and apparently he included the word baptism instead of immersion. Supposedly the entire Roman Catholic Church believed that sprinkling (pouring at that time) was OK. Whether that is right or not, I have not been able to confirm.

I also can’t confirm whether the KJV translators made any changes in that pattern.

In this article, rather than label a specific group with the charge of transliterating the word, I have found it is better to refer to ‘translators’ in general.

If the word baptism itself were in use in the 1200’s, that would predate Wycliffe.

More ideas about immerse may be found here.

THE OLD IS A SHADOW OF THE NEW

Colossians 2:16-17—Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

Hebrews 8:3-6—For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. 4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: 5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. 6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Hebrews 10:1—For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

One should be able to see why it is important to study the Old Testament; it helps us better understand the New.

Continue reading THE OLD IS A SHADOW OF THE NEW

SLAVERY

The Law Library of Congress features a section about Slavery and Indentured Servants (https://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/awlaw3/slavery.html). By studying that category carefully, one is able to understand that slaves were not always of African descent as modern America has been led to believe.

Laws listed there lend credence to recent research by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh in a book called WHITE CARGO. The book has proffered outlandish evidence, but who can say it is false?  Have the majority of Americans missed the facts because they were deliberately suppressed in our history books?

The New York Times Sunday Book Review had only favorable comments about the new release—stating in particular that the book uses vast irrefutable documentation (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/books/review/Lau-t.html).

Continue reading SLAVERY

IN THE NAME OF…OR BY THE AUTHORITY OF

Knowing the one true God and the Jesus he sent (John 17:3) requires faith that there is one true God.  To God’s chosen apostle, there was one God, the Father, from whom are all things (1 Cor. 8:6).  That same God and Father made all things through Jesus (Col. 1:15-18John 1:1-4).  That same Father gave Jesus all of his authority after the cross (Matthew 28:18).

Continue reading IN THE NAME OF…OR BY THE AUTHORITY OF

THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES

I know you like a little history so here is something that you may find interesting. King James II of England had about 50-60 or so scholars who translated the Bible from its original text to the King’s English. What’s important to realize here is that King James was Catholic. Of course, you know that Catholics have totally different beliefs than Protestant Christians so I won’t delve into specifics here.

Continue reading THE AUTHORITY OF THE SCRIPTURES