Of the doctrine of baptisms, and imposition of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

“Now, how long shall we saw away along the same line on this question [i.e., what is permitted], when we have a long-standing practice which by anticipation has all but settled the question? Even though no scriptural passage prescribes it, it is strengthened by a custom that certainly arose from tradition. How can anything become normal practice if it has not first been handed down to us? But, you tell me, "You must always have a written source if you are going to plead the force of tradition."Let us look into the matter, then, of whether or not a tradition without a written source should be accepted. The answer will certainly be no if we cannot adduce examples of other observations which are without written source in Scripture and rest solely on the basis of tradition and yet have come to have the force of custom. To begin, for instance, with baptism: When we are about to enter the water, and, as a matter of fact, even a short while before, we declare in the presence of the congregation before the bishop that we renounce the devil, his pomps and his angels. After that, we are immersed in the water three times, making a somewhat fuller pledge than the Lord has prescribed in the gospel. After this, having stepped forth from the font, we are given a taste of a mixture of milk and honey and from that day, for a whole week, we forego our daily bath. We also receive the sacrament of the Eucharist that the Lord entrusted to all at the hour for supper, at our early morning meetings, and then from the hand of none but the bishops. Further, we make offerings for the dead on their anniversary to celebrate their birthday of eternal life. We consider fasting or kneeling during service on Sundays to be unlawful, and we enjoy the same privilege from Easter until Pentecost. We also are upset if any of our bread or wine falls to the earth at the Lord's Supper. Lastly, we make the sign of the cross on our foreheads at every turn, at our going in or coming out of the house, while dressing, while putting on our shoes, when we are taking a bath, before and after meals, when we light the lamps, when we go to bed or sit down, and in all the ordinary actions of daily life.”

“Nor let any one think that, because baptism is proposed to them, heretics will be kept back from coming to the Church, as if offended at the name of a second baptism; nay, but on this very account they are rather driven to the necessity of coming by the testimony of truth shown and proved to them. For if they shall see that it is determined and decreed by our judgment and sentence, that the baptism wherewith they are there baptized is considered just and legitimate, they will think that they are justly and legitimately in possession of the Church also, and the other gifts of the Church; nor will there be any reason for their coming to us, when, as they have baptism, they seem also to have the rest. But further, when they know that there is no baptism without, and that no remission of sins can be given outside the Church, they more eagerly and readily hasten to us, and implore the gifts and benefits of the Church our Mother, assured that they can in no wise attain to the true promise of divine grace unless they first come to the truth of the Church. Nor will heretics refuse to be baptized among us with the lawful and true baptism of the Church, when they shall have learnt from us that they also were baptized by Paul, who already had been baptized with the baptism of John,36 as we read in the Acts of the Apostles.”

“But what is "the doctrine of baptisms"? Not as if there were many baptisms, but one only. Why then did he express it in the plural? Because he had said, "not laying again a foundation of repentance." For if he again baptized them and catechised them afresh, and having been baptized at the beginning they were again taught what things ought to be done and what ought not, they would remain perpetually incorrigible. "And of laying on of hands." For thus did they receive the Spirit, "when Paul had laid his hands on them" (Acts xix. 6), it is said. "And of the resurrection of the dead." For this is both effected in baptism, and is affirmed in the confession. "And of eternal judgment." But why does he say this? Because it was likely that, having already believed, they would either be shaken [from their faith], or would lead evil and slothful lives, he says, "be wakeful." It is not open to them to say, If we live slothfully we will be baptized again, we will be catechised again, we will again receive the Spirit; even if now we fall from the faith, we shall be able again by being baptized, to wash away our sins, and to attain to the same state as before. Ye are deceived (he says) in supposing these things.”

