ABBIDGED HAND-BOOK ON CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. R. INGHAM. !P "JR I C E SIXPENCE. &&P 148 o. LONDON: PEWTRESS BROTHEBS, AVE MABIA LANE 1864. £5 ,^T .5 ^ 1c < JO *^ IE ~~ ^ Q. # W H- to fe O *a $ * s CD C w O bfl rsT ^ 8 13 £ fc £ .£> ♦£ M cj *K» •5 * c/> §, ■** PH 2 «5 & 8 % CO 8 V* of baptism." In the H and-Book on Christian Baptism more lengthened ex- 1 racts are given. Also fourteen others are quoted as giving testimony similar to the above. III.— ON EVIDENCE FROM GREEK WRITERS. C. Tatloe.— " Surely the Greeks understood their own language." E. R. Conder. — " The meaning of words depends on their use." T. H. Horne.— " The meaning of a word must always be a simple matter of fact ; and, of course, it is always to be established by appropriate and adequate testimony." Dr. Wardlaw. — " I have already said that it is not by etymology, but by usage, that this point can be f|tirly determined." Dr. Halley, J. Stacey, Professors Wilson, Godwin, and others, speak as explicitly and emphatically on Use, as the above writers. It is by an examination of the occurrences of this word and others that the fidelity of lexicographers can be tested. The following in their writings have used the words which the Spirit of inspiration has chosen to designate the ordinance enjoined by the Church's only Head. Let the reader judge whether the writers could possibly use the word as meaning less than to immerse, when it is used literally, or less than to overwhelm when it is used figuratively. Orpheus (or the author of what is attributed to Orpheus). — " But when the sun baptizeto — immerses himself in the waters of the ocean." Pindar. — " As when a net is cast into the sea, the cork swims above, so am I abaptistos— unimmersed (or unimmersible)." The ancient Greek scholiast has thus explained, "For like the cork of a net in the sea I swim, and ou baptizomai — am not immersed. As the cork though loaded with tackle on dunei — does not sink ; so I also am abaptistos. They rail at me, indeed, but as, when the net is cast and sunk under water, the cork re- mains abaptistos ; in like manner am I abaptistos in the calumnies and detrac- tions of others ; for I am of another nature, and as the cork is in a fishing net." iEsop (or the author of what is attributed to JEsop). — " The dolphin, vexed at such a falsehood, baptizon — immersing, killed him." Anacreon. — "Platting a garland once, I found Cupid among the roses: taking hold of him by the wings, ebaptis — I immersed him into the wine." Alciriades. — " I, in waves of the sea baptizon — immersing will destroy thee." Eurulus. — " Who now the fourth time baptizetai — is immersed, leading the famished life of a miserable mullet." Hippocrates. — "And she breathed as persons breathe ek tou bebaptisthai — ■ from being immersed." * Plato. — " Knowing a youth to be baptizomenon — immersed (or overwhelmed) with questions." * In the work of which this is an abridgement, other, quotations from Hippoerates and many (subsequent authors are given. Aristotle speaks of certain " desert places, abounding with rushes and sea- weeds, which on the ebb me baptizesthai — are not immersed, but in the flood katakluzezthai are deluged." Heraclides Ponticus says, "When a piece of iron is taken red-hot out of the lire and hudati baptizetai — is immersed in (or with) water" Demosthenes speaks of persons who "know how diabaptizesthai — to play the immersing match." Evenus says that Bacchus " baptizei — immerses in sleep." JEsopic Fables. — In these we read of a salt-bearing mule which in a river " lowered down and baptizein — immersed the panniers." Also we read of a " ship being in danger baptizesthai — of being immersed;" and of "a certain man baptisas — immersing tow in oil." Life op Pythagoras. — In this is mentioned " baptizomenen — the immersed ship." Archias mentions "a fishing rod thrice- stretched, and oork abaptiston — ■ unimmersed (or unimmersible) by the water." The Septuagint. — " Naaman went down, and ebaptizetai — dipped himself— seven times." " Iniquity baptizei — immerses (or overwhelms) me." " Ebap- tizeto — she immersed herself in a fountain.*' " Baptizomenos — he who is immersed from the dead." (That is, from the touch of a dead body, or from the defilement of such a contact.) Polybius mentions foot- soldiers passing " with difficulty, baptizomenoi — ■ being immersed up to the breast." Diodorus Siculus. — " Whose ship baptistheises — being immersed." Dionysius, of Halicarnassus, mentions " the sword baptisthentos — being so immersed as to be warmed." Strabo. — "Nor does it happen to those who do not swim baptizesthai — to be immersed there." Conon. — " Baptisasa — having immersed (having overwhelmed) Alexander with much wine, and put him to sleep." Philo speaks of the " intoxicated, before they are entirely baptizomenon — immersed (overwhelmed)." Demetrius says that the soul in the body is " not wholly bebaptisthai — im- mersed, but rises above," &c. Josephus. — " When the vessel was about baptizesthai — to be immersed." Epictetus. — " Sailing in a large and polished and richly gilded ship bap* tizesthai — to be immersed." Plutarch. — " Then baptizon— immersing himself into the lake." Nicander. — " Embaptison — immerse many in sharp brine." Alciphron. — " If I am to see all the rivers, life to me katabaptisthesetai — will be overwhelmed." Poly.enus. — "Philip did not give over diabaptizomenos — thoroughly im- mersing." Justin Martyr. — "Us bebaptismenous — overwhelmed with most grievous sins which we have done." Lucian.— " I would push hiui down baptizonta — immersing, that he should never rise again." Dion Cassius. — " The ships baptisthenai — were immersed." Symmachus. — " Ebaptisthen — I am immersed into bottomless depths." Clemens Alexandrixus speaks of those who " baptizousi — immerse them- selves into fornication." Aristophon. — " Then baptisas — immersing potently." Athenjeus speaks of persons who seem " bebaptisthai — to be immersed in (or, to be overwhelmed with) undiluted wine." Alexander, of Aphrodisias, speaks of a force that " katabaptizei — overwhelms and quenches the native and vital warmth at the heart." Origen speaks of "those who were katabebaptismenon — altogether over- whelmed by wickedness ;" and of the deluged wood (1st lungs xviii, 33 — 35) which Elijah did not personally baptisontos — baptize. Aquila. — " Baptiseis — thou wilt immerse me in corruption." Plotinus. — " Bebaptismene — immersed in the body." Gregory, surnamed Thaumaturgus, speaks of " drawing up persons bap- tizomenous — immersed. Porphyry. — " The person, .batizetai — is immersed up to the head." Cyril, of Jerusalem. — " Ebaptisthe — he was immersed, .the body went down indeed and came up." Heimerius. — "And I will shew you., another baptizonta — immersing with the hands the Persian fleet." (The vessel being represented as sinking by the force of the hands.) Basil speaks of "those who are tempest-tossed in the deep, whom waves receiving one from another, and epibaptizonta — immersing (overwhelming), do not suffer to rise out of the surge." Gregory, of Nazianzus. — "Baptisthomen — that we may not be immersed, vessel and men, and make shipwreck." Heliodorus. — " "When midnight ebaptizon — had immersed the city in sleep." Libanius. — "He who. .an baptisthie — would be overwhelmed by a small ad- dition." Themistius. — " Whenever she observed me baptizomenon — overwhelmed by grief." Chariton, of Aphrodisium. — "But Dionysius . . was seized indeed by a tempest, and ebaptizeto — ivas overwhelmed as to the soul; but yet he struggled to emerge from the passion as from a mighty wave." Argoxautic Expedition, by an anonymous author. — "When Titan baptizeto • — immersed himself into the ocean-stream." Chrysostom teaches that the stedfast believer " baptizetai — is overwhelmed by none of the present evils." It is not necessary to adduce writers of a later period. These are unequivocal and decisive testimony that the import of baptizo is to immerse. In some instances plunge, dip, or sink, and similar words, 9 as well as overwhelm, might be used, but in not one instance are we at liberty to substitute pour, sprinkle, or cleanse. There is no differ- ence of testimony from use betwixt the period preceding and that succeeding apostolic times. We adopt the language of Professor Wilson : "The usage of the Greek language appears to be strictly harmonious." IV.— ON EVIDENCE FEOM ANCIENT VERSIONS. Dr. J. Bennett. — " Next to writers on theology are the translators of the Scriptures, as witnesses to what the ancient church thought to be the mind of God in His revelation to man." Dr. Halley.— " I know no better evidence than translations made without reference to the question." If the reader needs a stimulus to his diligence and decision to ob- tain from this and every available source, information respecting the import of the Divine ordinance of baptism, we need here quote, in addition to the above, only the words of Archb. Trench and Dr. Gotch. Archb. T. on the translation of God's word, says : "A single sug- gestion of lasting value towards the end here in view, is something for which to be ever thankful." The special object of Dr. F. W. Gotch, resident tutor in the Baptist College, Bristol, was to ascertain from versions whether baptizo had usually been translated into the vernacular languages, or merely transferred. His words giving the results of his investigations are : " The conclusions to which the investigation leads us are — With regard to the ancient versions, in all of them, with three exceptions (namely the Latin from the third century, and the Sahidic and the Basmuric), the word baptizo is translated by words purely native ; and the three excepted versions adopted the Greek word, not by way of transference, but in consequence of the term having become current in the languages. "Of native words employed, the Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and earliest Latin, all signify to immerse ; the Anglo-Saxon, both to to immerse and to cleanse ; the Persic, to wash ; and the Slavonic, to cross. The meaning of the word adopted from the Greek, in Sahidic, Basmuric, and Latin, being also to immerse. " With regard to modern versions examined, the Eastern generally adhere to the ancient Eastern versions, and translate by words signifying to immerse. Most of the Gothic dialects, viz. : the German, Swedish, Dutch, Danish, &c, employ altered forms of the Gothic word signifying to dip. The Icelandic uses 10 a word meaning cleanse. The Slavic dialects follow the ancient Slavonic ; and the languages formed from the Latin, including the English, adopt the word baptizo ; though with respect to the English, the words wash and christen were formerly used, as well as baptize." What encouragement do these versions give to sprinkling and pouring in opposition to immersing ? The word cross for baptize had come into use from the crossing that had been adopted in con- nexion with baptism. The crossing was not like present sprinkling, in lieu of immersion, but in addition to it. The Icelandic word meaning scouring, cleansing, and the Saxon, fullian, though less ac- curate than some, favour immersion, because the cleansing which is by washing includes immersion. Almost every translation unto the present century has either transferred the Greek word, or translated it by a word meaning to immerse. V.— ON EVIDENCE FROM THE PRACTICE OF THE GREEKS AND OF THE GREEK CHURCH. Dr. Halley. — " The language of the Christian Fathers is at least as unexceptionable as that of heathen poets and orators." " We respect" ecclesiastical antiquity ." as a witness of the meaning of the word." " Christians could speak Greek as well as Pagans." " Did they or did they not understand it [baptism] to be perfectly synonymous with immersion ?" We say with Mr. C. Taylor, " Surely the Greeks understood their own language." Our inquiry is not respecting speculative opinions, but respecting the meaning of a Greek word. The Greek church neither in Greece proper nor elsewhere, has given encouragement to the idea that the word baptizo changed its meaning when touched by the pen of inspiration. The following, called Greek Fathers, have thus written : Basil. — " The great mystery of baptism is accomplished by three katadnsesi — immersions." Gregory (Nazian.) — " We are buried with Christ dia tou baptismatm — by baptism that also we may rise with Him ; we descend with Him that we may be lifted up with Him ; we ascend with Him that we may be also glorified with Him." Chrysostom. — " We katadwnton— immersing the head in water as in any sepulchre, the old man is buried, and the lower parts katadus — being immersed, the whole person is entirely covered."' 11 Germanus (of Const.) — " Dia tcs kataduseos — By the immersion and anadu seos — emersion, even a triple inundation, we represent the three days' burial, and the resurrection of Christ Himself." John (of Damascus). — " Baptism is an emblem of the death of Christ, for by three kataduseon — immersions," &c. Photius. — " The three kataduseis — immersions, and anastasin — emersions of baptism signify," &c. Theophylact. — "Whoever is baptized or buried with Christ by three kata- duseon — immersions," &c. On the Greek church read the following : Dr. Whitby. — " The observation of the Greek church is this, that he who ascended out of the water, must first descend down into it." Dr. J. G. King. — " The Greek church uniformly practices the trine immer- sion." Dr. Wall. — " The Greek church in all the branches of it, does still use immersion." Alex, de Stourza. — " The Western church has done violence both to the word and the idea in practising baptism by aspersion ; the very annunciation of which is a ludicrous contradiction. In truth the word baptize has but one signification. It signifies literally and perpetually to immerse. Baptism and immersion are identical." Bp. of the Cyclades. — "Where has the Pope taken the practice from? Where has the Western church seen it adopted, that she declares it to be right ? Has she learnt it from the baptism of the Lord ? Let Jordan bear witness and first proclaim the immersions and emersions. From the words of our Lord ? Hear them aright. . . The word baptizo explained means a veritable dipping, and in fact a perfect dipping. An object is baptized when it is completely concealed." Prof. Stuart. — " The mode of baptism by immersion the Oriental church has always continued to preserve, even down to the present time." VI— ON EVIDENCE FROM JEWISH PROSELYTE BAPTISM. Prof. J. H. Godwin.—" Every author must be under great obligations to those wh» have preceded him,— not less perhaps to those who have maintained different views, than to those with whom in general he agrees." It is without evidence maintained by some of the advocates of in- fant baptism, that the proselyte baptism of the Jews existed before the baptism of Christ or of John. Whether it had a previous or a subsequent commencement, its entire testimony on the act of baptism is, that it is immersion. Hence 12 Dr. Halley.— " I feel bound in candour to admit that the Jewish baptism of proselytes was by immersion. Of this there can be no reasonable doubt what- ever." Db. Lightfoot. — " That the baptism of John was by plunging the body, after the same manner as the washing of unclean persons, and the baptism of pro- selytes was, seems to appear from those things that are related of him." VII.— ON EVIDENCE FROM P.EDO-BAPTIST CONCESSIONS. Dr. J. Cumming. — " Such extracts from able divines as are likely to throw light on the inspired word, will be introduced." Db. W. II. Hetherington. — " I have preferred to quote the testimony of opponents rather than that of friends, in many instances, as less likely to be disputed." Dr. Wardlaw. — "Let not the introduction of such quotations be interpreted by any of my hearers, as implying my approbation of every incidental sentiment or mode of expres- sion which they may contain." Most Protestant and Papal critics of eminence concede that to im- merse is the primary and proper meaning of baptizo. Some admit that this is its only meaning. The following is a part of Protestant deliverance on this subject. Tyndale.— " The plunging into the water signifieth," &c. Luther. — " Baptism is a Greek word, and may be translated immersion, as when we immerse something in water that it may be wholly covered." Archb. Cranmer. — " Baptisme and the dipping into the water doth betoken," &c. Calvin. — " The word baptize signifies to immerse." Venema. — " The word baptizo to baptize, is nowhere used in the Scriptures for sprinkling." Dr. Towerson. — " The words of Christ are that they should baptize, or dip those whom they made disciples to Him." Dr. Owen. — "The original and natural signification of the word (baptizo) imports to dip, to plunge, to dye." [Bapto sometimes means to dye. but baptizo never.] Dr. Watts. — " The Greek word baptizo signifies to wash any thing, properly by water coming over it." Dr. Whitby. — " Baptism is to be performed not by sprinkling, but by wash- ing the body." Dr. G. Campbell. — " The word baptizein both in sacred authors ami in classical, signifies to dip, to plunge, to immerse.. .It is always construed suit- ably to this meaning." E. Bickersteth. — " Into this name we are to be baptized, wholly immersed, . .The first step is. .our immersion into His name." 13 Elsley.— Baptizesthai " properly imports immersion. " Augusti. — " The word 'baptism' according to etymology and usage, signifies to immerse, submerge." Dr. Hook. — " Immersion. The proper mode of administering the sacrament of baptism." Olshausen.— " The elements of repentance and regeneration, imitated in the sacrament of baptism, and prefigured by immersion and emersion, were sepa- rated from one another in the latter practice of the church, when infant baptism came into use." Meyer. — " Immersion which the word in classic Greek and in the New Tes- tament every where means." Paullus. — " The word baptize, signifies in Greek sometimes to immerse, sometimes to submerge." Dr. M'Crie. — " "We do not hold that the word baptize signifies to pour or sprinkle. This was never our opinion." Dr. Chalmers. — "The original meaning of the word baptism is immersion." T. Lewin. — " In baptism we use immersion to signify our death and rising again." Conybeare and Howson.— " It is needless to add that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases) administered by immersion, the convert being plunged beneath the surface of the water to represent his death to the life of sin, and then raised from this momentary burial to represent his resurrection to the life of righteousness." Dr. Stieb. — " The perfect immersion is not accidental in the form, but man- ifestly intended in the baptizeiu eis." J. Stacey. — It represents "the putting, in short, by any means the object into the element which baptizes." Dr. E. Wilson. — " Let the baptizing element encompass its object.. .Greek usage recognizes it as a valid baptism." Dr. Halley. — " We believe that baptizo is to make one thing to be in another." "Let the concession of baptism by overwhelming, or covering with water, be fairly and openly made by the Baptists, and we have a common position." These concessions from men whose education and practice gave them a contrary bias, are not needed to establish what without them is obscure and doubtful, but they may aid in removing misapprehen- sion from some. We desire for them no more than their legitimate influence. The sentiments of the "Friends" we believe to accord with the following : R. Barclay. — "Baptizo signifies immcrgo, that is, to plunge, to dip in." G. Whitehead. — "Baptizo is to baptize, to plunge under water, to overwhelm." 14 VIII.— ON EVIDENCE FROM THE FIGURATIVE USE OF BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Dr. Reid.— "All figurative ways of using words or phrases suppose a natural and literal meaning." 1. — Christ's sufferings are called a baptism. Had he of these a sprinkling, or was he immersed therein ? 2. — We read of the baptism of the Spirit, or of baptism by the outpouring of the Spirit, when "it filled all the house where they were sitting." Was this a sprinkling or an immersion ? 3. — The disciples of Christ are said to be " buried with him by baptism," and to be " risen with him." Does this phraseology suggest sprinkling or immersion as baptism ? 4. — The children of Israel are said to have been " baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." Is being encompassed by a cloud and the sea what may be designated a sprinkling or an im- mersion ? If we remember that the cloud was altogether super- natural, being the symbol of God's presence, and being by night a pillar of fire, and that the sea was at this time to them as a wall on their right and left, and that they walked on dry ground, what other import than immersed can we rationally attach to the word baptized ? 