and who, out of love to their country, did comply with circumcision, and so became Jews?: and of the Ituræans, whom Aristobulus fought against, and added part of their country to Judæa, and obliged the inhabitants, if they would remain in their country, to be circumcised, and live after the laws of the Jews, and quotes Strabo, who upon the authority of Timogenes, says, that he enlarged the country of the Jews, and made part of the country of Ituræa theirs, joining them to them by the bond of circumcision. By which accounts it appears, that both these people were made Jews, or were proselyted to them by circumcision; but not a word is said of their baptism, or dipping; which, according to this custom, as is said, must have been of men, women, and children, which, had it been practised, could not have been well omitted by the historian. He also speaks' of Helena, queen of Adiabene, and of her son Izates, embracing the Jewish religion; and relates how desirous Izates was of being circumcised, that he might be a perfect Jew, without which he could not; but for a time he was dissuaded from it by his mother, and a Jew merchant, who instructed them; but afterwards, being exhorted to perfect the work by one Eleazer, who was more skilful in Jewish affairs, he submitted to circumcision: but neither Josephus nor Eleazer say a word about his baptism, or dipping; which yet, according to the pretended custom as then prevailing, was necessary, as well as circumcision, to make him a complete proselyte. Nor is any mention made of the baptism or dipping of Helena; which, had it been used at this time, would not have been omitted by the historian; since it was by that only, according to this notion, that females were then made proselytes. He also speaks of another son of Helena, Monbaz, embracing the Jewish religion; but says nothing of his baptism. The Sixth, It may be inquired whether or no any mention is made of this custom of receiving proselytes among the Jews by baptism, or dipping, in the Targums or Chaldee paraphrases. The most ancient ones extant are those of Jonathan Ben Uzziel of the prophets, and of Onkelos of the pentateuch; the one at the beginning, the other toward the end of the first century; in which nothing is met with concerning the admission of Jewish proselytes by dipping. The other paraphrases are by uncertain authors, and of an uncertain age. Targum of the Megillot, or five books of Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamentations, and Esther, is written by an unknown author: it is the latest of all the Targums. In that of Esther only the phrase became Jews, chap. viii. 12, is rendered became proselytes; but nothing is said of their manner of becoming such. In that of Ruth, chap. i. 16, the requisites of a proselyte are particularly observed; where Ruth is introduced, saying, that she desired to be made a proselyte; when Naomi informs her what commands the Jews were obliged to observe; P Antiqu. 1. 13. c. 9. s. 1; So Josippon Ben Gorion, Hist. Heb. 1. 2. c. 9, & 1. 4. c. 4, & l. 5. c. 23, & l. 6. c. 13. Antiqu. ib. c. 11. s. 3, so Josippon; ibid. 1. 4. c. 9. Antiqu. ibid. 1. 20. c. 2. s. 1. 5. These became proselytes in the times of Claudius Cæsar, Ganz Tzemach David, par. 2. fol. 15. 2, & Juchasin, fol. 141. 1. Of king Izates, see Tacit. Acnnal. 1. 12. c. Antiqu. c. 3. s. 1. 13. 14. as to keep the Sabbaths and festivals, and not to walk beyond two thousand cubits (on the Sabbath-day); not to lodge with Gentiles; to observe the three hundred and thirteen commands; not to worship an idol, &c, to all which Ruth is made to agree; but not a syllable is said about baptism, or dipping; whereas, that, with a sacrifice along with it, before the building of the temple, and while the temple stood, and since, without it, is the only thing, according to this notion, by which females were admitted proselytes. In the Targum of Jonathan of Gen. ix. 27, the sons of Japhet are said to be made proselytes, and to dwell in the school of Shem. In the Jerusalem-Targum, and in that of Pseudo-Jonathan, the souls that Abraham and Sarah got in Haran, Gen. xii. 5, are said to be the souls who were made proselytes by them; and in the same Targum of Gen. xxi. 33, at Beersheba, where Abraham planted a grove, he is said to make proselytes, and teach them the way of the world, of the world to come; but nothing more is said of the way and manner in which they were made such. In the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan of Gen. xxxviii. 2, Judah is said to make the daughter of a Canaanite a proselytess, and then married her; and in the same Targum of Numb. xi. 4, the mixed multitude who came with the Israelites out of Egypt, are interpreted proselytes; and no doubt but many of them were such; and Jarchi thinks the son of the Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, was a proselyte, since he was among the children of Israel, Lev. xxiv. 10. And Africanus affirms, that the Jews had genealogical tables, in which an account was kept both of original Jews and of proselytes; as of Achior the Ammonite, and Ruth the Moabitess, and those who came out of Egypt mixed with the Israelites; and which continued to the times of Herod, who burnt them, that his family might not be known. But to return to the Targums: in the Pseudo-Jonathan's of Exod. xviii. 