“Above, the Apostle made mention of the priesthood of Christ according to the order of Melchisedech, and showed the slowness of those to whom he was writing; here he returns to his proposal. And concerning this he does three things: first he opens his intention; second he shows its difficulty, at the place and this we will do; third he declares his intention, at the place we are confident. Concerning the first he does two things: first he makes clear his proposal; second he explains what he says, at the place not again. His proposal is that, having passed over those things which pertain to the beginning of Christian doctrine, he wishes to pursue other higher things. Hence he says: it has already been said that the perfect have need of solid food; wherefore, leaving aside the discourse of the beginning of the doctrine of Christ, by which Christ begins to be in us, which is through the doctrine of faith — Eph. c. III, 17: that Christ may dwell through faith in our hearts — let us be carried to perfection, that is, to those things which pertain to the perfection of the doctrine of Christ. I Cor. XIII, 11: when I became a man, I put away the things that were of a child. Now this, according to the Gloss, can be referred to two things: namely either to the intellect, so that when a man has advanced, he ought to leave aside childish things and devote himself to the things of the perfect. I Cor. c. II, 6: we speak wisdom among the perfect. Or to the effect. And the sense is that one must not always stand in the sense of beginners, but must tend toward the state of the perfect. Gen. c. XVII, 1: walk before me, and be perfect. Here there is a twofold objection. And first, concerning what he says about leaving aside the beginning, because the beginning ought never to be left aside. Ps. LXXVI, 10: and I said: now I have begun. Job c. XXVII, 6: the justification which I have begun to hold, I will not forsake. I answer. It must be said that the beginning can be left aside in two ways. Either as to estimation, and in this way a man must always be as one advancing and tending toward greater things. Phil. III, 12: not that I have already begun, or that I am already perfect. Or as to progress toward perfection, and in this way a man must always strive to pass over into the state of the perfect. Phil. III, 13: forgetting the things that are behind, stretching myself toward those that are before. For in the way of God, says Bernard, not to advance is to go back. Another objection concerns what he says, let us be carried to perfection. For perfection consists in the counsels. Matth. XIX, 21: if you wish to be perfect, go, and sell all, and so on. But not all are bound to the counsels; therefore. I answer. It must be said that perfection is twofold. One, namely exterior, which consists in exterior acts, which are signs of interior things, such as virginity, voluntary poverty. And to this not all are bound. The other is interior, which consists in the love of God and neighbor. Col. III, 14: have charity, which is the bond of perfection. And to this kind of perfection not all are bound, but all are bound to tend toward it, because if anyone were unwilling to love God more, he would not do what charity requires. Now he says let us be carried, and this according to an impulse from the Holy Spirit. Rom. VIII, 14: they who are led by the Spirit, these are the sons of God. Or as carried by God, who carries our weakness. Is. XLVI, 3: hear me, house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, who are carried by me from the womb. Or as carried by one another. Gal. VI, 2: bear one another's burdens. Then, when he says not again, he explains what he said, and intends to show what those things are which pertain to the beginning of the doctrine of Christ. And he uses a comparison. For through faith the soul is built up into a spiritual building. Therefore, just as in a bodily building the foundation is laid first, so here the first rudiments of the doctrine of Christ are, as it were, foundations. But on the contrary: because below, at XI, 1, faith is set down as being the foundation; but faith is one. Eph. c. IV, 5: one Lord, one faith, one Baptism. But here he sets down six foundations; therefore it seems that this is wrong. I answer. It must be said that faith is the foundation of the virtues. But these things which he sets down here are the foundations of the doctrine of Christ. And he says not again laying the foundation, etc., as if we should lay it so firmly that it need not be laid a second time. Or because you laid it long ago, and it need not be repeated. Now the Apostle orders these things very meaningfully. For just as in the way of generation and of any motion whatsoever, there is first a departure from the term from which, and afterward an approach to the term to which, so he says here — because penance is a departure from sin, and thus it is, as it were, a certain foundation in this life. For no one, according to Augustine, master of his own will, can begin a new life, unless he repents of the past one. Hence the Lord at the beginning of his preaching says: do penance, Matth. IV, 17. And therefore he says of penance from dead works. For works are called dead, either those which are dead in themselves, or those which are mortified. A thing is called living when it has the function of its proper power; and when it fails in this, it is called dead. For our works are ordered to beatitude, which is the end of man. And therefore when they do not lead to beatitude, nor can be ordered to it, they are called dead: and these are works done in mortal sin. Infra IX, 14: the blood of Christ, who through the Holy Spirit offered himself unspotted to God, shall cleanse our consciences from dead works. But works done in charity are mortified by sin; hence they do not have the power to merit eternal life. Ez. XVIII, 24: all his justices which he had done shall not be remembered. But