5. — The Apostle Peter having mentioned that eight souls were saved by water, says, " The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us." As the eight were saved by water, so does bap- tism now save us, not however " the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of good conscience towards God." As Noah's faith led him into the ark which floated safely on the waters, so the faith of those who in apostolic times heard and embraced the gospel, led to the divinely enjoined baptism as one of the things commanded by Jesus, that they might live in all "good conscience" and perfect safety. Ought not this to be the case now ? Assuredly nothing in this passage militates against immersion as the meaning of baptism. 15 IX.— ON EVIDENCE FROM THE WORDS WITH WHICH IN HOLY WRIT BAPTISM IS ASSOCIATED. J. A. James. — " Yield nothing when the truth of God is concerned. If we take but oue step backward, we give a first impulse to go a hundred, and we know not what will be the end." 1 . — We read in Holy Writ of the selection of a river, or of a place " because there ivas much water there," for the administration of bap- tism. 2. — The baptism is said to be administered in the river, and in water. The Greek en is the representative of the English in and ought to have been the rendering before water and the Holy Ghost, the same as before Jordan and the river. " The baptized," as says Dr. G. Campbell, " are also said anabainein to arise, or emerge, ascend." We read in connexion with baptism, of going down into the water and coming up out of it. On the prepositions en, eis, and ek, as requiring to be rendered in, into, and out of, unless the connexion demand another rendering, we shall subsequently speak. 8. — The Greek words rhaino or rhantizo, to sprinkle, cheo, to pour, and their compounds, are never translated with the same prepositions as baptizo. In all Greek literature we never read of any one being sprinkled or poured in or into water or any other liquid. As baptizo means to immerse, the words connected with it accord with this import. Dr. G. Campbell, on the preposition en, and on the words with which baptizo is construed, has the following in his notes on Matt, hi, 11 : 44 In water — in the Holy Spirit, en hudati — en hagio pneumati. E. T. with water — with the Holy Ghost. Vul. in aqua — in sjriritu sancto. Thus also the Sy. and other ancient versions. All the modern translations from the Greek which I have seen, render the word as our common version does, except L. CI., who says dans Veau — dans le Saint Esprit. I am sorry to ohserve that the Popish translations from the Vulgate have shown greater veneration for the style of that version, than the generality of Protestant translators have shown for that of the original. For in this the Latin is not more explicit than the Greek. Yet so inconsistent are the interpreters last mentioned that none of them have scrupled to render en to Iordane in the sixth verse in Jordan, though nothing can be plainer than that, if there be any incongruity in the expression in water, this in Jordan must be equally incongruous. But they have seen that the 16 preposition in could not be avoided there without adopting a circumlocution, and saying, with the water of Jordan, which would have made a deviation from the text too glaring. The word baptize in both in sacred authors and in classical, signifies to dip, to plunge, or to immerse, and was rendered by Tertuilian, the oldest of the La. Fathers, tingere, the term used for dyeing cloth, which was by immersion. It is always construed suitably to this meaning." X— ON EVIDENCE FROM THE DISTINCT & WIDE DIFFERENCE OF IMPORT BETWEEN IMMERSION & POURING & SPRINKLING. D. Fraser. — " It must remain an impossibility to reconcile such opposite modes of application as clipping and sprinkling." Immersion, pouring, and sprinkling, are distinct actions, described in Greek and English by definite and distinct terms. If the Saviour had used or recorded rhaino or rhantizo, he would have enjoined sprinkling ; if agnizo, or katharaino, cleansing ; if nipto or louo, washing or bathing ; if cheo, pouring. The word on inspired record is bajrtizo. The command is to immerse. The term denotes this specific action. We are not left to make an application of water according to our own option. XL— ON EVIDENCE FROM INVARIABLE ADAPTATION TO THE TEXT AND CONTEXT. C. Taylor. — " This is a sort of experimentum crucis to false propositions." Dr. John Brown. — " Unless the context absolutely requires it, we are never to depart from the literal signification of words and phases, when they afford a true and consistent meaning." The context of a word may sometimes he such that a most erro- neous rendering may be given without absurdity, but with a word of frequent occurrence this cannot invariably be the case. If immerse suits all occurrences of the Greek word, and all its connexions ; and if every substituted word, when so tested, manifests the greatest ab- surdity, there is surely some evidence that to baptize is to immerse. Let the reader begin to test Scriptural occurrences of this wurd by the use of sprinkle, pour, wash, cleanse, &c, and he will read, 17 "and were poured by Him in Jordan ;" "and was washed by John into the Jordan ;" "and was cleansed by John into the Jordan ;" " he shall wash you in the Holy Ghost;" " are you able to be sprinkled with the sprinkling that I am sprinkled with '?" " go ye therefore, disciple all the nations, cleansing them into the name," &c. ; "pouring them into the name," &c. ; " sprinkling in iEnon, near to Salim, because there was much water there;" "buried with him by sprinkling;" "buried with him by pouring;" "buried with him by cleansing ;" " were ye purified into the name of Paul ?" "all our fathers were washed into Moses;" " buried with him in sprink- ling, wherein also ye are risen with him;" "buried with him in pouring, wherein also ye are risen with him ;" " buried with him in cleansing, wherein also ye are risen with him." Shall professing Christians by adherence to tradition instead of Revelation, continue to hold up the Oracles of God to contempt ? In the larger work on Baptism, every occurrence of the words which in the New Testament represent the Christian ordinance, is given, along with the proper rendering in every instance, to prove the invariable suitability of immerse and immersion ; also the rendering is given according to the above supposed meanings, to shew that each hypothesis is utterly destitute of foundation. XII— HISTOKIC EVIDENCE OF A CHANGE FROM IMMERSION TO POURING AND SPRINKLING. J. C. Ryle. — " No tradition or man-made institution can ever, .justify disobedience to any plain commandment of God's word." 1. — The Scriptural records, as we judge to have been already demonstrated, enjoin immersion, and record its practice. 2. — The writings of those called Fathers, whether contemporary with the apostles, or immediately succeeding them, or living at a greater distance from apostolic times, confirm this. The writings attributed to Barnabas and Hennas speak of going down into the water, and coming up out of it. Justin Martyr teaches that candi- dates were led to a place where there was water. Clement mentions among other characteristics of the Christian, that he had been dipped 18 (or immersed j in the sacred laver. Tertullian speaks of John's practising, and our Lord's enjoining immersion. Clement, of Alex- andria, Tertullian, Jerome, Basil, Cyril, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Augustine, &c, &c, speak most explicitly of baptism as immersion. Cyprian, in the case of an illness which threatened death, defends pouring around as a substitute for baptism, and an abridgement of it, rendered lawful by the supposed necessity of the case, and God's indulgence. 3. — The Greeks, and the Greek church in the testimony from their first records unto the present time, have already been adduced in corroboration of baptism as immersion, and that nothing less than immersion is baptism. The first baptism on record in which a de- parture from immersion is mentioned, is that of Novatus, about A. D. 250, who on his bed was poured around, lest he should die unbap- tized, which substitute and acknowledged abridgement it was then attempted to justify only on the ground of supposed necessity and God's indulgence. 4. — The character of Ancient Baptisteries, Ritual Regulations and Confessions, are all historically confirmatory of immersion as baring preceded the pouring and sprinkling practice. The writings of Jus- tin, Tertullian, and others, prove that primitive Christians immersed in any convenient place, according to the practice recorded in the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Dr. Cave having stated above, sa} r s : " Afterwards they had baptisteries, or as we call them, fonts, built at first near the church, then in the church porch, to represent baptism's being the entrance into the mystic church ; afterwards they were placed in the church itself. They were usually very large and capacious, not only that they might comport with the general notions of this time, of persons baptized being immersed or put under water, but because the stated times of baptism returning so seldom, great multitudes were usually baptized at the same time." Dr. J. Gardner. — " Baptistery was a name given to the whole building in which the font stood, and where the rite of baptism was performed, whereas the font was only the fountain or pool of water in which the immersion took place." Dr. Halle y. — " Their practice of immersion forbids us to account for their language by supposing that a conventional use of the term had grown up in accordance with the customs of the church. They did immerse, for they seem as if they could not have made too much use of the holy water. With one im- mersion not content, they observed the trine immersion as the sacramental emblem of the Trinity." 19 The Ritual Regulations of the Eastern and Western churches corroborate the fact that immersion preceded pouring and sprinkling. In the Church of England, according to the rubric, sprinkling is but admissible where it is supposed that the weakness of the child might render immersion injurious. This exception has not always existed. The Presbyterian catechism teaches that " baptism is a sacrament wherein the washing with water in the name of the Father/' &c. Dr. Wall says that " France appears to have been the first country in the world where baptism by affusion was used ordinarily to per- sons in health, and in the public way of administering it." It is also believed that in France appeared the first liturgy in the world that prescribed aspersion absolutely. This is attributed by Dr. Wall to Calvin. The following from amongst other acknowledgements of Paedo- baptists, sufficiently establish the historic confirmation of immersion. Luther is stated to have designated sprinkling " an abuse which they ought to remove." Calvin, on Acts viii, 38, says, " Here we perceive how baptism was adminis- tered among the ancients, for they immersed the whole body in water." Otrotius. — " That this rite was accustomed to be performed by immersion, and not by pouring, appears both from the propriety of the word, from the places chosen for its administration, and from the many allusions of the Apostles which cannot be referred to sprinkling." Wolfius. — " That baptismal immersion was practised in the first ages of the Christian Church, many have shown from the writings of the ancients." Bp. Taylor. — " The custom of the ancient church was not sprinkling, but immersion." Bp. Nicholson. — " The sacrament of baptism was anciently administered by plunging into the water, in the Western as well as Eastern part of the church." Archb. Tillotson. — " Anciently those who were baptized — were immersed and buried in the water." T. Stackhouse. — " Several authors have shown that we read nowhere of any one's being baptized but by immersion ; and from the acts of councils, and ancient rituals have proved that this manner of immersion continued (as much as possible) to be used for 1300 years after Christ." Baxter. — " We grant that baptism then (in the primitive times) was by wash- ing the whole body." Poole. — " The first baptisms of which we read in Holy Writ, were by dipping of the person baptized." Chambers. — " In the primitive times this ceremony was performed by im- mersion as it is to this day in the Oriental churches, according to the original signification of the word." 20 Edin. Ency. — " In the time of the Apostle, the form of baptism was very simple. The person to be baptized was dipped in a river, or", &c. " The Greek church, as well as the schismatics in the East, retained the custom of immersing the whole body ; but the Western church adopted, in the thirteenth 3entury, the mode of baptism by sprinkling, which has been continued by the Protestants, Baptists only excepted." Penny Cy.— " The manner in which it was performed appears to have been at first by a complete immersion." Dr. Doddridge, on Rom. vi, 4. — " It seems the part of candour to confess that here is an allusion to the manner of baptizing by immersion." Dr. Whitby. — " Baptism by immersion is suitable both to the institution of our Lord and his Apostle, and was by them ordained to represent our burial with Christ," &c. Dr. G. Campbell. — " I have heard a disputant of this stamp, in defiance of etymology and use, maintain that the word rendered in the New Testament, baptize, means more properly to sprinkle than to plunge, and in defiance of all antiquity, that the former method was the earlier." J. Hewlett. — " Baptism was at first performed by immersing the whole body." J. Wesley.—" Mary Welsh, aged eleven days, was baptized according to the custom of the first church, and the rule of the Church of England, by immersion." Dr. A. Clarke, on Ro. vi, 4. — " It is probable that the Apostle here alludes to the mode of administering baptism by immersion." Dr. G. Hill. — " In one circumstance respecting the mode of administering baptism, the greater part of Christians have departed from the primitive practice." Coleman. — " It is a great mistake to suppose that baptism by immersion was discontinued when infant baptism became prevalent." Dr. Chalmers. — " The original meaning of the word baptism is immersion." 41 We doubt not that the prevalent stjde of the administration in the apostles' days was by an actual submersion of the whole body under water." Winer. — " In the apostolic age baptism was by immersion." Olshausen. — " The administrator immersed the candidate." Dr. Bloomfield. — " This with the Jews was always effected, not by sprink- ling, but by immersion." Dr. Alford. — " The baptism was administered by the immersion of the whole person." Dr. Lange. — " Baptism in the apostolic age was a proper baptism — the im- mersion of the whole person." Conybeare and Howson. — " It is needless to add that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases) administered by immersion." Dean Stanley. — "He came 'baptizing', that is, signifying to those who came to him, as he plunged them under the rapid torrent, the forgiveness and forsaking of their former sins." Da. Macbride. — " Immersion, .was that of the primitive Christian^." Dr. Bunsen.— " In the East people adhered to immersion. The Western church, which evidently commenced her career under the guidance of Rome, . . abolished, .immersion, and introduced sprinkling in its stead." 21 Prof. Stuart. — " But enough. It is, says Augusti, a thing made out, namely, the ancient practice of immersion. So indeed all the writers who have thoroughly investigated this subject, I know of no one usage of ancient times which seems to be more clearly and certainly made out." The following is from works professedly historic : Mosheim. — " The form of initiation which he [John] adopted, in regard to all those who promised amendment of heart and life, was to immerge them." M The sacrament of baptism was administered in this century, .by immersion of the whole body." The testimony of Cave and King accords with that of Mosheim. Venema. — " It is without controversy that baptism in the primitive church was administered by immersion into water, and not by sprinkling." Dr. Wall says, that " all those countries in which the usurped power of the Pope is, or has formerly been owned, have left off dipping of children in the font ; but that all other countries in the world, which had never regarded his authority, do still use it." "The way that is now ordinarily used, we cannot deny to have been a novelty, brought into this church by those that learned it in Germany or at Geneva, And they were not content to follow the example of pouring a quantity of water (which had there been introduced instead of immersion), but improved it if I may so abuse that word, from pouring to sprinkling." Guericke. — " Baptism was originally administered by immersion." Kurtz. — " Baptism was administered by complete immersion." Dr. G. Waddington. — " The ceremony of immersion (the oldest form of bap- tism) was performed in the name", &c. Gieseler. — " For the sake of the sick the rite of sprinkling was introduced." Neaxder. — " There can be no doubt that in the primitive times it was per- formed by immersion." The following from an eminent Paedo-baptist, quoted in Hinton's History of Baptism, although, as far as the earliest age of the church is concerned, unnecessarily qualified by the words " generally" and " perhaps," shall here conclude, requesting only that the practice of the reader accord with his convictions of what is Scriptural. Prof. Stuart.— " We have collected facts enough to authorize us to come to the following general conclusion respecting the practice of the Christian church in general with regard to the mole of baptism, viz. : that from the earliest ages of which we have any account subsequent to the apostolic age, and downwards for several centuries, the church did generally practise baptism by immersion, perhaps by immersion of the whole person ; and that the only exceptions to this mode which were usually allowed, were cases of urgent sickness, or other^cases of immediate or imminent danger, where immersion could not be practised. It may also be mentioned here, that aspersion and affusion, which had in par- ticular cases been now and then practised in primitive times, were gradually introduced, and became, at length, quite common, and in the Western church almost universal, before the reformation." XIIL— ON EVIDENCE FROM THE FUTILITY OF ALL KNOWN OBJECTIONS. Dk. J. Parker. — " There is no course so just, so wise, so useful, as an open and con* ecientious statement of the argument on both sides." Dr. K. W. Tweedie.— " There are many opinions which pass current for solid truth among men, which yet, when examined, are found to be superficial or untrue." In briefly replying to objections there is a difficulty, from the fact that an objection may be stated in few words, which it may require many lucidly to expose and utterly to overthrow. As brevity is a present necessity, we shall request those who wish for more, to ob- tain the lengthened replies of the afore -mentioned Hand-Book. § l.-FUTILITY OF PHILOLOGICAL OBJECTIONS. Dr. Eadie. — " The smallest words and particles have each its own signification." T. H. Horne. — " Although in every language there are very many words which admit of several meanings, yet in common parlance there is only one true sense attached to any word ; which sense is indicated by the connexion," &c, " unless any ambiguity be pur- posely intended. That the same usage obtains in the Sacred Writings there is no doubt whatever." i . — It is maintained by the Rev. A. Barnes, that baptizo means " to dip, commonly for the purpose of sprinkling, or for some other purpose." We know of no dipping in Christian baptism but in obe- dience to Christ, and as the profession of discipleship to Him, and of faith in Christian truths. Let Albert Barnes dip and encourage dipping for such a purpose, unless he knows another purpose of the Divinely enjoined dipping, or at all hazards is resolved to build on air. 2. — It is said by Dr. Beecher and others that baptizo means to purify. Nothing is here wanting but evidence ; which exists not, as we believe, in regard to a single occurrence of the word in profane or sacred literature. This is admitted by Prof. Wilson, and may be proved by examination. s. — It is said by Dr. J. P. Smith, " that the proper and leading idea of the term is, washing with water in order to cleanse and pu- rify." Were ships which the tempest immersed, washed with water 23 in order to being cleansed ? Was the land, immersed by the over- ' flowing tide, washed with water in order to being purified ? Was ho who by high authority was wickedly drowned in the swimming-bath, by his baptism washed in order to being cleansed ? Was Christ in Jordan, or were the multitudes whom John baptized, or the three thousand that gladly received the word on the day of Pentecost, by their baptism, washed in order to being cleansed ? Why could not • Drs. Smith and Farrer teach that immersion symbolizes the washing away of sins ? 