THE HEBREW "TABAL." by J. B. Tombes

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Sep 8, 1881

THE HEBREW "TABAL."

By J. B. Tombes

It is a remarkable caprice of scholarship, that Dr. Young in his "Analytical Concordance of the Bible," should render the well-known, and as well-defined Hebrew word tabal, by the terms moisten and besprinkle. It is also as inexplicable that he should render the Greek verb baptizo (baptizein) to consecrate, and this too as a literal meaning. Whatever worth Dr. Young has as a Biblical philologist, he has certainly shown the least possible in his handling these sacramental terms.

The Bible argument, in support of the New Testament immersion, is so strongly emphasized by the one only meaning of tabal, viz., to dip or immerse, that some Pedobaptist scholars, in order to serve a purpose, have attempted to foist on this word the sense of moisten and sprinkle. When pressed for a reason for so doing, they will refer us to the Latin tingo, used by some eminent lexicographers in their definition of tabal, as warranting them in such renderings. Now no genuine scholar needs to be told that the literal meaning of the Latin tingo is immergo or immersion. Turtullian (in second century) uses tingo forty-nine times in his writings, in every instance, however, in the exclusive sense of immersion, e. g., "in mortem ejus tinctisimus" (Rom. 6:3). So also Jerome (fourth century) in Latin Vulgate. The Roman orator and philosopher, Cicero, so renders the word, e. g., "Tunica sanguine tincta"—dipped in blood. As it respects the lexical use of the word we may refer to the distinguished Buxtorf. I speak from personal inspection. In his "Concordantia Bibliorum Chaldaical," he always renders the Hebrew tabal by some form of tingo. In this Buxtorf follows Jerome and Turtullian, e. g., "tinxerunt togam ejus in sanguine"—dipped his coat in blood (Gen. 37: 31). Parkhurst and Prof. Sophocles make the same use of tingo. Leverett defines dipped by intinctus. So also Littleton's English, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew Lexicon defines the English dip by tingo—"dipped, in-tinctus." Elliott's large Dictionary in Latin, German, and English, renders tingo "to dip, to dip a thing into a liquid." This Lexicon also renders the English work dip "tingo, mergo, immergo." So also Schrevelius, Bolles, Barclay, Webster, and others. It will appear, therefore, that Dr. Young and others who would resort to the Latin tingo, to find some relief in their garbled use of tabal, can only meet with disappointment.

The seventy learned interpreters, in their translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (282 B. C.) into the Macedonian Greek, in every instance save one, have rendered tabal by bapto or its derivative baptizo. I have carefully compared the Septuagint version with the Hebrew. And here we learn an important fact, viz., that the sacred Hebrew text comes into closer connection with that of the New Testament Greek, which is quite nearly the same dialect as that of the Septuagint. So we find that like phrases and style characterize each. This relationship or connection may be illustrated in the New Testament ecclesia, which finds its etymological counterpart in the Hebrew qahal (assembly); but it must be borne in mind that the seventy interpreters had long previously translated the Hebrew qahal by ecclesia (Ps. 22:22; Deut. 23:2, 4; also 18:15, and other passages). And no circumstance is better known than that our Lord usually quotes from the version of the Seventy. As it respects the Hebrew tabal it was as current a word as any in the Syro-Chaldee, the vernacular of Jesus and the New Testament writers, though they composed the sacred writings in the Greek of their times—the Macedonian. It is plain that the New Testament baptizo, sustained by the celebrated version of the seventy learned interpreters, is the synonym of the Hebrew tabal. Now, what is the radical meaning of this word? Here we must refer to the best authorities. Gesenius, in his Hebrew-German Lexicon (second edition) renders tabal by one word only, viz., eintauchen, to dip.