penance causes these to revive: hence then they are again reckoned toward eternal life. But in the approach to the term, first there is faith, and therefore he says the foundation of faith toward God. Now it is proper to faith that a man believes and assents not to things seen by himself, but to the testimony of another. Now this testimony is either of man alone: and this does not make the power of faith, because a man can both deceive and be deceived. Or this testimony is from divine judgment: and this is most true and most firm, because it is from the very Truth, which can neither deceive nor be deceived. And therefore he says, toward God, that is, so that one assents to those things which God says. Io. c. XIV, 1: you believe in God, believe also in me. Secondly, in this process there are the sacraments of faith. Now these are two sacraments of those entering; for the Apostle here treats only of these. And these are: Baptism, first, by which we are regenerated, and second is confirmation, by which we are confirmed. As to the first he says of Baptisms. But on the contrary, Eph. IV, 5: one faith, one Baptism. Therefore there are not several Baptisms. I answer. It must be said that Baptism is threefold, namely of the river, of the breath, and of blood; but the last two do not have force unless they are referred to the first, because these must be had in intention, if the opportunity is not present, in those having the use of free will. And therefore they are not three sacraments, but one sacrament, by which we are regenerated unto salvation. Io. III, 5: unless one is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, and so on. Now among these, the Baptism of blood has more of the effect of Baptism, provided the first was in intention, or the contrary was not held in mind, as is clear in the case of the innocents, who were not in an opposite disposition. For Baptism has its power from the merit of the Passion of Christ. Rom. VI, 3: whoever of us were baptized in Christ Jesus were baptized in his death. Therefore, just as he who is baptized is conformed to the death of Christ sacramentally, so the martyr is conformed really. And therefore this Baptism has the whole effect of Baptism, as to purging all guilt and penalty of sin, yet it does not imprint any character. And therefore if one receiving martyrdom without the Baptism of water were to rise again, he would have to be baptized. But penance does not have as much of the effect of Baptism, because it does not take away every penalty, although it takes away the guilt. But just as the martyr conforms himself to the death of Christ through exterior suffering, so the penitent through interior suffering. Gal. c. V, 24: they who are Christ's have crucified their flesh with its vices and desires. Therefore it can be so great that it takes away all guilt and penalty, as is clear in the case of the thief and the Magdalene. Hence penance is called Baptism, inasmuch as it supplies the place of Baptism. And because it is not lawful to repeat that, therefore penance was instituted. These, therefore, are called Baptisms, because they have the effect of Baptism; but there is only one Baptism, because they do not operate unless that is held in intention. The second sacrament of those entering consists in the very laying on of hands. Therefore he says also of the laying on of hands. But this is twofold. One is that which works miracles, as when Christ through the laying on of hands healed the sick, Lc. IV, 40: laying his hands on each of them he healed them; and this is not sacramental. The other is sacramental, and this is twofold. One in the sacrament of order. I Tim. V, 22: lay hands hastily on no one. The other is in the sacrament of confirmation for renewal. Tit. III, 5: through the laver of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, and so on. For in confirmation the Spirit is given for strength, that is, so that a man may boldly confess the name of Christ before men. For just as in the being of nature, a man is first generated, and afterward grows and is strengthened, so it is in the being of grace. Thirdly there follows the term of the motion, to which the motion is terminated, and this is twofold. For we await two things: the first is the resurrection of bodies, and this is a foundation of faith, because without this our faith is vain, I Cor. c. XV, 14. Therefore he says of the resurrection of the dead. Likewise we await recompense, which will be made through the judge. Eccle. XII, 14: God will bring all things that are done into judgment. And therefore he says of eternal judgment, not that this judgment will last a thousand years, as Lactantius held, but the whole will be in a moment. But it is called eternal, because the sentence which will be given there will last forever. Matth. XXV, 46: these shall go into eternal punishment, but the just into eternal life. And it must be known that all these things, which he says he wishes to treat here, are, as it were, certain rudiments of the faith. Hence he preaches these to novices, Act. XVII, 18 ss., and in many other places. Then, when he says and this we will do, he shows the difficulty of carrying out his proposal: for it is difficult, both in itself, and with respect to his hearers. Hence he does three things. First he indicates that in this he especially needs divine help; second he adds the weakness of certain persons, at the place for it is impossible; third he brings forward a certain comparison, at the place for the earth. He says therefore: let us be carried toward the perfect, and this we will do, if indeed God permits. Now he says less, and signifies more. For it is not only necessary that the Lord permit, but it is required that he do all things. Sap. VII, 16: in the hand of God are we and our words. And therefore one must place everything under confidence in divine help. Io. XV, 15: without me you can do nothing. Iac. IV, 15: instead you should