4. — It is said that baptizo is not confined to a modal putting into. If our opponents prefer by other means to bring the water upon and around the candidate, let them do so, but let them in reality encom- pass the candidate with water, according to their acknowledgments of the import of the word Divinely chosen. Nothing ought to occa- sion speedier and deeper humiliation than the undeniable evidence of countenancing and perpetuating a practice which is condemned by the words of our own lips. 5. — It has been recorded that baptizo "proves nothing." Then the Divine Spirit has recorded the duty of man and the command of God by a word that has no meaning. 6. — Baptism is said to mean "coming upon," "pouring out," "rest- ing upon," "put upon," "given to," "put within." This is ludi- crously, but we doubt not honestly maintained, by giving the name of baptism to what is neither so designated nor intended to be so understood, and by not distinguishing between what is baptism, and what may simply lead to baptism. If we may call what we like a baptism, we may make baptism to mean what we like. If we may call that which leads to baptism a baptism, we may call a tempest, a falling, a pouring, a jumping, &c, &c, a baptism. t. — To baptize is also said to be, to register, to purify, to cleanse, to wash, to anoint, to initiate, to consecrate, to dedicate, to disciple, to train, to introduce to religious teaching, to introduce to the congre- gation of the Lord, &c. We shall not despair of any import being given to baptize, when the above can be justified. Let the reader test these alleged meanings by using them for baptizo in the New Testament occurrences of the word. 24 8 . — Baptizo is said to mean, to cover partially with water. In every instance the partiality of the covering, when it is partial, is described, not by baptizo, but by other words associated with it. 9 . — Baptizo is said to mean more than to immerse. The word itself does not mean more ; although without emersion a man will necessarily be drowned, and a ship will sink. i o . — Baptizo is said to have received a new meaning when it was used by John or adopted by Christ, or rather when chosen by the Spirit of inspiration. This hypothesis has not in its favour one par- ticle of evidence, and it is contradicted by the facts recorded in the inspired volume respecting John's baptism and Christian baptism, as well as by the records of inimediately subsequent ages. i i . — It has been learnedly maintained that baptizo means to stand. This meaning has nothing but imagination on which to stand. i 2. — Baptizo is said to be a generic, an open, equivocal, and ob- Bcure term. When a defence of human practice is a glaring reflection on the Divine character, we believe either the practice or the defence, or both — and in this we believe both — to be wrong. i s . — It has been said that baptizo has never been properly analysed. What word then has been ? 1 4 . — It has been said that Tertullian employs tingo and mergo (which mean to immerse), but never submergo for baptize. Surely tingo and mergo are both suitable and sufficient for the practice of immersion, and for the condemnation of pouring and sprinkling. i 5 . — The testimony of early Fathers is deemed obscure respecting the action of baptism. We admit that when superstition had added oil, &c, we have more particulars ; but all evidence — and we main- tain that it is both early and abundant — is in corroboration of immerse as the import of baptizo. i 6 . — It has been said that baptism is washing, and that we may wash by sprinkling ; therefore to baptize is to sprinkle. "To pro- pose this, is all but to refute it ;" yea, altogether sufficient. The truthfulness of our replies we believe to be substantiated by what we have previously written, which also contains a reply to every philo- logical objection we have seen recorded. 25 § 2.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE CONFIRMATION OF IMMER- SION FROM THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST. C. Taylor.—" One decisive instance" of what baptism is, " is as good as a thousand. " We shall reply to the objection from Christ's sufferings, which appear to us so strikingly confirmatory of our position, only by quoting the concessions of some of our opponents. T. Scott. — " Our Lord might indeed, by a strong figure of speech, be said to be immerged in sufferings." Assembly of Divines. — " With the baptism. A comparison taken from the manner of baptizing them, by dipping them over head and ears in water." Doddridge. — " To be baptized with the baptism, and plunged into that sea of sufferings with which I am shortly to be baptized, and as it were overwhelmed for a time." R. Watson. — " Baptized with the baptism, &c. The being immersed and ovenvhelmed with waters, is a frequent metaphor in all languages to express the rush of successive troubles." Dr. D. Brown. — " Compare, for the language, Ps. xlii, 7." Thus Bames, Alford, Bloomfield, Neander, &c, &c. § 3.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT. Dr. W. L. Alexander.—" The sacred writers, .appear to have observed in the prepara- tion of their works the ordinary rules and usages, both grammatical and rhetorical, of literary composition." It is objected to the baptism of the Spirit — or rather in the Spirit, as the inspired writers invariably say, in the Holy Spirit — that it is not consistent with immersion. Yet we believe that the filling of the house with the Spirit in his chosen emblems so abundantly poured out, is confirmatory of immersion as the import of baptism. Also the fact of the disciples being filled as to their souls with the Divine Spirit, is decidedly opposed to the idea of sprinkling. Hence the following Paedo-baptists have thus written : Archb. Tillotson. — " This is that which in v. 5, of this chap, our Saviour calls baptizing the apostles with the Holy Ghost, as they who sat in the house were, as it were, immersed in the Holy Ghost, as they who were baptized with water were overwhelmed and covered all over with water, which is the proper notion of baptism." 26 Doddridge. — " He shall baptize you with a most plentiful effusion of the Holy Ghost." Knapp. — " Baptisma, from baptizein, which properly signifies to immerse, is often used tropically. 1. — For that which flows or is communicated to any one in full measure, as in Latin, perfundere, imbuere ; to pour all over, to imbue, e. g. Acts i, 5." Neander. — " He it was that should baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire ; that is to say, that as John's followers were entirely immersed in the water, so the Messiah would immerse the souls of believers in the Holy Ghost imparted by Himself." § 4.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE BAPTISM OF ISRAEL IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA. J. A. James.—" There is no truth, however evident and certain it may be, against whioh the ingenious and dexterous sophist may not advance some plausible objections." De. Halley.—" To baptize, although sometimes used figuratively in reference to the mind, ought to be understood, unless there be some reason to the contrary, like every other word, in its ordinary acceptation." It is maintained by one of our opponents, that the children of Israel ''were sprinkled by the clouds over their heads, and perhaps by the water." Dr. A. Clarke boldly teaches that the symbol of God's presence, which was as "a pillar of a cloud" by day, and " a pillar of fire" by night, was composed of " aqueous particles" which gave " refreshment to themselves and their cattle," and in the " aqueous vapour" of it "they were thoroughly sprinkled and en- veloped !" Dr. L. Woods teaches " that they were sprinkled or wet from the cloud, or from the spray of the sea." Mr. Arthur teaches that " the sea sprinkled them." Mr. Stacey and others read in the Book of Psalms, of thunder, lightning, and abundant rain, and jump to the conclusion, that, this storm pelting the children of Israel, they were thus being sprinkled, whilst God was miraculously and glo- riously leading them through the sea on dry ground. It would not answer the purpose of our opponents to believe that this frowning and dreadful storm, which is not stated in the Book of Psalms, or in any part of Divine Revelation, to have taken place at this time, took place after God's people had passed through the sea, and whilst their enemies were still in its depths. Dr. Halley expresses entire igno- rance of what St. Paul supposed the Corinthian believers perfectly 27 to understand. He says of this baptism, " It might have been the spray of the sea, it might have been the rain sent down from the cloud." " How then were they baptized ? I do not know." And yet this brother, in the assumption that baptized does not here mean immersed, can thus lecture his opponents: " Does St Paul mean, I would not have you ignorant of what never occurred ; I would not have you ignorant of a piece of rhetoric," &c. ? Yea, this baptism and that of the Spirit are so indispensable to the support of sprink- ling, that in pleading for anything less than immersion as being in any part of the New Testament implied in baptism, he says, "I must be understood as continually leaning upon these two instances." Mr. Thorn teaches that this is " the first recorded instance of water baptism as a religious ceremony administered on a large scale." Dr. Halley more truly says that the time of David was "more than a a thousand years before baptism was instituted." Mr. Thorn teaches that the sea was the "purifying element to the people of God;" and that this " beginning of the numerous baptisms recorded in the Holy Writings," was a baptism "by simply affusing or sprinkling them." * And after this, none " could form any part of God's worshipping communion without first being washed, or undergoing the rite of baptism." Let the reader judge whether some of the opponents of baptism do not write either in the sea or in a cloud. We adduce the following as more clear and Scriptural ; but, as in other instances, without pledging approval of every expression. Poole. — " Others more probably think that the apostle useth this term in regard of the great analogy betwixt baptism (as it was then used), the persons going down into the waters, and being dipped in them ; and the children of Israel going down into the sea, the great receptacle of waters ; though the waters at that time were gathered on heaps on either side of them ; yet they seem buried in the waters, as persons in that age were when they were baptized." Bengel. — " The cloud and the sea took the fathers out of sight and restored them again to view ; and this is what the water does to those who are baptized." * Without placing sprinkling on a par with " the sum of all villanies," the assertions of some respecting sprinkling, as compared with those of their predecessors, remind us of " the peculiar institution," which was first acknowledged to be wrong, and its existence was deplored, but at length it was maintained to be of Divine right, and its perpetuity and extension were worthy of blood and treasure. Compare Luther and many others with some recent writers. 28 Whitby. — " They were covered with the sea on both sides ; so that both the cloud and the sea had some resemblance to our being covered with water in baptism." Olshatjsen. — " Reference is made to the relation in Ex. xiv, 19, 20, according to which the pillar of cloud concealed the Israelites from the view of the Egyp- tians, surrounding them, as it were, with a veil." " It appears necessary to add that all attempts to render the type more perfect by means of trifling sup- positions, such as that drops fell from the clouds on the Israelites, or that they were sprinkled by the sea, must be utterly discarded." Alford. — " The allegory is obviously not to be pressed minutely: for neither did they enter the cloud, nor were they wetted by the water or the sea." " They entered by the act of such immersion into a solemn covenant." Bloomfield. — " They were, passing under the cloud and through the sea, as it were, baptized." Barnes. — " The probability is, that the cloud extended over the whole camp of Israel, and that to those at a distance it appeared as a pillar." In opposition to the hypothesis of rain, he says, " 1. — There is not the slightest hint of this in the Old Testament. 2.— The supposition is contrary to the very design of the cloud. It was not a natural cloud, but was a symbol of the Divine presence and protection. It was not to give rain on the Israelites or on the land, but it was to guide and be an emblem of the care of God. 3. — It is doing violence to the Scriptures to introduce suppositions in this manner, without the slightest authority." § 5.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO A CORROBORATION OF IMMER- SION FROM ROMANS vi, 3, 4. Dr. R. J/biieson. — " Every metaphor used in the language of ordinary life, is formed either on the natural scenery, or on the customs and prevailing notions of society." The language of the apostle in Ro. vi, 3 — 5, and Col. ii, 12, we believe to be inconsistent with the supposition that baptism is sprink- ling, pouring, cleansing, or any thing else than immersion. A person buried is covered with earth ; a person baptized with or in water is covered with water. The resemblance is not in putting into the earth and into water, but in being covered and encompassed. Out of a hundred acknowledgements from the Hand-Book in favour of our sentiments, we select the following ; as in other instances, not endors- ing every word and idea. Luther. — " That the minister dippeth a child into the water, significth denth ; that he again bringeth him out of it, signifieth life. So Paul explains it, Ro. vi . . Being moved by this reason I would have those that are to be baptized, to be entirely immersed, as the word imports and the mystery signifies." 29 Baxter. — " In our baptism we are dipped under the water as signifying our covenant profession, that as He was buried for sin, we are dead and buried to sin." WiiiiriKLi). — " It is certain that in the words of our text fRo. vi, 3, 4), there is an allusion to the maimer of baptism, which was by immersion." Wesley. — " ' Buried with him,' alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion." J, Benson. — " ' We are buried with him,' alluding to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion." Dr. A. Clarke. — " They receive baptism as an emblem of death, in volun- tarily going under the water, so they receive it as an emblem of resurrection unto eternal life, in coming up out of the water." Dr. G. Hill. — " The apostle Paul. Bo. vi, 4, 5, 6, illustrates this connection by an allusion drawn from the ancient method of administering baptism. The immersion in water of the bodies of those who were baptized, is an emblem", &c. Dr. Chalmers. — " We doubt not that the prevalent style of the administra- tion in the apostles' days was by an actual submerging of the whole body under water. We advert to this for the purpose of throwing light on the analogy that is instituted in these verses." Dr. Bloomfield. — " There is plainly a reference to the ancient mode of bap- tism by immersion." Conybeare & Howson. — " This passage cannot be understood unless it be borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion." Webster & Wilkinson. — " Doubtless there is an allusion to immersion." Hence says a Presbyterian Review. — "We have rarely met, for example, with a more weak and fanciful piece of reasoning, than that by which Mr. Ewing would per- suade us that there is no allusion to the mode by immersion, in the expression 'buried with him in baptism.' This point ought to be frankly admitted, and indeed cannot be denied with any show of reason." § 6.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROill 1st PETER in, 20, 21. W. Jay.— "Paley observes that* 'we should never suffer what we know, to be disturbed by what we know not.' And Butler remarks nearly the same, when he Bays, ' If a truth be established, objections are nothing. The one is founded on our knowledge, and the other in our ignorance.' " We consider the apostle here to teach that eight souls were saved by water, and that the antitype, baptism, the answer of a good con- science toward God, now saves us. Not a S}*llable is recorded in God's word respecting the baptism of these eight souls. It is enough for the Baptists here and elsewhere if there is nothing incompatible with immersion. When our opponents have but acknowledged 30 that the primary import of baptizo is to immerse, it devolves on them, if in any instance they depart from this meaning, to prove that im- mersion is not meant. Some of our Paedo-baptist brethren have spoken as rashly, unscripturally, and absurdly, on this as on the baptism of the Spirit, and the baptism of the children of Israel in the cloud and in the sea. Baptism has been made to be a type of baptism. The rain falling in torrents has been supposed to sprinkle the ark ; ergo, the eight souls were baptized by sprinkling ! The fol- lowing is more nearly correct : Prof. Wilson. — " In the original, baptism is styled the antitupos, corres- ponding in its effects to the preservation of Noah and his family, which thus occupies by implication the place of the tiqws or type." " That the safety extended to Noah and his family by water, typified the salvation of the Christian by the baptism of the text, is evidently the substance of the apostolic state- ment. In both instances there is deliverance, and both imply the instrumen- tality of water. These are indispensable points of resemblance ; and they abundantly warrant the application of the terms type and antitype." The Wesley an Rev. J. Sutcliffe, in his Commentary, says on this passage, " ' The figure' is immersion, the mode of baptizing among the Jews." § 7.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO A CONFIRMATION OF IMMERSION FROM THE ASSOCIATED PREPOSITIONS. Dr. A. Ranken.