6, 7, Jethro is made to say to Moses, as before observed, that he was come to be made a proselyte; and Moses is said to make him one; but in what manner it is not said; and so the rest before mentioned; indeed, the same Targum of Exod. xii. 44, is, "And every stranger who is sold for a servant to an Israelite, bought with money, then thou shalt circumcise him, and thou shalt dip him, and so shall he eat of it," the pass-over. Now in this Targum of Exod. xxvi. 9, not only mention is made of the Misnah, but it abounds with Talmudic fables and traditions, and so must be written after both the Misnah and Talmud; and in the Targum of Numb. xxiv. 19, mention is made of the city of Constantinople, which shows it to be not ancient, and that it is not the work of the true Jonathan. And besides all this, the case of the servant refers not to a proselyte, who became so of choice, but to a bought servant, who, according to the original law in Gen. xvii. 12, 13, was obliged to be circumcised; and so, according to the Rabbinic custom, to be dipped; but then, according to these writers, baptism, or dipping for servitude, was a different thing from baptism, or dipping for proselytism; the one was on a civil, the other on a religious account; the one was repeated when a servant was made Apud Euseb. Eccl. Hist. 1. 1. c. 7. a free man, and the other never". The same Pseudo-Jonathan, in his Targum of Deut. xxi. 13, to the conditions required of a beautiful captive in order to be married to an Israelite, this is added, that she should dip herself, and become a proselytess in his house; but the text has nothing of it, nor the Targum of Onkelos; nor is this custom to be met with in the paraphrases of the true Jonathan; only in this, which was written after the Talmud, and does not come within the time under consideration. Seventh, Nor is there any mention of such a custom in the Jews' Misnah, or Book of Traditions; which is a collection of all the traditions among the Jews, which had been handed down from age to age, and were collected together from all parts, and written in a book of this name, in order to be preserved. This was written by R. Judah Hakkadosh, in the middle of the second century, A.D. 150; or as others, in the beginning of the third century, reckoning the date of it 150 years from the destruction of the temple; which brings it to the year 220; and here, if any where, one might expect to meet with this rite or custom; but no mention is made of it. Dr. Gale" seems to allow it upon what Dr. Wall has transcribed from Selden, which he granted without examination. The doctor says, it is not only mentioned in the Gemara, but in the text of the Misnah itself; which, as he suggests, speaks of a child becoming a proselyte by baptism, or dipping; but the passage he has from Selden' says no such thing; which runs thus:2 66 A she stranger, a captive, and a maiden, who are redeemed and become proselytes, and are made free, being under (or as in the following section above) three years and one day old, are allowed the matrimonial dowry; that is, when they come to age, and are married; but not a word is here of being made proselytes by baptism, or dipping; indeed, the tradition shows, that minors may be proselyted, and that a man's sons and daughters may become proselytes with him; but there is no need to have recourse to a tradition for this; the law is express, that a stranger who desires to be a proselyte to the Jewish religion, and to eat of the passover, must be circumcised, and all his males, and then he and all his children, males and females, may be admitted to eat of it, Exod. xii. 48, 49; only the circumcision of the males is required, but no baptism, or dipping of any. There is a passage in the Misnah, which perhaps some may think countenances this custom; which is this, "a stranger who is made a proselyte, on the evening of the passover, the house of Shammai say, he dips and eats his passover in the evening; but the house of Hillell say, he that separates from uncircumcision, is as he that separates from a grave.' Now it should be observed, 1. That here is a division about this matter, be it what it may; Shammai, and his party, assert, that a proselyte newly made might dip and eat his passover that evening; but Hillell, and his party, dissent, for a reason given; and the determination, in all cases, was u Vid Maimon. Issure Biah, c. 13. s. 11, 12, & Schulchan Aruch, par. 2, c. 267. s. 9. Reflections on Wall's History of Infant Baptism, p. 327. History, Introduction, p. 49. z Misn. Cetubut, c. 1. s. 2. 4. De Synedriis, 1. 1. c. 3. a Ib. Pesachim, c. 8. s. 8; the same in Misn. Ediot, c. 5. s. 2. generally according to Hillell, as it was in this; so we learn from Maimonides b. 2. This baptism, or dipping, was not on account of proselytism, but for ceremonial uncleanness; for it goes along with cases of that kind instanced in before. The Canon begins thus, "A mourner (who was unclean according to the ceremonial law) dips and eats his passover in the evening; but eats not of the holy things: he that hears tidings of the death of his (friend or relation) and who gathers to him bones, dips, and eats of the holy things;" and then it follows, “ A stranger who is made a proselyte," &c.-3. This rule, according to Shammai, was concerning one already made a proselyte, and therefore the dipping, or baptism, he prescribes to him, in order to his eating the passover that evening, was not to make him a proselyte; but for some other reason. Wherefore, - 4. This strongly makes against admission of proselytes by baptism, or dipping, at that time; for if he had been made a proselyte that way, there would have been no reason for a second dipping to qualify him for the passover.