say, if God wills, and if we live, we will do. Then, when he says it is impossible, he shows their weakness: for they were weak in hearing. Just as in bodily matters no condition is so dangerous as that of relapsing persons, so in spiritual matters, he who after grace falls into sin rises to good again with more difficulty. And concerning this he does three things: first he sets forth the goods which they had received; second the difficulty caused in them from relapse, at the place and are fallen away; third he assigns the reason, at the place crucifying again. Now some goods are present, but others are future. Now they in the present had spiritual regeneration, and as to this he says enlightened, namely through Baptism. And Baptism is fittingly called illumination, because Baptism is the beginning of spiritual regeneration, in which the intellect is illumined through faith. Eph. V, v. 8: you were once darkness, but now light in the Lord. They also have a participation in the goods of God, and as to this he says and have tasted the heavenly gift. This gift is grace, and it is called heavenly, because God gives it from the heavens. Ps. LXVII, 19: he gave gifts to men, and Iac. c. I, 17: every best gift and every perfect gift is from above, descending from the Father of lights. There is also in them a participation in the divine goodness. II Pet. I, 4: through whom, namely Christ, he has given us the greatest and precious promises. Therefore he says made partakers of the Holy Spirit. For all gifts are given out of love: and therefore he attributes this participation to the Holy Spirit. Now to participate is to take a part. But only Christ had the Holy Spirit unto fullness. Io. III, 34: for God does not give the Spirit by measure. For the other saints received of his fullness, and were made partakers, not indeed of his substance, but of his distributions. Supra II, 4: and various distributions of the Holy Spirit. I Cor. XII, 4: there are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit, and so on. Likewise in the present they had the instruction of doctrine. And as to this he says they have tasted nonetheless the good word of God. This word is called good, because it is the word of eternal life. Io. VI, 69: Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Ps. CXVIII, v. 103: how sweet are your words to my throat. Now he says they have tasted, because it not only illumines the intellect, but also refreshes the affection, in which there is a certain savoring. Ps. XXXIII, 8: taste and see that the Lord is sweet. But future goods they had in hope. Rom. VIII, 24: we are saved by hope. And therefore he says and the powers of the age to come. Now of these, some are had not only in hope, but also in a certain inchoation, and these are the endowments of the soul, namely vision, possession, and enjoyment, and these are had in a certain inchoation, inasmuch as faith, hope, and charity, which correspond to them, are had in the present. But other goods there are, which are had only in hope, such as the endowments of the body, namely subtlety, agility, impassibility, clarity. Consequently, when he says and are fallen away, he shows the difficulty of rising again, caused by the fall. Where it must be noted that he does not say fallen simply, but fallen away, that is, totally fallen: because if they had only fallen, it would not be so difficult to rise again. Prov. XXIV, 16: the just man falls seven times a day, and rises again. But if the Apostle were saying that it is impossible for those who have fallen away to rise again, then it could be said that in this he notes the greatest difficulty of rising, namely both on account of sin, and on account of pride, as is clear in the case of the demons. But because he says that those who have once fallen away cannot again be renewed unto penance, and there is no sin in this world from which a man cannot repent, therefore it must be understood otherwise. Hence it must be known that from this passage a certain Novatus, who was a priest of the Roman Church, took an occasion of erring. For he held that no one after Baptism could rise again to penance. But this position is false, as Athanasius says in his epistle to Serapion, because Paul himself received back the incestuous Corinthian, as is clear from II Cor. II, 5 ss., and likewise Gal. IV, 19, because he says: my little children, whom I bring forth again, and so on. It must therefore be understood, as Augustine says, that he does not say that it is impossible to repent, but that it is impossible to be renewed again, that is, to be baptized. Tit. III, 5: through the laver of regeneration and renewal, and so on. For a man could never so repent that he could be baptized again. And the Apostle says this, because according to the law the Jews are baptized many times, as is clear from Mc. VII, 3 s. And therefore, to remove this error, the Apostle says this. Then, when he says crucifying again, and so on, he assigns the reason why Baptism is not repeated, namely because Baptism is a certain configuration to the death of Christ, as is clear from Rom. VI, 3: as many of us as were baptized in Christ. But this is not repeated, because Christ, rising from the dead, dies now no more, Rom. VI, 9. Therefore they who are baptized a second time crucify Christ again. Or otherwise, that the opposition to the grace of Christ is denoted, namely that they wish to sin frequently and afterward be baptized again — so that it is referred not to a repetition of Baptism, but to the fall of those who sin. Who, namely, as far as it is in them, crucify Christ again, because Christ died once for our sins, I Pet. III, 18. Therefore when you sin after being baptized, as far as it is in you, you give occasion for Christ to be crucified again, and thus an insult is done to Christ, in whose blood you, having been washed, stain yourself. Apoc. I, 5: he loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.”