— " The tendency to error renders study the more necessary to prevent it, or when it does prevail, to distinguish it from the truth." The Greek en our opponents would translate with before water, instead of in. We do not maintain that with or by is not sometimes a proper rendering of en. We deiry that it is its primary meaning. Its primary and most frequent import is in; and every deviation from this requires evidence of its necessity from those who deviate. In three instances we meet with hudati water without a preposition. These are Lu. iii, 16; Acts i, 5, and xi, 26. There are facts which encourage in these cases the translation in water, in accordance with en in the Holy Ghost in these passages, and with en hudati in water as explicitly stated by the other evangelists. But we will not con- test this. We admit that instances of the expressed en are stronger than those of the dative without a preposition. We need and desire nothing having the shadow of a doubt. An immersion with water 81 must be an inimersion in water. That there is no reason for a de- parture from in as the translation of en when associated with baptizo and hudor, all sacred and profane literature evinces. Hence Hervey, on en as meaning in, says, " I can prove it to have been in peace- able possession of this signification for more than two thousand years." It is universally admitted that the plain and natural sense of words is always to be preferred, and only to be abandoned in cases of necessity. Doddridge says, "I choose to follow the plain- est and most obvious and common interpretation." Giving to words a signification at random would convert all writing into riddles. As, where en occurs, we read in the wilderness, in Jordan, in the river, in heaven, &c, &c, so should we read in water, in the Holy Ghost. We believe that all lexicons and grammars in existence give in as the meaning, or the primary meaning of en. Further, it is asserted by our opponents that the preposition eis, before Iordanen and hudor, ought not to be translated into, but at, \o, nigh to, &c. The attempt to sustain this involves much contra- diction, and is opposed to all evidence. Dr. Halley admits " that baptizein construed with the preposition eis, is to immerse into." He correctly translates eis ton Iordanen "into the Jordan"; and he teaches also that " to immerse eh to onoma — into the name — of the person whose religion is professed, is the religious rite of making pro- selytes, as to immerse into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is the appropriate act of the apostles and ministers of the gospel." But because water is not mentioned in immersing into the name of the Father, the immersion is lost, and sprinkling legitimately takes its place ! It is freely admitted that water was the known, the understood, and the intended element, but because it is not expressed, this baptizo which is able " to sink the largest ship in Her Majesty's navy" is metamorphosed into sprinkling, or performs its immersion of the person by a sprinkling of the face ! We are told in the unerring record, that Philip and the eunuch had come epi — unto a certain water, before we are told that they went down both eis — into the water, and that Philip baptized the eunuch. In corroboration of into as the meaning of eis, from which, according to the laws of interpretation, a departure is never justified unless proved to be necessary, read the following : 82 Dr. E. Robinson, speaking of baptizo with adjuncts, says, u eis c. accus. to baptize or be baptized into." Dr. Halley. — " It may be said that men were baptized into Moses, baptized into Christ, baptized into his death, baptized into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, which expressions, if literally translated, would be,, immersed into Moses, immersed into Christ, and so on." " The baptism was into Moses, the syntax corresponding with the baptism into Christ." J. Stacey. — " The preposition eis, into." Prof. Wilson. — " The record commands to 'baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' " Dr. Alford on Mat. xxviii, 19. — " It is unfortunate again here that our English Bibles do not give us the force of this eis. It should be into (as in Gal. iii, 27, al.) both here and in 1st Cor. x, 2, and wherever the expression is used." Thus our translation is corrected in 1st Cor. i, 14, 15, and in the above places, by most commentators and translators. Some correct in one or more of these places, and some in all. See Dr. A. Clarke, R. Watson, E. Bickersteth, Webster and Wilkinson, J. Brewster, Drs. Watts, dimming, Bennett, Hill, Turnbull, Conquest, Words- worth, Macknight, Stier, Stanley, Bloomfield, &c, &c. All gram- mars and lexicons which we have seen, give into as the primary meaning of eis* Also the preposition ek or ex our prejudiced opponents wish to translate from instead of out of, when it implies having been in the water or river, which has been previously mentioned. This objection is dishonourable, in every instance, either to scholarship or godliness. Read the following from lexicons and grammars. Liddell & Scott. — " Radical signification, from out of, away from, opp. to e?s." Robinson. — " Out of, from, of; spoken of such objects as were in another." " It is direct antithesis of ei's." Buttmann. — "Out of, from." Jelf. — " Primary meaning, out, opposed to en in." "Winer. — " The original signification of ek is, issuing from within (the com- pass, sphere of) something. It is antithetical to ez's." Trollope. — " Ek or ex, from or out of, differs from apo, in referring to such objects as proceed from the interior of another object." So Webster and Wil- kinson, &c, &c. Dr. Carson maintains that the idea out of invariably belongs to this preposition. And to his remarks on the prepositions, Dr. Hal- ley gives bis assent, excepting one particular, in the following words : 33 " On tlie subject of Greek prepositions I have, on account of the length of this work, suppressed the remarks which I had prepared. I do this the more willingly, as I do not observe in regard to them any difference from Dr. Carson in more than one particular. This particular relates to the peculiar use of eis in such phrases as * he died in (eis J Ecbatana.' " § 8.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE CORROBORATION OF IMMERSION FROM JOHN in, 23. R. Baxter.— '• A new and forced exposition, which no reader dreameth of till it be put into his head, is usually to be suspected." Dr. Waedlaw. — " The question is not how often it has been produced, but how often it has been refuted." W. Jay. — " It is better to let the text speak its own language, naturally and glowingly, than to use coercive measures, and torture out the meaning, or bombard it into submis- sion." Though God's word says that John was baptizing in Mnon be- cause there ivas much water there, yet to discredit immersion it is main- tained that John selected iEnon to slake the thirst of men and beasts. To us the inspired record is so plainly confirmatory of immersion, that the objections of opponents remind us of the language of Drs. Wall and Campbell. Dr. W. says, " 'Tis a great want of prudence as well as of honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary what is cer- tainly true, and may be proved. It creates a jealousy of all the rest that one says." Dr. G. Campbell, speaking of persons who "in defiance of etymology and use, maintain that the word rendered in the New Testament, baptize, means more properly to sprinkle than to plunge ; and in defiance of all antiquity, that the former method was the earliest," says, " a candid mind will disdain to take the help of a falsehood even in support of truth." The action of baptism is generally admitted to have been the same, whether administered by John and his disciples, or by the disciples of Christ. Instead of re- cording the irrelevant and unworthy assertions of our opponents respecting the need of water by the men, women, and children that attended John, and by the beasts of burden that are supposed to have borne them, or the quibbling that has been written respecting many waters or rills in iEnon, we will record the following more honourable testimony. 34 Calyin. — " From these words, John iii, 23, it may be inferred that baptism was administered by John and Christ by plunging the whole body under water." Bengel, on this much water. — " So the rite of immersion required." Dr. Wall. — " "lis plain that the ordinary and general practice of St. John, the apostles, and primitive church, was to baptize by putting the person into the water, or causing him to go into the water." Dr. A. Clarke. — " As the Jewish custom required the persons to stand in the water, and, having been instructed, and entered into a covenant to renounce all idolatry, and to take the God of Israel for their God, then plunge themselves under the water, it is probable the rite was thus performed at JEnon." Here and elsewhere we accept that which has proof or probability, rejecting the rest. Dr. Doddridge. — " Nothing surely can be more evident than that polla huclata many waters signifies a large quoMtity of water, it being sometimes used for the Euphrates. — Jer. li, 13. Sept. Comp. Eze. xl, 2, and Rev. i, 15 ; xiv, 2 ; xix, 6 ; where the voice of many waters does plainly signify the roaring of a high sea." Olshausen. — " John also was baptizing in the neighbourhood, because the water there, .afforded convenience for immersion." § 9.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE MULTITUDES BAPTIZED BY JOHN. A. Barnes.—" One reason why we do not understand the plain doctrines of the Bible is our prejudice. Our Saviour plainly told his disciples that he must die. He stated the manner of his death, and the principal circumstances. To us all this is plain ; but they did not understand it. They had filled their heads with notions about his earthly glory and honour, and they were not willing to see the truth as he stated it." The baptism of multitudes by John is supposed to be incompatible with immersion on account of the time, the changes of raiment, and the physical strength that would be required, also from the extreme depth and the extreme shallowness of the Jordan. The difference of time occupied in the act of immersing or sprinkling, we maintain to be small. We do not suppose that time was lost by the following of one another into the water where bathing was as common as sleeping. Some of our opponents have fancied that John's disciples stood in rows on the bank of the river, and that John operated on them in this solemn ordinance by means of a squirt or some such thing. A greater number endeavour to estimate the thousands or millions of John's disciples, and, incapable of believing that John baptized by means of his disciples, they believe the venerable fore- runner of Christ would have been worked or starved to death by immersing such multitudes. Whether our opponents believe that Alexander and Cffisar slew with their own hands those said to have been slain by them ; that Solomon with his own hands built the temple; and Noah with his built the ark, we are not informed. Was John's baptism distinguished by a priestly efficacy which immediately vanished, but which popery resumed and perfected ? We admit ex- press information that Christ, an exceptional person, baptized none personally. Assuredly this wise and gracious conduct of the Lord of glory, of Him who in all things had and has the pre-eminence, does not prove, and we think does not encourage the idea, that John did not baptize both personally and by means of his disciples. We think that it decidedly favours our conclusion. Does any one be- lieve that the man whose name appeal's as the printer of a book, has done all the work of the compositor and the steam engine ? Dr. A. Clarke so far differed from his Paedo-baptist brethren, that he believed John baptized none personally, but that they plunged themselves ! What a narrow escape from becoming a Baptist ! But how satisfactory a reason for continuing to sprinkle ! As to change of raiment in such a climate, and where bathing was, with the many, more common than the return of day; the supposi- tion of any deficiency in any requisite as to prevention of danger, as to convenience or decency, is inadmissible. Dr. Pye Smith says, " In Judea, during the larger part of the year, persons in ordinary health might plunge into the water, and sit down in their wet clothes with safety, and often with great comfort and pleasure." Dr. Li- vingstone testifies to bathing in his clothes in Africa without harm, the travelling being continued. The clothing of the East is so differ- ent from ours, that a change, when requisite, can be made without inconvenience or indelicacy. We may again revert to this matter of delicacy. The river Jordan is said by one of our opponents to be too deep, even at the edge, to admit of immersion being practised with safety, unless in those days the inhabitants of Palestine were giants. It is maintained by another that is too shallow for the practice of immer- sion. This is the river in which pilgrims, by hundreds or thousands, now annually plunge themselves, about which our opponents con- tradict and dishonour themselves by giving their differing depths and widths, as if these and the character of the edge, in a river flowing 36 for hundreds of miles, must necessarily be every where the same, and as if no one was ever immersed in a rivulet, in a deep river, or in the sea. This is as rational as believing that John's baptism was by plunging, that the baptism of Christ and of the apostles was the same as John's, and yet that Christian baptism is immersion, pour- ing, or sprinkling, or the application of water in any way ! The following are worthy of the consideration of Pcedo-baptists. Witsius. — " It is certain that both John the Baptist, and the disciples of Christ, ordinarily practised immersion." Vossius. — "That the apostles immersed when they baptized there is no doubt." J. Sutcliffe. — " The Jews, .did baptize by dipping." Archb. Sumner. — " John was baptizing, i.e., immersing in water." Neander. — "John's followers were entirely immersed in the water." Fritsche. — " I baptize one unto repentance means : I immerse," &c. D. A. Schott. — " Were immersed by him in the Jordan." Lange. — "And were baptized, immersed in the Jordan." Alford. — " The baptism of proselytes was administered" "by immersion of the whole person." " It is probable that John's baptism in outward form re- sembled that of proselytes." Ellicott. — " The forerunner decends with his Redeemer into the rapid streams of the now sacred river." Harvey Goodwin. — "When he went up out of the water in which he had with such humility permitted himself to be baptized." Dean Stanley speaks of present "plunging" and "immersion" in the river Jordan as presenting a likeness to the multitudinous bap- tisms of John. The belief that John's baptism was immersion is shown by previous extracts from Lightfoot, Bloomneld, Macbride, Olshausen, Neander, Wall, Stuart, Waddington, Guericke, Kurtz, Tillotson, Chalmers, Whitfield, Hill, Conybeare amlHowson, Barnes, Wesley, Benson, Clarke, Baxter, Assembly of Divines, &c. § 10.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM MARK mi, 4, 8 ; LUKE XI, 38 ; AND HEBEEWB ix, 10. T. Powell.—" It is a supreme rule of interpretation, that what is obscure must be in- terpreted by what is clear." In Mark vii, 3, the authorised version says, " For the Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders." In v. 4 we read, "And (being come) 87 from market, except they shall be baptized, they eat not." Nipto, in v. 3, is properly rendered wash ; baptizo, in v. 4, is improperly rendered wash. On returning from the market, on account of the greater probability of defilement, and of more than ordinary defile- ment, they baptized, they immersed themselves. Did they wash their their hands when practising what was ordinary, and in doing the more extraordinary, the greater, did they sprinkle ? Does baptizo mean less than nipto ? This verse also records the immersions of " cups and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables," rather, couches, or beds. The washing of cups, pots, brasen vessels, tables or couches, or beds, by sprinkling, is unknown, except in imagination ; and in imagination is an absurdity. We deny not that ceremonial purifica- tion might be effected by sprinkling what God directed to be sprinkled. If couches and beds had been the same amongst the Jews as amongst ourselves, and if the climate had been the same in Palestine as in England or in the States of North America, some difficulty might have appeared in a faithful rendering of the original. Read on East- em beds the following Pgedo-baptist testimony. Dr. Kitto. — " The more wealthy classes sleep on mattresses stuffed with wool or cotton, which are often no other than a quilt thickly padded and are used singly, or one or more placed upon each other." Prof. Paxton. — " The Eastern beds consist merely of two thick cotton quilts, one of which folded double, serves as a mattress, the other as a covering." Dr. R. Jamieson. — " Eastern beds being often no more than mattresses, are iu the morning thrown aside into a closet or recess." So Ingram Cobbin, Calmet, and others. The requirement of frequent ablutions, by the Divine law, by superstition, and by pleasure, led to abundant provision for this. Ablution, says Dr. Gardner, is " the ceremony of washing or bathing the body in water, which has been in all ages and all countries, but particularly in the East, resorted to as conducive in a high degree to health and comfort." Dr. Kitto speaks of every house in Canaan having one large cistern or several small ones, and he subsequently quotes from Dr. Robinson ; " The same eause which led the inhab- itants to excavate cisterns, also induced them to build in and around most of the cities, large reservoirs for public use." Dr. W. Smith's Bib. Vic. speaks of water in Jerusalem, which " seems at all times to have been sufficient." Why depart from, why object to, a faith- fill rendering of the original, whether we read of the immersion of persons or things ? The admitted import of baptizo renders a de- parture from immersion to be culpable in every instance, without evidence that it must have another meaning. Such evidence we believe, is not in existence. It is not necessary for Baptists to prove that the rich Pharisee was certainly provided with baths, in one of which he expected that Christ would immerse himself. It belongs to certain opponents to prove that there was no provision for immersion. We maintain further that the pretended meaning of baptizo in these places is unnatural, as well as unnecessary. Is Mr. Bruce, who speaks of Abyssinians who "wash themselves from head to foot after coming from the market", more worthy of belief, and of not having his words tortured and perverted, than those who wrote by inspiration? Scaliger says respecting the Jews, " The more superstitious part of them, every day, hefore they sat down to meat, dipped the whole body." Maimoxides says that, " Whenever, in the law, the washing of the flesh, or of the clothes is mentioned, it means nothing else than the dipping of the whole body in a laver." Dr. Halley admits, ''I cannot rely so confidently upon these baptisms of furniture as do many of my brethren." " The Jews were undoubtedly most careful and particular in washing the drapery and coverings of their seats ; and if any one will take the trouble to study the various pollutions of beds and couches, as they are described in Maimonides and the Talmudic tracts, they must in candour admit that these articles of furniture were in some instances immersed in water." Again, " I cannot deny that the Pharisees as early as the time of our Saviour practised immersion after contact with the common people." The Assembly of Divines, on John's baptism, have these words : " Were baptized. Washed by dipping in Jordan, as Mark vii, 4 ; He. ix, 10." Dr. Kitto. — "In very ancient times the priests seem to have previously bathed themselves in some river or stream. And the Egyptian priests washed themselves with cold water twice every day, and twice at night." " But after the rise of the sect of the Pharisees, the practice of ablution was carried to such excess, from the affectation of excessive piety, that it is repeatedly brought under our notice in the New Testament, through the severe animadversions of our Saviour on the consummate hypocrisy involved in this fastidious attention to the external types of moral purity while the heart was left unclean." Macknight. — "And when they come from the market, except they wash (baptisovtai, dip themselves), they eat not." Olkhausen. — " The term baptizesthai is different from niptesthai, the former is the dipping." TnoLLOPE. — " Niptesthai signifies to wash simply, and is distinguished from baptizesthai , which signifies to immerse, to dip (whence baptisms, immersions, in the Bame verse)." 39 Dr. John Brown. — " It was a custom among the Jews, and other Oriental nations, for the people to bathe their whole bodies previous to going to a convi- vial entertainment.'" Dr. W. Smith's Bib. Die. — "There were bath-rooms in the later temple over the chambers Abbines and Happarvah for the priests' use (Lightfoot's Descr. of Temple). A bathing chamber was probably included in houses even of no great rank in cities from early times." Dr. Stier. — " It was, generally speaking, customary before meals, especially for guests at a feast, to enter the bath." S. Burder. — " Thus also Homer represents Telemachus and Pisistratus as being entertained at the court of Menelaus." Dr. R. Jamieson. — " They were accustomed to subject their hands, the ves- sels they ate on, the couches on which the head reclined, and every article which had been touched, to ablution, both before and after meat." Lord Bacon. — " It is strange that the use of bathing, as a part of diet, is left. With the Romans and Greeks it was as usual as eating or sleeping ; and bo it is amongst the Turks at this day." Beza. — " Baptizesthai in this place is more than chemipteirv ; because that seems to respect the whole body, this only the hands. Nor does baptizein signify to wash, except by consequence." T. Scott. — " Except they washed, or were baptized." G. Wakefield. — " Baptisontai : literally dip themselves." Schott. — " Except they immerse themselves." Meyer. — " Ean me baptisontai is not to be understood of washing the hands (Lig. Wets.), but of immersion, which the word in classic Greek and in the Nev Testament every where means." F. M. — " Bapt., which denotes total immersion." See Archb. Trench, on New Tes. Synonyms, and other writers. On He. ix, 10, we deem the following, in addition to what has preceded, sufficient : J. Alting. — " Washings, the apostle calls diaphorous baptismous divers bap- tisms ; that is, divers immersions." E. Bickersteth. — " We have a further instruction in baptism in the wash- ings appointed ry the law of Moses. Aaron and his sons, on their being consecrated to the priesthood were to be wholly washed with water, as well as sprinkled with blood, at the door of the tabernacle . . Christians are a royat priesthood ; they have an initiatory washing, the ordinance of baptism." . Storr and Flatt. — " The reason why Christ prescribed immersion in bap- tism, from which the several figures found in the New Tes. are taken, seems to have been that some of his first followers were already accustomed to religious washings of this kind, especially the Jews who had been used to Levitical wash- ings (He. ix, 10)," &«. Webster and Wilkinson. — " Diaph. bap. The various ablutions enjoined on the priests and people as purifications." Whitby, Grotius, and Macknight have given the literal and propel translation, immersions* 40 § 11.