doctrinae distinguuntur ἃ lotionibus ceteris leviticis”. Similarly Winer (Gramm., Ῥ. 240) : “ΤῈ we render Barr.
διδ. baptisms of doctrine or instruction, as distinguished from the legal baptisms (washings) of Judaism, we find a support for this designation, as characteristically Christian, in Matt. xxviii. 19, βαπτί- σαντες αὐτούς . . . διδάσκοντες αὖτ- ovs”’. It is better to take the words as equivalent to διδαχῆς περὶ βαπτισμῶν. In N.T. βάπτισμα is regularly used of Christian baptism or of John’s baptism, while βαπτισμός is used of ceremonial washings as in ix. τὸ and ΜΚ. vii. 4. [Cf. Blass, Gramm., p. 62. Josephus,
2---4.
Χειρῶν, ἀναστάσεώς τε]
τοῦτο ποιήσομεν,
~ ‘ , νεκρῶν, καὶ κρίματος αἰωνίου.
ἐάνπερ ἐπιτρέπῃ ὁ Θεός.
ΞΕ 295 4. /* nat 5. Acts 4 Ὁ Αδύνατον ὰ eH : ee 19; Jac.
iv. 15.
bx. 26; Matt. xii. 31,45; Joan, iv. 10; 2 Peter ii. 20; 1 Joan ν. 16.
1 τε in SACDcEKL, vg.; omitted in BD στ. P, and rightly rejected by Ττ., WH
and Weiss.
2T.R. in ΝΒΚΙΙΝ, 17, d, 6, f, vg., etc. ; ποιησωμεν in ACDEP, Arm. The indi-
cative agrees better with ἐάνπερ, κ.τ.λ.
(Ant., xviii. 5, 2) uses βαπτισμός of John’s baptism.] Probably, therefore, ‘‘ teach- ing about washings” would include in- struction in the distinction between the various Jewish washings, John’s baptism and that of Christ (cf. Acts xix. 2); and this would involve instruction in the cleansing efficacy of the Atonement made by Christ as well as in the work of the Holy Spirit. It was very necessary for a convert from Judaism to understand the difference between symbolic and real lustration. The reference of the plural must, therefore, not be restricted to the distinction of outward and inward bap- tism (Grotius), nor of water and spirit baptism (Reuss) nor of infant and adult baptism, nor of the threefold immersion nor, as Primasius, ‘‘ pro varietate acci- pientium”’. ἐπιθέσεώς τε χειρῶν closely conjoined to the foregoing by τε be- cause the ‘laying on of hands” was the accompaniment of baptism in Apos- tolic times. ‘‘As through baptism the convert became a member of the House of God, through the laying on of hands he received endowments fitting him for service in the house, and an earnest of his relation to the world to come (vi. 5)” (Davidson, cf. Delitzsch). The laying on of hands was normally accom- panied by prayer. Prayer was the essen- tial element in the transaction, the laying on of hands designating the person to whom the prayer was to be answered and for whom the gift was designed. ο σα ποτ δ: ΙΙ ὙΔ4 17; xiii 3; vi. 6; and Lepine’s The Ministers of Fesus Christ, p. 141-4. In Apostolic times baptism apparently meant that the baptised believed in and gave himself to Christ, while the laying on of hands meant that the Holy Ghost was conferred upon him. In baptism as now adminis- tered both these facts are outwardly repre- sented. ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν καὶ κρίματος αἰωνίου: “resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment,” “ con- stituting the believer’s outlook under which he was to live” (Davidson). The genitives depend on διδαχῆς, not on
θεμέλιον, as Vaughan. The phrase ava- στασις νεκρῶν naturally includes all the dead both righteous and unrighteous (see John v. 29 and Acts xxiv. 15. κρίμα though properly the result of κρίσις is not always distinguished from it, see John ix. 39; Acts xxiv. 25; and εἴ. Heb. ix. 27). It is “ eternal,” timeless in its results. These last-named doctrines, although not specifically Christian, yet required to be brought before the notice of a Jewish convert that he might dis- entangle the Christian idea from the Jew- ish Messianic expectation of a resurrec- tion of Israel to the enjoyment of the Messianic Kingdom, and of a judgment on the enemies of Israel (Cf. Weiss). Ver. 3. καὶ τοῦτο ποιήσομεν : ‘and this will we do,” that is, we will go on to perfection and not attempt again to lay a foundation. So Theoph.: τὸ ἐπὶ τὴν τελειότητα φέρεσθαι. And Prima- sius: «εί hoc faciemus, ΐ.6., et ad majora nos ducemus, et de his omnibus quae enumeravimus plenissime docebimus nos, ut non sit iterum necesse ex toto et a capite ponere fundamentum”. Hof- mann refers the words to the participial clause, an interpretation adopted even by von Soden [‘‘namlich abermal Funda- ment Einsenken’’] which only creates superfluous difficulty. The writer, fee!- ing as he does the arduous nature of the task he undertakes, adds the condition, ἐάνπερ ἐπιτρέπῃ ὁ Θεός, ‘if God per- mit’. The addition of περ has the effect of limiting the condition or of indicating a sine qua non; and may be rendered ‘‘ if