“Of the doctrine of baptisms,.... Some read this divisively, "baptism and doctrine", as the Ethiopic version; as if the one respected the ordinance of baptism, and the other the ministry of the word; but it is best to read them conjunctively: and by which most understand the Gospel ordinance of water baptism, so called by a change of number, the plural for the singular, as the Syriac and Ethiopic versions, who render it baptism; or because of the different persons baptized, and times of baptizing, as some; or because of the trine immersion, as others; or because of the threefold baptism of spirit, blood, and water, which have some agreement with each other; or because of the baptism of John, and Christ, though they are one and the same; or because of the inward and outward baptism, the one fitting and qualifying for the other; and so the doctrine of it is thought to respect the necessity, use, and end of it; but since there is but one baptism, and the above reasons for the plural expression are not solid, and sufficiently satisfying, it is best to interpret this of the divers baptisms among the Jews, spoken of in Heb 9:10 which had a doctrine in them, to that people; teaching them the cleansing virtue of the blood of Christ, and leading them to it, to wash in for sin, and for uncleanness; but now, since this blood was shed, they were no more to teach nor learn the doctrine of cleansing by the blood of Christ this way; nor any more to be led unto it through these divers baptisms, ablutions, and purifications. And of laying on of hands; the foundation of this was to be no more laid, nor the doctrine of it to be any longer taught and learned in the way it had been; for not the rite, but the doctrine of laying on of hands is here intended; and it has no reference to the right of laying on of hands by the apostles, either in private persons, or officers of churches; for what was the doctrine of such a rite, is not easy to say; but to the rite of laying on of hands of the priests, and of the people, upon the head of sacrifices; which had a doctrine in it, even the doctrine of the imputation of sin to Christ, the great sacrifice. It was usual with the Jews (g) to call the imposition of hands upon the sacrifice, simply, "laying on of hands"; and they understood by it the transferring of sin from the persons that laid on hands, to the sacrifice, on which they were laid; and that hereby, as they express it, sins were separated from them, and, as it were, put upon the sacrifice (h); but now believers were no longer to be taught and learn the great doctrine of the imputation of sin, by this rite and ceremony, since Christ has been made sin for them, and has had sins imputed to him, and has bore them in his own body on the tree: and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment: articles of faith, which distinguished the Jews from the Gentiles, who were greatly strangers to a future state, the resurrection of the dead, and judgment to come: these are doctrines of pure revelation, and were taught under the Old Testament, and were believed by the generality of the Jews, and are articles which they hold in common with us Christians; yet the believing Hebrews were not to rest in the knowledge of these things, and in the smaller degrees of light they had in them, under the former dispensation; but were to go on to perfection, and bear forward towards a greater share of knowledge of these, and other more sublime doctrines of grace; since life and immortality are more clearly brought to light by Christ through the Gospel. (g) Misn. Kiddushin, c. 2. sect. 8. & Bartenora in ib. (h) R. Levi ben Gersom in Exod. fol. 109. 1. & in Lev. fol. 117. 2.”