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE INJUNCTION OF IMMERSION IN MATTHEW xxviii, 19. J. A. James. — " Affect no false candour, no spurious charity, as if all sentiments were equally unimportant. This is treason against truth, and the God of truth." J. Gilbert. — " Few there are who need to be informed that, when the import of a phrase, or a customary form of expression, is the question, if there be undeniable evidence of the meaning conveyed by such form, it is worse than trifling to go into all the senses in which a particle, a preposition, or some other individual word in that phrase may, under other circumstances, be employed." Previous statements prove, as we think, that the meaning of bap- tlzein eis is to immerse into, and consequently that the commission, translated into English, reads, immersing them into the name, &c. The idea of immersion being carried away by the lack of eis hudor or of en hudati in the words of the commission, and any application of water being thus left in its place, is a fancy, notwithstanding any exceptional rule of syntax, the extravagance of which we have not seen exceeded in ought from either Greek or Barbarian. The ad- mission of Independents and Wesleyan Methodists, of Episcopalians and Presbyterians, of members of the Lutheran and Reformed churches, that the meaning of baptizo includes a covering, an encom- passing with the element of baptism, is wanting as to multitudinous instances in nothing but practice. The ideas that Christ, in com- manding his disciples to baptize, commanded them to purify, to purify souls, to purify them for the name of the Father, &c, to purify them through the word and by water, we do not deem it necessary to combat. We assent to the translation of an eminent Paedo-baptist : "Make disciples of all nations, baptizing (immersing) them." § 12.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE IMMERSION OF THE THREE THOUSAND. Dr. L. Woods.—" A doctrine proved by sufficient evidence is not to be rejected on any account." J. A. James. — " I cannot forsake and give up evidence, because of some yet unexplained difficulty, and thus relinquish what I do know for what I do not know." G. West.—" Presumptions are of no weight against positive evidence." Du. Halley. — " I admit that I have no right to reason from the difficulties of the dis- puted practice, if the usage of the word be clearly, distinctly, and uniformly against me." The above extracts, were our opponents honourably candid and consistent, are, in addition to evidence on the import of baptizo, a 41 ■sufficient reply to all objections to every immersion mentioned in Scripture. Yet our opponents, from imaginary difficulties, continue to object in opposition to clear, distinct, and universal usage ; and it is done even after expressly acknowledging this ; yea, and it is determined to continue to practise sprinkling for baptism till Baptists shall acknowledge sprinkling to be baptism ! It is not known what number of bathing places, and what conveniences for immersion there were in Jerusalem, therefore baptizo here means or may mean to sprinkle ! Was ever inference more preposterous ? All evidence in existence, — and that is not small in amount — is in confirma- tion of there being at that time ample convenience of water and places for the immersion of tens of thousands on any day in Jerusa- lem. It is not asserted in Holy Writ, nor is it probable, that the twelve alone, or that they principally, baptized. The time for the immersion of the three thousand was amply sufficient. The privacy or publicity of this baptism, as of every Christian baptism, is not mentioned in the New Testament. We have abounding Paedo -baptist testimony to a sufficient supply of water in Jerusalem for all the purposes of ablution when at the festivals there might be a popula- tion of millions. Whoever will read on Palestine and Jerusalem from Drs. Kitto, Buchanan, Bobinson, Thomson, Stanley, W. Smith, or any similar writer, may perceive that a sufficiency of water and convenient places for the immersion of many three thousands on the day of Pentecost must have existed. Yet, alas ! this reason can be given for infidelity regarding immersion: "I cannot imagine how three thousand persons were immersed in one day in Jerusalem at the season of the Pentecost without any previous arrangements, as I do not believe it could now be done with decency and propritey in Manchester." Not more contemptible are certain infidel objections to the inspiration of the Pentateuch. It belongs to our opponents, in opposing immerse as the import of baptizo, the word given by the Spirit of inspiration, to prove that Peter did not command immersion, and that the three thousand were not immersed. Dr. Carson does not more severely than justly thus administer rebuke: "In baptizing the three thousand on the day of Pentecost, I will trouble neither the twelve nor the seventy, if they have more important work... It does not lie on us to show that there is any evidence of water, except the 42 evidence implied in the word. Many writers on our side have shown that there is independent evidence of the sufficiency of water in Jerusalem. This is highly useful with a view of putting obstinacy^ to the blush ; but it is not necessary to prove the fact by direct evidence in any instance. I trample on such objections. If it is asserted by credible testimony that a man was shot, are you to re- fuse belief, unless you are informed where the powder and ball were purchased, in order to kill him ?" Hence Bp. Patrick, referring to the law of Moses, says, " There are so many wash- ings prescribed, that it is reasonable to believe, there were, not only at Jerusalem, and in all other cities, but in every village, several bathing places contrived for these legal purifications, that men might, without much labour, be capable to fulfil these precepts." Stackhofse. — " The only question is, how such a multitude of converts could possibly be baptized in one day ? to which some reply, that this rite of initiation into the Christian church was then performed by way of sprinkling, as it is amongst us ; but whoever looks into history will find, that the form of baptism amongst the Jews was plunging the whole body under water, and that, in conformity to them, the primitive Christians did, and the Eastern church, even to this day does, administer that sacrament in this manner." § 13.— FUTILITY OP OBJECTIONS TO THE IMMERSION OF THE SAMARITANS. Dr. Owen.— 4 ' Every undue presumption hath one lameness or other accompanying it ; it is truth alone which is square and steady." We read in Acts viii of Philip's preaching in a city of Samaria. No article is in the original before rendered city. Whether this city was Sychar, the capital, or some other city, we are not in- formed. In making out a case against immersion, it is assumed, or believed to be probable, that this city was Sychar, that be- cause a certain woman came hither to draw water, there was in this "land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths that spring out of the valleys and hills," no other water in that region, none suitable either for drinking or bathing purposes ! And when conscious that these assumptions respecting Samaria are a libel on all that every accredited historian has written, it is said to be .worth record- ing and publishing, because, if this city was not in such a condition, it is believed there were Eastern cities in that plight ! And this is 43 candour towards opponents ! This is evidence against immersion 1 And from men who know on whom the burden of proof rests ! The following respecting Samaria will satisfy all who are open to conviction. Dr. Kitto, speaking of Samaria, says, " So abundantly is this valley watered that popularly it is said to be enriched by 365 springs." Dr. Stanley says that Jacob's well "was dug by one who could not trust ta fresh springs so near in the adjacent vale." Dr. Robinson says of the ancient Sychar, that it " is furnished with water in- signal abundance in comparison with the rest of Palestine." Dr. Wilson says : "A very obvious question presented itself to us on the spot, viz. : — How it can be supposed that the woman should have come from the city, when there are so many fountains just around the city, and she must also have passed directly by a large one at mid distance ? But in the first place the ancient city probably lay in part nearer to this well than the modern one ; and then too it is not said, that the woman came thither from the city at all. She may have dwelt, or have been labouring, near by the well, and have gone into the city only to make her wonderful report respecting the strange prophet. Or, even granting that her house was in the city, there would be nothing im- probable or unusual in the supposition that the inhabitants may have set a peculiar value on the water of this ancient well,"&c. § 14.— FUTILITY OP OBJECTIONS TO THE IMMERSION OF THE EUNUCH. J. B. Patterson. — " Among the most common and most vexatious arts of controversy, is that by which a disputant selects what is in reality but a part of an opponent's argu- ment, and undertakes to refute it as if it were the whole." C. T. — " Under the abiding conviction that all we can know, as to what wUJ please and displease God, is revealed in His word, let us peruse it with a previous prayerful determi- nation that we will believe whatever it says, and do whatever it commands us." The inspired record of the eunuch's baptism is, in its naked and beautiful simplicity, strongly confirmatory of immersion. "It would be very unnatural," says Dr. Doddridge, "to suppose that they went down to the water, merely that Philip might take up a little water in his hand to pour on the eunuch. A person of his dignity had, no doubt, many vessels in his baggage, on such a journey through so desert a country ; a precaution absolutely necessary for travellers in those parts, and never omitted by them." Is there not also in the eunuch's language, " See, here is water ; what doth hinder me to be baptized ?" an indication to us that baptism required more water than was contained in their vessels ? Let everv Christian set 44 his face as a flint against the wresting, torturing, and perverting of God's word and ordinances. Previous remarks are a reply to all objections to this immersion, whether they relate to its convenience, the required change of raiment, the safety of immersion in journey- ing, or to the fact of going down into, oncl coming up out of the water. Hence says Calvin, " Here we perceive how baptism was administered among the ancients, for they immersed the whole body in water." § 15.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE IMMERSION OF PAUL. H. M. Vixliers.— " Which, from want of a better name, I must designate as the Dan- gers of Plausibility, I mean those which arise not from any wilful perversion of truth, but," &c. H. W. Beecher.— " The church is God's window ; and if it is so obscured by errors that its light is darkness ; how great is that darkness ?" T. H. Horne. — " Wherever any doctrine is manifest, either from the whole tenor of Divine revelation or from its scope, it must not be weakened or set aside by a few obscure passages." It is objected to immersion that "Paul's baptism appears to have taken place in a private house, in which we are not at liberty to say there was a bath large enough for immersion." Whether the house of Judas in the street called Straight, in which this agent of the San- hedrim lodged, contained a bath, a towel, or a thousand other things that might be named, Scripture deposeth not. The want of par- ticulars respecting the plan of baptism, the amount of water, and the supply of other conveniences, as much proves that immer- sion did not take place, as the records of Baptists in the 19th century prove that they do not immerse. On the character of Eastern houses we have already adduced Paedo-baptist testimony. Respecting the rivers of Damascus no Biblical student is ignorant. That immersion might be refreshing and invigorating to Paul, we have abundant evidence. That it would be injurious, we have none. Those on whom the burden of proof rests, adduce as much evidence that Paul was not immersed, as that the rivers of Damascus were then dry. Hence the Rev. G. Gilfillan can say that he u w:is. we doubt not, immersed in one of those lucid rivers of Damascus, and rose up, like an eagle 'newly bathed,' to pursue," &c 45 1 ig.— 'futility of objections to the immersion of Cornelius and them that were with him. Dr. R. Vaughan.— " There arc no doctrines so obvious in themselves, or that can be so olearly stated, as to be secure from gross misconception." J. G.'Manley.— "Nothing that can secure the truth from corruption, that can elucidate its meaning, th;U can multiply and diffuse its accurate transcription and translation, its due rehearsal and exposition, and that can worthily promote its prevalence, should be neg- lected by tbe church of Christ." It is thought from the language on record respecting Cornelius and his friends, that j^ssibly or probably the water was brought to them. This assumption and the convenience of sprinkling are grand proofs that sprinkling is baptism, or that any application of water for baptism is right ! Our conviction is that the forbidding of water is the forbidding of baptism, and that the phrase of forbidding water proves nothing respecting the import of baptism. Thus Dr. Halley uses the phrase when he says, "Whoever forbids water to any incurs a fearful responsibility." Our opponents should first prove that baptizo somewhere means to sprinkle. To change the meaning of a word in the Oracles of God from supposition without a particle of evidence, is to darken Divine counsel and lead astray from Ged's directions. Dr. J. A. Alexander on this passage, says : "Nothing can be proved from this expression." § 17.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO THE IMMERSION OF LYDIA AND HER HOUSEHOLD. M. Henry. — " In plain texts keep to the plain sense ; in difficult ones be modest and humble in your remarks, and ' keep to the proportion of faith,' expounding them by them that are more plain." W. G. Humphry. — " The Jews held their prayer meeting outside the city, that they might not be molested — by the river's side, because in their ceremonies they washed often." Our opponents admit that the river was convenient for Jewish ablutions, and would afford the required water for an immersion. But the immersion of Lydia would be so inconvenient and indelicate that " a greater improbability cannot well be imagined." Indeed " it seems impracticable to have immersed a woman in an Asiatic head-dress." After the hypothesis of a head-dress that did not ad- mit of immersion, and that conld not or would not be put oft' for it, you have only further to suppose that Asiatic delicacy did not admit 40 the exposure of the face or the head, and consequently baptism is not an application of water to the face or to the head, and by pro- ceeding further to test the import of baptizo by such a crucible, you may at last come to the conclusion that baptism is whatever you please, or nothing at all. To this goal the adoption of such means to prove that baptism is not immersion, inevitably leads. All the bathings of the law — and far more than these — could be practised by male and female ; there was every facility for these ; in the bath- ings that have ceased there was nothing indecent or repulsive : but the troublesome and indelicate immersion, a single immersion, an immersion now binding, is not conceivable ! The alleged inconve- nience and indelicacy of immersion we shall subsequently notice. § 18.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE BAPTISM OF THE JAILOR "AND ALL HIS." Db. Halley— " The allusions to baptism which are not so distinctly expressed, must be interpreted in accordance with those whose meaning can be clearly ascertained." "Whoever assigns to a disputed word a secondary sense, or any variation of usage, is bound to the proof of it. Can any thing be more reasonable ?" Mr. Thorn does not believe that the jailor " took his wife and children out of bed at midnight, and had them plunged into cold water ; or that he led them in the dark to a neighbouring river ;" or that we have " any ground for supposing that this prison contained a cistern or tank adapted or available for such an immersion." These assumptions are the proof that the jailor was sprinkled ; that the signification of baptizo is not to immerse ! Could not Mr. T. also have informed us in how many blankets, sheets, and quilts, the " wife and children" of the jailor at Philippi would then be envel- oped ? Another, fancying the shivering of immersion, the want of convenience for immersion, and much more of aerial basis, wannly and eloquently teaches : "Even imagination requires some material out of which to fashion its theories, and a love for truth demands that its flights should be restricted within the range of at least ap- parent probability." So think we ; and instead of imagined shiver- ing and wretchedness from immersion of the Philippian jailor helping to prove that to sprinkle is to baptize, we believe rather that exhila- ration resulted from immersion. Every fact iu existence favours the 47 conclusion that the jail at Philippi would afford convenience for im- mersion; whilst it devolves on the opponents of immersion to adduce evidence that it could not or did not take place. The Psedo- baptist Grotius, instead of sharing in what some now imagine, could deem it " highly probable from the practice of the country, that the jail at Philippi was provided with baths." De Wette considers it not improbable that the rite was performed in the same fountain or tank in which the jailor had washed them. Meyer says i " Perhaps the water was in the court of the house ; and the baptism was that of immersion, which formed an essential part of the symbolism of the act." Let the reader judge whether an iota of evidence against immersion exists in any recorded fact or rational supposition, §*19— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM EPHESIANS iv, 5. Prof. J. H. Godwin. — "We must dismiss prejudice when we open the Bible, if wa would discern truth ; and we must search for instruction, rather than confirmation of our creed, if we would be set right, where we have been wrong, and be led onward in the noblest and best of studies." We maintain not that this passage contains any proof of immer- sion beyond the use of words which faithfully translated are " one immersion." We believe that Barnes has truly said, " This does not affirm that there is one mode of baptism, but it refers to the thing itself." All our advocacy is for " the thing itself." We be- lieve also that Dr. Carson sincerely said, "I cannot wrest the Scrip- tures in order to please men, nor to retain popularity even among Christians. What Christ has shown me in His word I cannot con- ceal or pervert. I must not be ashamed of His words more than of Himself." § 20.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM HEBREWS vi, 1, 2. Bp. Watson. — " What a blessing is it to beings with such limited faculties as ours con- fessedly are, to have God himself for our instructor in every thing which it much concerns us to know." We need not affinn to what baptisms there is reference in He. vi, 2 ; whether to Christian baptism, to John's baptism, to Jewish baptisms, or to all. We can say with Dr. A. Clarke : " Baptisms, or immersions of the body in water... were frequent as religious rites among the Hebrews ;" or with Dr. Macknight : "In the Levitical ritual many baptisms, or immersions of the body in water, were enjoined," 48 § 21.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM HEBREWS x, 19—22 ; TlTVS in, 5 ; EPHESIANS v, 26 ; AND JOHN in, 5. H. M. Villiers.— " Raise the standard of man to the standard of God, and not lower* the standard of God to the standard of man." In the above passages baptism is not mentioned, but is supposed to be referred to. The meaning of louo, occurring in He. x, 22, ac- cording to Liddell and Scott, and Donnegan, is, "to wash, to bathe;" and according to Robinson, "to bathe, to wash." The word loutron, occurring in Eph. v, 26, and Tit. iii, 5, is said by the same lexico- graphers to mean a bath, a bathing place, water for bathing or washing, the act of bathing, washing, ablution. In vain, we believe, will any lexicon in existence be examined for evidence in favour of sprinkling from louo or loutron. And whether a sprinkling of the face, or an emersion of the body out of water after being immerged therein, is more accordant with a birth, let any reader of John iii, 5, judge. § 22.