Permit me to say, Mr. Editor, that my quotations are directly from the authors themselves, whose works I have personally consulted. I may refer to the English, Hebrew, and Chaldee Lexicon Concordance (Wilson's), second edition, 1866, London. This work thus defines tabal "to plunge, to dip in any fluid, to dye." The Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon of the Old Testament by B. Davis, or Student's Hebrew Lexicon, defines tabal "to dip, to sink into," 2 Kings 5:14, "ultimate from tab (depth), German taufen." So Davidson defines tabal, "to dip, immerse." Hebraist's Vade Mecum renders tabal by one term only, viz., dip. The Novum Testamentum (tetra-glottero), with version of the Latin Vulgate, and German of Luther, renders tabal always by the German word taufen (to dip), or its equivalent tauchen (to plunge). A more critical work on the New Testament Scriptures is not extant than the Biblica Theological Lexicon of Herman Cremer, Professor of Theology in the university of Griefswald, 1872. After defining baptizo (I quote directly from his Lexicon) immerse, submerse, he quotes the Septuagint rendering of tabal by baptizo. He maintains the only meaning of tabal, viz., "to dip, to immerse." I must omit, for room, other important references. But there are other and different proofs of the one only meaning of the Hebrew tabal. I refer to the sacred text itself, to the laws of verbal construction and interpretation, perhaps the best of all evidence, as it lies at the foundation of all reliable lexicography. Had Dr. Young, in his grand undertaking of compiling an Analytical Concordance of the Bible, studied more carefully the laws of language and interpretation, he would doubtless have produced a much less objectionable work.

But I wish to refer to a syntactical construction, which, I am sure, necessitates the only meaning tabal has, viz., immersion. The principle is this, that tabal is invariably, in its Bible use, followed by (Hebrew preposition "in" "into") attached to the fluid, with the solid in the accusative. Dr. Wise, an eminent Jewish Rabbi and Hebraist (editor of the Israelite, Cincinnati) cites only one exception to this construction, viz., Lev. 4:17. And yet here (Lev. 4:17) there is evidently an ellipsis, viz., into the blood. We will turn to Lev. 4:6. We read: "The priest shall dip (tabal) his finger into (be) the blood," etc. The syntax is evident, the preposition be (into) follows tabal and is attached to the fluid (e. g., badam), with the solid (etsha, finger) in the accusative. I quote directly from the Hebrew Bible. As the principle here illustrated is universal in the Hebrew Bible, I have only to say, that in these instances it is plain that the fluid remains at rest and is governed by the preposition into; the solid, on the other hand, in the act of baptism, is in motion. It follows, then, that there is a syntactical impossibility for tabal to be rendered otherwise than in the sense of to dip or to immerse. But there is nothing so convincing as evidence. I will furnish Dr. Young's rendering of Job 9:31: "Yet shalt thou sprinkle (tabal) me in or into the ditch." Now any one can see that such rendering of tabal is simply ridiculous; for how could Job be sprinkled into the ditch? Then the construction of the sentence is unmistakable; tabal is here, as always, followed by the preposition into (be) with its regimen, e. g., beshachath, into the ditch. Again, take Dr. Young's rendering of 2 Kings 5:14; "Then went he down and sprinkled (tabal) himself seven times in or into the Jordan." Here the same regimen occurs, viz., bayardeen, into the Jordan. Naaman could not have sprinkled himself into the Jordan. The Septuagint renders correctly (while the Analytical Concordance does not), "And Naaman went down and dipped himself (ebaptisato—middle voice) in the Jordan." Again take 2 Kings 8:15, "And he took a thick cloth and sprinkled (so says Dr. Young) it in the water." Here tabal, which Dr. Y. renders sprinkle, is followed by the usual preposition be (Hebrew "in" or "into") attached to the fluid, with the solid (cloth) in the accusative, being in motion in the act of baptism, while the fluid is quiescent. It is, therefore, nothing short of persistent stubbornness or ignorance that insists on the rendering of the Hebrew tabal otherwise than "to dip or to immerse." —J. B. Tombes, in Herald of Truth.