“Of the doctrine of baptisms - "There were two things," says Dr. Owen, "peculiar to the Gospel, the doctrine of it and the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Doctrine is called baptism, Deu 32:2; hence the people are said to be baptized to Moses, when they were initiated into his doctrines, Co1 11:2. The baptism of John was his doctrine, Act 19:3; and the baptism of Christ was the doctrine of Christ, wherewith he was to sprinkle many nations, Isa 52:15. This is the first baptism of the Gospel, even its doctrine. The other was the communication of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, Act 1:5; and this alone is what is intended by the laying on of hands; and then the sense will be the foundation of the Gospel baptisms, namely preaching and the gifts of the Holy Ghost." I am afraid, with all this great man's learning, he has not hit the meaning of the apostle. As teaching is the means by which we are to obtain the gifts of the Holy Ghost, surely the apostle never designed to separate them, but to lead men immediately through the one to the possession of the other. Nor is the word baptism mentioned in the passage in Deuteronomy which he quotes; nor, indeed, any word properly synonymous. Neither βαπτισμος, baptism, ῥαντισμος, sprinkling, nor any verb formed from them, is found in the Septuagint, in that place. But the other proofs are sufficiently in point, viz. that by baptism in the other places referred to, doctrine or Teaching is meant; but to call Teaching one baptism, and the gifts of The Holy Ghost another baptism, and to apply this to the explanation of the difficulty here, is very far from being satisfactory. I am inclined to think that all the terms in this verse, as well as those in the former, belong to the Levitical law, and are to be explained on that ground. Baptisms, or immersions of the body in water, sprinklings, and washings, were frequent as religious rites among the Hebrews, and were all emblematical of that purity which a holy God requires in his worshippers, and without which they cannot be happy here, nor glorified in heaven. Laying on of hands - Was also frequent, especially in sacrifices: the person bringing the victim laid his hands on its head, confessed his sins over it, and then gave it to the priest to be offered to God, that it might make atonement for his transgressions. This also had respect to Jesus Christ, that Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. The doctrine also of the resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment, were both Jewish, but were only partially revealed, and then referred to the Gospel. Of the resurrection of the dead there is a fine proof in Isa 26:19, where it is stated to be the consequence of the death and resurrection of Christ, for so I understand the words, Thy dead shall live; with my dead body shall they arise: awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. The valley of dry bones, Eze 37:1, etc., is both an illustration and proof of it. And Daniel has taught both the resurrection and the eternal judgment, Dan 12:2 : And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake; some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Now the foundation of all these doctrines was laid in the Old Testament, and they were variously represented under the law, but they were all referred to the Gospel for their proof and illustration. The apostle, therefore, wishes them to consider the Gospel as holding forth these in their full spirit and power. It preaches, 1. Repentance, unto life. 2. Faith in God through Christ, by whom we receive the atonement. 3. The baptism by water, in the name of the holy Trinity; and the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 4. The imposition of hands, the true sacrificial system; and, by and through it, the communication of the various gifts of the Holy Spirit, for the instruction of mankind, and the edification of the Church. 5. The resurrection of the dead, which is both proved and illustrated by the resurrection of Christ. 6. The doctrine of the eternal or future judgment, which is to take place at the bar of Christ himself, God having committed all judgment to his Son, called here κριμα αιωνιον, eternal or ever during judgment, because the sentences then pronounced shall be irreversible. Some understand the whole of the initiation of persons into the Church, as the candidates for admission were previously instructed in those doctrines which contained the fundamental principles of Christianity. The Hebrews had already received these; but should they Judaize, or mingle the Gospel with the law, they would thereby exclude themselves from the Christian Church, and should they be ever again admitted, they must come through the same gate, or lay a second time, παλιν, this foundation. But should they totally apostatize from Christ, and finally reject him, then it would be impossible to renew them again to repentance - they could no more be received into the Christian Church, nor have any right to any blessing of the Gospel dispensation; and, finally rejecting the Lord who bought them, would bring on themselves and their land swift destruction. See the 4th and following verses, and particularly the notes on Heb 6:8-9 (note).”

“the doctrine of baptisms--paired with "laying on of hands," as the latter followed on Christian baptism, and answers to the rite of confirmation in Episcopal churches. Jewish believers passed, by an easy transition, from Jewish baptismal purifications (Heb 9:10, "washings"), baptism of proselytes, and John's baptism, and legal imposition of hands, to their Christian analogues, baptism, and the subsequent laying on of hands, accompanied by the gift of the Holy Ghost (compare Heb 6:4). Greek, "baptismoi," plural, including Jewish and Christian baptisms, are to be distinguished from baptisma, singular, restricted to Christian baptism. The six particulars here specified had been, as it were, the Christian Catechism of the Old Testament; and such Jews who had begun to recognize Jesus as the Christ immediately on the new light being shed on these fundamental particulars, were accounted as having the elementary principles of the doctrine of Christ [BENGEL]. The first and most obvious elementary instruction of Jews would be the teaching them the typical significance of their own ceremonial law in its Christian fulfilment [ALFORD]. resurrection, &c.--held already by the Jews from the Old Testament: confirmed with clearer light in Christian teaching or "doctrine." eternal judgment--judgment fraught with eternal consequences either of joy or of woe.”