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE OCCUR- ENCE OF THE WORD " SPRINKLE" IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. Bp. Lowth.— " Such strange and absurd deduction of notions and ideas, foreign to the author's drift and design, will often arise from the invention of commentators." God promised bj* his prophets to " sprinkle clean water" (or water of cleansing) on his people, to "give" them "a new heart," and to "put within" them "a new spirit." — Eze. xxxvi, 24 — 26. From what God promised to do, from the promised gift of the Spirit being figuratively designated the sprinkling of clean water (or water of cleansing), it is conceived that baptism is sprinkling ! We are not taught in God's word to call any outpourings of the Spirit a baptism, except the Pentecostal one, when "it filled the whole house where they were sitting ;" and that of Cornelius and them that were with him, when, says Peter, "the Holy Ghost fell on them as on us at the beginning." No other impartation of the Spirit is in the Oracles of God designated a baptism. We have as much philological and every other right to say that to baptize is to give, to put within, as to say that it is to sprinkle. Hence 49 Bradbury. — " I should think that man's reason very weak, who would pre- tend to prove sprinkling from 'your hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.' This is a mere jingling upon words." Barnes, on Is. Hi, 15. — " It furnishes no argument for the practice of sprink- ling in baptism. It refers to the fact of His purifying or cleansing nations, and not to the ordinance of Christian baptism." § 23.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT IMMERSION IS SOMETIMES IMPRACTICABLE. J. A. James. — "A skilful polemic may often make error appear more plausible than truth." Dr. Wardlaw.— " If the general view which I am about to present on this subject shall be fairly established from Scripture, it is foolish to allow our minds to be easily startled and shaken by particular difficulties which may be suggested and urged, as to what would be right in certain supposed cases." Bp. Taylor.—" If it can be obeyed, it must ; if it cannot, it must be let alone." When the commanded immersion is impracticable, as in a case like that of the thief on the cross, it is not required. God never demands impossibilities. But who in such circumstances has author- ity to invent a substitute, and to foist on it the usurped name of baptism ? This has been done in a Christian ordinance. First it was done exceptionally and apologetically, the mercy of God and the necessity of the circumstances being pleaded. Eventually in regard to a large portion of the professing church, the substitute, or a fur- ther abridgment of it, usurps the regular place of the ordained service, and our Paedo-baptist friends in the nineteenth century of the Christian era by word and deed seek to sanction and perpetuate this. If this can be justified, what is wrong? "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." § 24.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT IMMERSION IS DANGEROUS. W. E. Boardman.— " The child is both obedient and docile. His father commands, and he knows it is right to obey, and trusts entirely in his father's judgment," &c. J. G. Manly. — " Our Sovereign Lord must be obeyed and honoured, whoever may choose to contradict or question, or whatever may be the concomitant or consequent difficulty and risk." Dr. Eadie. — " The Bible is an infallible rule of faith and manners." Bathing in the sea, and in rivers, and in cold water, has almost universal recommendation, and is practised annually, or repeatedly in the year, by thousands and tens of thousands in our own country, for pleasure and the renovation of health and strength ; but to be immersed once dining life by Divine authority, is dangerous ! 50 The law of God enjoining immersion says nothing about the water being cold or warm ; nor do the inspired records of first practice. If the cold is certainly to be dreaded as dangerous, have the tepid ; but break not Christ's command, "immersing them into the name," &c. Dr. Wall, in advocating a return to immersion, says, " Our climate is no colder than it was for those thirteen or fourteen hun- dred years from the beginning of Christianity here to Queen Eliza- beth's time ; and not near so cold as Muscovy and some other countries where they do still dip." § 25.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT IMMERSION IS INDECENT. Dr. A. Reed.—" We must not bring clown the majesty of truth to our tastes, but elevate our tastes to its majesty." H. M. Wheeler.—" Whatever God has done He has done -well." Sir W. Jones. — "The Scriptures contain .. purer morality .. than could be collected within the same compass from all other books that were ever composed in any age or in any idiom." Dr. Browne.— " With a view to preserve or improve, men frequently deteriorate what they value and admire, either by absurd guards, or by preposterous refinement." If immersion is necessarily indelicate, to say nothing of our ado- rable Redeemer, who went from Galilee to Judea to be baptized by John, and who has enjoined what we believe to be immersion, both Baptists and Paedo -baptists at all our bathing places are deeply in- volved in the scandal of indelicacy. If indecency belongs to any mode of immersion, we attempt not the vindication of such mode. But we as fearlessly deny the necessary indecency of immersion, as we confidently affirm the holiness of the Godhead. What is the previous testimony to the import of that word by which the Spirit of inspiration has chosen to designate the ordinance of which we are speaking ? It is asserted by our opponents, who refer again and again to the indelicacy of immersion, that the word meant immersion, pouring, or sprinkling ; that all these ideas — not to mention also any application of water — are embraced by this word ; and yet immer- sion is indelicate, and for decency s sake should be rejected ! And these advocates of refinement and decency, who lay their claim for liberty of election, by no means deny that immersion is indeed " a proper mode of baptism !" They "stand entirely on the defensive, not assailing the mode defended by the Anti-Paedo-baptist." They simply maintain that sprinkling or pouring is also baptism ! They 51 write tract after tract, and volume after volume, in the unsectarian spirit of not wishing "to make a single convert to sprinkling!" And when Baptists, renouncing their obstinacy, and casting away the veil from their hearts, will acknowledge pouring or sprinkling to be "equally valid with immersion" as baptism, they will (we have some encouragement to expect) practise immersion ! If our opponents denied that to immerse was the primary meaning, or any meaning of baptlzo, their remarks on the indelicacy of immersion would not be such a reflection on the Lord of glory, or such a stigma on themselves. We are far from deeming all our opponents equally censurable in regard to this indecency. Let the following from a Paedo-baptist have its rightful application : "I must needs say that nothing in the world doth (and I think I may say, ought) more to prejudice my mind against any religion, than to find it constrained in its defence, to say indecent things of that which it grants to be the word of God." If our opponents did not speak that which they know not, and testify respecting what they have not seen, we should have more testimony like the following from another Pasdo-baptist : " I confess that before I saw this baptismal act, I had no great expectation of its exciting my devotion ; but I found the contrary. Never could any act of baptism have a nearer resemblance to those performed in the river Jordan, nor consequently better assist the imagination of those who read the account of baptizings in the Bible with any veneration, than this imitation." § 26.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT IMMERSION IS INCONVENIENT AND INEXPEDIENT, AND DISCOURAGED BY THE SILENCE OF SCRIPTURE RESPECTING A CHANGE OF DRESS. Dr. Guthrie. — " How happy, how holy should we be, were our hearts, our minds, our bodies, as obedient to the laws of His word and to the influences.of His Spirit as that hand and this tongue are to the head that rules them." Dr. S. Davidson.—" The nearer its substantial assimilation to the Divine model, the more does it commend itself to our judgment and conscience." Dr. R. W. Hamilton.—" If the hypothesis, that the Divine will is the true foundation of every difference between right and wrong cannot be maintained without an insult even to blasphemy, against the Divine character, much less can we favour opinions which place the very truth of virtue in the perceptive faculty of the creature." Advocates of the lawfulness of sprinkling are deeply touched with the "ease," the "facility," the "convenience" of this as compared with the "tedious" and "irksome" immersion. Indeed immersion is inexpedient, "from the feelings of delicacy which happily distin- guish a high state of civilization, and must on no account be vio- lated," and from "the inconvenience of bathing dresses, and of 52 various decorous and troublesome arrangements." Such is the refinement of Britain in the 19th century, that the professing disci- ples of Christ can admit that baptizing is covering and encompassing, that the commission of our Redeemer enjoins "immersing into the name of the Father," &c, and yet can say, " In Britain we claim the right of not immersing." This too is the language not of Dr. Pusey or of Cardinal Wiseman, but of a Protestant Dissenting Doc- tor of Divinity, at the head of a distinguished Dissenting College. Cyprian in the 3rd century sought to justify an acknowledged abridg- ment and substitute in the case of affliction and threatened death. In the 19th century, Paedo-baptists who acknowledge that Christ has commanded our "immersing into the name," &c, will practise im- mersion when Baptists admit the validity of sprinkling for baptism ! The same pen from which most of the above has been quoted, and which has written less contemptuously than some respecting the "toilsome," the "protracted," the "painful," the "Herculean labour" of immersion, has written on another matter, "We are content with 1 the standing regulation of primitive times.' On no consideration of expediency would we innovate upon this apostolic practice." The objection to "one immersion" from its being such "an irk- some service," and such "a yoke of bondage," we deem very dis- honourable to the disciples of Him who died on the cross for our salvation, and who has taught us to deny self and follow Him as a condition of being His disciples. The slight inconvenience of im- mersion proves not that Christ has not enjoined it, or that in Christ's estimation it may not be expedient as compared with sprinkling, or that the expediency of immersion may not have led to the selection of baptizo by the Spirit of inspiration. Assuredly the fact of chang- ing dresses not being mentioned, no more proves that immersion did not take place, than it does in thousands of instances in the 19th century, when thousands of baptisms are recorded without the men- tion of this. The amount and manner of changing dresses might be different according to varying places, times, and seasons, but ever, when acceptable to God, it would be done "decently and in order." Would that we all bore a greater resemblance to him that "conferred not with flesh and blood." We commend the following to the con- sideration of every reader : 53 Dr. S. Clarke. — " In tilings of external appointment, and mere positive in- stitution, where we cannot, as in matters of natural and moral duty, argue concerning the natural reason and ground of the obligation and the original necessity of the thing itself, we have nothing to do but to obey the positive command. God is infinitely better able than we to judge of the propriety and usefulness of things He institutes ; and it becomes us to obey with humility and reverence." Dr. Hallet. — "The symbols of our faith," "if not of Divine authority, are profane inventions of men." Dr. Owen. — "A worship not ordained of God, is not acceptable to God." § 27.-FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION, " SPRINKLING ANSWERS ALL THE MORAL ENDS OF BAPTISM." Dr. R. S. Candlish.— " In point of fact, no tendency towards the recognition of an in- fallible human authority can be more direct and strong than that which the denial of an infallible objective standard of Divine truth implies." Dr. Wardlaw.— " If there be a God, He must rule ; and if He rules, His will must be His law." Dr. E. Henderson.—" He frowns on every attempt to improve upon its contents." " Instead of proudly opposing the statements of Scripture, because they may not accord with preconceived notions, or favourite hypotheses, there will be a cheerful relinquish- ment of every thing that is inconsistent with the will of God." Dr. R. W. Hamilton.—" There is a rule before them which they understand, or, which is the same thing for our argument, might understand." When God has commanded, ought not the matter to be decided ? " Who art thou that repliest against God ?" The premise of the objection, in the opinion of numerous and eminent Paedo-baptists, is baseless. The inference is worthless. Sprinkling does not teach equally with immersion on death to sin, burial with Christ, and resur- rection to newness of life, or to eternal life. Consider the following : Dr. Owen. — " Divine institution alone is that which renders any thing ac- ceptable to God." T. Aquinas. — " It belongs to the signifier to determine what sign is to be used for the signification." J. Stacey. — " Tradition, valuable in its own subordinate sphere, becomes unmixedly pernicious when employed to propound a doctrine or establish an ordinance." § 28.-FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS FROM " I WILL HAVE MERCY, AND NOT SACRIFICE." Jesus Christ.—" Tf ye love me, keep my commandments." That God loves mercy, we thankfully acknowledge : that this authorizes the changing of a Divinely enjoined immersion into sprinkling, we do not admit. ' ' Where it may be," we read in Poole's 54 Commentary, "we judge it reasonable, and most resembling our hurled with Christ by baptism into death, but we cannot think it ne- cessary, for God loveth mercy," &c. The substance of this and of what we elsewhere read from Psedo-baptists is, that sprinkling is not equal to immersion, but that, it is believed God's mercy will allow it in exceptional cases, and therefore they will practice and recom- mend nothing else. We do not believe that God's mercy authorizes or encourages the change of Divinely ordained immersion into hu- manly approved sprinkling. Can God's mercy warrant the refusal to take up our cross and follow our Saviour ? Must it, whenever we choose, be our justification in avoiding self-denial ? Let the fol- lowing have a rightful application : Dr. Wardlaw. — " The infinitely wise may say, in regard to all the devices of our wisdom, 'My thoughts are not your thoughts.' " Charnock. — " Some have observed that it is a greater sin, in worship, to do what we should not, than to omit what we should perform. The one seems to he out of iveakness, because of the high exactness of the law, and the other out of impudence, accusing the wisdom of God of imperfection, and controlling it in its institutions." Paley. — "When men accustom themselves to look upon positive duties as universally and necessarily inferior to moral ones, as of a subordinate species, as placed upon a different foundation, or as unworthy of being made a part of their plan of life, or of entering into their sense of obligation, they appear to be egregiously misled by names." Dr. N. Macleod. — " In proportion as we value our Christianity, these [creeds], its expressions and habitations, will be regarded and sustained." Are Divine ordinances of less moment than humanly composed creeds ? Dr. E. Henderson. — "Against conjectural emendations we ought to be spe- cially on our guard." Dr. W. H. Stowell. — " The errors of mankind have been the natural con- sequence of departure from the Scriptures ; there is no remedy but in retmning to the Scriptures." Dr. K. W. Hamilton. — " Let us honour law as the crowning blessing of blessings." § 29.-FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION—" IN SPRINKLING, GOD'S COMMAND IS SUBSTANTIALLY OBEYED.'' Jesus Christ.—" Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." Dk. Wardlaw.—" The alteration of an old constitution, or the setting aside of an old law, as was formerly hinted, requires an express precept, as much as the appointment of a constitution, or law entirely new." Dr. ( )wen.— " All things concerning the worship of God, and the whole church or house now under the gospel, are no less perfectly and completely ordered and ordained by tho Lord Jesus Christ, than they were by Moses under the Jaw." 55 It is incomprehensible to us, that sprinkling is the substance of immersion. Do those who sprinkle water on the face, substantially encompass and cover the candidate with water ? We could speak more strongly than the Pasdo-baptist who says : " If sprinkling des- troys not the substance of baptism, yet it alters it, and in some sort corrupts it ; it is a defect which spoils its lawful form." Hear also the following : Dr. Owen. — " That principle, that the church hath power to institute and appoint any thing or ceremony belonging to the worship of God either as to matter or to manner, beyond the orderly observance of such circumstances as necessarily attend such ordinances as Christ himself has instituted, lies at the bottom of all the horrible superstition and idolatry, of all the confusion, blood, persecution, and wars, that have for so long a season spread themselves over the face of the Christian world." Bp. Butleb. — " Now if God has given a revelation to mankind, and com- manded those things which are commanded in Christianity, it is evident, at first sight, that it cannot in any wise be an indifferent matter whether we obey or disobey those commands, unless we are certainly assured that we know all the reasons for them, and that all those reasons are now ceased with regard to mankind in general, or to ourselves in particular. And it is absolutely im- possible we can be assured of this." Dr. Paley. — "Was the design of any positive institution inexplicable — did it appear to have been proposed only as an exercise of obedience — it is not for us to hesitate in our compliance." Dr. K. W. Hamilton. — " Error is insidious in its approaches. It flatters by liberality, and betrays by sophism." Dr. K. Vaughan. — " The mission of the Saviour was to found his church, and to constitute that order for her benefit best adapted to her need ; and to attempt to supplement or amend what He had thus completed, was to reflect on Him as a defective instructor, who had not attained to our standard of wisdom and goodness." § 30.— FUTILITY OP THE OBJECTION THAT SPRINKLING MIGHT BE PRACTISED IN APOSTOLIC TIMES. Dr. G. Redford.— " The will of the Creator must be the rule of His creature." R. Walker.—" The laws of the gospel" " do not bend to the humour of men, nor ac- commodate themselves to those flexible maxims and customs which by turns prevail in this or the other age and country." We believe that the evidence of sprinkling as baptism in apostolic times has not yet appeared. Let practice be deferred till the arrival of evidence that sprinkling was then practised for baptism and that it had apostolic approval. 56 § 31.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT SPRINKLING IS NOT FORBIDDEN. Dr. A. Reed. — " Whatever is new in religion is false." If sprinkling be justified because it is not forbidden, what num- bers of popish and pagan ceremonies and practices are immediately proved to be right ! Is it wrong to add unto, to take from, or to alter God's institutions ? Meditate on the following : J. Gilbert. — " The essential importance and immense dignity of Divine law." Dr. Owen. — " It is an impious and daring thing to affix God's name to our own imagination." Dr. J. Foote.— "Let us see that we be able to say, from the heart, with David, ■ I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to he right ; and I hate every false way.' " M. Henry. — " Not being holy fire, it is called strange fire ; and though not expressly forbidden, it was crime enough that God commanded it not." § 82.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION THAT BAPTISTS ADHERE WITH UN- NECCESSARY STRINGENCY TO THE PRIMARY MEANING OF THE WORD. Paul, the Apostle. — " Charity rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth." W. Chillingworth.