Is "with water" more accurate?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, May 23, 2009.

  1. Logos1560

    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Oct 22, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Mark 1:8 in the KJV
    I indeed have baptized you with water; but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

    Concerning Mark 1:8, Baptist Thomas Patience [or Patient] in 1654 maintained that the rendering with water "suits with sprinkling" (Doctrine of Baptism, p. 9). Patience wrote: "It may be as well rendered, I baptize you in water, and he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit." Patience added: "It may as well be rendered, I baptize you, or dip you into water, as it is rendered, they were casting a net into the sea, Mark 1:16, for which the words are affirmed to be the same, and it would be too improper a speech to say, John did baptize with the wilderness [1:4], and they were casting a net with the sea [1:16]" (Ibid.).

    Baptist S. E. Anderson observed: "The KJV of Matthew 3:11 reads, "I baptize you with water," but the Greek has it, "I immerse you in water" (Biblical Baptist Beliefs, p. 17). Henry Burrage also noted: "In those passages in our English version [KJV] where we find the words 'with water,' as in Matt. 3:11, 'I indeed baptize you with water,' the Greek has 'in water'" (Jenkens, Baptist Doctrines, p. 153). John R. Rice pointed out that "the word translated with in the above verse is usually translated in" (Bible Baptism, p. 41). In 1849, Baptist Richard Pengilly asserted: "'IN water'; not with water,' as it is rendered in the English authorized version" (Scripture Guide to Baptism, p. 14). Pengilly asked: "Would it not be absurd to render the passage [Matt. 3:6] 'John baptized with the Jordan'"? (p. 15). Augustus Strong maintained that at texts such as Matthew 3:11 the "en is to be taken, not instrumentally, but as indicating the element in which the immersion takes place" (Systematic Theology, p. 935). Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's Duoglott, Great, and Bishops' Bibles have "in water" at Matthew 3:11. Was that rendering "in water" in those pre-1611 English Bibles more accurate or less accurate than the rendering "with water" in the KJV? Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's Duoglott, Great, and Whittingham's also have "in water" at John 1:33. M. L. Moser, Jr., a KJV-only advocate, asked: "If we should say that John immersed in water, are we to be considered as Bible correctors?" (Baptist Challenge, June, 1989, p. 16). The 1842 revision of the KJV by Baptists and other believers began Matthew 3:11 as follows: "I indeed immerse you in water."

    Is the rendering "with water" or "in water" more accurate at Mark 1:8, Matthew 3:11, and John 1:33?
  2. franklinmonroe

    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Aug 2, 2006
    Likes Received:
    A word of appreciation, not just to Logos1560, but to all BBers that take the time to offer a topic for discussion.
    I think that when 'immerse' or 'dip' is recognized as the genuine meaning behind "baptise" the issue become a bit more clear. Nearly all translations that render baptizo as "immerse" will also use "in" --
    I indeed dipped you in water; he but will dip you in spirit holy. (Emphatic Diaglot interlinear text)

    I, indeed, have immersed you in water; but he will immerse you in the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8, Living Oracles)

    I indeed immersed you in water; but he will immerse you in the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8, American Bible Union 1865)

    I immersed you in water; but He will immerse you in the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8, Worrell)
    There are exceptions --
    I, have immersed you, with water,––He, will immerse you, with the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8, Rotherham)

    I have immersed you with water; he will immerse you in the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8, Hackett)
  3. HankD

    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    May 14, 2001
    Likes Received:
    The idea that "with water (en hudati)" indicates that the water is the instrument of baptism in Mark 1:8 etc. and can include "sprinkling" is improper IMO.

    However that very concept of instrumentation is used of actual sprinkling in the NT with a different prepositional form (meta hudatos).

    KJV Hebrews 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with (meta) water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people.​

    If John (humanly speaking) had meant instrumentive rather than locative he probably would have used the preposition meta rather than en.

    "In water" is better IMO. ​

    "In the Holy Ghost" would also indicate a profound difference as to the nature of "Spirit baptism" than "with the Holy Ghost".​

    #3 HankD, May 23, 2009
    Last edited: May 23, 2009
  4. EdSutton

    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Jan 9, 2006
    Likes Received:
    Yeah - what they said!


Share This Page