-5. The case of such an one, according to Hillell, is, that being just come out of heathenism, he was unclean, as one that touched a dead man, a bone, or a grave; and therefore could not eat of the passover that evening, but must wait seven days, until he has purified according to the law in Numb. xix. 11-19.-6. After all, the view of Hillell, in putting such a person off from eating the passover the evening he became a proselyte for the reason given, was with respect to the next year, and by way of caution; fearing that should he be then in any uncleanness, which required purification, he would say, last year I did not dip, or purify myself from any uncleanness, and yet I eat, and now I must dip and eat; not considering that the last year he was an heathen, and uncapable of uncleanness, according to the law, but now he was an Israelite, and capable of it; and so it is explained in the Gemara and Gloss on it, and by other interpreters. Besides, this baptism or dipping, was not on account of proselytism, but was common to, and obligatory upon, a circumcised Israelite, in order to eat of the passover, as is acknowledged by all. There were several in the times of the Misnic doctors, and before the Misnah was compiled, who were persons of eminence, and said to become proselytes; as Onkelos the Targumist, who, it is said, was made a proselyte in the days of Hillell and Shammai, hence he is called Onkelos the proselyte'; some says he was a sister's son of Titus the emperor, and by whom three Roman troops, sent one after another, to take him, were made proselytes also", and Aquila, the author of the Greek version of the Bible, became, as is said', a proselyte in the times of Adrian; and so the emperor Antoninus Pius, and Ketiah, a nobleman in Cæsar's court, as before observed: yea, the famous R. Akiba, a Misnic doctor, was a proselytek; and so b c Hilchot Korban Pesach, c. 6. 8. 7. T. Bab. Pesachim, fol. 92. 1. eMeor Enayim, c. 45; Ganz Tzemach David par. i, fol. 28. 2. * Zohar in Gen. fol. 28. 4; Tzemach David, ut supra, fol. 28, 1. was R. Meir'. And of the circumcision of most of these we read; but nothing of their baptism; neither in the Misnah, nor in any other Jewish writings. Not to take notice of those very early masters of tradition Shemaia and Abtalion, before observed, who were proselytes of righteousness", there were also women of note within this time, who became proselytes; as queen Helena", with her two sons, of whom mention is made in the Misnah°; and Beluria, the proselytess, who had a discourse with R. Gamaliel; and the wife of Turnus Rufus, whom R. Akiba married, after she was proselyted". Now though female proselytes were admitted by baptism only, as is pretended, yet nothing is said of the baptism of these women. And as there is no mention of this custom in the Misnah, so neither have I observed any notice taken of it in the Rabbot, which are commentaries on the Pentateuch and five Megillot, before named; and which were written by R. Bar Nachmoni, about A.D. 300, according to Buxtorf", in one of which the text in Gen. xii. 5, is commented on: And the souls they had gotten in Haran; which the Targums of Pseudo-Jonathan and Jerusalem, interpret of the souls they proselyted, before observed; and here it is said, "These are the proselytes which they made:R. Hona said, Abraham proselyted the men, and Sarah proselyted the women;" but not a word is said about the baptism or dipping of either. Yea, Abraham and Sarah are said to be proselytes themselves; but it is not suggested that they were baptized. In these commentaries mention is made of the circumcision of proselytes, particularly of king Monbaz, and his brother, said to be the sons of king Ptolemy"; and of Aquila, the Greek translator"; but nothing is said of their baptism. t Eighth, Nor is this rite or custom of receiving Jewish proselytes by baptism or dipping, once spoken of by any of the Christian fathers of the first three or four centuries; which they could not be ignorant of, if from hence Christian baptism was taken, and especially such who were Jews, or had any connexion with them, or were acquainted with them, and with their affairs, as some of them were. Barnabas was a Jew, and an apostolic man, cotemporary with the apostles; there is an epistle of his still extant, in which he treats chiefly of Jewish rites, and of their being typical of evangelic things, and of their having their fulfilment in them; and yet says not a word of this initiating baptism, which he could not have failed making mention of had he known any thing of it; yea, he sets himself to find out what was beforehand said concerning the ordinance of baptism: "Let us inquire," says he,' * "whether the Lord has taken any care to make manifest beforehand any thing concerning the water;" that is, concerning baptism; and then he adds, "Concerning the water, it is written to 1 Juchasin, fol. 41, 1; Ganz. fol. 29, 1. m Juchasin, fol. 18, 1. Yoma, c. 3, s. 10. n Juchasin, fol. 141, 1. P Roshashanah, fol. 17, 2. 9 T. Bab. Nedarim, fol. 50, 2, & Gloss in ibid. ; Tzemach David, par. 1, fol. 28, 1. Biblioth, Rab. p. 326. Shemot Rabba, ut supra. Bemidbar Rabba, s. 8. fol. 190, 4. Bereshit Rabba, s. 39, fol. 35, 1. "Bereshit Rabba s. 46, fol. 41, 3. |