— ",The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants." We believe that immerse is the only meaning of that word which God has given for our baptize. But if it were only the primary meaning, every philological and theological principle would demand an invariable adherence to this, except a necessity for departure therefrom were manifest. Not a single instance occurs in all Greek literature, sacred or profane, to justify our substituting in any part of God's word sprinkle, your, cleanse, or any similar word for which the opponents of immersion contend, or to justify in present prac- tice any substitute for the Christian immersion. Reflect on the following : Dr. L. Woods. — " If, after long and impartial examination, we find that any of the doctrines held by ministers and Christians of past ages, are not conformed to the word of God, we not only have a right, hut we are obliged in duty, to withhold our assent." A. Hall. — " All that concerns the glory of God, is unerringly and unaltera- bly settled in the word of God, which is 'not yea and nay.' It does not acco- modate its doctrines to succeeding periods of time, nor to the changing tempers, humours, or fashions of place ; like its Divine author, it is ' the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.' " 57 Dr. J. Waddington. — " Want of faithfulness to one truth, professed in theory, involves treachery to all the rest." J. A. James. — In the temple of truth, not only the foundation is to he valued and defended, but every point and every pinnacle." C. Leslie. — " False religion is but a corruption of the true." Bp. Butler. — " If the result of examination be, that there appears upon the whole, any the lowest presumption on the one side, and none on the other, or a greater presumption on one side, though in the lowest degree greater, this determines the question." Scotus. — "Where there is a possibility, the safest way is to be chosen." Dr. J. Parker. — "Men of elastic conscience, accommodating belief, and feeble utterance, are courted and flattered and exalted. Away with such exalta- tion ! Its pedestal is ashes — its capital is smoke." A. Hall. — " Who is the daring insolent worm, that will presume to dispute the authority, or change the ordinances of Him who is given to be Head over all things to the church ?" Dr. Halley. — " I cannot conceive how the Greek Testament is to be trans- lated, if its words are not to be understood in their classical import, unless there are reasons to believe that a new signification has been adopted." "Bap- tizein, construed with the proposition efo, is to immerse into." § 83.— FUTILITY OP THE OBJECTION, THAT BAPTISTS BIGOTEDLY AT- TACH IMPORTANCE TO WHAT IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL & UNIMPORTANT. Dr. Wall.—" As to the necessity, we should, methinks, account all our Saviour's com- mands to be necessary." Dr. S. Davidson. — " Our standard" " is not early ecclesiastical tradition, however ven- erable or hoary." T. Boston.—" The saints have no confidence in man's externals. I call those things so which God never made duty." E. R. Conder. — " The word of Christ is the only law of His Church." We desire not to be bigoted, but we believe that immersion is neither circumstantial nor unimportant. We believe that Christ has clearly enjoined and certainly practised immersion, and that before His immersion He said, "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteous- ness." Immersion, sprinkling, and pouring, are distinct acts. We believe that one alone is Divinely enjoined ; and consequently that we are not bigoted in adhering exclusively to immersion. Believing that Christ has enjoined as a perpetual ordinance, which was clearly un- derstood and faithfully observed by the apostles, the immersing of those who should become His disciples, adherence to immersion is in us demanded by allegiance to Jesus. Apply the following : 58 Dr. J. Morison. — "We have no dispensing power here." G. Gilfillan. — " The New Testament has given no hint whatever of a day that was to arrive when it ought to he otherwise." Dr. Watts. — " We must take heed that we do not add the fancies of men to our Divine religion ; so we must take equal care that we do not curtail the ap- pointments of Christ." Dr. Grosvenor. — " Can there he any moral virtue or Christian grace, with- out a disposition to obey the authority of Christ, wherever I discern it ?" "It is worse than trifling to cavil and say, It is but an external rite." Bp. Taylor. — " The will of the Supreme, being actually limited to this spe- cification, this manner, this matter, this institution, whatsoever comes besides, it hath no foundation in the will of the Legislator, and therefore can have no warrant or authority. That it be obeyed or not obeyed, is all the question and all the variety. If it can be obeyed, it must ; if it cannot, it must be let alone." " Positive precepts" " admit no degrees, nor suppletory and commutation." Dr. Owen. — " From the foundation of the world He never did allow, nor ever will, that in any thing the will of the creatures should be the measure of His honour, or the principle of His worship, either as to matter or manner." Bp. Butler. — " It is highly necessary that we remind ourselves how great presumption it is, to make light of positive institutions of Divine appointment ; that our obligations to obey all commands whatever, are absolute and indis- pensable." § 34.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION TO IMMERSION, THAT MARK xvi, 1G AND 1st COR. I, 14—17 PROVE THE UNIMPORTANT CHARACTER OF THIS ORDINANCE. J. A. Haldane.— " It is unworthy your character as believers to treat anything con- nected with religion with indifference." J. C. Ryle. — " Do not attach a superstitious importance to the waters of baptism." " Do not dishonour the sacrament of baptism." Dr. Wardlaw. — " The convenient but often mischievous designation of non-essentials." If, on Mark xvi, 16, our opponents simply said that the record agrees with the administering of baptism exclusively to professing believers, we should give our assent. It would have been every way improper for Christ to have said, He that believeth not and is not baptized shall not be saved, when baptism was intended to be the first act of professing discipleship to Him. The unbeliever should first become a believer. Hence, says Barnes, " Faith and baptism are the beginnings of a Christian life : the one the beginning of piety in the soul, the other of its manifestation before men, or of a profession of religion." That Paul depreciates baptism either in his epistle to the Corin- thians or elsewhere, does not appear. In 1st Cor i, 14—17, he is 59 expressing his* gratitude that baptism, with exceptional cases, had not been administered by himself at Corinth, became the church was divided, and this was sufficient to prevent any from saying that he had baptized into his own name. His great work was that of preach- ing the gospel, whilst the act of baptizing could be performed by those not favoured with his gifts. This view of the passage is taken by all Baptist and Psedo-baptist commentators so far as we know. Dr. Halley says : " Although Quakers speak with marvellous complacency of the great apostle of the Gentiles being sent, not to baptize, but to preach the gospel, yet even St. Paul sometimes baptized ; if seldom at Corinth, yet occasionally elsewhere, The Corinthian converts were unquestionably baptized, and many of them, we have no reason to doubt, by the assistants of Paul, and under his direction." § 35.— FUTILITY OF THE OBJECTION TO IMMERSION, THAT BAPTISTS ALLOW OF DEVIATIONS FROM GOD'S WORD. Dr. Wardlaw. — " The case affords no ground of argument at all ; and would never have been appealed to bivt for the want of better material." W. Arthur. — " Well may we raise the standard, emblazoned with the watchword, • The Church of Christ — Christ Himself the great Head of the Church — expects every man, every professing member and disciple, to do his duty.' " One objection to being immersed is, that Baptists observe not the institution of the holy kiss. We believe not that the kiss was in- stituted by the apostles. Its impure and improper observance are clearly forbidden ; and an inference in favour of its observance might be deduced. Another objection to immersion is, that some of the Baptists do not commemorate Christ's death in the evening, and also they are said to substitute "a small piece of bread and a mouth- ful of wine" for a supper. We are not aware that there is any injunction respecting the time of celebrating this feast in commemo- ration of Christ's death I nor do we know that apostolic practice was uniform as to the hour or part of the day. If we partake of it as an ordinary meal and without respect to its commemorative and symbolic character, we are "guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." Hence, " If any man hunger, let him eat at home," is in- spired instruction. We believe too that Scripture, without enjoining it, encourages and sanctions the observance of the first day of the week, which is now generally observed as a day of rest and worship instead of the seventh. Let those who believe in the continued 60 sanctity of the seventh, so observe it. The observance of baptism without any unnecessary delay after believing on Christ, we believe to be Scriptural. As to our not repeating the example of prayer left by our Lord, at the close of the longer prayer in the public ser- vice, which is deemed by some sufficient to silence Baptist advocacy of immersion, we might reply that, after examining the records of Matthew and Luke on this, and the subsequent prayers recorded in Holy Writ, our conviction is that Christ never intended that prayer to be used as it is used by Wesleyans and some other Pasdo-baptists, but that it was given as a pattern of prayer. Finally, whatever de- linquencies and inconsistencies may characterize the Baptists, this is on the part of others no justification of a refusal to immerse and be immersed at the command of Christ. § 36.-FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION FROM THE ADMISSION OF WOMEN TO THE LORD'S TABLE. Dr. W. Cunningham. — " These are some of the means by which they prejudice the minds of well-meaning people." Dr. R. Vaughan.— " There is an aversion to change, by which others are liable to be deterred from moving in the right path." It is maintained by some that we have as good a warrant from Scripture for the sprinkling of infants as for the admission of women to the Lord's table. We feel assured that Mat. xxviii, 19, and Mark xvi, 15, 16, do not and cannot legitimately exclude females. If this be doubted, read Acts viii, 12 ; xvi, 14, 15; 1st Cor. xi, &c. To females the gospel was preached. They believed [and were bap- tized. They became members of churches. They exercised certain gifts. They received directions as a part of the church, respecting the observance of the Lord's Supper, &c. Where is' the precept, where the precedent, for the sprinkling or immersion of infants ? § 37.-FUTILITY OF SOME LESS FREQUENTLY REPEATED OBJECTIONS TO IMMERSION. Prof. GoldwiN Smith.— "A portion of truth is truth ; but a fragment of a rule is no rule at all." Dr. W. L. Alexander.— "Aim exclusively in studying Scripture at evolving from its words the precise meaning which the Divine Spirit has embodied in them." Dr. Wardlaw.— " There is nothing so weak as not to be caught at by some minds in the absence of something better." Dr. L. Woods.—" Systems of error will always be found to contain a portion of funda- mental truth." " Make truth itself the object of your inquiries." 61 1. — It is by some maintained that clinic circumfusion being by the Fathers called baptism, is an evidence that they deemed something else than immersion to be baptism. That, of which they could say, " If it is fit to call such a thing a baptism," and which to avoid circum- locution they called baptism, — as the Baptists of this day speak, — and which was confined to cases of professed necessity, is a proof that baptism is not properly and exclusively immersion ! We admit that some of the Fathers in their exuberant fancy designated many things a baptism from a resemblance in the act or in the supposed efficacy ; but what they regarded as baptism, is evident from their practice, and from their writings already quoted. It is evident that " they did immerse," and that they regarded anything less as an abridgment of God's institution, justifiable only in cases of sup- posed necessity. 2. — It is argued from John xiii, 10, that the washing of a small part is, in a religious sense, equal to the washing of the whole body. We deem such reasoning to be worthy only of the papacy. It is sufficient in reply to this fallacy, to record the rendering of Dr. G. Campbell, who makes a proper distinction betwixt the louo and nipto of the original, and is sustained by all lexicographers. "He who has been bathing, needeth only to wash his feet." 3. — It is said that under the law one person is not enjoined to im- merse another. Such a command under the law is assuredly not necessary to determine the meaning of baptizo, or whether Christ meant that we should immerse ourselves or be immersed by another. If Abraham and Moses had thus reasoned what had been the result ? 4. — It is said that dipping, pouring, and sprinkling, are all used as signs of cleansing, or of spiritual blessing. But does it follow from the admission of this, that we may sprinkle or pour when God has commanded us to immerse ? 5. — It is said that Baptists assume baptism to be immersion- We are not disposed to boast of Baptists as compared with Psedo-bap- tists, but our conviction is that the assumptions on baptism belong to our opponents. 6. — It is boasted that Dr. Johnson " considers the word baptism" " not as confined to any one specific action, as to sprinkle, to dip, or the like." What glorious evidence that sprinkling is the import of the Greek baptizo t that an English Dictionary gives this as the pre- sent import of the Anglicised word baptize ! Let the reader but also examine his definition of Bishop and some other ecclesiastical terms. We do not maintain that the English word baptism is synonymous with immersion, any more than that the English word Bishop is synonymous with Pastor, Elder, Shepherd, or Overseer. The same Johnson spoke of sprinkling as "in the room of the ancient baptism." 7. — There is supposed evidence against immersion from, carved and painted representations of baptism. These representations, alas, are much less ancient not only than inspired writings, but also than the subsequent writings which undeniably teach that "they did immerse." 8. — It is scornfully said on immersion being " in use for thirteen hundred years," " that is, through the darkest times of Popery ! What a mighty recommendation /" Was the whole of the first thirteen hundred years the dark popish age ? Shall we reject a truth because the papist holds it ? Shall we disobey Christ in every thing in which the Pope is or has been obedient ? 9. — The Baptist is called upon by the opponents of immersion, to show "that the word baptize has no other meaning in classic, or if in classic, in sacred literature." We make affirmation respecting the import of baptizo, and from every source abundantly prove and con- fTrni our affirmation. Our opponents, with scarcely an exception, depose that to immerse is its primary meaning, whilst many of them maintain that this is not its only meaning. On Paedo-baptist au- thority we say, "To a man's belief a positive cause is required; but for his not believing, it is sufficient that he have no cause." We believe in immersion and assign our reasons ; for sprinkling we see no just cause. It devolves on our opponents to prove that in any instance before a.d. 250 the word baptizo means less than to immerse. 10. — The fewness of those who entertain Baptist sentiments is deemed an indication that they are erroneous. Numbers, which on the sub- ject of immersion are often incorrectly represented, are never a test of truth. The time was when Luther, on justification by faith, was indeed in a minority. How was it with Christ and the apostles ? We believe with the Rev. Samuol Martin, that " as a rule, the his- tory of the world will show that majorities are in the wrong." § 38.— FUTILITY OF OBJECTIONS WHICH RELATE MORE TO THE PRACTICE OF IMMERSION, THAN TO THE MEANING OF BAPTIZO. Prof. W. Scott. — " We wish to be prepared to follow truth wherever it may lead, or whatever the sacrifices of long-cherished opinions which it may require us to make." R. Mimtriss. — " We must not allow the opinions of even those we recognize in office under God, to prevent us from doing what we know to be His will." Prof. Mansel. — " The highest principles of thought and action to which we can attain are regulative, not speculative." Dr. Chalmers. — " The only question in which we are concerned is, ' What is written in the law ? How readest thou ?' The Bible will allow of no compromise." Dr. J. Appleton. — " Deliberation beeomes important, chiefly because it relates to ac- tion." Dr. J. Hannah.—" This is the book of God. Why do we not then faithfully apply it to its own spiritual and practical purposes ?" Dr. J. Brown. — " However sincere a man may be in a creed or worship of his own in- vention, or of other men's invention, it will profit him nothing." Dr. R. S. Candeish. — " In one view my pride may be gratified. These Divine com- mands are all subject to me : I am their master." Dr. J. P. Smith. — " Our honest question must be, ' What saith the Lord ?' " Dr. J. Foote. — " The believer is not 'partial in the law.' " Dr. Guthrie. — " Let his claims on our obedience be as cheerfully conceded as his claim to our faith." Some wish not to be nnbaptized ; as if they had been buried with Christ by baptism and had put on Christ when sprinkled in infancy. We wish not anabaptism, but baptism itself. Some wish to avoid the reflection which present immersion would cast on previous sentiments and practice ; as if we ought not ever to be growing wiser, and ever to be acting consistently wdth increased knowledge ; and as if it was not better to reflect on ourselves than on the Lord. Many say that they have received the thing signified by bajjtism, and that they deem this sufficient. Are they cleansed from sin and re- leased from obedience ? We assent to Dr. Eadie : " The will of God is to be done cheerfully" ; and to Dr. Wardlaw : " "What He appoints, it is ours to observe," Obedience is not only better than selfish and frivolous excuses, it is better than sacrifice. Many say that they do notfeel their conscience to demand immersion. If the judgment does not see it to be God's command, we desire not its observance. Where it is seen that " immersing" is the import of Christ's commission, the words of the Rev. S. Martin may apply : " You are not saved by gazing upon Him as upon a great sight, but by receiving that which He presents to you, and doing that which He bids you do." Also Dr. Eadie : " It is very wrong to make a selection among the commands of God, to obey some and neglect others." 64 It is also iterated and reiterated that baptism is not essential to sal- vation. We doubt not that many in heaven have misunderstood and neglected this ordinance of Christ, and that many such are now on their way to glory. We put not baptism in the place of Christ. We point first to Christ, and glory only in Him. To those who receive Christ, we say with Dr. Guthrie : " Let His claims on our obedience be as cheerfully conceded as His claim to our faith," To say Lord, Lord, and refuse to do what the Lord saith, is to build a house on a foundation of sand. But it is even feared that a Scriptural observance of this ordinance will diminish usefulness. If this can ultimately, or on the whole, be the case, is not God certainly at fault ? Is it our province, or with- in our capacity, to gauge the results of obedience ? Dr. Wardlaw has said : " Consequences are His ; obedience ours. His will can never be at variance with His cause." It is very evident that the apostles thus thought, and that in accordance with this they acted. ADDITA. I. — DESIGN OF BAPTISM. A. Hewitson.— " Love of theory should have no existence in the mind of a disciple, whose single aim is to know the mind of Christ, as it is embodied in the Holy Scriptures." We believe immersion into the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, to be a solemn act of professing discipleship to Christ ; that it supposes a previous death to sin, and trusting in Christ who died for our sins and rose again ; and that this temporary burial by im- mersion and the rising again after immersion, are intended signifi- cantly and impressively to declare our renunciation of sin and self, our belief in Christ's death and resurrection, our acceptance of Christ and trust in Him for our cleansing from all sin, and our sincere, entire, and everlasting dedication to Him who has bought us with His own infinitely precious blood. The sincere believer, in " the answer of a good conscience toward God," thus puts on Christ, and looks forward to his own resurrection unto eternal life. 65 II.— UTILITY OF BAPTISM. Dr. Wardlaw.— " Our first inquiry should be, What is God's will ? not why is it His will ?" Canon Stowell.— " The minds of multitudes are utterly at sea as to the purpose, the nature, and the benefit of baptism." Dr. J. Campbell. — " As things now generally stand, .nothing supports it [the P?edo- baptist theory] but blind custom." Dr. Tweedie.— " What are the benefits that are actually derived from baptism ? Let it be scrupulously observed that no benefit can be enjoyed by any but believers." We believe as firmly in the utility of baptism as in the wisdom and benevolence of its Author. These we cannot separate, however incapable we are of doing justice to the explanation of this. We believe not in the extravagant assertions of Papists and many Pro- testants respecting the efficacy of baptism. We believe the immer- sion of Christ's disciples to be acceptable to God ; to constitute a line of separation from the world, it being a profession of discipleship to Christ ; and that this solemn and significant act of obedience is instrumental in promoting humiliation for sin, and the desire to spend and be spent for Christ. It is by a symbolic and solemn act opening our mouths to the Lord, and taking upon us the vows of God. We thus enter into association with the disciples of Christ, purposing to unite with them in all ordinances of the Redeemer's appointment, and to share with them in honouring, defending, sus- taining, and extending the cause of Him whom we love more than life ; and, if faithful unto the end, invaluable New Covenant blessings, through the merit not of our baptism, but of Christ's sac- rifice and intercession, are ours throughout subsequent life and through eternity. III.— IMPORTANCE OF BAPTISM. J. A. James.—" Whatever God has made the subject of revealed truth, should be guard- ed on that account from being considered as too frivolous to deserve our attention." Prof. Wilson.—" The ordinance of baptism, as the initiatory rite of the New Covenant, demands from the student of Scripture a full and searching investigation. Instituted by our blessed Lord, and designed to continue in the church till His second coming, this solemn and interesting observance puts forwards high claims on the understanding and conscience of every Christian." Dr. Chalmers. — " Surely when God cometh forth from His sanctuary with a communi- cation to our world, we should go forth to meet it with all the powers and perceptions of our rational nature." Dr. Belfrage.— " Let us guard against exalting one of these sacraments above the other." G6 The importance of baptism is evident from the Divine dignity of its Author ; the example and precept of Christ in reference to this rite; the words of Jesus before His own baptism, " Thus it be- cometh us to fulfil all righteousness ;" the baptism of Christ being honoured by the visible descent of the Spirit, and the audible words of approval from the Father ; the solemn manner in which Jesus after His resurrection enjoined it, saying, "All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth, Go ye therefore, and make diseiples of all na- tions, immersing them," &c. ; the preaching of baptism by apostles and evangelists ; the administering of it by them and under their direction ; the baptism of the Spirit, which had taken place in the case of Cornelius and them that were with ;him, being mentioned as an incontrovertible reason for water baptism ; the association of baptism with the answer of a good conscience towards God ; the universality of baptism in the churches of Christ in apostolic times (Ro. vi, 3 ; and Gal. iii, 27) ; the variously symbolical and deeply im- pressive character of this immersion ; the connexion of baptism with our highest privileges and dignities ; and the results of cheerful obe- dience to God, in time and eternity, as compared with the awful consequences of wilful neglect and guilty disobedience. IV.— CONCLUDING EEMAKKS. Dr. R. W. Hamilton. — " If the doctrine of the preceding argument be true, let it be asseverated. Let it possess our minds." Dr. J. P. Smith. — " The facts cannot be set aside ; they are too numerous, too various and independent, and too weighty in their character as grounds of reasoning." D. Fraser. — " Surely denominationalism is not to last for ever." Dr. Eadie. — "• You are never to seek to be wise above what is written, but you are always to labour to be wise up to what is written." We have endeavoured to show that baptism is a Divine, a New Testament, and a permanent institution, that its element is water, and that it has an initiatory, practical, and positive character. We have sought the import of the word philologically, inquiring into the meaning of baptizo, not into the sentiments of a denomination. Our principle of interpretation has been, that the secondary meaning of a word is inadmissible without the necessity and the consequent proof of a departure from the primary meaning. This principle has the expressed approval of Psedo-baptists. The practice of quoting 67 from opponents we believe to be relevant and just, and to have the highest sanction. (See Acts xvii, 28 ; Lu. xix, 22 ; &c.) We have sometimes from unwavering conviction spoken strongly, but we hope not uncharitably, ever desiring to distinguish between mistakes and wilful disobedience. We believe that through a union of circum- stances, one of which is the transference instead of the translation of a Greek word, a mistake relative to a Divine ordinance may consist with supreme love to Christ. We would cherish and recommend fervent love to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours. With Dr. Cairns we can say, "The essence of religion... is not ortho- doxy, but piety." Yet we desire not for ourselves or others that upon the right foundation, " wood, hay, stubble" may be built, instead of " gold, silver, precious stones." We know who has said, " The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." We are aware, too, that many objections to immersion which by one are applauded, are by another contemptuously rejected. Let those who have hitherto despised infinite excellence and tram- pled under foot the blood of the covenant, that blood which alone cleanses from sin, and which cleanses the believer from all sin, penitently, thankfully, and immediately accept Christ as their Surety, Redeemer, Sovereign, and Exemplar, and cleave to Him with purpose of heart. We desire for ourselves and all our readers a " clean heart" and a "right spirit," a heart sound in Divine doctrines and statutes, a renewed heart and holy life on earth, and the " crown of life" in the world to come. " With joy may we our course pursue, And keep the crown of life in view ; That crown which in one hour repays The lahour of ten thousand days." " To bear His name — His cross to bear, Our highest honour this ! Who nobly suffers now for Him Shall reign with Him in bliss." " And truth alone, where'er my lot be cast, 'Mid scenes of plenty, or the pining waste, Shall be my chosen theme, my glory to the last." " The conclusion of the whole matter" is, " Fear God and keep His commandments." * INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. iEsop, 6. JEsopic Fables, 7. Alcibiades, 6. Alciphron, 7. Alexander, J. A., D.D., 45. Alexander, of Aphrodisias, 8. Alexander, W. L., D.D., 25, 60. Alford, Dean, 20, 28, 32, 36. Alting, Dr. J., 39. Anacreon, 6. Appleton, J., D.D., 63. Aquila, 8. Aquinas, T., 53. Archias, 7. Argonautic Expedition, 8. Aristophon, 8. Aristotle, 7. Arthur, W., 26, 59. Assembly of Divines, 25, 38. Ast, 5. Athenseus, 8. Augusti, 13. Bacon, Lord, 39. Barclay, R., 13. Barnes, A., D.D., 22,28,34,47,49, 58. Basil, 8, 10. Bass, 5. Baxter, E., 19, 29, 33. Beecher, H. W., 44. Belfrage, Dr., 65. Bengel, J. A., 27, 34. Bennett, J., D.D., 9. Benson, J., 29. Beza, 39. Bickersteth, E., 4, 12, 39. Bishop of the Cyclades, 11. Bloomfield, S. T., D.D., 20, 28, 29. Boardman, W. E., 49. Boston, T., 57. Bradbury, 49. Bretschneider, 5. Brown, D., D.D., 25. Brown, J., D.D., 16, 39, 63. Browne, Dr., 50. Bruce, 38. Buchanan, J., iii. Bunsen, Dr., 20. Burder, S., 39. Butler, Bp., 55, 57, 58. Buttmann, Dr. P., 32. Cairns, J., D.D., 67. Calvin, 12, 19, 34, 44. Campbell, G., D.D., 12, 15, 16, 20, 33, 61. Campbell, J., D.D., 65. Candlish, R. S., D.D., 53. Carson, A., L.L.D., 41, 42, 47. Cave, W., D.D., 18. Chalmers, T.,D.D., 13,20,29,63,65. Chambers, 19. Chariton, 8. Charnock, S., 54. Chillingworth, W., 56. Chrysostom, 8, 10. Clarke, A., LL.D., 20, 26, 29, 34, 47. Clarke, S., D.D., 53. Clemens (Alexandrinus), 8. Coleman, L., 20. Conder, E. R., 6, 57. Conon, 7. Conybeare and Howson, 13, 20, 29. Cranmer, Archb., 12. * The literary honours of most are omitted, on account of our ignorance in regard to many. The theological distinctions, where known, have been given. 70 dimming, J., D.D., 12. Cunningham, W., D.D., 60. Cyclades, Bishop of the, 11. Cyclopedia, Penny, 20. Cyril, 8. Davidson, S., D.D., LL.D., 51, 57. Demetrius, 7. Demosthenes, 7. De Stourdza, A., 11. De Wette, 47. Diodorus (Siculus), 7. Dion Cassius, 8. Dionysius, of Halicarnassus, 7. Doddridge, P., D.D., 20, 25, 26, 31, 34, 43. Donnegan, J., M.D., 5, 48. Dunbar, 5. Eadie, J., D.D., LL.D., 22, 49, 63, 66. Ellicott, Bp., 36. Elsley, 13. Ely, John, iii. Encyclopedia, Edinb., 20. Epictetus, 7. Evenus, 7. Eubulus, 6. Ewing, G., D.D., 5. Foote, J., D.D., 56, 63.* Fraser, D., 16, 63, 66. Fritzsche, F. V., 36. Gardner, Dr. J., 18, 37. Germanus, 11. Gieseler, J. K. L., 21. Gilbert, J., 40, 56. Gilfillan, G., 44, 58. Godwin, J. H., D.D., 3, 11, 47. Goodwin, Harvey, 36. Gotch, F. W., LL.D., 9, 10. Green, T. S., 5. Greenfield, W., 5. Gregory (Nazianzen), 8, 10. Gregory (Thaumaturgus),8. Grosvenor, B., D.D., 58. Grotius, 19, 39, 47. Grove, 5. Guericke, H. E. F., 21. Guthrie, T., D.D., 51, 63, 64. Haldane, J. A., 58. Hall, Archi, 56, 57. Halley. R., D.D., 4, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 26, 27, 31, 32, 33, 38, 40, 45, 46, 53 57 59. Hamilton, R.W., LL.D.,D.D.,51, 53, 54, 55, 66. Hannah, J., D.D., 63. Heimerius, 8. Heliodorus, 8. Henderson, E., D.D., 53, 54. Henry, M., 45, 56. Heraclides Ponticus, 7. Hervey, J., 31. Hetherington, W. H., LL.D., 12. Hewitson, A., 64. Hewlett, J., 20. Hill, G., D.D., 20, 29. Hippocrates, 6. Hook, W. F., D.D., 13. Home, T. H, 4, 6, 22, 44. Humphry, W. G., 45. James, J. A., iii, 15, 26, 40, 49, 57,65. Jamieson, R., D.D., 28, 37, 39. Jay, W., 29, 33. Jelf, 32. John, of Damascus, 11. Johnson, Dr. S., 62. Jones, J., LL.D., 5. Jones, Sir W., 50. Josephus, 7. Justin Martyr, 7. King, D., LL.D., iii. King, J. G., D.D., 11. Kitto, J., D.D., 37, 38, 43. Knapp, G. C, 26. Kurtz, 21. Lange, J. P., D.D., 20, 36. Leslie, C, 57. Lewin, T., J 3. 71 Libanius, 8. Liddell and Scott, 5, 32, 48. Life of Pythagoras, 7. Lightfoot, J., D.D., 12. Livingstone, Dr. D., 35. Lowth, Bp., 48. Lucian, 8. Luther, M., 12, 19, 28. Macbride, J. D., D.C.L., 20. Macknight, J., D.D., 38, 39, 47. Macleod, N., D.D., 54. M'Crie, D.D., 13. Maimonides, 38. Manly, J. G., 45, 49. Mansel, Prof., 63. Martin, S., 62, 63. M. F., 39. Meyer, 13, 39, 47. Mimpriss, R., 63. Morison, J., D.D., 58. Mosheim, J. L., D.D., 21. Neander, Dr. J. A. W., 21, 25, 36. Nicander, 7. Nicholson, Bp., 19. 01shausen,H.,D.D., 13,20,28,34,38. Origen, 8. Orpheus, 6. Owen, J., D.D., 12, 42, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58. Paley, Archd., 54, 55. Parker, J., D.D., 22, 57. Parkhurst, 5. Patrick, Bp., 42. Patterson, J. B., 43. Paullus, 13. Paxton,Prof., 37. Philo, 7. Photius, 11. Pindar, 6. Plato, 6. Plotinus, 8. Plutarch, 7. Polysenua, 7. Polybius, 7. Poole and Continuators, 19, 27, 54, Porphyry, 8. Powell, T., 36. Presbyterian ReviewfJIQ. Ranken, A., D.D., 30. Bedford, G., D.D., LL.D., 55. Reed, A., D.D., 50, 56. Reid, Dr., 14. Revieiv, Presbyterian, 29. Robinson, E., D.D., LL.D., 5, 32, 37, 43, 48. Ryle, J. C, 17, 58. Scaliger, 38. Schleusner, 5. Schott, D. A., 36, 39. Schwarzius, 5; Scott, Prof. W., 63. Scott, T., 25, |39. Scotus, 57. Septuagint, the, 7. Smith, J. P., D.D., 22, 35, 63, 66, Smith, W., LL.D., 37, 39. Smith, Prof. Goldwin, 60. Stacey, J., 4, 13, 32, 46, 53. Stackhouse, T., 19, 42. Stanley, Dean, 20, 36, 43. Stephanus, H., 5. Stier, Dr. R., 13, 39. Storr and Flatt, 39. Stowell, Canon, 65. StoweU, W. H., D.D., 54. Strabo, 7. Stuart, M., D.D., 11, 21. Sumner, Archb., 36. Sutcliffe, J., 30, 36. Symmachus, 8. T., C, 43. Taylor, Bp., 19, 58. Taylor, C, 6, 10, ]6, 25. Themistius, 8. Theophylact, 11. Thomas, D., D.D., iii. 72 Thorn, W., 27, 46. Tillotson, Archb., 19, 25. Towerson, Dr., 12. Trench, Archb., 9. Trollope, W., 32, 38. Tweedie, W. K., D.D., 22, 65. Tyndale, W., 12. Vaughan, K., D.D.,45, 55, 60. Venema, 12, 21. Villiers, H. M., 44, 48. Vossius, 36. Waddington, G., D.D., 21. Waddington, J., D.D., 57. Wakefield, G., 39. "Walker, E., 55. WaU,W., D.D., 11, 19,21,33,34, 50, 57. Wardlaw,R., D.D., 1, 6, 12, 33,49, 53, 54,58,59,60,63,64,65. Watson, Bp., 47. Watson, R., 25. Watts, I., D.D., 12. Webster and Wilkinson, 29, 39. Wesley, J., 20, 29. West, G., 40. Wheeler, H. M., 50. Whitby, D.,D.D., 11, 12, 20, 28, 39. Whitehead, G., 13. Whitfield, G., 29. Wilson, J., D.D., 43. Wilson, Prof. E., D.D., iii, 4, 9, 13, 30, 32, 65. Winer, G. B., 20, 32. Witsius, 36. Wolfius, 19. Woods, L., D.D., 26, 40, 56, 60. Wright, M., 5. INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Ablution, common in the East, 36 — 39, 47. Abridgment, reason of this, iii. Adaptation of immerse for baptizo, and its suitability to context, 16, 17. Adherence to God's truth commended, 15, 17, 40, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55. 56. 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66. .ZEnon, baptism at, 33, 34. Anabaptism, 63. Ancient Baptisteries, 18. Ancient Versions, 9, 10. Associated words corroborative of immersion, 15, 16.'" Axioms and rules of interpretation, 4, 22, 25, 26, 29, 33, 36, 40, 45, 46, 47. Baptism of Christ by overwhelming sufferings, 14, 25. Baptism of the children of Israel in the cloud and in the sea, 14, 26, 27. Baptism of the Spirit, confirmatory of immersion, 14, 25, 26. Baptism ; the English word not synonymous with immersion, 61, 62. Baptism, varied characteristics of, 1, 2. Baptisms, divers, 36 — 39. Baptisms of furniture, 36 — 39. Baptisteries, ancient, 18. Baptizo, numerous fancied and unfounded meanings of, 22 — 24. Baptizo, philological remarks on, 3, 4, 22 — 24, 62. Bathing common in the East, 36 — 39. Bathing enjoined in the Law, 37 — 39. Beds, Eastern, 37. Bigotry, not in adhering to immersion, 56 — 59. Birth not symbolized or suggested by sprinkling, 48. Burden of proof disreputably evaded by the opponents of immersion, 41,47, 62. Burial in and by baptism, 14, 28, 29. Carved representations of baptism, 62. Change of raiment not always needed after immersion, 35, 51, 52. Climate of Palestine and the East, 35. Clinic baptism, 18,19,21. Command of Christ to immerse, 40. Concessions of Pasdo-baptists, 12, 13, 18 — 21. Conduct of man should accord with the precepts of God, 53 — 64, &c. Conscience and practice ought to be regulated by inspired truths and pre- cepts, 63, 64, &c. 74 Context of baptizo a confirmation of immersion, 14, 15, 16, 17, 25 — 29, 30 — 34« Controversy, if properly conducted, not to be deprecated, iii, 1, 22. Cornelius, immersion of, 45. Cups, pots, &c, immersion of, 37 — 39. Danger of immersion, supposed, 49, 50. Delaying to baptize believers, unscriptural, 2. Design of baptism, G4. Difference between immersion, pouring, and sprinkling, an evidence that all are not the meaning of baptizo, 16. Dipping for the purpose of sprinkling, a supposed import of baptizo, 22. Divers Jewish immersions, 36 — 39, 47. Divine origin of baptism, 1 . Dress, change of, 35, 51, 52. Eis, ek, and en, corroboratory of immersion, 15, 16, 30 — 33. Element of baptism, 2. Enjoyment of blessings symbolized by baptism no justification of its neg- lect, 63. Essentiality of baptism to salvation, on the, 63, 64. Eunuch, immersion of the, 31, 32, 33, 43, 44. Fathers, testimony to immersion from the, 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, 18, 61. Fewness, not a test, 62. Figurative use, an evidence of immersion, 14, 25 — 29. First departure on record from Christ's command to immerse, 18. First thirteen hundred years, 62. See also 9, 10, 18 — 21. Fonts, ancient, 18. Forbidding of sprinkling not necessary to its condemnation, 50. Frequency of immersion in the East, 37 — 39, 47. Friends, testimony of, 18. Futility of objections to immersion, 22 — 64. Greeks and Greek Church, practice of the, 10, 11, 18. Historic records, 17 — 21. Historical acknowledgments, 21, and elsewhere. Immerse invariably suitable for baptizo when used literally, 16, 17. Immersion of one by another, 61. Immersion once during life, as irksome, enslaving, &c., 51, 52. Immersion, one, 47. Importance of adhering to God's word, 51 — 64, 65, and elsewhere. Importance of baptism, 58, 59, 65, 66. Impracticability of immersion in certain cases, 49. Inconvenience and supposed inexpediency of immersion, 51, 53. Indecency of immersion, supposed, 50, 51. Interpretation, rules of, 4, 22, 25, 26, 29, 33, 36, 40, 44, 46. Israel, baptism of, in the cloud and in the sea, 14, 26 — 28. 75 Jailor, immersion of the, 46, 47. Jewish divers immersions, 36 — 39, 47. Jewish proselyte baptism, 11. John's immersing in iEnon, 33, 34. John's immersing of multitudes, 34 — 36. Johnson, useless glorying in Dr. S., 61, 62. Jordan's depth, and suitability for immersion, 35, 36. Kiss of charity, 59. Lexicographers tested by use, 6 — 9. Lexicons, evidence from Greek, 4, 5. Louo and loutron, meaning of, 48. Louo and nipto distinguished, 61. Lydia, immersion of, 45, 46. Mercy, love of, no evidence against immersion, 53, 54. Mode of immersion not expressly enjoined, 3. Naaman's immersion, 7. Noah's salvation by water, 14, 29, 30. Novatus, circumfusion of, 18. Numbers, not a test, 62. Objections are made to most obvious truths, 26, 34, 45. Objections to immersion, futile, 22 — 64. Old Testament prophecies, 48, 49. One immersion, 47. Paedo-baptist concessions, 12, 13, 18 — 21, and elsewhere. Paintings of baptisms, 62. Palestine, a "land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths," 42. Paul's immersion, 44. Pentecostal baptisms, 14, 25, 26. 40 — 42. Perpetuity of baptism, 1. Philological objections to immersion, futile, 22 — 24. Philology of bajJtizo, 3, 4. Positive and ritual character of baptism, 2. Pots, &c, immersion of, 37 — 39. Pouring and sprinkling, as words used by God and man, no proof against enjoined immersion, 48, 49. Practical knowledge of Divine truth desirable, 4, 40. Practice of immersion, frivolous objections to, 63, 64. Practice of the first thirteen hundred years, 62. See also 9 — 11, 17 — 21. Prejudice, blinding power of, 34, 47. Prepositions, corroborative of immersion, 15, 16, 17, 30 — 33. Proselyte baptism, 11, 12. Publicity or privacy of Christian baptism not mentioned in God's word, 41. Purify, as the import of baptizo, destitute of all evidence, 22. 76 Quoting from the admissions of opponents, Divinely sanctioned, 67. Eaiment, Eastern, changed (when necessary), with ease and delicacy, 35, 51 , 52. Regeneration not effected by baptism, 2. Reproach from man never a justification of disobedience to God. 63. Ritual regulations, .1 9. Samaritans, immersion of the, 42, 43. Saul, immersion of, 44. Scarcity of water and time for immersion imagined, 41, 42. Silence of Scripture respecting the changing of dresses, 52. Spirit, baptism by and in the, 14, 25, 26. Spiritual blessings as represented by sprinkling, pouring, and immersion, 54, 55, 61. Sprinkle and pour in no Scriptural occurence found for baptism, 48, 49. Sprinkling and pouring, not baptism because significant of spiritual blessings, 61. Sprinkling not justified because not expressly condemned, 56. Sprinkling not justified by suppositions or by irrelevant facts, 53 — 6-1. Stringent adherence to immersion justified, 56, 57. Sufferings of Christ being called a baptism, corroborative of immersion, 14, 25. Supper of the Lord not a full meal, 59. Sychar and its waters, 42, 43. Three thousand, baptism of the, 40 — 42. Tingo and mergo, to immerse, sufficient for baptizo, 24. Unimportant character of baptism not proved from Mark xvi, 16 and 1st Cor. i, 14—17, 58, 59, Unimportant character of baptism, were it proved, no justification of a sub- stitute for immersion, 56 — 58. Use, or occurrences of baptizo, 6 — 9. Usefulness not eventually diminished by obedience, 64. Utility of baptism, 65. Versions, testimony of, 9, 10, 15, 16. Washing before meals, 36 — 39. Washing by sprinkling, on, 37. Washing in order to cleanse, on, 22, 23. Washing of a part for the whole, supposed, 61. Washing, the supposed meaning of baptism, 21. Washings, divers, 36 — 39. Water, the element of baptism, 2. Women baptized, 60. PRINTED BY D. T. INGHAM, 41, SOUTH STREET, SHEFFIELD.